"Windermere is the most poorly managed, unethical and predatory real estate company in America. Ethical agents are growing more and more reluctant to show Windermere listings these days, and potentially expose their clients to such catastrophic jeopardy. WindermereWatch.com is an indispensable internet news and opinion resource that provides hard evidence why consumers, agents and prospective realty franchisees should avoid Windermere Real Estate at all costs."

 

 

 

WindermereWatch

A public service consumer advocate reporting clear, compelling evidence of America's most dangerous and unethical corporate predator, Windermere Real Estate. When your home is listed for sale by Windermere, the resulting commission will fund Windermere's predatory legal strategies against other Windermere customers damaged by unscrupulous Windermere brokers, agents and franchise owners. Protect your life, home, family and future by cancelling or not renewing your Windermere listing. Don't risk doing business with Windermere Real Estate, the brand built on lies, fraud and ruined lives.

ABOUT WINDERMEREWATCH.COM CONTENT: Various image and editorial WindermereWatch.com content is protected from copyright infringement by 17 U.S.C. § 107, Non-Commercial Fair Use. Learn more about Fair Use here. ALL legal documents, pleadings, and case summaries presented on WindermereWatch.com have been collected from public resources available to everyone. Challenges to WindermereWatch.com and/or Windermere Victims' First Amendment speech rights will be vigorously defended. FOR PROOF THAT WINDERMERE INTIMIDATES, THREATENS AND SUBMITS FALSE STATEMENTS TO WEBSITE HOSTING COMPANIES, CLICK HERE.

WINDERMERE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPLAINTS and REVIEWS • CW TITLE/COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE REVIEWS

DON'T SUPPORT OR DONATE TO SEATTLE PRO MUSICA CHORAL GROUP—CLICK HERE TO LEARN WHY

WindermereWatch Top Reports Lineup • Got a Comment, Question, Case Tip or Windermere Story? Email WindermereWatch

as
 

CONSUMERS ARE URGED TO EXERCISE CAUTION IN THEIR SELECTION OF REAL ESTATE SERVICES...

What everyone who is currently doing business with Windermere Real Estate—or what anyone who is CONSIDERING doing business with Windermere Real Estate—should know about this predatory and consumer-abusive company:

In most cases, your home is the single biggest and most important investment you will ever make. Your ability to afford a home, and your home itself, are at the core of your happiness and human survival. If you can, just imagine for a moment what it would mean to lose your home; or what it would mean to lose the financial resources you’ve toiled so hard to earn—that allow you to own a home. This website is about the many individuals who have actually lost their homes or financial resources—or both—because they had the misfortune to deal with public predator Windermere Real Estate. And the cases presented here are only the ones we KNOW about—we’re finding more all the time. Please consider this next information VERY carefully, for how diligently you consider it may determine if you are willing to risk losing EVERYTHING you have ever worked for, including your home itself.

There are plenty of deceitful Realtors out there, Realtors who are willing to ruin your whole life just to make a buck. Have you ever thought about what might happen if something goes wrong with your home transaction? Most of the national brand real estate companies have policies in place to address agent or broker misconduct, but not Windermere Real Estate—it’s privately held by a single family, with no stockholders.

After all, your home is not a shirt from Macy’s you can return under a well-mandated return policy. It’s true that most home sales and purchases go smoothly, but have you ever asked yourself… “Who will be responsible if I end up with a crooked real estate agent who lies, or who doesn’t disclose something awful they know about the property I’m buying? Who will be responsible if I’m dealing with some agent who’s running a financial scam they’re not revealing? Who will be responsible if my agent is in cahoots with a dishonest seller, or is conspiring with an inspector who looks the other way at serious problems so the agent will recommend him again?”

The answer is, in most cases, it’s the franchise owner and/or the broker to whom the agent is licensed, that is responsible for agent malfeasance. And nobody would be willing to buy a Windermere franchise, or be a Windermere broker, if they’d actually end up being legally responsible for all the damage a dishonest Realtor will cause, because that damage is not done to a simple shirt from Macy’s that you can return: THAT DAMAGE IS DONE TO SOME INNOCENT AND UNSUSPECTING HUMAN BEING’S HOME, LIFE and FINANCIAL FUTURE.

If you're a buyer and some variety of agent misconduct has occurred, the subject property may not be habitable for various reasons, which will turn your life upside down, fast. There’s enormous money and emotional distress at stake. And there will be lawyers, lots of lawyers. Windermere Real Estate employs and profits on so many corrupt franchise owners, brokers and agents, that it maintains its own fulltime, in-house legal services, the Demco Law Firm. If you think for one moment that when your Windermere home deal goes bad, your Windermere broker or franchise owner is going to run over, apologize, and ask what they can do to help you, you’ve got another, very serious think coming. When your Windermere agent crosses over the Realtor code of ethics line, YOU AND YOUR HOME BECOME THE ENEMY.

That broker and/or franchise owner are legally on-the-hook for their agent’s misconduct, and the Windermere Legal War Machine will come down on you like a supersonic ton of bricks. If Windermere did not provide its franchise clients such hardcore legal resources, nobody would even BE a Windermere broker or franchise owner—the exposure is too great. And make no mistake, Windermere will do nothing—and spend nothing—to settle your problem amicably, no matter what indecency the agent or broker has committed. Windermere will force you to sue. Windermere's much-ballyhooed and heavily promoted commitment to "The highest ethical standards. Uncompromising honesty and integrity," is nothing but a marketing lie designed to induce business volume.

Windermere's Demco Law Firm is so unethical, so deceitful and intimidating, that it’s famous in law circles. Its lead attorney, Matthew F. Davis, is renown for his dishonesty, dubious legal tactics, lack of decency and disrespect for the rules of professional conduct. He will do absolutely anything to win—without regard for truth or justice. He will lie to courts and opposing parties. He will file fallacious and erroneous documents with the court. He will email opposing parties telling them not to hire a lawyer when he has just served them a lawsuit. He will call a judge's chambers and request more time without informing the opposing party. He will file orders for a bench trial when he knows a jury trial has been demanded and paid for. He will trick, stall, coerce, menace and threaten. He will invent and extend costly, mendacious Windermere litigation and abuse the legal process for no other reason than to exhaust an opponent’s pocketbook. If he can, he will get YOUR attorney to quit—a favorite tactic.

Windermere, Davis and Demco Law will push a $5 cat poop case all the way to the state supreme court, just to avoid paying damages, because it’s all in the Windermere operating budget—while your legal expenses will be coming out of your savings, retirement account, home equity or credit cards, if you even have those resources. And in the end, Windermere/Davis/Demco will try to coerce silence about your bad Windermere experience by forcing you into signing a legal "settlement" agreement that terminates your speech rights, so you can't ever tell anybody or inform the public about your Windermere debacle. When you sign, they'll let you out of the bogus lawsuit.

Don't be fooled when your particular local Windermere office says "Oh... OUR Windermere franchise doesn't work that way." Every Windermere franchise in every state pays a portion of every commission to franchise policy-maker Windermere Services Company, and its legal war chest. If you are dealing with Windermere Real Estate, you are unwittingly being duped into funding Windermere's financial genocide against other damaged Windermere customers.

If anything does indeed go wrong with your Windermere home transaction—like it has for so many—you may never recover. When these profoundly devastating problems occur, the resulting irreversible human toll of precious time, money and brutal emotional distress will forever ruin your life and future. If you are considering doing business with Windermere Real Estate, think VERY carefully about doing so.

REMEMBER: IF SOMETHING GOES WRONG WITH YOUR WINDERMERE DEAL, IT'S FAR EASIER—AND CHEAPER—FOR WINDERMERE LAWYERS TO STALL AND SLOWLY WASTE YOUR ENTIRE NET WORTH ON LITIGATION, THAN IT IS FOR WINDERMERE TO STEP UP AND MAKE YOU WHOLE.

_______________

WINDERMERE'S PRIVITY ARGUMENT

DO YOU HAVE A LEGAL DISPUTE WITH WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE? YOU MAY BE ABLE TO ADD FRANCHISER WINDERMERE SERVICES COMPANY TO YOUR COMPLAINT.

Franchiser Windermere Services Company prevailed in a motion in which it has admitted that it is in tradename privity with its Windermere network owner franchisees. (Access the motion here)

Are you suing or litigating against Windermere Real Estate? Are you the victim of a dishonest Windermere agent, broker, or franchise owner who is forcing you to sue to recover honest damages? Franchiser Windermere Services Company has prevailed in a motion in which it has admitted that it is in tradename privity with its franchisees, which may allow you to add  Windermere Services and/or the entire Windermere Real Estate Network of franchise owners to your complaint. Ask your lawyer. Read what follows here, then print out Windermere’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and take it to your legal counsel, or send your legal counsel the link to this story.

In King County Superior Court case number 05-2-34433 SEA, to dispose of a defendant’s counterclaims in their  defamation and trade libel lawsuit of intimidation brought against a buyer who publicized Windermere lies and its refusal to honor its public commitment to the “highest ethical standards, uncompromising honesty and integrity,” franchiser Windermere Services Company and franchisee broker Windermere Real Estate/Northeast—and their lawyer, Matthew Davis of Demco Law Firm—argued in a motion for partial summary judgment that “It is true that Windermere Services Company was not itself a party to the first lawsuit, but as the owner of the Windermere tradename, it is in privity with Windermere Real Estate/Northeast.”

Black’s Law Dictionary defines privity as:

privity (priv-e-tee) 1. The connection or relationship between two parties, each having a legally recognized interest in the same subject matter (such as a transaction, proceeding, or piece of property); mutuality of interest <privity of contract>

The court agreed with Windermere’s argument and granted its motion. But when it was clear Windermere would face a jury, it voluntarily dismissed its own lawsuit under CR 41, after first pressuring the defendant without success to be silent and sign away his protected speech rights.

While this writer is not an attorney or legal expert, and this news coverage is not intended in any way to be legal advice, it has been noted that privity works both ways, and suggested that the court’s ruling on Windermere tradename privity could be interpreted or construed to mean that Windermere Services Company shares automatic mutual liability for any harmful act or violation of law committed by any Windermere franchisee broker, because the parties share the same tradename; and/or that ALL Windermere Network franchisee brokers share automatic mutual liability for ANY OTHER Windermere Network franchisee broker’s harmful act or violation of law, through sharing the same tradename. When you are damaged by any Windermere broker or agent, the entire Windermere Network may now be mutually liable.

ALTERNATIVE SERVICE PROVIDERS:
• COLDWELL BANKER
• CENTURY 21
• JOHN L. SCOTT
• RE/MAX
• PRUDENTIAL
• KELLER WILLIAMS
• HELP-U-SELL
• ASSIST-2-SELL

 

_______________

 

 
Smart Consumer SideBar:
 
Read the FINANCIAL CRIMES ENFORCEMENT NETWORK REPORT...

"SUSPECTED MONEY LAUNDERING IN THE RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE INDUSTRY"

Courtesy of www.FinCEN.gov
Download this important info here.

