Alert!  Windermere argues in court that Windermere agents are not agents of Windermere!

That being the case, what is the nature of Windermere's business?  Are these the arguments of people you can trust?

Someone You Can Trust?

You are listening to a radio ad produced by the National Association of Realtors, aired in 2006.  To view National Assn. of Realtors TV ad, click here.

This is the story of what happened when we put our trust in a Windermere Realtor.

Paul H. Stickney, Realtor licensed to the broker at Windermere Real Estate /SCA, Inc.  Windermere, the Northwest's largest real estate firm, boasts of "the highest ethical standards" and "uncompromising honesty and integrity."  As you read, be reminded that Windermere is defending Mr. Stickney in court.

Is your Realtor as trustworthy as Windermere's Mr. Stickney?

To watch Mr. Stickney explaining his case to MSNBC, click here.

If you have an opinion you would like to communicate to Windermere, the head office may be reached at:

5424 Sand Point Way NE
Seattle, WA 98105
206/527-3801
wsc@windermere.com

To see the letters we are currently sending Northwest Realtors, click here.

Not with a gun, but a Windermere Realtor license.  For years, Windermere Wall Street provided a base of operations for Cheryl Jonet to fleece the Seattle area public.  When the victims realized they'd been robbed, Windermere's lawyers lied, saying that Windermere brokers are not responsible for their agents' actions.  For details, see the Windermere Gallery.  This is the Irony and the Ecstasy of Windermere's advertizing.

Peter Doorish lost hundreds of thousands of dollars to Jonet's schemes, and so did Tom Mc Makin.  We are told Jonet struck at least eleven other victims.

Cheryl Jonet (aka Cheryl Baumhofer) is now deceased, but the devastation she caused in the lives of others goes on and on.  Windermere, meanwhile, has enjoyed the fruit of her commissions.

Isn't it about time the State of Washington prosecuted Windermere's lawyers for what amounts to racketeering?

And how honest a reporting service is The Seattle Times?  The Times refused to cover our story (reporter Susan Kelleher interviewed us in December, 2006, but her story was killed).  The Times has refused to follow up on the Doorish or Mc Mackin stories, and the eleven other leads Mc Mackin provided.  Yet The Times does report other real estate scams.  See, for example, February 27, 2009, Mortgage-fraud defendant sentenced to seven years in prison.  It seems The Times looks the other way when the problem is Windermere.

Rob McKenna, Washington Attorney General, is styled as the top consumer protection advocate in the State of Washington.  He is courageous enough to go after guppies, but has no appetite for sharks, such as the nation's largest savings and loan, Washington Mutual.  Meanwhile, from across the continent, New York's AG, Andrew Cuomo, noticed the problem with this homegrown Washington firm, and took action.

We sought McKenna's help with our renovation problems, and achieved the predictable result — zero.

In 2006, McKenna settled a law suit against Ameriquest Mortgage for "pennies on the dollar," according to one attorney involved.  Ameriquest was charged with overvaluing homes in appraisals and inventing employment and income information to "help" the borrowers qualify.

Who supports McKenna? 

According to the Public Disclosure Commission (PDC), McKenna accepted improper campaign contributions from the Washington Association of Realtors in his 2008 bid for re-election.

And talking about disclosure ... McKenna's Assistant AG for Government Accountability, Timothy Ford, is the former legal counsel for the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW).  Ford also co-chairs the AG's Eminent Domain Task Force.  So the former BIAW lawyer decides eminent domain issues for Washington?  How convenient is that for the real estate development community?

On June 15, 2009 we wrote to McKenna asking him to stop DOL's collusion with Windermere to flout Washington real estate law.  We included specific documented examples.  McKenna's office responded that McKenna supports DOL’s decisions on Windermere, McKenna will do nothing to enforce state law, and McKenna would defend DOL if anyone challenged its decisions.  On July 13, we asked our AG correspondent why McKenna thinks it’s OK to allow Windermere to sell a contaminated meth lab house to unsuspecting buyers without even a hint of administrative sanction.

On the one hand ...

Paul H. Stickney, Realtor, authored an itemized invoice dated June 9, 2004 in which he stated he "[p]rovided comprehensive overview of costs associated with major cosmetic and some structural improvements to the subject home so DeCourseys could compare value when finished to other homes seen in the market place that were updated, because this home was unacceptable to DeCourseys in as is condition." 

On the other hand ...

Brandi Adams, Windermere and Stickney's attorney from the Demco law firm, told the court on 11 June, 2007 that Stickney recommended his business partner, Bob Trustworthy (footnote), for "cosmetic work and non-structural work" only.

