If you followed along back then, you’ll recall the story of how the wife called the AG’s Office and pleaded with them to get out of the way so I could help.

You’ll also remember how the Assistant Attorney General in charge at that time laughed in her face. It was incredibly cruel and left the wife and I in tears.

I was proud to have stepped up and rescued them, with no time to spare, in spite of the fact the AG’s office would likely sue me for having done so. And, they did.

There’s an update to the story here.

The final update, which I haven’t talked about, is remarkable.

The couple, whose actual name is Steve and Clare Garza, ultimately testified AGAINST me at my trial, convinced I was some sort of con man. They’d long forgotten the AG’s Office laughing in their face and their promise they’d be right there with me if the matter ever went before a judge.

And, I’m hearing now that I should expect to be served with a lawsuit they’ll soon be filing against me. No, I’m not surprised.

I saved their home with minutes to spare, knowing it was a dumb thing to do but feeling like I owed it to them. Here’s my recent letter to Steve and Clare . . .

March 19, 2010

Re: Your home in Outlook

Dear Steve and Clare,

I’m hearing through the grapevine that you’re going to be suing me for the return of your home, and I understand.

Please remember that I was the fellow who stepped up at the very last minute, with much personal risk, and saved your home from tax foreclosure. There would be no property to be discussing today were it not for my efforts to help you.

I have done nothing wrong and would not do anything to harm or injure any of my clients. The AG’s office is masterful at brainwashing people like you into believing they’re somehow victims, and I do not hold you responsible for falling into that trap.

Attached are the posts I made to my blog about you a year or two ago. They tell the real story of what happened here. I encourage you to read them to see what it feels like from the other side of the table.

I remember a couple things really clearly about you. The first was the effort Clare made to get the AG out of the way so we could assist, and how Assistant Attorney General Cheryl Kringle laughed in her face at the very thought that she could ask anything of the AG. For me, at least, it made it clear the AG’s office is not about helping people in need. Kringle could have very well caused you to lose your home (and no, you would not have been better off).

And, I remember driving out to meet both of you in mid-winter, checking to see that you had wood for heat and offering to buy wood if not. I also remember when you said the $300 a month was difficult that I responded by saying “just do your best.” You made only two payments in more than three years and we never said a word.

In ten years as a tax foreclosure investor, we did 400 deals with people in foreclosure, and everyone with whom we dealt was paid in full and everyone rescued, like you, is in their homes today. The AG’s foreclosure rescue “scam” story is 100% made-up by consumer protection crazies who have no boundaries or respect for the truth.

Rob McKenna, et al, has now spent in excess of $1,000,000.00 of taxpayer money coming after me in a Consumer Protection case having not a single consumer complaint. It sickens me.

In the end, you’re still in your home and that makes me proud. Please have your attorney contact me at the number below and I will execute a quit-claim deed to put the property back into your name.

You owe me nothing other than promising me you’ll think long and hard about what actually took place before calling me a “scam artist.” I am not a scam artist . . . I’m the guy who, with no time to spare, with the AG on my back threatening to sue me for millions, pushed all of that aside and saved your home.

Sincerely,

Joe Kaiser

And so it continues . . .

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. –Upton Sinclair

Although I’ve never met attorney David Leen, he has been a hero of mine for many years.

Way back in the 80’s, he sued on behalf of an owner in foreclosure who’d been mistreated and forever ensured foreclosure trustees in Washington State play fair.

After Cox v. Helenius, there was no question that foreclosure trustees owed fiduciary duties to both lender and borrower.

David Leen, no doubt, is a good guy and, apparently, a foreclosure rescue scam artist (no, not really).

Misleading Website?

David, it seems, has a website, as do many attorneys in this state.

I’ve reviewed his site and note one damning inequity shines above all: Leen represents himself to the property owners as an expert who will use his superior knowledge of foreclosure and real estate to help the property owner during their ‘difficult time.’

Unconscionability, if not outright fraud, should be presumed in these instances because Leen and his associates so obviously misrepresent their intentions to the property owners by asserting that they are going to help them out while instead helping themselves to enormous profits to the substantial detriment of property owners.

The Help Word

Mr. Leen misleads by mentioning “help” no less than four times on his website, and as you know your office makes it clear you can’t both help and charge for your foreclosure rescue services.

As such, according to AAG David Huey, there can be no other conclusion . . . it’s a scam.

“You gotta help or make money,” Huey says. “If you’re in it to make money, then you shouldn’t be telling people that you’re gonna help them because our experience is they don’t get help in this type of transaction.” — The Seattle Weekly

I’m sure everyone visiting Mr. Leen’s site assumes he stops foreclosure out of the goodness of his heart and his services are provided at no charge, especially since he makes no mention of costs or fees.