_______________________

AGGRESSIVE, HARDBALL LEGAL TACTICS:

WINDERMERE ABUSES THE LEGAL PROCESS THROUGH FILING FALSE AND MENDACIOUS LAWSUITS TO INTIMIDATE, BANKRUPT, SILENCE AND COERCE DAMAGED CUSTOMERS OUT OF THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL SPEECH RIGHTS

REALTY GIANT DEMANDS "DARK CLAUSE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS" THAT TERMINATE DAMAGED CUSTOMER SPEECH RIGHTS, BUT THEN RUNS AWAY AND VOLUNTARILY DISMISSES ITS OWN LAWSUIT WHEN VICTIMS WON'T SIGN...

As WindermereWatch proves, there are many Windermere victims—more all the time—and when those victims use the media to complain and warn others, franchiser Windermere Services Company and local franchise owners sue them for libel and defamation through specious lawsuits that are intended to intimidate and silence. Read one of the phony lawsuits here.

Then Windermere tries to coerce victims into signing a “dark clause settlement agreement” that permanently terminates their speech rights.

In the Mark and Carol DeCoursey case dark clause, Windermere even tried to dictate what the DeCourseys could say to other individuals in simple conversation: "The DeCourseys agree that they shall not communicate with any person about their dispute with Windermere unless asked, and if asked, will only state that they have resolved their claim to their satisfaction." Read the DeCoursey Case Dark Clause here.

And in another of its dark clauses, Windermere required "...that he will cease all efforts of any kind (c) to publicly state opinions or beliefs about Windermere Real Estate." Read the Kruger Case Dark Clause here.

This predatory legal tactic is known as abuse of process or malicious prosecution. When a victim refuses to sign, Windermere runs away and voluntarily dismisses its own lawsuit under Civil Rule 41—just before trial, after costing the victim years of distress and yet thousands more to defend against the false action.

In one example, franchisor Windermere Services Company served an outspoken victim a fallacious lawsuit for libel and defamation, and then immediately sent them an email instructing that they "...need not hire an attorney," and further stating, “…we will try to resolve this directly and outside the legal system." Incredibly, Windermere implements both the aggression and arrogance to overtly and unabashedly order that a damaged customer it has falsely sued be unrepresented by counsel and resolve their dispute outside the very same legal system in which Windermere has brought suit against them.

In this day and age it all sounds so inconceivably Orwellian—but it's true.

___________________________

DON'T DONATE OR BUY CONCERTS TICKETS TO SEATTLE PRO MUSICA CHORAL GROUP DETAILS HERE

paul draynaTHE CORPORATE HYPOCRITE PERSONIFIED: Windermere Services Company's General Counsel, attorney Paul S. Drayna, exploits the pretense of charitable public service at Seattle Pro Musica while he's simultaneously ruining damaged Windermere customers with false marketing warranties and the costly, mendacious lawsuits he files against defrauded Windermere victims who speak publicly. Drayna sues an outspoken party for trade libel and defamation, tries to coerce the defendant into silence through fear and intimidation, continues to prosecute the bogus action for years at enormous cost to the parties, then runs away and voluntarily dismisses his own lawsuit under CR41, just before trial when the innocent, honest victim persists in refusing to sign away their speech rights. Such are the ethics of the individual who manages Seattle Pro Musica's legal affairs, a tax-exempt 501(c)3 charitable organization, funded by tax deductible contributions. DETAILS HERE

DOWNLOAD A PDF COPY OF THE WINDERMEREWATCH.COM PRO MUSICA LETTER TO SHARE WITH AN INTERESTED PARTY

"We are committed to: The highest ethical standards. Uncompromising honesty and integrity." —The Windermere Mission Statement "In the real estate business somebody's word is very important. If you say you're going to do something, you've got to do it." —Windermere CEO Geoff Wood's Public Affirmation

California Real Estate Law pages: 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12-13-14-15-16

 

DOWNLOAD A PDF COPY OF THE CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE LAWS HERE

 

Refund of Advance Fee Paid

10167.10. (a) (1) A licensee shall refund in full the fee paid by a prospective tenant if the licensee does not, within five days after execution of the contract, supply at least three rental properties then available to the prospective tenant and meeting the specifications of the contract, unless the prospective tenant obtains a rental through the services of the licensee.

(2) A licensee will be deemed to have supplied information meeting the specifications of the prospective tenant if the information supplied meets the contract specifications with reference to: (i) type of structure; (ii) designated area; (iii) furnished or unfurnished; (iv) number of bedrooms; (v) maximum rental; and (vi) any other specification expressly set forth in the contract. A demand for the return of the fee shall be made by or on behalf of the prospective tenant within 10 days following the expiration of the five-day period referred to above by delivery or by mailing by registered or certified mail to the address of a location, or branch office of a real estate broker, set forth in the contract.

(b) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (3), a licensee shall refund any fee paid over and above the sum of a fifty dollar ($50) service charge to the prospective tenant if the prospective tenant obtains a rental other than through the services of the licensee during the term of the contract or does not obtain a rental, provided that the prospective tenant demands a return of that part of the fee within 10 days after the expiration of the contract.

(2) The licensee shall refund any fee paid over and above the sum of a fifty dollar ($50) service charge to the prospective tenant within 10 days of receipt from the prospective tenant of either the documentation specified in subparagraph (A) or the written statement specified in subparagraph (B), as applicable:

(A) Except as specified in subparagraph (B), a prospective tenant demanding a refund shall provide to the licensee reasonable documentation of the prospective tenant’s new rental or of the fact that the prospective tenant did not move, such as a lease, rental agreement, or utility bill, with sufficient information to verify that the new rental was not obtained through the services of the licensee or that the prospective tenant did not move.

(B) If the prospective tenant is unable to locate or provide the documentation specified in subparagraph (A), the prospective tenant may, at his or her option, fill out and sign a written statement, supplied by the licensee, in the following form:

I, __________________________, do (name of prospective tenant) swear or affirm the following:

I currently live at __________________ (street address)

The following statement is true (check one):

____ I have rented a unit at the above address. I did not obtain this rental through the services of _________________________ (name of licensee) during the time of our contract.

____ I did not find a new rental and did not move. I still live at the above address.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

________________________________ (date) ____________________________________ (location)

________________________________ (signature)

(3) On or after January 1, 2002, the department may, from time to time, by regulation, adjust the amount of the allowable service charge to reflect the rate of inflation from the previous date that the amount of the allowable service charge was established, as measured by the Consumer Price Index or other method of measuring the rate of inflation which the department determines is reliable and generally accepted.

(c) Each contract shall contain provisions that shall read as follows unless different language shall have been approved in writing by the department prior to use:

RIGHT TO REFUND

(Full capital letters, in 12-point type or greater, boldface or italicized)

 

“IF, WITHIN FIVE DAYS AFTER PAYMENT OF A FEE, THE LICENSEE HAS NOT SUPPLIED THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT WITH AT LEAST THREE AVAILABLE RENTAL PROPERTIES MEETING THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE CONTRACT AS TO (I) TYPE OF STRUCTURE; (II) DESIGNATED AREA; (III) FURNISHED OR UNFURNISHED; (IV) NUMBER OF BEDROOMS; (V) MAXIMUM RENTAL; AND (VI) ANY OTHER SPECIFICATION EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN THE CONTRACT, THE FULL AMOUNT OF THE FEE PAID SHALL BE REFUNDED TO THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT UPON PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE OF THAT FAILURE WITHIN 10 DAYS AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF THE FIVE-DAY PERIOD. THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT IS NOT ENTITLED TO A REFUND IF THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT OBTAINS A RENTAL THROUGH THE SERVICES OF THE LICENSEE.

 

IF THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT OBTAINS A RENTAL OTHER THAN THROUGH THE SERVICES OF THE LICENSEE DURING THE TERM OF THIS CONTRACT OR IF THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT DOES NOT OBTAIN A RENTAL THROUGH THE SERVICES OF THE LICENSEE DURING THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT, THE LICENSEE SHALL REFUND THE FEE RECEIVED IN EXCESS OF A (INSERT APPLICABLE LIMIT PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION (B) OF SECTION 10167.10 OF THE BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE) SERVICE CHARGE TO THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT WITHIN 10 DAYS AFTER THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT SUPPLIES EITHER (I) REASONABLE DOCUMENTATION OF THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT’S NEW RENTAL OR OF THE FACT THAT THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT DID NOT MOVE, SUCH AS A LEASE, RENTAL AGREEMENT, OR UTILITY BILL, WITH SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO VERIFY THAT THE NEW RENTAL WAS NOT OBTAINED THROUGH THE SERVICES OF THE LICENSEE OR THAT THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT DID NOT MOVE, OR (II) IF THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT IS UNABLE TO LOCATE OR PROVIDE THAT DOCUMENTATION, THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT MAY, AT HIS OR HER OPTION, FILL OUT A WRITTEN FORM PROVIDED BY THE LICENSEE AND SIGNED BY THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY STATING THAT HE OR SHE DID NOT OBTAIN A RENTAL THROUGH THE SERVICES OF THE LICENSEE DURING THE TIME OF THE CONTRACT.

 

TO BE ENTITLED TO A REFUND IN EXCESS OF THE SERVICE CHARGE, THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT MUST MAIL OR DELIVER THE DEMAND FOR REFUND NOT LATER THAN 10 DAYS AFTER EXPIRATION OF THIS CONTRACT, AND MUST SUPPLY EITHER (I) REASONABLE DOCUMENTATION OF THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT’S NEW RENTAL OR OF THE FACT THAT THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT DID NOT MOVE, SUCH AS A LEASE, RENTAL AGREEMENT, OR UTILITY BILL, WITH SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO VERIFY THAT THE NEW RENTAL WAS NOT OBTAINED THROUGH THE SERVICES OF THE LICENSEE OR THAT THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT DID NOT MOVE, OR (II) A WRITTEN FORM PROVIDED BY THE LICENSEE AND SIGNED BY THE PROSPECTIVE TENANT UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY STATING THAT HE OR SHE DID NOT OBTAIN A RENTAL THROUGH THE SERVICES OF THE LICENSEE DURING THE TIME OF THE CONTRACT. THE DOCUMENTATION MAY BE SUPPLIED AFTER THE DEMAND FOR A REFUND IS MAILED OR DELIVERED, PROVIDED THAT IT IS SUPPLIED WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME AFTER IT BECOMES AVAILABLE.”

 

(d) This section shall not apply to a person purchasing rental information for a purpose other than that of locating a rental unit for personal use or the use of a designated person.

(e) If the licensee fails to make a refund as provided in this section and if the denial or delay in making the refund is found to have been done in bad faith, a court of appropriate jurisdiction, including a small claims court, shall be empowered to award damages to the plaintiff in an amount not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) in addition to actual damages sustained by the plaintiff. If the licensee refuses or is unable to pay the damages awarded by the court, the award may be satisfied out of the security required under Section 10167.7.

Violations

10167.11. It shall be a violation of this article for any licensee or any employee or agent of a licensee to do the following:

(a) Make, or cause to be made, any false, misleading, or deceptive advertisements or representations concerning the services that the licensee will provide to prospective tenants.

(b) Refer a property to a prospective tenant knowing or having reason to know that:

(1) The property does not exist or is unavailable for tenancy.

(2) The property has been described or advertised by or on behalf of the licensee in a false, misleading, or deceptive manner.