And that's what Stickney told the MSNBC reporters, too -- that he recommended Trustworthy's company to the DeCourseys for cosmetic work only.  The MSNBC show Undercover: Home Wreckers was aired in October, 2007. 

Stickney's 2007 statement was different from his 2004 statement.

On the third hand ...

Michele McNeil, Paul H. Stickney's other attorney, heads up her own Skyline Law Group.  On January 14, 2008 she argued to the court that Stickney's business partner, Bob Trustworthy (footnote), "was quite capable of handling the DeCoursey project.  He has over 50 years of construction experience, has built two homes for himself and four hundred apartments in Crossroads."

Stickney's 2008 statement reverts back to his 2004 statement -- a complete 360 degree turn. -- Which proves having two law firms is not necessarily better than having one.

On September 26, 2006, McNeil "ordered" us to take this web page down and told us: "If anything good comes of this case, I hope it is to put all contractors and realtors on notice never to do business with you."  She also accused us of attempting to "extort money" from Paul Stickney.

In August, 2008, McNeil famously told our lawyer that we should accept half our damages in settlement because "everyone knows [the DeCourseys] are out of money and can't afford to go to trial."

Samantha Saul was a Windermere agent on Whidbey Island.

Linda Gabelein was a Windermere agent on Whidbey Island.

In 2005, Linda Gabelein and her daughter, Samantha Saul (above), were working as real estate agents licensed to Windermere's Freeland office on Whidbey Island.  The office was situated near Mutiny Bay, and owned Windermere lawyer/broker John Demco (cached).

Freeland was also the home town of Emma Endicott, an elderly widow who suffered from bouts of disorganized thinking.  Emma knew Linda and Samantha and trusted them.  And Emma owned 24 acres of prime waterfront-view property on Mutiny Bay ... Well now!

Without informing Emma's sons, Samantha secretly persuaded Emma to give her power of attorney over Emma's property.  Then Linda and Samantha persuaded Emma to sell parcels of land to them and their friends at prices far below market value.  For details, see the Windermere Gallery. 

When Emma's sons found out, they objected, but John ("So Sue Me") Demco defended his agents' actions and said the sales were final.  Emma's sons were forced to sue.  Carolyn Cliff of Langley, WA represented the Endicott sons, while Demco and his law firm defended the agents.

Emma's sons won: The trial court found that Linda and Samantha exploited Emma's trust, thereby violating Washington's Abuse of Vulnerable Adults Act (AVA).

The facts were now undeniable and the community standards had been voiced.  But Windermere and the Demco Law Firm know no shame.  They appealed to Washington Court of Appeals.

On February 4, 2008, the Appeals Court spelled it out again: Taking advantage of a vulnerable old lady and cheating her of her land is WRONG.  The land the Windermere agents swiped from Emma was returned to her estate, and the agents had to pay legal expenses.

Legally speaking, corporations are persons, and they have personalities.  Windermere's personality is sociopathic: Windermere has a grandiose sense of self and feels entitled to certain things "by right."  It tells lies with ease.  It sees others not as people, but as opportunities to be exploited.  The end justifies the means.  Windermere lacks remorse, shame or guilt; it has no conscience.  It can change its image as necessary to avoid detection (see for example, the Windermere Mission Statement, the Windermere Foundation, and Windermere's Community Service Day).

What happened when the Washington Department of Licensing was informed of the facts and the court decisions?  Acting more like part of a criminal syndicate than government law enforcement, DOL announced that Linda and Samantha had not violated any Washington real estate laws.

Question: What's the difference between the Windermere/DOL/Attorney General combine and organized crime?

Is it safe to buy a home in Washington?  In 2003, Theresa McCormick bought a house in western Washington.  Her housing inspector did not report 1000 sq. ft. of the toxic black mold and soft rot fungus, Chaetomium, growing in the attic.  Ms. McCormick moved into her new home, soon became sick, and discovered the mold.  When she complained to the Washington Dept. of Agriculture (at that time the supervisory agency of home inspectors), she learned that Washington did not require home inspectors to mention mold in their reports.  Read Ms. McCormick's story here.

Learn about Melinda Ballard's story with different species of toxic mold in this CBS news article and this video.

New York State understands the problem.  What's wrong with Washington?  As Ms. McCormick notes, the corporate headquarters for Weyerhaeuser is located right here in Washington.  And we wouldn't want people to get the idea that wood is a less-than-perfect building material, would we?

Tom Merrick, attorney for MacPherson's Property Management, Inc., filed an anti-trust suit against Windermere in 2001.  Among other things, MacPherson's claimed theft of trade secrets.  MacPherson employees photocopied MacPherson's client list and wrote to the clients announcing they planned to move to Windermere.  They urged the clients to move their accounts to Windermere, also.   Even before they quit MacPherson's, these employees were listed on Windermere websites marketing their property management services.