Imagine the hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, he’s taken from deceived homeowners faced with the loss of their homes (again, no, not really).

More “Help” Words

Here’s a couple of the deceptive passages on his site . . .

At Leen & O’Sullivan, PLLC, we will make every effort to help you keep your home and get you back on the track toward financial recovery.

We will clearly explain all of your options and help you find a creative solution to stop foreclosure.

Think of the people who, believing they’d be rescued from foreclosure at no cost, hired Mr. Leen to represent them and were subsequently forced to pay thousands of dollars for his services, becoming victims of his foreclosure rescue scheme in the process (again, no, not really).

Other perps

I was shocked to learn Mr. Leen and his associates aren’t the only Washington attorneys with deceptive websites (again, no, not really). Here are just a few I quickly located who are using the “help” ruse:

At the Law Office of Jason Anderson in Seattle, Washington, we are committed to helping our clients avoid foreclosure and holding mortgage companies accountable. Attorney Jason E. Anderson

Are you worried that the bank might foreclose on your home? . . . Don’t worry, I can help.Attorney David Fuller

Contact a Seattle real estate litigation attorney to learn how we can help protect your interests in any real estate dispute.Barrett & Gilman
Attorneys at Law

If you need expert help with a real estate matter in Seattle, Washington, please contact William Snell for a personal consultation regarding your situation. Attorney William N. Snell

Let’s get ‘em

I’m glad you’re on to them now because they’re doing exactly what your office has been warning us about . . .

AAG David W. Huey

They’re trying to make money off someone’s foreclosure.
AAG David W. Huey

Maybe it’s time we round up these scammers and spend a million dollars suing each and every one of them to end the “outright fraud” in which they are so obviously engaged (again, no, not really).

Help AND get paid . . . sheeez!

In the arena,

Joe Kaiser

Your office says my objective is to steal homes and strip equity from folks facing foreclosure. Your office, I think we can all acknowledge by now, is nuts.

Here’s another short Zook Mann clip with me talking to a fellow we rescued and sold back our interest. Five years later, he’s yet to pay dime one, btw.

My goal here is not for you to default and me ending up owning your whole thing. Like I said, I will never foreclose and I will never evict you. I will work with you every step of the way . . . Joe Kaiser

Hmmmm?

Lacking Objectivity

Could I be any more clear, Rob? Or is this really that difficult for your crack staff to comprehend?

I understand that having zero objectivity, your staff is incapable of acknowledging what they see with their own eyes. And that anything I do, in order for your allegations to make any sense, has to be a scam.

And really, that’s just fine, because I’m confident the judge will have no problem being objective.

A million bucks wasted, and counting . . .

In the arena,

Joe Kaiser

In late 2003, Jesse Zook Mann followed me around with a video camera, documenting my investing style and for some reason, we decided I needed to be wearing a hooded sweatshirt.

So, every day that month I showed up in said hoodie and the two of us hit the streets. Sometimes, a partner or two tagged along, and we video-taped the whole thing.

I think there’s something like 18 hours of videos, and finding them the other night was just about the best news I could imagine.

An “absolute falsehood”

AAG Sugarman told a recent interviewee, a fellow I’d rescued years earlier, that I was “evicting people left and right” before you sued me. Untrue.

And Chief Investigator Renee Shadel suggested the only reason he wasn’t evicted was because your office got involved, saying, “who knows what they would have done if we wouldn’t have sued them?”

I think we all know what would have happened, Rob (you need only check the video to confirm for yourself).

Clear enough?

We could never foreclosure, we could never evict, we could never do anything like that to her. We just couldn’t.—Joe Kaiser

And even though only a handful of the folks we rescued paid any rent, much less the agree amount, not a one was evicted and not a one had his interest foreclosed away.

Exculpate This!

I have 200 GB of videos like this. They tell the story and document our approach to helping people facing foreclosure.

And your allegations of unfair and deceptive acts?

Or that we were out scamming people out of their homes?

Or that sellers thought they were getting loans or were rushed to signing or inundated with paperwork or thought it was free and all that other nonsense you’ve made up?

Poof!

Project Canned

I paid Jesse something like six or eight grand to work on this project, and I ultimately decided to cancel it because I thought I looked too damn fat. So, the tapes got tossed.

But Jesse, smart guy that he is, had stuck them all on a portable hard drive, thinking they might be useful someday.

And today, Rob, is that day. Turns out it was the best six or eight grand I ever spent. Thanks for pushing me so hard to find them.