(3) The licensee has not confirmed the availability of the property for tenancy during the four-day period immediately preceding dissemination of the listing information. However, it shall not be a violation to refer a property to a prospective tenant during a period of from five to seven days after the most recent confirmation of the availability of the property for rental if the licensee has made a good faith effort to confirm availability within the stated four-day period, and if the most recent date of confirmation of availability is set forth in the referral.

(4) The licensee has not obtained written or oral permission to list the property from the property owner, manager, or other authorized agent.

License Suspension or Revocation

10167.12. (a) The commissioner may suspend, deny, or revoke the license of a licensee or the license of the licensee to operate at one or more locations for either of the following:

(1) A violation of this article by a licensee or by an employee or agent, including a designated agent, of the licensee.

(2) A conviction of a licensee, or a designated agent, or of an officer, director, or owner of 25 percent or more of the shares of a corporate licensee for a crime which is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a prepaid rental listing service licensee.

(b) For the purpose of determining whether grounds exist for suspending, denying, or revoking the license of a licensee, the commissioner shall hold a hearing in accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 11500) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code.

Two-year License Term

10167.13. A prepaid rental listing service license issued by the department shall be for a period of two years. An application and fee for renewal filed with the department before midnight of the last day of the period for which a previous license was issued entitles the licensee to continue operating at all locations specified in the previous license for which a renewal fee is paid.

Injunction

10167.14. Whenever any person has engaged or threatens to engage in any acts or practices which constitute, or will constitute a violation of a provision of the article, the superior court of the county in which the acts or practices have taken place, or are about to take place, on complaint of the commissioner, the attorney general, district attorney, or city attorney, may enjoin such acts or practices by appropriate order. The proceedings under this section shall be governed by Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 525) of Title 7 of Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, except that no undertaking shall be required.

Misdemeanor

10167.15. Any person, including an officer, director, or employee of a corporation who willfully violates any provision of this article is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Applicable Laws

10167.16. A person or corporation licensed pursuant to this article and not engaging in acts for which a real estate license is required under Article 1 (commencing with Section 10130) of Chapter 3 of Part 1 of Division 4, shall be subject, in addition to the provisions of this article, to the provisions of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 10000) and Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 10050) of Part 1 of Division 4, and to Sections 10450, 10452, 10453, and 10454.

Provisions of Licensure

10167.17. The commissioner shall, by regulation, make prepaid rental listing service licensees and applicants for prepaid rental listing service licenses subject to the same provisions respecting licensure as are applicable to real estate licenses under Sections 10151.5, 10156.5, 10156.6, 10156.7, 10200, and 10201.

Article 2.5. Continuing Education

Legislative Determination

10170. The Legislature has determined that it is in the public interest of consumer protection and consumer service that all real estate licensees licensed under the provisions of this part comply with continuing education requirements adopted by the commissioner pursuant to this article as a prerequisite to the renewal of real estate licenses on and after January 1, 1981.

Advisory Committee

10170.2. The commissioner may appoint a committee comprised of licensees under this part and persons with expertise in real estate education to advise him with respect to his responsibilities under this article.

Regulations to Be Adopted

10170.4. The commissioner shall adopt regulations pursuant to Section 10080, to prescribe all of the following:

(a) A definition of basic requirements for continuing education of 45 clock hours of attendance at approved educational courses, seminars, workshops, or conferences, or their equivalent, achieved during a four-year period preceding license renewal application.

(b) A basis and method of qualifying educational programs, the successful completion of which, will satisfy the requirements of this article.

(c) A procedure for evaluation of petitions based on a claim of equivalency with the requirements of subdivision (a), and a reasonable standard by which an activity would be judged equivalent, including, but not limited to, instruction in real estate subjects, publication of professional articles or books, or development of real estate educational programs, law or research.

(d) A system of control and reporting qualifying attendance.

(e) An appropriate form of testing, examination or evaluation by the sponsor of each approved correspondence or homestudy educational program, or equivalent, of the student.

(f) A statement of the conditions of exemption from the continuing education requirements established under this article, as well as a method of applying and qualifying for these exemptions, for reasons of health, military service, or other compelling cause.

In exercising the authority under this article, the commissioner shall establish standards which will assure reasonable currency of knowledge as a basis for a level of real estate practice which will provide a high level of consumer protection and of competence in achieving the objectives of members of the public who engage the services of licensees. The standards shall permit a variety of alternatives of subject material to licensees taking cognizance of specialized areas of practice, and alternatives in sources of programs considering availability in area and time. The standards shall include, where qualified, generally accredited educational institutions, private vocational schools, correspondence institutions, educational programs, workshops, and seminars of professional societies and organizations, other organized educational programs on technical subjects, or equivalent offerings.

Required Courses

10170.5. (a) Except as otherwise provided in Sections 10153.4 and 10170.8, no real estate license shall be renewed unless the commissioner finds that the applicant for license renewal has, during the four-year period preceding the renewal application, successfully completed the 45-clock hours of education provided for in Section 10170.4, including all of the following:

(1) A three-hour course in ethics, professional conduct, and legal aspects of real estate, which shall include, but not be limited to,relevant legislation, regulations, articles, reports, studies, court decisions, treatises, and information of current interest.

(2) A three-hour course in agency relationships and duties in a real estate brokerage practice, including instruction in the disclosures to be made and the confidences to be kept in the various agency relationships between licensees and the parties to real estate transactions.

(3) A three-hour course in trust fund accounting and handling.

(4) A three-hour course in fair housing.

(5) A three-hour course in risk management that shall include, but need not be limited to, principles, practices, and procedures calculated to avoid errors and omissions in the practice of real estate licensed activities.

(6) Not less than 18-clock hours of courses or programs related to consumer protection, and designated by the commissioner as satisfying this purpose in his or her approval of the offering of these courses or programs, which shall include, but not be limited to, forms of real estate financing relevant to serving consumers in the marketplace, land use regulation and control, pertinent consumer disclosures, agency relationships, capital formation for real estate development, fair practices in real estate, appraisal and valuation techniques, landlord-tenant relationships, energy conservation, environmental regulation and consideration, taxation as it relates to consumer decisions in real estate transactions, probate and similar disposition of real property, governmental programs such as revenue bond activities, redevelopment, and related programs, business opportunities, mineral, oil, and gas conveyancing, and California law that relates to managing community associations that own, operate, and maintain property within common interest developments, including, but not limited to, management, maintenance, and financial matters addressed in the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act.

 

(7) Other courses and programs that will enable a licensee to achieve a high level of competence in serving the objectives of consumers who may engage the services of licensees to secure the transfer, financing, or similar objectives with respect to real property, including organizational and management techniques that will significantly contribute to this goal.

(b) Except as otherwise provided in Section 10170.8, no real estate license shall be renewed for a licensee who already has renewed under subdivision (a), unless the commissioner finds that the applicant for license renewal has, during the four-year period preceding the renewal application, successfully completed the 45-clock hours of education provided for in Section 10170.4, including an eight-hour update survey course that covers the subject areas specified in paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, of subdivision (a).

(c) Any denial of a license pursuant to this section shall be subject to Section 10100.

(d) For purposes of this section, “successful completion” of a course described in paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, of subdivision (a) means the passing of a final examination.

Licensee Right

10170.6. The commissioner may amend or repeal any regulation adopted pursuant to this article in the same manner as provided for adoption of such regulations, except that no amendment or repeal shall operate to deprive any licensee of the right to submit qualifying education completed pursuant to such amended or repealed regulation during his current license term, as a basis for license renewal.

Exemption Conditions – 30 Years as Licensee – 70 Years or Older

10170.8. The provisions of this article shall not apply to any real estate licensee who submits proof satisfactory to the commissioner that he or she has been a real estate licensee in good standing for 30 continuous years in this state and is 70 years of age or older.

A licensee in good standing is one who holds an active license which has not been suspended, revoked, or restricted as a result of disciplinary action.

License Grace Period

10171.2. If an applicant for a license has submitted, in good faith, evidence of completion of continuing education which he had reason to believe would qualify him for license renewal, but the commissioner finds that the evidence submitted does not qualify under standards adopted pursuant to this article, the commissioner may, nonetheless, extend the license for 90 days in order to allow the applicant to submit additional evidence of compliance, which satisfies the requirements of this article. When the license is issued during or at the end of the grace period provided for in this section it shall expire four years from the date otherwise applicable if no grace period had been granted.

License Reinstatement After Disciplinary Action

10171.3. On and after January 1, 1981, a real estate license, which has been revoked as the result of disciplinary action by the commissioner, shall not be reinstated, nor shall a restricted real estate license be issued to an applicant in connection with a petition for reinstatement, unless the applicant presents evidence of completion of the continuing education required by this article. This requirement of evidence of continuing education shall not be imposed upon an applicant for reinstatement who has been required under Section 10182 to pass a qualifying examination as a condition to reinstatement.

Temporary License Issuance

10171.4. Any licensee who applies for renewal of his or her license under Section 10461, or for reinstatement of his or her license under Section 10161.5 or 10463, shall, if the previous active license issued to him or her was issued four or more years prior to his or her application for renewal or reinstatement, present evidence of compliance with this article. If no such qualifying evidence is presented, the commissioner may issue a temporary license for a period of 90 days.

 

If the applicant presents evidence within 90 days of compliance with this article and is otherwise qualified, the commissioner shall issue a regular license without additional fee. It shall expire four years from the date which would otherwise have been applicable if a temporary license under this section had not been issued.

Corporate Broker-Officer

10171.5. A person who is licensed as a real estate broker only as an officer of a corporate broker pursuant to Section 10158 or 10211 shall not be eligible for the renewal of such license nor for the issuance of a license in an individual capacity or as an officer of a corporate broker licensed pursuant to Section 10158 or 10211, unless and until such person has completed the continuing education requirements of this article.

Article 3. Disciplinary Action

Powers

10175. Upon grounds provided in this article and the other articles of this chapter, the license of any real estate licensee may be revoked or suspended in accordance with the provisions of this part relating to hearings.

Monetary Penalty in Lieu of Suspension

10175.2. (a) If the Real Estate Commissioner determines that the public interest and public welfare will be adequately served by permitting a real estate licensee to pay a monetary penalty to the department in lieu of an actual license suspension, the commissioner may, on the petition of the licensee, stay the execution of all or some part of the suspension on the condition that the licensee pay a monetary penalty and the further condition that the licensee incur no other cause for disciplinary action within a period of time specified by the commissioner.

(b) The commissioner may exercise the discretion granted under subdivision (a) either with respect to a suspension ordered by a decision after a contested hearing on an accusation against the licensee or by stipulation with the licensee after the filing of an accusation, but prior to the rendering of a decision based upon the accusation. In either case, the terms and conditions of the disciplinary action against the licensee shall be made part of a formal decision of the commissioner.

(c) If a licensee fails to pay the monetary penalty in accordance with the terms and conditions of the decision of the commissioner, the commissioner may, without a hearing, order the immediate execution of all or any part of the stayed suspension in which event the licensee shall not be entitled to any repayment nor credit, prorated or otherwise, for money paid to the department under the terms of the decision.

(d) The amount of the monetary penalty payable under this section shall not exceed two hundred fifty dollars ($250) for each day of suspension stayed nor a total of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per decision regardless of the number of days of suspension stayed under the decision.

