BBB Northwest Region – 11 Complaints

Posted June 26th, 2008 by Joe Kaiser

That means in all of Alaska, Washington, and Oregon, 11 complaints were received by the BBB for the year in question.

Dear Rob,

I happened to discover the Better Business Bureau’s August 07 article about the so-called foreclosure rescue scam epidemic, and although it isn’t broken down by state, they do confirm claims have been made in “almost all 50 states.”

Almost?

Hmmm . . .

But what about in our area?


Northwest Region

The BBB’s northwest region reported 11 foreclosure rescue scam complaints in the previous 12 months.

I’m guessing most of those are the typical “advance fee” scams where homeowners paid a consultant to stop foreclosure and the consultant didn’t come through, as promised.

As to the sale/lease-option deals your new law targets, probably in the minority of complaints.


Three states

That means in all of Alaska, Washington, and Oregon, 11 complaints were received by the BBB for the year in question.

Eleven complaints in three states in 12 months isn’t an epidemic necessitating a wholesale rewrite of our property rights laws, Rob, and pretending it is makes us wonder what else you’re pretending about.

Maybe my case, for instance?

In the arena,

Joe Kaiser


8 Responses to: “BBB Northwest Region – 11 Complaints”

  1. anemonehead responds:
    Posted: June 29th, 2008 at 12:31 am

    Wow! 11 complaints in 3 states over 12 months…it’s an epidemic!
    Good thing Rob’s there to protect them! (sticks tongue in cheek)

    Let’s look at the numbers as figures don’t lie, but liar’s sure can figure.

    *All Estimates based on US Census Bureau 2007 Population Estimates unless noted*

    2007 Estimated Population:

    WA: 6,468,424
    OR: 3,747,455
    AK: 683,478

    Total Population of all states: 10,899,357
    WA’s % of Total population 59.35%
    WA’s BBB complaints based on Population %: 7.12

    WA’s 2007 Homeownership: 67.6%
    Number of WA residents living in Owner Occupied Homes: 4,372,654

    People per household:
    2.53 (2000)

    Number of Owner Occupied units:
    1,728,332

    2007 Total Foreclosure Filings
    (does not necessarily mean the property was foreclosed, just the action started. This includes all foreclosures not just owner occupied)

    WA: 23,705
    http://realestate.msn.com/buying/article2.aspx?cp-documentid=6119868

    So, 7 BBB complaints plus 1 AG complaint gives us 8 complaints and that’s if the folks that complained to the BBB didn’t bother to complain to the AG. And of the 23, 705 foreclosure filings there were only 8 complaints of foreclosure rescue scams or, wait…it doesn’t compute on my calculator…the number is negligible!!!

    Good going Rob. Screwed up the whole system, for what? NOTHING!!!

    Found these interesting:

    http://www.realtown.com/CSundstrom/blog/real-estate-news/washingtons-foreclosure-rate-is-less-than-1

    http://blogs.thenewstribune.com/realestate/2008/06/06/washington_foreclosures_lower_than_u_s_r

  2. Jason responds:
    Posted: June 29th, 2008 at 7:53 pm

    anemonehead is right by his #’s.

    “Hey Rob, my wife can generate at a minimum of 11 complaints aginst me on any give day, forget about three states in 1 year! Maybe it is time for your office to wage war against the legal bond known as marriage!! ”

    By doing this Rob, at least by the stats, you would have a hook to hang your pot!

    I retract that, as I now understand it will not help you get votes by dissing a minimum of 1/3 of the voting population.

    So full stream ahead Rob, Dog a few people and make it appear that you are helping all homeowners (majority of voters) by protecting them from would be scammers to which your office has recieved 4 complaints????? WTF??
    (just one note…….. How much has this cost individuals as well as the taxpayers of the state of WA?
    All for the sake of 4 complaints ( or 11 in a tri-state area?)

    Ahhhhh, I get it, Politics at its best!!!
    So Now that we know where you stand Rob, what are you doing to help the people that are in forclosure other than making them poor and giving business to your buds over at the NWJP.

    I just don’t get it other than your attempt at appealing to most voters during an election year.

    The floor is your Rob, care to answer?

  3. Chris responds:
    Posted: June 30th, 2008 at 7:47 am

    HB 2791 in the news:

    HB 2791Better Drowned Than Eaten?: http://www.nuwireinvestor.com/blogs/investorcentric/2008/06/hb-2791-better-drowned-than-eaten.html

    “This bill may have started with good intentions, but by penning these drowning homeowners off from the sharks, this legislature has penned them off from their only lifeboats, too. With the foment we’ve already seen surrounding this new bill, some political careers may be dragged under if reasonable changes aren’t made…and soon.”