In the arena, caught on tape (Zook Mann, you are the man!),

Joe Kaiser

For the sake of argument, you’re in foreclosure, with 24 hours to get it brought current or you lose your home.

Are you with me?

In 24 hours, if you don’t get this thing squared away, your home is sold at auction.

And then I show up and make you the following proposal . . .

The Proposal

I’ll stop your foreclosure by curing the default, and ultimately, all you’ll have to do is pay me 50% of the future profits.

I’ll even let this thing run four years, so you don’t have to be concerned about paying me any time soon. In fact, you don’t have to pay me a penny for that entire time. And, if any problems come up that require funds, I’ll be glad to step in and get them handled.

And when that four years is up, I’ll even finance my profits so you don’t have to get a loan from a bank or risk not being able to get a loan at all. Just start making payments at 10% and we’ll call that good enough.

And, I’ll advance all your closing costs so you don’t have to bring a penny to escrow when it comes time to settle up.

Even better, if you’re short of funds and need some operating capital at that time, I’ll loan you an additional $10,000 (we’ll just add it into the loan) so you can walk out of escrow with a check in hand.

You interested?

Of course you are. You, along with everyone else on the planet at risk of losing his home takes this deal in a heartbeat.

Insane?

Who’d ever offer anyone that deal?

Me.

It’s a real deal, and it worked out exactly like that (and in case you’re wondering, we did just fine ourselves).

Four years later, the fellow is still in his home, and when AAG Jim Sugarman and ace investigator Renee Shadel met with him last month, they made it clear he’d been scammed.

He told them my deal felt like a Christmas present.

Not to be deterred, Sugarman told him he “screwed up,” saying he’d have been better off letting it go to the foreclosure sale in hopes an overage was created.

I kid you not.

Sugarman actually suggested passing on my “Merry Christmas” deal and instead losing his home to foreclose made more sense.

It leaves us with only one possible conclusion, Rob . . . your people are idiots.

Reality

Today, the fellow is paying us with the equity the house created. It doubled in value during those four years and had we not been around, that appreciation never happens for him.

Had we not been around, he’s foreclosed on, evicted, and homeless, hoping bidding activity creates an overage. That’s absurd. Suggesting it’s a better solution than my deal only makes sense if you enjoy living in your car.

He doesn’t.

Mucked up

And thinking he’d be able to collect the overage, if any, was equally absurd because if your people had a clue they’d have known title was mucked up as well, with his deceased grandmother showing up as a part owner.

Any overage created would not have been collectible without an attorney opening probate, a process requiring funds he did not have and more than a few months he could not have afforded to wait.

I have just one question, Rob . . . could your office possibly get it any more wrong?

Truly, I cannot imagine how.

In the arena,

Joe Kaiser

You may recall my post earlier this month when I suggested . . .

The next thing you will do is attempt to distance yourself from this ridiculous new foreclosure law, and you’ll do that by saying the bill as passed wasn’t the bill you’d intended.

You’ll say it got hijacked in committee and the folks who got in there and screwed it up are to blame, not you.

And you’ll be pointing the finger at Brian Weinstein to name just one. — June 2, 2008 Pushed to Shove.com
HB 2791 – What Happens Next?

New HB 2971 Article

Today’s Spokesmans Review has an article about the new law, and it’s not what you’d call favorable. But of interest to me are David Huey’s comments.

Here’s part of the article . . .

The Washington attorney general’s office, which proposed the legislation to protect consumers but watched as it was amended, says the law is unnecessarily broad. The office will advocate during the next legislative session to exempt Realtors, and likely won’t enforce the law against real estate agents except for “substantive” violations, said Assistant Attorney General David Huey.

While the original shorter version of the bill passed the House unedited, it was amended in the Senate to include the concept of foreclosure consultants.

So close.

The leaseback deal

It continues . . .

Huey drafted what became House Bill 2791 at the request of Attorney General Rob McKenna. It was intended to strictly regulate “distressed home conveyances” – when an owner relinquishes control of a home under the premise he or she can stay in the property and lease it with an option to buy or receive a portion of sale proceeds. About 18 states have similar protections, he said.

Such schemes might let the owner keep a house for six months or a year, but owners typically lose, Huey said.

Seduced

And the article continues . . .

It is a particularly seductive representation to tell somebody who’s facing foreclosure that you’re going to save them, that you’re going to keep them in that house,” Huey said. “For these transactions to turn out economically positive for both parties is just so difficult as to be beyond probability.— SpokesmanReview.com Article
June 12, 2008

Come again, Dave?

For these transactions to turn out economically positive for both parties is just so difficult as to be beyond probability.AAG David W. Huey

Did he really just say that, Rob?