(e) Any monetary penalty received by the department pursuant to this section shall be credited to the Recovery Account of the Real Estate Fund.

Grounds for Revocation or Suspension

10176. The commissioner may, upon his or her own motion, and shall, upon the verified complaint in writing of any person, investigate the actions of any person engaged in the business or acting in the capacity of a real estate licensee within this state, and he or she may temporarily suspend or permanently revoke a real estate license at any time where the licensee, while a real estate licensee, in performing or attempting to perform any of the acts within the scope of this chapter has been guilty of any of the following:

(a) Making any substantial misrepresentation.

(b) Making any false promises of a character likely to influence, persuade or induce.

(c) A continued and flagrant course of misrepresentation or making of false promises through real estate agents or salespersons.

(d) Acting for more than one party in a transaction without the knowledge or consent of all parties thereto.

 

(e) Commingling with his or her own money or property the money or other property of others which is received and held by him or her.

(f) Claiming, demanding, or receiving a fee, compensation or commission under any exclusive agreement authorizing or employing a licensee to perform any acts set forth in Section 10131 for compensation or commission where the agreement does not contain a definite, specified date of final and complete termination.

(g) The claiming or taking by a licensee of any secret or undisclosed amount of compensation, commission or profit or the failure of a licensee to reveal to the employer of the licensee the full amount of the licensee's compensation, commission or profit under any agreement authorizing or employing the licensee to do any acts for which a license is required under this chapter for compensation or commission prior to or coincident with the signing of an agreement evidencing the meeting of the minds of the contracting parties, regardless of the form of the agreement, whether evidenced by documents in an escrow or by any other or different procedure.

(h) The use by a licensee of any provision allowing the licensee an option to purchase in an agreement authorizing or employing the licensee to sell, buy, or exchange real estate or a business opportunity for compensation or commission, except when the licensee prior to or coincident with election to exercise the option to purchase reveals in writing to the employer the full amount of licensee's profit and obtains the written consent of the employer approving the amount of the profit.

(i) Any other conduct, whether of the same or a different character than specified in this section, which constitutes fraud or dishonest dealing.

(j) Obtaining the signature of a prospective purchaser to an agreement which provides that the prospective purchaser shall either transact the purchasing, leasing, renting or exchanging of a business opportunity property through the broker obtaining the signature, or pay a compensation to the broker if the property is purchased, leased, rented or exchanged without the broker first having obtained the written authorization of the owner of the property concerned to offer the property for sale, lease, exchange or rent.

(k) Failing to disburse funds in accordance with a commitment to make a mortgage loan that is accepted by the applicant when the real estate broker represents to the applicant that the broker is either of the following:

(1) The lender.

(2) Authorized to issue the commitment on behalf of the lender or lenders in the mortgage loan transaction.

(l) Intentionally delaying the closing of a mortgage loan for the sole purpose of increasing interest, costs, fees, or charges payable by the borrower.

(m) Generating an inaccurate opinion of the value of residential real property, requested in connection with a debt forgiveness sale, in order to do either or both of the following:

(1) Manipulate the lienholder to reject the proposed debt forgiveness sale.

(2) Acquire a financial or business advantage, including a listing agreement, that directly results from the inaccurate opinion of value, with regard to the subject property.

Escrow Services – Notification of Enforcement or Disciplinary Actions Taken

10176.1. (a) (1) Whenever the commissioner takes any enforcement or disciplinary action against a licensee, and the enforcement or disciplinary action is related to escrow services provided pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 17006 of the Financial Code, upon the action becoming final the commissioner shall notify the Insurance Commissioner and the Commissioner of Corporations of the action or actions taken. The purpose of this notification is to alert the departments that enforcement or disciplinary action has been taken, if the licensee seeks or obtains employment with entities regulated by the departments.

 

(2) The commissioner shall provide the Insurance Commissioner and the Commissioner of Corporations, in addition to the notification of the action taken, with a copy of the written accusation, statement of issues, or order issued or filed in the matter and, at the request of the Insurance Commissioner or the Commissioner of Corporations, with any underlying factual material relevant to the enforcement or disciplinary action. Any confidential information provided by the commissioner to the Insurance Commissioner or the Commissioner of Corporations shall not be made public pursuant to this section. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the disclosure of any underlying factual material to the Insurance Commissioner or the Commissioner of Corporations shall not operate as a waiver of confidentiality or any privilege that the commissioner may assert.

(b) The commissioner shall establish and maintain, on the Web site maintained by the Department of Real Estate, a database of its licensees, including those who have been subject to any enforcement or disciplinary action that triggers the notification requirements of this section. The database shall also contain a direct link to the databases, described in Section 17423.1 of the Financial Code and Section 12414.31 of the Insurance Code and required to be maintained on the Web sites of the Department of Corporations and the Department of Insurance, respectively, of persons who have been subject to enforcement or disciplinary action for malfeasance or misconduct related to the escrow industry by the Insurance Commissioner and the Commissioner of Corporations.

(c) There shall be no liability on the part of, and no cause of action of any nature shall arise against, the State of California, the Department of Real Estate, the Real Estate Commissioner, any other state agency, or any officer, agent, employee, consultant, or contractor of the state, for the release of any false or unauthorized information pursuant to this section, unless the release of that information was done with knowledge and malice, or for the failure to release any information pursuant to this section.

 

CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE LAWS CONTINUED, CLICK TO NEXT PAGE HERE

California Real Estate Law pages: 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12-13-14-15-16

CURRENT TOP REPORT LINKS:

 

 

FBI & U.S. ATTORNEY INVESTIGATE WINDERMERE COACHELLA VALLEY, CHARGED WITH PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE, UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES & OTHER CLAIMS IN $30 MILLION-PLUS DEAL—COMPLAINT ALLEGES WINDERMERE SERVICES IS AN "UNLICENSED ENTITY" FIFTH AMENDMENT CASE MANAGEMENT UPDATE: "...the following additional matters be considered or determined at the case management conference (specify): Fifth Amendment Privilege issue as to Peggy Shambaugh, defendant and major witness."

john jacobipaul drayna

Above L to R: (1) Joseph R. "Bob" Deville and (2) Bob Bennion of Windermere Services Southern California, Bennion & Deville Fine Homes, Inc., and Windermere Real Estate Coachella Valley. (3) Peggy Shambaugh, Realtor at Windermere Real Estate Coachella Valley, Indian Wells office. (4) Current Windermere Services Company governing persons John W. Jacobi, (5) Geoffrey P. Wood, (6) Jill Jacobi-Wood, (7) John O'Brien "OB"Jacobi, (8) attorney Paul Drayna—WSBA# 26636, (9) and Timothy Wissner.

ADDITIONAL CURRENT BENNION & DEVILLE FINE HOMES, WINDERMERE COACHELLA LAWSUITS:

 

BENNION & DEVILLE, DBA WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE COACHELLA VALLEY, SUED FOR CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD AND OTHER CLAIMS

 

FEDERAL CASE: A&L PARTNERS, ANDREA MARQUEZ, JOSEPH R. DEVILLE, BOB BENNION, BENNION & DEVILLE FINE HOMES, SUED FOR TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT

 

RELATED SIDEBAR: WINDERMERE PREFERRED LIVING, BREA, CALIFORNIA, CLAIMS TO BE WINDERMERE "PREFERRED PROPERTIESTM" IN FALSE AND PREDATORY WEBSITE TAKEDOWN LETTER WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY BEING SUED FOR USING THE "PREFERRED PROPERTIES" PHRASE

 

CASE UPDATE 1/3/2012: PLAINTIFF FILES REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREDJUDICE

WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE SERVICES COMPANY, WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE SOCAL, INC., and WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE COACHELLA VALLEY, SUED FOR WRONGFUL DEATH DUE TO NEGLIGENCE IN RENTAL HOME CHILD DROWNING

Andrea Turnage (left) of Windermere Real Estate, Indian Wells, California: "One of the worst experiences in real estate I've ever had..." and "...extremely unprofessional and unethical..." READ ANDREA'S REVIEW HERE

_______________________________________________

 

ATTENTION AGENTS AND REALTY FRANCHISE OPERATORS: CONSIDERING A BUSINESS ASSOCIATION WITH WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE?

"In Retaliation Windermere Sought to Make the Litigation as Expensive and Time Consuming as Possible to Dissuade Mr. Rodriguez and other Agents from Asserting Claims against Windermere"

"On April 4, 2005, without explanation, Mr. Jacobsen terminated Mr. Rodriguez's agency with Windermere. CP 92. As part of the termination agreement, Mr. Jacobsen reviewed the files for five pending transactions and agreed that Mr. Rodriguez was entitled to one half of the listing commission on those transactions... In November 2005, however, before the Brady transaction closed, Mr. Jacobsen unilaterally changed the commission disbursement form in a way that eliminated Mr. Rodriguez's share of the listing commission. CP 92; TE 14. Neither Mr. Jacobsen nor Ms. Thompson ever told Mr. Rodriguez of the change or that he would not receive his $16,800 share of the commission from the Brady transaction. CP 94." Windermere Wall Street's Richard "Jake" Jacobsen (shown left).

THE PERIL IN BEING A WINDERMERE AGENT: READ EX-WINDERMERE AGENT ROBERTO RODRIGUEZ'S RESPONDENT'S BRIEF HERE

WINDERMERE SERVICES COMPANY v. MAXWELL (FORMER WINDERMERE PCR OWNER) UPDATE: VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS FILED

A REAL ESTATE FRANCHISE OWNER'S ULTRA-NIGHTMARE: "...Jacobi decided to open another Windermere office in the territory in which WPCR was operating..."

PLEADINGS AND THE ENTIRE SAGA OF WINDERMERE PUYALLUP CANYON ROAD

 

WINDERMERE EAST SUES ITS OWN AGENT—DEFAULT JUDGMENT OF $76, 535.47

WINDERMERE SERVICES LITIGATION with DISGRUNTLED FORMER FRANCHISEES

21 Former California Offices Drop the Windermere Brand

 

Get the Popular Windermere Franchise News here

 

8-Office Powerhouse Quits the Windermere Brand: Windermere Exclusive Properties Changes to Real Living Lifestyles

 

THE WINDERMERE RELOCATION RAPE CASE • COMPLETE LIST OF PIERCE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, WINDERMERE CASES

_____________________________________________________

 

paul draynaLITIGATION WITH WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE? DON'T EXPECT HONEST, AVERAGE LEGAL COMPETENCE—OR EVEN COMMON DECENCY: Opposing counsel and legal professionals should take note of Windermere Services Company and Demco Law Firm Lying Lawyers and Legal Process Cheats, Paul Stephen Drayna and Matthew F. Davis (shown left, respectively), by clicking here for salient review of these two princes of process abuse and unethical misconduct. Holding lawyers in low esteem has become a national pastime, and absolutely craven, crooked characters like Drayna and Davis are just a couple of the many reasons why. Windermere must often be compelled by courts to provide or participate in discovery—as in this example. For information on Windermere Services Company's privity with franchises—click here.

PROSPECTIVE WINDERMERE FRANCHISEES and RENEWING WINDERMERE FRANCHISEES HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW: John W. Jacobi and franchisor WSC demand fees and commissions, but won't protect the brand image that Windermere franchise owners pay for—as graphically evidenced by this website. Prospective and renewing Windermere franchisees should click here for FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION RULES, PART 436, FRANCHISOR DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS.

