I doubt it, Rob

Posted January 17th, 2008 by Joe Kaiser

My gut tells me this is a bunch of huey.

Dear Rob,

Foreclosure Rescue-Rescue attorney Melissa Huelsman is mentioned in the new proposed legislation report, and frankly, I do not believe her claims.

If she truly is the “go-to gal” for this sort of thing, one would presume she’s got dozens and dozens, (if not hundreds) of clients needing to be rescue-rescued.

She mentions being “swamped with victims of real estate scams.”

I say “prove it.”


Dear Melissa Huelsman,

You’re mentioned in the AG Request Legislation – 2008 Session report. Here is the exact comment . . .

Seattle attorney Melissa Huelsman has filed multiple lawsuits in foreclosure “rescue” cases and is planning several others. She’s told KOMO TV and others that she is swamped with victims of real estate foreclosure scams.

I would very much like to document the validity of these claims, particularly the assertion you are “swamped with victims of real estate foreclosure scams.”

Accordingly, please advise on the following:

(1) How many foreclosure rescue-rescue cases have you actually filed?

(2) How many foreclosure rescue-rescue cases are you currently planning to file?

(3) How do you quantify “swamped?”

Your comments are, in part, the basis of the proposed new legislation and therefore require scrutiny.

I’d prefer to work with you rather than against you on this. As such, please advise at your earliest convenience. Thank you.

Joe Kaiser


Prove me wrong

My gut tells me this is a bunch of huey. Anyone from your office bother to check out her claims?

I’m thinking, Rob, she’s got, at most, a handful of rescue-rescue clients. Please prove me wrong.

Please tell me this new legislation isn’t just some cockamamie scheme to garner political juice for Rob “The Scambuster” McKenna.

Which, btw, I’m confident is the real story here.

In the arena,

Joe Kaiser


4 Responses to: “I doubt it, Rob”

  1. Brad B responds:
    Posted: January 17th, 2008 at 8:32 am

    So, if I ready Rob’s proposed legislation correctly, he expects you to fork over at least 82% of profits that you generated in a transaction that the former homeowner has agreed to? That’s like me selling you my shares of Apple earlier this year at $100, and asking for $85 of the $100 profit you earned when you sold those same shares at $200 when it hit its 52-week high.

    Does that mean that the State of Wash. will still make sure the homeowner gets what’s due to them after the state forecloses and collects the overage? Or will Rob keep his 18% too..

  2. olyguy responds:
    Posted: January 17th, 2008 at 8:55 am

    Perhaps it’s time for you to contact the feds and enjoin them in a lawsuit against the gov, the ag, the county “confiscatin’ our money” clerks, et al.

    See… the feds can be reluctant to jump in a state’s shtuff; however, if invited by a citizen of a state or asked for help by a citizen, they have a rationale for doing what is one of the all time fun sports for a fed: whacking a gov and ag upside the head.

    U.S. Attorney’s office…

    Make their day. :D

    Due to the clerks conspiring and abconding with money of the citizens they have sworn to serve, it’s almost like a RICO situation.

  3. DaveD responds:
    Posted: January 17th, 2008 at 3:29 pm

    What Rob is proposing is interference of contract. Again, dubious that it can even be “well intentioned.” Indeed, more owners will lose their homes because his ham-handed “fix” will eliminate the investor element of the market. It comes right back to that risk vs. reward thing, doesn’t it? Where will Rob be when the law of unintended consequenses catches up with those homeowners in need? Will he turn to Melissa? Oh, right… she doesn’t take referrals. Or was that just from you, Joe?

    Oh, silly me. He has it covered. My guess is he will vote for Hillary because I just heard her say if she is president, she will MANDATE a 90 day moratorium of all foreclosures. Yep, that means those big, bad, greedy lenders will just have to suck it up. Not sure how she is going to change the financial markets out of thin air. Kinda reminds me of the story of King Canuck who COMMANDED the tides not to rise… and got his feet wet.

    Since he is getting clobbered by the truth of your case, and can’t possibly beat you in court, he is trying to elbow you out by the legislative process instead. The mark of a sore loser, but scary because of the ongoing abuse of power. He hasn’t invited YOU to comment, has he? I’m not holding my breath.

    Better for the county to end up with overages instead of the market place? Hmmm. Unconstitutional, ineffective, and politically driven. The mark of bad public policy, and inevitably poor law.

    Shouldn’t he at least give you the dubious honor of naming the law after you since it is premised on the bogus settlement to begin with?

  4. anemonehead responds:
    Posted: January 18th, 2008 at 9:21 am

    The AG Request Legislation is a joke based on a false premise. Here’s a pretty good article from the Dallas Fed that explains the sub-prime problem: http://www.dallasfed.org/research/eclett/2007/el0711.html

    You can see that the sub prime market makes up a small percentage of all loans, 14%. Based on the figures quoted, “Craig Nolte of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco said subprime adjustable-rate mortgages now account for nearly half of conventional loans entering foreclosure, even though they make up less than 10 percent of the market” that’s less than 1.4% of loans.

    If you take into account that these high risk loans are a fairly new phenomenon, basically over the passed 6 years, that knocks the percentage of all loans down even further. To move one more step, 33% of all homes in the U.S are owned free and clear! Which brings this percentage WELL under 1% of homeowners.

    Government interference is the last thing needed in this case. Let the market work and it will take care of it. The blame for this goes on the people who devised these high risk loans, the wall street investors that bought the dubious securuties and the folks that took the loans, many lying about their financial circumstances to obtain them. They call the liar loans for reason.

    The US has one of the highest percentages of homeowners of any country in the world but some people are not equipped for that responsibility. 64% of homeownership is probably about right. Heck as a nation we save close to 0% of our money. We have to have it now and will borrow until it hurts to have it now, including our government. In that situation when something goes wrong we have no safety net and that’s our fault. It’s not the governments place to bail out businesses or individuals who make bad decisions. Let the free market do it’s thing.


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.