Improbable

As Dave suggests, it is difficult to create the sort of foreclosure transactions that “turn out positive for both parties.” Inordinately difficult, (and best left to the pros).

But beyond probability?

We did something like 30 of them . . . and have a couple dozen going right now. An unbiased observer would look at our track record and conclude pretty much 100% of our partnership deals turned out as planned . . .

Owners are all still in their homes, they’re all happy, satisfied, and they have more equity today than when we saved them from foreclosure.

Beyond probability?

We made it happen virtually every time we got involved.

Nothing Personal, Dave

So, Rob, having pulled off what even Dave confirms is a near impossibility (dozens of successful foreclosure rescues), your office has sued me, calling these transactions foreclosure rescue scams.

Huh?

After all these years you still can’t appreciate the art and beauty of the foreclosure rescue deals we do?

Good grief.

In the arena,

Joe Kaiser

I’ve sent Jim a link to the Partnership Deal closing we did way back in 2003 or 04.

In fact, I’ll post it here so we can all take a look.

I thought as long as it’s up we might all play, “Spot the Scam,” and unless I miss my guess, AAG Jim Sugarman will be the winner, hands-down.

Screwed

Let’s all take a few minutes and see how I’ve totally screwed these poor folks over by tricking them into signing a deal that’s completely unfair and deceptive . . . at least in Jim’s opinion.

In our client’s opinion?

. . . the three year deal works out perfectly for us.Foreclosure Rescued Partners

In mine?

A great deal for all of us (as are all the deals we do).

A loan? Not for Profit?

The argument we hear from your office, Rob, is that these folks think all I did was make them a loan.

Did you hear any talk of me making a loan?

Of course not.

And you allege we pretend we’re giving away our services for free, and folks are somehow mislead.

Did it sound to you like we offered anything other than a paid service (and not a cheap one at that)?

Offer – Acceptance

We made a proposal – we’ll save your home, pay the arrears, and own a 50% interest in the property for having done so. And they, deciding our proposal “works out perfectly,” accepted.

Offer – Acceptance . . . what an innovative concept.

They weren’t mislead or tricked or confused, and they weren’t denied a chance to read the paperwork or consult an attorney or anything else you accuse me of. And they sure weren’t pressured into signing.

What they were, Rob, was delighted we could help them save their home from foreclosure.

The Pudding

And now, some four or five years later, how did things go?

Exactly as planned, of course.

Today, they’re in their home with the house having more than doubled in value.

And had we not partnered up and they somehow managed to save it on their own, it’s likely they’d have lost it in the intervening years (lots can happen, and did, while we’re involved).

Luckily for them, we were around to help them through a tough time or two.

Yeah, we screwed them over, Rob, and good.

In the arena,

Joe

Consumer advocate attorney Melissa A. Huelsman posted the following challenge on www.businessweek.com:

I . . . request for people . . . who are conducting this business “honestly” to show us how it works. I would LOVE you to show me satisfied customers who got their house back at a reasonable price that they could afford. PLEASE!— Foreclosure Rescue-Rescue Attorney
Melissa A. Huelsman

Melissa A. Huelsman

I accept her challenge.

Hello?

Some ten days ago I sent the following email to Melissa . . .

Hi Melissa,

Joe Kaiser

Hello?

So far, no response.

If you happen to see her in the hallway, would you let her know to get in touch with me so we can get her up to speed on this thing? Thanks.

In the arena,

Joe Kaiser

Yesterday’s post addressed the foreclosure rescue scam hoax your office perpetrated against the citizens of this state. From your own records, we know it doesn’t exist. And, it never did.

We also know attorney Melissa Huelsman’s contention we are in a “foreclosure fraud crisis” is just as bogus. We’re not. Your office receiving four actual foreclosure leaseback rescue complaints is proof enough to dispel that nonsense.

And, while the economy and subprime mortgage meltdown has put foreclosures at all time highs in many areas of the country (do we really want to talk about Minnesota?), the Pacific Northwest has been relatively unaffected (see very cool chart above from The NY Times).

So, where again is the crisis that necessitated a complete overhaul of our foreclosure laws?

The bottom of the scale

We know there’s no foreclosure rescue scam (your term) crisis or foreclosure fraud (Huelsman’s term) crisis, and from the very cool chart above, it’s clear, we’re at the extreme low-end of the scale in terms of actual foreclosures.

In fact, nationally, it appears we’re pretty much the lowest of all.

Crisis?

I’m guessing every other state dreams to be in our foreclosure crisis.

Isn’t it about time your office stops yelling, “the sky is falling?” In case you haven’t noticed, Rob, it’s not, and the evidence is nothing short of conclusive.

In the arena,

Joe Kaiser