________________________________________________________________

 

Considering LISTING YOUR HOME with Windermere? Focus on Risk and Unethical Misconduct in Consumer Realty Services...

PAUL STICKNEY WINDERMERE SCA'S MILLION-DOLLAR FAILURE TO DISCLOSE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST

 

THE PAUL STICKNEY WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE/WINDERMERE SCA REDMOND SUPERSEDEAS APPEAL BOND

 

INTERESTED PARTIES and PROSPECTIVE BUYERS SHOULD THINK TWICE PAUL STICKNEY'S CURRENT LISTINGS

DOWNLOAD and READ THE WINDERMERE REDMOND SCA/PAUL STICKNEY WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE $1,030,627.00 JUDGMENT HERE

PAUL STICKNEY WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE'S (A.K.A. STICKNEY TEAM) MILLION-DOLLAR FAILURE TO DISCLOSE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Plundering Paul Stickney (left) was officially adjudged by Washington courts as having a conflict of interest and failing to disclose it to his Windermere SCA clients—Mark and Carol DeCoursey—when he sold them a Redmond house, and then recommended a remodeling company. But Stickney neglected to mention he was AN OWNER of the remodeling company, who absolutely ruined their home. Stickney testified that he DID NOT KNOW he was named as the company's VP until AFTER the DeCoursey's lawsuit began. STORY HERE

Windermere Founder John W. Jacobi's Washington Loan Company, Craig and Rosalie Shriner's Windermere Real Estate S.C.A. Redmond, and its Agent Christopher Judd, Sued for Intentional Misrepresentation and Other Claims in Alleged "...unlawful scheme to enrich themselves at the expense of plaintiffs and others..."

john jacobipaul drayna

(Left to right) Governing Persons of the Washington Loan Company: 1) Windermere Founder John W. Jacobi is listed as President of the Washington Loan Company; 2) Timothy Wissner, CFO of franchiser Windermere Services, and CFO of Windermere Solutions, is listed as Washington Loan Company Vice President; 3) Kendra Vita, Manager of franchiser Windermere Services Company is listed as Secretary of the Washington Loan Company; 4) franchiser Windermere Services Company General Counsel, attorney Paul S. Drayna—WSBA #26636—is listed as Registered Agent of the Washington Loan Company; 5) Don Riley, Washington Loan Company manager; 6) Windermere Real Estate S.C.A. Redmond owner Craig Shriner; 7) Windermere Redmond SCA managing broker Aaron Shriner; 8) Windermere Redmond SCA agent Christopher Judd.

Is Windermere's SCA Redmond, Washington, office the most dishonest and unethical Windermere franchise of all?

Scams Typical Of Every Windermere Network Office: A Windermere Real Estate SCA Redmond Review That You Should Read

__________________________________________________________

 

The Windermere Relocation Rape Case: Court Declares that Windermere "...condoned a rape by a business colleague..."

The incredibly violent and insidious psychological ramifications of rape, connected through an “abusive work environment” serves as an unfortunate—yet credible—subtext for the way in which Windermere Real Estate treats employees and defrauded, damaged customers alike. Windermere’s application of aggressive, wasteful and mendacious litigation to stall and ruin innocent consumers serves as the coercive metaphor of corporate power and arrogance: Windermere has no genuine concern for the damage it has done to people or communities, It cares only about how to manipulate the law and the courts to avoid any legal responsibility—and about how to deflect bad PR with disingenuous promotion.

paul draynajohn jacobi(Left to right) Windermere CEO Geoff Wood (far left) is listed as a Governing Person of Windermere Relocation. Peggy Scott (second from left), also a Governing Person of Windermere Relocation, "... did not give Little any advice about going to the police, and she did not conduct an investigation of Little's complaint..." Windermere attorney Paul Drayna (third from left) is listed as the registered agent of RELO LLC, the entity name of Windermere Relocation. Windermere Founder John W. Jacobi (fourth from left) along with Gayle Glew (far right) are listed as Governing Persons of Windermere Relocation during the Little case. Glew told Ms. Little he did not want any "clouds in the office," and after she would not accept a pay cut, that she should "...clean out her desk."

All citizens who abhor such treatment of women in the workplace should recall Maureen Little v. Windermere Relocation when choosing real estate services. WindermereWatch visitors will also want to read the United States District Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit's Order and Amended Opinion from the Little case.

WINDERMERE ATTORNEY AND SOUTH WHIDBEY FREELAND WINDERMERE FRANCHISE OWNER JOHN DEMCO'S AGENTS' ABUSE, UNDUE INFLUENCE and EXPLOITATION OF A VULNERABLE ADULT: Windermere mother-and-daughter agents Saul and Gabelein take advantage of an elderly woman: “Emma has sold property to members of the Gabelein family for a fraction of its value, jeopardizing her ability to remain in her home for the remainder of her life." The single most despicable example of Windermere’s egregious contempt for justice and human decency—not to mention, its very own customers. CLICK HERE FOR THIS TRULY SHOCKING MUST-READ ACT OF WINDERMERE PREDATION. (Demco, Saul and Gabelein, shown left.)

 

COURT SAYS WINIDERMERE CAMANO ISLAND'S SONYA EPPIG "...DID NOT SO UNEQUIVOCALLY SET FORTH THE PERMITTING AND INSPECTION PROBLEMS." Sonya Eppig (left) of Windermere/Camano Island, agent in the Ruebel case. And when Camano Realty listed the Hovis property for approximately two years, Camano learned about the permitting and inspection problems but did not inform the Ruebels."

 

CO-OWNER OF WINDERMERE MOUNT VERNON/SKAGIT VALLEY AND WINDERMERE ANACORTES PROPERTIES, NATE SCOTT; ALSO SALES MANAGER COLLEEN CRAIG, AND AGENT MEREDITH LAWS OF WINDERMERE ANACORTES PROPERTIES (shown left, respectively), SUED FOE FRAUD IN MYSTERIOUSLY APPEARING "2ND LISTING" CASE: Skagit County single mother of autistic, special needs five-year-old and Natural Spa & Body Care Products entrepreneur filed Complaint.

 

DELIBERATELY AND KNOWINGLY CONCEALING TOXIC RAT INFESTATION IN A RUINED HOME DECEPTIVELY PAINTED-UP WITH FRESH "MARTHA STEWART COLORS," AND THEN LYING ABOUT IT, TOO. WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE NORTHEAST KIRKLAND'S INCREDIBLE PREDATORY LIARS, GEORGE RUDIGER AND JOAN WHITTAKER: THE WORST OF THE WINDERMERE WORST. (At left, George Rudiger and some of his concealed rats; lying Realtor Joan Whittaker photo unavailable.)

 

YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT A WINDERMERE EAST ASSOCIATE BROKER MIGHT BE DOING: " Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Ivan G. Popchoi and Varvara M. Popchoi and against Csaba Kiss (left) in the total amount of $44,885,39, ... "On October 17, 2006, Melanie A. Leary, an attorney with the Demco Law Firm, P.S., sent Mr. Williams a written response to his October 6, 2006 letter. Ms. Leary advised Mr. Williams that she represented Mr. Kiss and relayed Mr. Kiss’s position that the Popchois were not entitled to the protection of the warranties provided by the Statutory Warranty deed executed by Mr. Kiss. Ms. Leary’s letter notified Mr. Williams that Mr. Kiss was “far more inclined to let a court decide” the Popchois’ warranty rights “than to spend money to settle” the Popchois warranty claim.”

________________________________________________________

 

Complaint alleges Windermere Auburn and Lake Tapps owner told employee: "You're nothing without me! We don't date, you don't have a job!" ... "Tollen ridiculed Clark, humiliated her and verbally abused her at work and in public ... Tollen grabbed Clark and threw her against garbage cans. She fell. While she was lying on the ground Tollen kicked her at least ten times, yelling "You're a piece of shit! ..."

WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE AUBURN, INC., SUED BY EMPLOYEE FOR CONSTRUCTIVE DISCHARGE, HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT, NEGLIGENCE, INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS AND CIVIL CONSPIRACY IN PIERCE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, COMPLAINT. OWNER OF WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE AUBURN AND WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE LAKE TAPPS, THOMAS TOLLEN, SUED FOR CIVIL ASSAULT AND BATTERY, TRESPASS, INVASION OF RIGHT TO PRIVACY, CIVIL STALKING AND OTHER CHARGES—PLEADS GUILTY TO RELATED CRIMINAL COUNTS

 

Complaint for Declaratory Relief, Damages and Foreclosure of Landlord's Lien against Windermere Real Estate/Auburn, Inc., and Windermere Real Estate/Cascades Group, Inc. Judgment for Plaintiff: $128,105,63, costs of $342.80 and attorney's fees of $7,420.00 CASE HERE

 

__________________________________________________________________

 

LYING CORPORATE CRIMINALS JOHN W. JACOBI and PAUL STEPHEN DRAYNA... IS WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE ONE OF WASHINGTON'S MOST RESPECTED BRANDS?

john jacobipaul draynaSHAMELESS LIARS, BULLIES, COWARDS and PUBLIC PREDATORS: Windermere Founder and Chairman, John W. Jacobi (left), and Windermere Services General Counsel, attorney and Jacobi yes-man, Paul Stephen Drayna—a University of Wisconsin Law School alumnus (right)—ruin damaged Windermere customers with marketing lies and the costly, mendacious lawsuits they file against defrauded Windermere victims who speak publicly. Jacobi and Drayna falsely sue an outspoken party for trade libel and defamation, try to coerce the defendant into a "dark clause" settlement agreement through fear and intimidation, continue to prosecute the bogus action for years at enormous cost to the parties, then run away and voluntarily dismiss their own lawsuit under Civil Rule 41, just prior to trial when the honest, innocent victim persists in refusing to sign away their speech rights. Is Windermere Real Estate one of Washington's most respected brands? STORY HERE

_______________________________________________________

 

BOISE, IDAHO, WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE/RICHARD B. SMITH and ITS ECOBROKER, MINDI MCALLASTER, SUED FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, NEGLIGENCE, AND VIOLATION OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT IN MOLDY HOME CASE WHERE BUYER WAS FORCED TO MOVE FROM THE NEWLY PURCHASED PROPERTY (Shown at left to right) Jason Gray Smith, Broker/Owner/EcoBroker at Boise, Idaho, Windermere Real Estate/Richard B. Smith, who states on his Windermere webpage, "Your broker must be there for you during each part of the deal..."; Shelley Smith Eichmann, Owner at Windermere Real Estate/Richard B. Smith; and Mindi McAllaster, AB & EcoBroker at Boise, Idaho, Windermere Real Estate/Richard B. Smith, who says on her Windermere webpage, "I joined Windermere/Richard B. Smith because of its mission to serve the community through leadership, the highest ethical standards,and uncompromising honesty and integrity..."

