Onerous my Asserous

Posted September 1st, 2007 by Joe Kaiser

Time and time again you've made allegations that not only border on ridiculous, they leap those borders as if pole-vault enabled.

Dear Rob,

Does it seem strange you’ve brought an action against me where no one I’ve done business with has complained?

Or that based on information received not from dissatisfied customers but from county prosecutors, you’ve sued me on behalf of my customers, none of whom have as much as hinted feeling taken advantage of?

Do you know why that is?

I believe I do . . .


Your AAGs, having no appreciation for the position homeowners in foreclosure are in or the issues we investors face, have concluded, from the sidelines, they know better then any of the parties involved.

The parties involved, you see, agree our transactions were fair and represented a reasonable “value for value” exchange.

Your AAGs, on the other hand, sitting behind their desks in their air-conditioned offices, with no skin in the game, have decided we’re not playing fair?

Doesn’t it seem strange the people involved have no issues, but you do?

onerous obligations

Reviewing the amended complaint . . .

Defendant falsely markets his scheme to the property owner as a way to save ownership of the home. But the scheme actually results in the owner losing both title to and control over the property. All that the former property owner is left with is a tenuous right to buy back his home or receive some proceeds if he can comply with the onerous obligations imposed by the many complex documents Defendant had him execute as part of the scheme.— Amended Complaint, dated June 21, 2007

It boggles the mind, Rob, that your office could get things so completely screwed up.

Time and time again you’ve made allegations that not only border on ridiculous, they leap those borders as if pole-vault enabled.

Your office did it with the overage claim allegations, with the public records allegations, and now you’ve done it with the partial interest transactions.

We’re beginning to see a pattern.


Here’s how it works . . .

We don’t market any sort of scheme. Instead, we offer a partnership arrangement to people on the verge of losing their homes.

It’s an arrangement where the seller and I agree to co-own the property, again, as partners. I have no exclusive right to buy him out, nor does he have any exclusive right to buy me out.

Certainly, there is no agreed buy-back price or option-to-buy or anything like that. That’s a whole different game I’m not interested in playing

Instead, the seller and I have simply teamed up together and from that moment on we jointly own the property.

our role

After many years of putting these kinds of transaction together, we’ve decided partnering up makes the most sense for everyone.

And now when we do these partnership deals, we’re teammates with mutual interests (the property), with us taking care of whatever problems come up.

Where you go completely off track is seeing this as some sort of scheme to steal homes, and you do that because you have no fundamental appreciation for who we are and what we imagine our role to be.

You see other foreclosure rescue scams where investors buy properties for what is owed and rent them back to sellers who are evicted a few months later when they can’t make the rent payments, leaving the investors with all the equity.

We consider that a stupid business model and I tell my students, continuously, that evicting former owners is off the table and that they must figure out a solution that works for everyone.

Your AAGs have made the assumption our approach is somehow intended to create those equity grab kinds of situations and, again, they are mistaken.

When we agree to partner up, the problems sellers face disappear.

artists in action

Look at our track record and note we’ve done approximately two dozen partnership transactions. Also note all sellers desiring to remain in their homes are in their homes today.

Why is that, Rob, and how does it hold up against your allegations of “scheme?”

It’s simple, it doesn’t.

Your office, not understanding our role as partners, assuming we’re just another couple o’ guys in the foreclosure rescue racket, and having no experience with successful foreclosure rescue investors, believe all such efforts to be scams.

Look around, Rob. What you’re seeing are foreclosure rescue artists in action. Not scam artists, Rob, but actual world class artists.

Look around, Rob. See the two dozen families still in their homes at this very moment? See them not being evicted (even though today most are years behinds in rent). See them with their equities now doubled?

Look around, Rob. See them with their foreclosures ended, their property taxes paid, their power turned back on, their leaking roofs repaired, their garbage hauled to the dump, their abatement orders revoked, and their properties (and lives) cleaned up and back on track?

We did that Rob.

We fixed their cars or bought them new ones, paid their bail and got them out of jail, and gave them money to take care of their medical bills.

We, as their valued partners, did all of that.


Joe Kaiser

2 Responses to: “Onerous my Asserous”

  1. Chris responds:
    Posted: September 1st, 2007 at 6:01 pm

    I saw in the news that Nifong will spend a day in jail — a symbolic message to other prosecuters to use better discretion before ruining lives.

  2. adrian w. responds:
    Posted: September 3rd, 2007 at 11:55 am

    2. lacking a sound basis, as reasoning; unsubstantiated; weak: a tenuous argument.

    5. lacking in clarity; vague: He gave a rather tenuous account of his past life.

    To me, definition #2 for tenuous in the dictionary seems to apply more towards the — Amended Complaint, dated June 21, 2007!
    The AG’s complaint is based on unreasonable prejudice against real estate investing . Something they lack basic knowledge in. False marketing?!! What evidence substantiates that? None given or found. Hint, you won’t find any.

    I’d have to say, that its their complaints/arguments that are tenuous!!

Post a Comment

Enter Your Details:

You may write the following basic XHTML Strict in your comments:
<a href="" title=""></a> · <acronym title=""></acronym> · <abbr title=""></abbr>
<blockquote cite=""></blockquote> · <code></code> · <strong></strong> · <em></em>

  • If you’re a first-time commenter, your response will be moderated.
  • If your response includes a link, it will require moderator approval.
Enter Your Comments:

Note: This is the end of the usable page. The image(s) below are preloaded for performance only.