I doubt it, Rob

Posted July 10th, 2008 by Joe Kaiser

So, Rob, my challenge to you is to find me one unhappy client who participated in a partnership transaction.

Dear Rob,

Received your latest 30 page interrogatories today and I’m guessing asking for copies of all our post 2006, 2007, and 2008 files will amount to another output of thousands upon thousands of pages of needless discovery.

And, of course, the end result will be more and more sellers reporting (1) I delivered on every promise I made, and (2) they were paid every nickel they were due.

But what else is new?

Bury me?

Asking me to essentially close up my business and spend another month gathering your requested documents is, undoubtedly, a means to bury me. And if that’s the way you want to play this game, that’s fine.

I’m convinced it’s unethical and unfair, but coming from your office, I’d have to say I’m used to it by now.

And, I’m convinced that once the hours and time and taxpayer money wasted on this case are made public, those thousand and thousands of pages of documents you’ve demanded won’t seem like such a hot idea.

30 for 30

But, enough of that.

What interests me the most about your newest demand is the copy of a blog post Jim Sugarman included as an Exhibit.

Does Jim actually read this blog every day?

Has he got nothing better to do?

The post he referenced was about the 30 partnership deals we did, and he’s asked for the list.

Rob, he’s already got that spreadsheet as well as all the files of those transactions, and all he has to do to find 30 satisfied clients is to pick any one of those transactions and give that seller a call.

Of course, it’s probably not hard to intimidate those sellers and convince them they’re victims (you’ve listed them as such), but if they’re telling the truth, they’ll all say we came through for them, exactly as promised.

Find me even one

I doubt you’ll be able to find even one genuinely unhappy client.

Not one.

So, Rob, my challenge to you is to find me one unhappy client who participated in a partnership transaction.

Yes, just one.

You can’t and you won’t, because no such person exists, (and no fair having Renee twist their arms).

In the arena,

Joe Kaiser

6 Responses to: “I doubt it, Rob”

  1. DaveD responds:
    Posted: July 10th, 2008 at 5:37 am

    Maybe you should “just say no” to the request. Is an interrogatory merely a request for information, or does it carry the force of subpoena with it? Quit rolling over for these clowns and make them prove their need of forcing you to continuously cough up docs. They already have all they are going to find… nothing!

    I’m thinking their operating credo “we don’t have anything yet, but remain hopeful” needs to be laid out for what it is… a hope an a prayer to end their embarassment, while heaping unmitigated harassment on a civilian resident. Make them prove the need. But check with your lawyer first.

  2. DaveD responds:
    Posted: July 10th, 2008 at 6:53 am


    You said “… Does Jim actually read this blog every day?

    Has he got nothing better to do?”

    He’s thinking you are making it easy for him. This would be where others would call you a dope for wearing your heart out on your sleeve through PTS. You had to expect someone to start using your own posts against you. Really lame creative effort by Jim, but should you be surprised?

    You have given them enough, in fact way too much already. Tell them to pound sand.

  3. Vlad responds:
    Posted: July 10th, 2008 at 9:40 am

    Gee, I thought all government entities were trying to pretend they’ve jumped on the “paperless” band wagon…now Rob’s office will be responsible for the needless death of even more trees….

    Not only posing danger to our routine Real Estate transactions through legislation that sucks, but bad for the environment too!!!…Seems the AG’s office will have a lot to answer for to the man up the steps…

  4. Joe Kaiser responds:
    Posted: July 10th, 2008 at 10:56 am


    It’s not a papercrunch thing at this point so much since we scan and burn CDs for them.

    But, what is troubling is knowing the absolute budget crunch the state of Washington is under, and the wasted $1mil this case is costing Washington tax payors.

    Rob McKenna’s 2004 campaign platform focused in part on helping state agencies avoid lawsuits. Here’s the now ridiculous sounding promise . . .

    McKenna based his 2004 campaign for the office of Attorney General around three areas of protection he promised to bring to Washingtonians: . . . and protection of pocketbooks by counseling state agencies to avoid costly trial and litigation . . . BallotPedia.org

    I guess his own office doesn’t count.

    Kinda takes your breath away, don’t it?


  5. Chris responds:
    Posted: July 10th, 2008 at 11:54 am

    A fellow traveler:

    Consumer Protection or Legal Extortion?:

  6. Joe Kaiser responds:
    Posted: July 10th, 2008 at 12:01 pm

    Chris, that is an amazing story!!! It fits, exactly.

    Time to get to work.


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.