 

WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE/CAPITAL GROUP of BOISE, IDAHO, SUED FOR VIOLATION OF THE FAIR HOUSING ACT—TITLE VIII of the CIVIL RIGHTS ACT of 1968. WINDERMERE AGENT MARY LIESE ALLEGED TO HAVE TOLD AN IFHC TESTER, "WE PREFER PEOPLE 55 AND OVER." Complaint Charges: "The Defendants have engaged in coercion, intimidation..." CASE UPDATE 07/19/2011: Stipulation of Dismissal filed by Intermountain Fair Housing Council. Defendants Steve Osburn and Mary Liese are now listed as employees at Windermere Boise—Access Realty.

 

Windermere Real Estate Bellevue Commons Sued for Unlawful Removal and Exclusion of Plaintiff from the Residence, Negligence, Breach of Statutory Duty, Conversion, and Violation of the Consumer Protection Act. Windermere Bellevue Commons Sales Associate Tony Ferrelli's Alleged Response when Informed of Plaintiff's Missing Personal Property was "Not my problem." Get the Windermere Bellevue Commons Answer here. Left to right) Windermere Bellevue Commons associate Tony Ferrelli, associate Marcus Crane, and Windermere Bellevue Commons owners Courtney Adams, and Amy Adams, whose Windermere web page states "I strongly believe that everyone should be treated with kindness, fairness, caring, and honesty." But does Ms. Adams' definition of honesty include informing the Bellevue Commons clients of Dick and Cecilia Pelascini about their violation of the consumer protection act? GET THE STORY HERE

 

WINDERMERE BELLEVUE COMMONS ASSOCIATE BROKER DICK PELASCINI'S FORECLOSURE RESCUE RIPOFF SCAM: "At about the period of Pace-Knapp’s initial notices of foreclosure, Windermere Associate Broker Dick Pelascini (left), and Thomas Boboth of Pacific Shoreline Mortgage, individually approached her at her home. She knew neither of the men, but they were clearly aware of her pending foreclosure. They offered to collaborate with Pace-Knapp in an effort to save her home. Pelascini and Boboth each proffered business cards, identifying each respectively as a broker at a real estate company, and the president of a mortgage company. The pair visited many times over the ensuing weeks, continually offering to help her. Neither man ever stated they wanted to buy her house, or offer her a loan. Pace-Knapp declined their offers of help." Click here for this report and the Court's opinion

 

WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE/WEST CAMPUS, FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, AND ITS AGENT DAN DENNIS, SUED FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT, FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION, UNJUST ENRICHMENT, AND NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION. Complaint alleges that “…Windermere Real Estate/West Campus, Inc. and Dan Dennis SUPPLIED FALSE INFORMATION to AMERCO in its business transaction…" (Shown left to right) Windermere Defendant Dan Dennis, the generic silhouette head of John A. Tidwell, Manager, Owner and Designated Broker of Windermere West Campus.

 

Windermere Real Estate West Campus Federal Way; Agents Dan Dennis and Cheryl Crutcher Sued by Newport Village Condominium Owners Association for Misrepresentations and/or Omissions of Material Fact, Fraudulent Concealment, and Violation of the Consumer Protection Act. (Shown left to right) Windermere Real Estate/West Campus Federal Way Defendants Broker Dan Dennis and Salesperson Cheryl Crutcher. The generic silhouette of John A. Tidwell, Owner and Designated Broker of Windermere West Campus Federal Way. Complaint alleges "... intentionally and/or negligently  failed to disclose facts regarding known defects and physical hazards..."

 

 

Maria Kalafatich of WINDERMERE PROFESSIONAL PARTNERS, Tacoma, Sued for Negligent Misrepresentation, Fraud and Fraudulent Concealment, Rescission, Violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act, Professional Negligence / Violation of RCW 18.86.030. Leslie Walters of WINDERMERE COMMENCEMENT ASSOCIATES, Tacoma, Sued for Professional Negligence /Violation of RCW 18.86.030. Defendants WINDERMERE PROFESSIONAL PARTNERS, LLC, and WINDERMERE COMMENCEMENT ASSOCIATES, INC., Sued for Vicarious Liability Under RCW 18.85.155 as Liable for the Tortius Conduct of Defendants Kalafatich and Walters.(Left to right) : Windermere Professional Partners' Maria Kalafatich, who states on her Windermere web page that "My clients appreciate my integrity..." Windermere Commencement Associates' Leslie Walters, Windermere Commencement Associates owners David Sinding and Dick Beeson. Windermere Professional Partners owner Michael Robinson.

 

____________________________________________________________

 

WINDERMERE AFFILIATED SERVICE COMPANIES: CW TITLE REPORTS—PREVIOUSLY COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE OF PUGET SOUND

 

CW TITLE REVIEWS: "I'M STILL WAITING TO CLOSE ON MY PROPERTY BECAUSE OF HER LIES."

 

Windermere's Commonwealth Land Title of Puget Sound—AKA CW Title—Sued for Slander of Title and CPA Violation: Dismissal Update

 

Jury Finds Windermere's Commonwealth Land Title Company of Puget Sound Negligent, Awards $1,190,000.00

BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP FKA COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING LP, a Texas Limited Partnership; NORTHWEST TRUSTEE SERVICES CORPORATION, a Washington Corporation; COMMONWEALTH LAND AND TITLE OF PUGET SOUND, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company; FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION, a United States Government Sponsored Enterprise, sued for Wrongful Foreclosure, Violation of the Consumer Protection Act, and other claims. Complaint alleges: "This is a violation of the Trustee's duty of good faith as provided by statute and a violation of federal statutes."

______________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

A Message to Seattle Pro Musica's Board of Directors about its relationship with Legal Predator Paul S. Drayna and Windermere Services Company: The business ethics and civil conduct your 501(c)3 board members demonstrate at their regular employment also reflects on the way Seattle Pro Musica is managed, on its professed core values, and on its high public duties of social responsibility and absolute financial integrity.

 

ATTENTION SEATTLE PRO MUSICA BOARD MEMBERS:

Noreen King, President, Seattle Pro Musica; Sales Manager Belo, Inc.

Katie Oman, Vice President, Seattle Pro Musica; Fisher Dachs Associates, Project Manager; Fermata Consulting, Principal

Josh Smith, Treasurer, Seattle Pro Musica; Director, Cost Analysis, Washington Dental Services

Paul S. Drayna, Corporate Secretary/Legal Counsel, Seattle Pro Musica; General Counsel, Windermere Services Company

J Howard Boyd, Board Member, Seattle Pro Musica; Zanadu Comics, Downtown Seattle Store, Manager

Carole Jones, Chair, Marketing Committee; Carole Jones Design, Principal

Jim Nuerenberg, Board Member, Seattle Pro Musica; The Boeing Company, Project Manager

Laura Patton-Ballard, Chair, Membership Committee; Physician, Group Health Cooperative, ret.

Christa M. Phillipson, Chair, Education and Outreach Committee, Seattle Pro Musica;

Austrian Classics, a Music Education Institute, Sole Proprietor

Urging the public: Don't support or donate to Seattle Pro Musica choral group (shown above left).

At his employment as Windermere Services General Counsel, predator attorney Paul Stephen Drayna sues innocent, financially-ruined homebuyer victims of Windermere fraud, through false and mendacious lawsuits of intimidation that seek to silence those victims and permanently terminate their speech rights. Implicit in his phony, expensive, and emotionally-distressing litigation, Windermere counsel illegally abuses process by inferring to victims that if they sign a "settlement agreement" proposed by Windermere which prevents in perpetuity any future speech about their Windermere experience (examples here), Windermere will dismiss the action against them. When victims won't sign, Drayna runs away and voluntarily dismisses his own bogus lawsuit under CR41. Is Windermere prevaricating legal bully Paul S. Drayna snickering (left) because he's so good at wrecking homes and families—and running away from Windermere's fraudulent promotion of "The highest ethical standards. Uncompromising honesty and integrity."? Or does he just enjoy thinking about Windermere victims losing their whole lives, their homes, and sleeping under bridges? To learn more about Mr. Drayna's business and professional ethics, click here.

 

____________________________________________________________

 

Windermere Real Estate Allen & Associates Agent Lance Miller's Deliberate Non-Disclosure of Home's Prior Use as Pot Farm and Methamphetamine Laboratory: Eva and Eddie Bloor relocated to Longview, in Washington State, and purchased a home from Charmaine and Robert Fritz through Lance Miller at Windermere Real Estate/Allen & Associates, who served as dual agent for both for both parties. The Fritzes and Miller both opted to withhold their knowledge that the onetime rental property had been a site for marijuana farming and methamphetamine production. Windermere and Miller were cognizant of the property’s prior use because Windermere staff managed the rental home months earlier when a drug raid occurred, and they subsequently issued a notice of eviction on the tenants after learning of their illicit operation. Locals all herd the news, including the Fritzes, who conversed about it with others. (Left, Lance Miller of Windermere Allen & Associates.) IF YOU'RE CONSIDERING DEALING WITH WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE, YOU ABSOLUTELY OWE IT TO YOURSELF—AND YOUR FAMILY—TO READ THIS REPORT BY CLICKING HERE.

 

Windermere Real Estate Northwest, Inc., Agent Howard Johnson, Broker and Branch Manager Loretta Larson, Sued for Violation of the Washington State Securities Act (WSSA), Negligence, Negligent Misrepresentation, Negligent Supervision (Against Windermere and Larson), Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Violation of Washington's Consumer Protection Act: (Left to right) Generic silhouette head of Steven Kieburtz, CEO and Owner, Windermere Real Estate/Northwest; April Kieburtz, President, Designated Broker, and Owner Windermere Real Estate/Northwest; and Loretta Larson, Manager and Broker, Windermere Real Estate/Northwest. Read the complete report here.

 

john jacobiWINDERMERE REAL ESTATE/WALL STREET—Where Windermere Founder John W. Jacobi is listed as Director—PROFITS ON LOAN-CON SCAMMER CHERYL JONET Recently deceased Windermere Real Estate/Wall Street agent Cheryl Jonet was a judgment debtor and defendant in many legal actions involving lawsuits for mishandling earnest money, the breach of promissory note agreements, and unlawful detainer. Peter Doorish was selling a home in February of 2005, and Jonet was a buyer’s agent. Jonet represented her buyer as being a lawyer, when in reality, the buyer was in fact a clerical employee and the single mother of four children. Jonet convinced Doorish to provide the buyer a $50,000 loan, with assurances that Windermere lawyers would generate the proper paperwork. But Jonet actually kept the Doorish loan for herself... (Shown left to right) Rich Gangnes is an owner and also the designated broker of Windermere Real Estate / Wall Street; Jake Jacobsen is the managing broker at Windermere Wall Street where both were on duty for the Doorish and Jonet cases; Windermere chairman and founder, John W. Jacobi. CLICK TO THE FULL REPORT HERE.

 

Windermere Real Estate Bainbridge Island and Associate Broker Debbie Nitsche (left) Sued for Copyright Infringement, Violation of the Lanham Act, and Unfair Competition: "Without permission of Plaintiff Lawrence, Defendants selected, modified and placed Plaintiff’s photograph as modified in the “Walkthrough Media” video... As part of their video and/or website services, Defendants Clark, Nohre and/or GraphicalData sold and distributed the video to various real estate agents, including without limitation, Debbie Nitsche..."