    NuWire Investor Investigates New Foreclosure Scam Legislation:
    http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/6/prweb1038264.htm

    “NuWire helps explain how HB 2791 became so altered during the political process and identifies some of the key points that real estate agents, investors and service providers need to know before engaging in any foreclosure rescues or short sales affected by the bill.”

    The Legislative Labyrinth of HB 2791 –
    Washington state distressed homeowner legislation draws criticism:
    http://www.nuwireinvestor.com/articles/the-legislative-labyrinth-of-hb-2791-51744.aspx

    “Even Rodne, one of the sponsors for HB 2791, believes that the Bill has some fundamental problems.

    “As the industry and the Attorney General began to implement the provisions of HB 2791, it became clear that HB 2791 was flawed and corrective legislation may be necessary in the 2009 Session,” he said in an e-mail statement. “Please be assured that we are aware of potential problems and are working on a solution.””

  4. Chris responds:
    Posted: June 30th, 2008 at 7:54 am

    And one more:

    Distressed by Distressed Properties Law:
    http://seattlerealestatenews.com/tag/wa-house-bill-2791/

    “The bill has resulted in numerous rewritten and newly printed real estate transaction forms. It has already created and will create more confusion and waste of time for anyone involved in buying and selling a home. That includes all the aforementioned potential distressed home owners. The worst and most costly impact of this bill will be this: Every sane real estate agent will stay miles away from anybody suspected of harboring thoughts of being a potentially distressed home owner. The potential liability to be sued is simply too great. Ultimately, this bill may achieve the opposite results of what was intended: more foreclosures and more bankruptcies. The shady characters meant to be deterred by this bill will find other ways to ply their trade. Most condo owners remain unprotected and should watch out.”

  5. Chris responds:
    Posted: June 30th, 2008 at 8:07 am

    One more thing of note:

    On the Northwest Justice Project’s site:
    http://www.nwjustice.org/about_njp/index.html

    they post something of a mission statement saying,

    “NJP is committed to a policy of equal opportunity. It strives to foster an environment free of barriers and discriminatory practices for its clients”

    Wow! They sure blew that one.

  6. Chris responds:
    Posted: June 30th, 2008 at 8:35 am

    Ok – last item:

    Have you seen the info at the Washington Realtors website on distressed properties?
    http://www.warealtor.org/distressed_properties.asp

    What a mess.

  7. anemonehead responds:
    Posted: June 30th, 2008 at 8:42 am

    What’s the problem with this statement?:

    On the Northwest Justice Project’s site:
    http://www.nwjustice.org/about_njp/index.html

    they post something of a mission statement saying,

    “NJP is committed to a policy of equal opportunity. It strives to foster an environment free of barriers and discriminatory practices for its clients”

    HB 2791, which they were instrumental in penning, screws everyone in foreclosure or even thinking about being in foreclosure, the same!

  8. Jason responds:
    Posted: June 30th, 2008 at 3:51 pm

    anemonehead,
    I detect a bit of sarcasm in your post.

    I would still like to comment on one portion of the statement as follows
    ” It strives to foster an environment free of barriers”

    Yes, this is a portion of the entire statement.
    I would like to state 2 things about this statement……..
    1) Free of barriers????? Define barrier. Are a persons financial circumstances a barrier?
    Would the NJP help a person with several assets being forclosed the same as they would a person who makes $5/hr and supports a family of 5 whom is being forclosed on and most likely should not have been given the loan in the first place. (another story for sure)

    2) Equal opportunity eh????
    Why are they in tandem with the AGs office by cutting the throats of the folks helping people only to get them booted from their home making them in part qualify for the NJPs services?

    One scenario I forcast:
    Family gets booted, qualify for NJP services (BINGO) Don’t worry folks we will help you get into section 8 (Cha Ching) $ for NJP. Oh, now you need a bigger joint because you were not responsible with your circumstances and had another child, Don’t worry, we can fight> (keyword: charge our service to state and federal funders) (cha Ching again) for you to get that larger place. Now family is again unresponsible an gets evicted from property. (can take years in some areas of the country) Not to worry, NJP will help you again (again cha cing on the backs of responsible citizens, oops I mean Fed and State funding).

    Would Joe Kaiser and his offer not be better not only for the family in question, but the taxpayers of the state of WA as well?
    I just don’t get it, how are we better off being forced into forclosure and losing our home at a sale and walking away with nothing other than the service of the NJP. vs. giving up a bit of equity for the possibility of turning our situation around?
    I question the states intent as I remember reading on more than one
    occasion that they would be better off letting the home go to auction.
    To make myself clear…. the state feels that the homeowner would comeout better with the auction than it would with with Joes services!
    Is the state now involved in some sort of illegal gambling operation?

    Their is more wrong with the statement however I have limited time today.
    Thanks,
    Jason


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.