 

 

Washington State Representative Marcie Maxwell is a Windermere Associate Broker who never revealed her knowledge of a home’s septic system defects: Once again, Windermere escapes the legal responsibility for damages based not upon the merits of a case, but by exploiting our dysfunctional courts; and also through the disingenuous machinations and legal gymnastics of its ethically-challenged and crafty Demco counsel. (Left) Washington State Representative and Windermere Associate Broker, Marcie Maxwell. CLICK HERE FOR YET ANOTHER UPDATE ON SHENANIGANS OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE UP TO...

 

Windermere Agent Recommends Rookie Inspector Who Misses Toxic Mold. (Left) Judy Bigelow, agent for Windermere Real Estate / West Sound, Silverdale. RCW 18.86.030: "Regardless of whether the licensee is an agent, a licensee owes to all parties to whom the licensee renders real estate brokerage services the following duties, which may not be waived: (a) To exercise reasonable skill and care; (b) To deal honestly and in good faith."

 

 

Windermere Real Estate Oak Tree and Broker Steve Laevastu Sued for Negligent Misrepresentation and Violation of the Consumer Protection Act. "Defendants Laevastu, on behalf of himself, Windermere and other defendants, misrepresented the history and quality of the Stationhouse to the current owners of Units A, B, and C prior to their purchase of a unit at Stationhouse. These buyers reasonably relied on the representations of Laevatsu and Windermere when they decided to purchase their units." (Left) Broker Steve Laevatsu of Windermere Real Estate / Oak Tree.

 

UNITED STATES SENATOR MARIA CANTWELL TAKES A WHOPPING $49,200 IN CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS FROM PUBLIC PREDATOR WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE! (Left) Senator Maria Cantwell, Democrat from Washington State, whose website says she "...is driven by her duty to serve the people..." Judging by Ms. Cantwell's ginormous appetite for Windermere money, she must mean her duty to

 

cate moyegregoirelucegranlyAfter Nearly 7 Years Producing Commission for Windermere Services and Windermere Spokane Valley Owner Cate Moye, Convicted Robbery Felon and Shotgun-Shootout Windermere Agent, Nicholas Granly, Mysteriously Disappeared from the Windermere Real Estate/Valley Roster, just as Owner Moye is Nominated for Vice Chair of Washington’s Real Estate Commission. Did Ms. Moye ever advise ANY of her unsuspecting clients that Mr. Granly might be showing their homes—or grant them the opportunity to deny Windermere agent Granly access to their homes? (Shown left to right) Cate Moye, Owner Windermere Real Estate/Valley, Spokane; Washington State Governor Chris Gregoire; Washington State Department Of Licensing's Director Liz Luce; and Windermere Real Estate/Valley, Spokane's Agent Nicholas Granly.

_____________________________________________________________

 

BUYERS BEWARE: DON'T PURCHASE PROPERTIES BUILT BY BENNETT HOMES OF BELLEVUE

 

Bennett Homes of Bellevue is Generating Commission Revenue for Public Predator Windermere Real Estate: FOR THEIR OWN PROTECTION, consumers are urged to refuse seeing—OR BUYING—Bennett Homes represented by Windermere Real Estate and Windermere Bellevue Commons. PROTECT YOUR RIGHT to ETHICAL CONDUCT in REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS. (At left, Bennett’s Drake, Bridgeport, and Andover homes, respectively

 

 

National Real Estate Fraud Center—Windermere Real Estate Case Histories:

 

SOUND BUILT HOMES V. WINDERMERE REAL ESTATE SOUTH: "Accordingly, Sound Built is now entitled to a judgment against Windermere..."

 

"DUAL AGENCY IS PERILOUS" says Court. "...Windermere did not advise the Lunsfords that it would present the Thomas offer." LUNSFORD v. FRALEY

 

EARNEST MONEY FORFEITURE: Court rules "...plain language of RCW 64.04.005 does not allow substantial compliance..." CHRISP v. GOLL

An important message to University of Washington administrators, staff and regents about The Windermere Cup, social responsibility, and the University's relationship with John Wood Jacobi and Windermere Real Estate

 

__________________________________________________

 

• Welcome to WindermereWatch •

Is WindermereWatch.com of social benefit to consumers and the public? You decide:

Windermere Real Estate is one of our country’s largest real estate companies and widely promotes a fraudulent express warranty that states “We are committed to... The highest ethical standards. Uncompromising honesty and integrity.” The definition of an express warranty from Black's Law Dictionary is: "A warranty created by the overt words or actions of the seller. • Under the UCC, an express warranty is created by any of the following: (1) an affirmation of fact or promise made by the seller to the buyer relating to the goods that becomes the basis of the bargain."

But when customers are victimized by dishonest Windermere brokers and agents, and complain in writing through legal counsel to franchiser Windermere Services Company, it is absolutely silent in the face of clear and convincing evidence, and forces the customer to sue or go away. In many cases, unsuspecting consumer lives are thrown into complete chaos through costly litigation; and also because the subject homes may actually be uninhabitable or unserviceable for reasons about which Windermere knew and had a legal obligation to disclose—but did not. For some victims, the long and expensive litigation forced upon them even results in bankruptcy and homelessness. Despite their clear evidence, many victims go on to lose in court because they can't afford attorneys or have no legal experience, and Windermere exploits those impediments to endless advantage—lives, homes, and personal finances are ruined forever. And Windermere expects those victims to just go away without their lives and homes, merely for buying a house through Windermere Real Estate, innocently.

Although such irrefutable evidence of Windermere broker/agent misconduct has been presented to franchiser Windermere Services Company, it knowingly continues collecting commissions from dishonest agents and brokers by deliberately passing them on to other unwitting consumers. Just one example is Windermere S.C.A. Redmond's Paul Stickney, who received a $522,200 court judgment for not disclosing a conflict of interest, but is still producing commissions for his Windermere SCA franchise, and Windermere Services Company. Is that the "Highest ethical standards. Uncompromising honesty and integrity?"

When victims use the media to report their Windermere experiences honestly, Windermere sues them for libel and defamation through false lawsuits to intimidate, silence, and hush bad PR—read one of those lawsuits here. It then tries to coerce victims into signing a “dark clause settlement agreement” that permanently terminates their speech rights—read some of those "settlement" agreements here. Through an expensive and emotionally distressing roller coaster ride with Windermere's nasty Demco lawyers, a victim of Windermere fraud is told they will be taken all the way to trial on trumped-up libel and defamation charges, and if they don't sign the dark clause, their life and future will be ruined. When a victim persists in refusing to sign, Windermere voluntarily dismisses its own lawsuit under Civil Rule 41, just before trial, after costing the victim years and yet thousands more to defend against the false action. This predatory legal tactic is known as abuse of process or malicious prosecution. In one example cited below, franchiser Windermere Services Company served an outspoken victim a lawsuit for libel and defamation, and then immediately sent them an email instructing that they "...need not hire an attorney," and further stating, “…we will try to resolve this directly and outside the legal system.”

Every Windermere office in every state is legally tied to franchiser Windermere Services Company's fraudulent express warranty, false advertising, predatory conduct and policies through privity and its pecuniary franchise agreement. Some legal observers believe that Windermere's conduct has RICO and Civil Rights violation implications. If you have recently purchased a Windermere franchise without having been disclosed Windermere's falling brand value, PR decline, and its adverse website problems, click here for its duty of disclosure under Federal Trade Commission rules. Proof that Windermere Services Company knew about WindermereWatch.com in March of 2007 is in this document.

Windermere Real Estate is a textbook corporate predator who operates franchises in Washington State, Oregon, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Montana, Hawaii and British Columbia. Windermere repeatedly makes the false claim that it has offices in Wyoming, but it does not. If you’re buying or selling property through ANY Windermere office, a percentage from your transaction will be used by franchiser Windermere Services Company to silence and financially ruin innocent parties who’ve encountered Windermere fraud. Windermere won't pay legitimate damages or acknowledge wrongdoing, and will stall settlement of cases all the way to state supreme courts, a legal strategy that Windermere routinely employs to bankrupt victims and exhaust their resources.

We believe the information presented here is of profound social benefit to consumers and the community, and we are dedicated to providing it.

THROUGH FEES AND COMMISSIONS PAID TO FRANCHISER WINDERMERE SERVICES COMPANY, EVERY WINDERMERE NETWORK OFFICE IN EVERY STATE IS AN ENTHUSIASTIC PARTNER AND KNOWING ACCESSORY TO WINDERMERE MARKETING FRAUD AND ITS PREDATORY POLICIES

___________________________________________________

WINDERMERE: AMERICA'S PREDATORY REAL ESTATE ENTERPRISE
Consumer advocates, legal experts and elected lawmakers all agree that the American real estate industry demands greater regulation to protect consumers from the human disaster of real estate fraud perpetrated by unethical realtors employed at companies like Windermere Real Estate. Windermere manipulates our clogged, inundated courts and the justice system to stall, wear down and financially exhaust victimized consumers, many of whom are wiped-out by the cost of pursuing civil justice in a process where innocent victims must CHASE perpetrators of real estate fraud through the courts AFTER a fraudulent offense has been committed. Acts of fraud are so common and widespread throughout the Windermere real estate network, that the defense of real estate fraud has become has become just another bottomline expense on the Windermere balance sheet. And the litigation nightmare of real estate fraud can happen to anyone who deals with Windermere Real Estate. It could happen to you. Windermere is by far the most unethical, deceitful, and culturally toxic real estate company operating in the United States. Windermere knowingly, deliberately, and unabashedly profits on corrupt franchise owners, brokers and agents with proven histories of fraud and ethical misconduct, many of whom are profiled in the pages of WindermereWatch.com. Despite Windermere's well-documented assault on victim speech rights, more and more unconscionable cases of Windermere fraud continue emerging.

Windermere is headquartered in Seattle, at franchiser Windermere Services Company. It was founded by John W. Jacobi, and he has kept the company a private, family-owned enterprise, eluding the transparency and ethical accountability required by stockholders. For decades, Windermere has harnessed the art of positive PR, affixing itself—however superficially—to community art events, the homeless, and even an annual college rowing competition which opens Seattle's boating season—the Windermere Cup—irresponsibly promoted by, and in conjunction with, the University of Washington. But those are the disingenuous and cynical sideshows created by an adept market manipulator, shown only briefly to the public, to obscure and obfuscate Windermere's true predatory nature.

FRANCHISER WINDERMERE SERVICES' MANAGEMENT TEAM AND DESIGNATED GOVERNING PEOPLE: EXPERTS IN MARKETING FRAUD, ABUSE OF THE LEGAL PROCESS, AND AT COERCING DAMAGED WINDERMERE CLIENTS INTO SILENCE BY SUPPRESSING THEIR SPEECH RIGHTS

The shameless greed and repugnant ethics of Seattle's Jacobi family, deliberately profiting on the loss and suffering of Windermere victims through commissions on the fraudulent home deals and unlawful misconduct of dishonest Windermere agents, brokers and franchise owners. Forget human decency, commercial reputation or social responsibility—it's all about the money.

john jacobiBefore turning the business over to his children and son-in-law, Windermere founder John W. Jacobi (left) simply ignored any complaints of fraud from Windermere victims, sending them straight to the lawyers. Yet despite claims of retirement, Jacobi is still indeed quite active at franchiser Windermere Services Company:

In Complaint 10-2-36192-8 SEA, filed in King County Superior Court on October 12, 2010, Windermere Services Company has sued former Windermere Puyallup Canyon Road owner Joe Maxwell for default on an “Unconditional Guaranty of Payment” promissory note. The Maxwell Answer and Counterclaims state that the “Plaintiff's [Windermere Services Company] claims are barred by Plaintiff’s fraud, duress, and unclean hands,” and alleges $4,000,000 in damages and violation of Washington's Franchise Investment Protection Act; and also that "The alleged Note and Guarantee are unconscionable and unenforceable." Maxwell's Counterclaims state "6. The WPCR Operating Agreement contains a provision granting Jacobi a special veto power which among other things, states that the company shall conduct its business and manage its affairs in accordance with the directions of Jacobi and all management decisions are subject to Jacobi’s review," and "13. In early 2006, WSC and Jacobi decided to open another WSC office in the territory in which WPCR was operating, despite the objections of Maxwell. As a result of the opening of this new WSC office, WPCR lost a significant number of its real estate agents and revenue that transferred to the new office in Graham, Washington," and "14. As a direct result of these actions taken by WSC and Jacobi, WPCR was left with a large debt burden and overhead, and WPCR’s revenue was significantly reduced... 22. On September 14, 2010, Maxwell heard from a real estate agent working at WPCR that the agent had received an email from WSC notifying him WPCR’s franchise had been terminated. This notice was sent to WPCR’s real estate agents before Maxwell learned of the termination of WPCR’s franchise." Read the complete report on this case here.

Jacobi's Washington Loan Company is also currently being sued for Intentional Misrepresentation—read that report here—Case Update: Stipulation and Order for Dismissal. And the Windermere affiliated service company, Commonwealth Land Title Company of Puget Sound (recently re-named "CW Title") , has been found negligent by a jury who awarded the third-party plaintiffs $1,190,000. Read the Commonwealth report here.

Current Governing Person and Windermere Services Company CEO Geoffrey P. Wood (left) is married to John W. Jacobi's daughter, Jill Jacobi-Wood. Wood is the chief architect of Windermere marketing fraud, inducing business volume through—among other fraudulent promotion—an express warranty of "The highest ethical standards. Uncompromising honesty and integrity." When called upon to honor his company's warranty, Wood instructs Demco lawyers—led by Matthew F. Davis–to sue vocal victims for libel and defamation. Wood is also a Governing Person of Windermere Relocation, the subject enterprise of Windermere's employee rape case. He was briefly a real estate sales person in 1994, but that license was CANCELLED in 1995, and Wood currently has no real estate license of any kind that WindermereWatch can find.

jill jacobi woodGoverning Person Jill Jacobi-Wood (left), Windermere Services President, is a licensed real estate broker in Washington State, and as such is subject to the statutory condition of RCW 18.86.030 "(d) To deal honestly and in good faith." For her part in Windermere's marketing fraud and malfeasance, Jacobi-Wood's RE license should be cancelled by the Washington State DOL's real estate division. By promoting honesty and integrity—while in reality—she is suing and coercing Windermere victims to shutup about their Windermere experience, Jacobi-Wood is hardly dealing honestly and in good faith.

 

Governing Person John O'Brien "OB"Jacobi (left) is General Manager of franchiser Windermere Services Company and also has many Windermere realty brokerage offices. He's a licensed real estate broker who is also called upon by statutory law to "Deal honestly and in good faith." But John "OB" Jacobi instead promotes fraudulent claims of honesty and integrity, and falsely sues victims of Windermere misconduct for libel and defamation to intimidate them and coerce their silence. Then this junior Jacobi runs away and voluntarily dismisses his own mendacious lawsuit when a victim refuses to sign Windermere's dark clause settlement agreement that has cost the victimized party so much distress and money to defend.

 

paul draynaWindermere Services Governing Person and attorney—WSBA# 26636—Paul Drayna (left) has even more stringent ethical requirements placed upon him through his collateral professions of Lawyer and Notary Public; and Drayna is also bound by the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. But Mr. Drayna is not only practicing marketing fraud at Windermere. As Windermere in-house counsel, Drayna oversees Windermere's predatory litigation strategy of deliberately abusing the legal process by falsely suing victims for libel and defamation, and then attempting to intimidate and coerce those victims out of their speech rights and into Windermere's Dark Clause silence agreement. When victims WON'T sign the Windermere Dark Clause, Drayna runs away too, and voluntarily dismisses his own company's lawsuit under Civil Rule 41—but only after first costing the victim thousands to defend the phony lawsuit. Drayna is even copied on the mendacious, Demco-authored settlement documents meant to quash speech rights and be signed by Windermere victims. Drayna is also listed on the Board of Directors at Seattle Pro Musica, "a world of choral beauty," as being Pro Musica's Corporate Secretary and Legal Counsel. Pro Musica states as part of its mission "Respect/Integrity—a principle of respect and integrity in all our endeavors." So while Mr. Drayna is ruining lives by prosecuting costly, false and mendacious lawsuits that seek to intimidate Windermere victims and terminate their speech rights, he is also promoting "...a belief in the importance of music as a means of connection to each other and the community." Visitors to WindermereWatch.com and responsible citizens alike are urged to boycott Seattle Pro Musica concerts. Visit the boycott Seattle Pro Musica page by clicking here. Read a more in-depth review of Drayna's legal practice here.

Timothy Wissner (left), is named as a Governing Person and Treasurer of Windermere Real Estate Services Company. Wissner ia also CFO of franchiser Windermere Services; and CFO of Windermere Solutions; and is listed as Washington Loan Company Vice President. Washington Loan Company has also been sued for Intentional Misrepresentation—read that report here—Case Update: Stipulation and Order for Dismissal.

 

WINDERMERE'S DEMCO LAW FIRM: ESCHEWING ETHICS and DOING WHAT OTHER LAWYERS JUST WON'T DO

john demcoAttorney and multi-office Windermere broker John Demco (left) is the ethically-elastic Windermere kingpin lawyer who operates Demco Law, Windermere’s in-house legal firm, whose primary job is to stall and outspend small fry consumers damaged by dishonest Windermere brokers, agents and franchise owners. When an innocent real estate consumer has the misfortune to suffer one of Windermere’s many bad apples, Demco Law Firm will refuse to settle the matter forthrightly, no matter what conspicuously unlawful or offensive conduct the agent or broker has committed. Demco and Windermere will force the aggrieved party to sue or swallow their damage and go away—standard Windermere operating procedure.

matthew davisWindermereWatch has compiled voluminous evidence that Windermere-Demco attorney Matthew F. Davis (left), WSBA# 20939, is the kind of lawyer about which jokes are coined. Davis is franchiser Windermere Services' frontline bully—the guy in the legal trenches actually wrecking lives, making threats, and suing victims who speak out. When Shakespeare was recommending "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers," in Henry the Sixth, Part 2, he was talking about egomaniacal lawyers like Matt Davis.

Attorney Matt Davis of Windermere's Demco Law Firm is so unethical, so deceitful and intimidating, that he's famous in law circles. As Windermere-Demco's lead attorney, Matthew F. Davis is renown for his dishonesty, dubious legal tactics, lack of decency and disrespect for the rules of professional conduct. He will do absolutely anything to win—without regard for truth or justice. He will lie to courts and opposing parties. He will file fallacious and erroneous documents with the court. He will email opposing parties telling them not to hire a lawyer when he has just served them a lawsuit. He will call a judge's chambers and request more time without informing the opposing party. He will file orders for a bench trial when he knows a jury trial has been demanded and paid for. He will trick, stall, coerce, menace and threaten. He will invent and extend mendacious Windermere litigation and abuse the legal process for no other reason than to exhaust an opponent’s pocketbook. If he can, he will get YOUR attorney to quit—a favorite tactic.

Windermere, Davis and Demco Law will push a $5 cat poop case all the way to the state supreme court just to avoid paying damages—because it’s all in the Windermere operating budget. And in the end, Windermere and Davis will try to coerce silence about your Windermere experience by trying to make you sign a "settlement" agreement that terminates your speech rights, so you can't ever inform the public about your Windermere debacle. What if you DON'T sign that you'll shut up, and then SPEAK UP instead? Windermere-Demco's Matt Davis will sue you for libel and defamation, then run away and dismiss his own lawsuit on the eve of trial—because after all—you're telling the truth.

Windermere's Clear and Overt Marketing Fraud:

"THE HIGHEST ETHICAL STANDARDS. UNCOMPROMISING HONESTY AND INTEGRITY."
—The Windermere Real Estate Mission Statement

Windermere widely promotes its deceptive express warranty in sales documents and on the internet which states "We are committed to... The highest ethical standards. Uncompromising honesty and integrity." In other Windermere promotion, like the Puget Sound Business Journal, Windermere CEO Geoff Wood is quoted as saying "In the real estate business somebody's word is very important. If you say you're going to do something, you've got to do it." The article goes on to say, "Geoff oversees marketing, legal, financial and internet development services throughout the Windermere network..." Mr. Wood claims absolute dominion over both Windermere legal and internet strategy, making him chief architect of Windermere marketing fraud.

Effective reportage can be harsh in recounting facts, but it must be said in consideration of all the Windermere victims profiled here who truly sought Windermere's vaunted honesty and integrity, that Windermere Services CEO Geoffrey P. Wood is simply lying when he states his company's utterly false and fraudulent commitment to honesty and integrity. He both lies and deceives again when he says that "In the real estate business somebody's word is very important. If you say you're going to do something, you've got to do it." Wood clearly doesn't do what he says he's going to do—be committed to uncompromising honesty and integrity. Wood himself is indeed IN the real estate business and his word is absolutely no good at all. He sues victims of Windermere misconduct for trade libel and defamation to shut them up, and then he tries to use the legal system to suppress victims' speech rights when they ask him to actually perform on the warranty he promotes. As this website proves, Mr. Wood does anything BUT what he says he's gonna do. Far from providing victimized Windermere customers a commitment to high ethical standards, honesty and integrity, Wood and Windermere run away and hide behind their lawyers when innocent consumers are ruined by their Windermere experience.

John W. Jacobi, Geoff Wood, his wife Jill Jacobi-Wood, and governing cohorts John O'brien "OB" Jacobi, attorney Paul Drayna, and Timothy Wissner have gone to the absolute ends of the earth in stonewalling, ignoring, denying and fleeing any and all responsibility for Windermere wrongdoing and misconduct. When called upon by victimized Windermere consumers to make good on its warranty of honesty and integrity, Windermere even states in legal pleadings that Windermere agents are NOT agents of Windermere at all—but independent contractors. As the legally-designated Governing People and top managers of the Windermere empire who drive policy, ethics and market promotion, it demands repeating that John W, Jacobi, Geoff Wood, Jill Jacobi-Wood, John OB Jacobi and attorney Paul Drayna are all clearly lying when they promise high ethical standards and uncompromising honesty to the public and consumers of real estate services.

Protect your life, home, family and future by cancelling or not renewing your Windermere listing. Don't risk doing business with Windermere Real Estate, the brand built on lies, fraud and ruined lives. Refuse to fund public predator Windermere Real Estate with commission from the sale of your home.

Back to Top

©2012 by WindermereWatch.com | If you have a question, comment or Windermere story, please email: windermerewatch@aol.com