During depositions, Merrick discovered those MacPherson employees were former Windermere employees, sent into MacPherson's as industrial spies or moles.  For details, see the Windermere Gallery.

Marsha J. Pechman, United States District Court Judge, ruled that MacPherson client lists were not trade secrets because Windermere could have gotten the client's names and addresses from public records.

But, Judge, if Windermere could get the names and addresses from public records, why didn't they?  Why was Windermere allowed to benefit from what most ordinary mortals call "theft?"

Liar Liar, starring Jim Carrey, delighted movie goers by portraying the hilarious results when a lawyer was rendered unable to lie for just one day.

Ron Ward, past president of the Washington State Bar Association, was outraged by judicial tolerance of lawyer misconduct:

Lawyer misconduct and lack of professionalism include most notably: 

1. Lying (including material omissions verbally and in pleadings directed to the court and to opposing counsel). 
   
2. Engaging in intimidation tactics and abuse of the discovery process (including badgering and attempted intimidation of witnesses and opposing parties and other "Rambo" techniques; name-calling; threatening CR11 sanctions; brow-beating pro se litigants; failing to timely file responsive pleadings; failing to submit responsive pleadings; concealing and destroying evidence; and engaging in cost-prohibitive litigation intended not to resolve the dispute, but to force opponents from the fray because of their inability to afford justice). ...

Mr. Ward also provides a prescription for this professional disease:

A more assertive role by judges is the single most important factor in fostering professionalism. Judges are the referees in the justice process. There is no way to abrogate that responsibility. It is clear that in many cases the litigants are not just going to work it out among themselves. Breaches of professionalism and flouting of the rules are akin to corporate policy in some firms. Unfortunately, it is their culture.  - Ward, Pit Bulls, Pikes, and Pitchforks

Dark Vader had very few customer complaints with the Better Business Bureau.  This is an amazing record, considering Mr. Vader's methods.  American business (and consumers) would do well to discover how this was accomplished.

The corporate tool for a squeeky clean reputation is the "dark clause."  Windermere, for example, asserts that the dark clause is of "utmost importance" in a settlement agreement.  Blackbeard the Pirate was familiar with the concept: "Dead men tell no tales."

Seattle Weekly, October 15, 2008, published an opinion entitled The Way We Elect Judges Is a Sham (Cached).  The article quotes a number of prominent judges from the Washington courts.

At the very minimum, we ask:  Shouldn't candidates for judicial office to required to publicly disclose comprehensive and detailed resumes of their careers?  If a candidate for judicial office has spent his much of his professional life defending other lawyers who are caught lying, cheating, and stealing, or real estate agents who swindle their customers, shouldn't the public know about that?

 
Windermere Customer Service

Windermere has a unique business plan (or maybe not so unique):

• Windermere holds that the agents are independent contractors, not agents of Windermere
• Windermere brokers do not learn of a transaction until after settlement — Windermere brokers know only the papers the agents put in front of them
• If a customer has a complaint, Windermere calls in the lawyers
• As Windermere lawyer John Demco said, you'll have to sue
• And when you sue, Windermere will use every legalistic stall and obstruction they can.  They will waste your money on frivolous filings and bogus claims, sending your legal bills through the roof
• Demco's lawyers claim the brokers are not answerable to Windermere clients for improper conduct of the agents
• Demco argues that TMC's government documents naming Stickney as Vice President are "just a piece of paper."
• Demco also argued that our damages were not caused by Stickney lying to us and failing to disclose his conflicts of interest — our damages (if any) were caused by poor construction.  That's like arguing that the gunman didn't kill the victim, the bullet did.
• When dissatisfied Windermere customer Gary Kruger spoke publicly about his experience, Windermere sued him for "trade libel."  What else could a self-respecting billionaire corporation do?

Learn about the RAT HOUSE a Windermere agent sold to unsuspecting customer, Gary Kruger.  Documents show the Windermere agent, George Rudiger, knew of the home's prior rat history when he sold the house, but did not warn Mr. Kruger.  For details, see the Windermere Gallery. 

George Rudiger, Windermere agent, says of himself, "you need an experienced, knowledgeable professional to get the job done."

When Kruger moved into his newly purchased house, he suffered a severe allergic reaction and then discovered the rat problem.  A rat abatement specialist found rat nests behind the walls, dozens of dead rat carcasses, electrical wires chewed by rats (causing a fire hazard), and subfloors and interior walls soaked with rat urine.  The stench was so bad, the pest man said respirators should be worn by anyone working on the house.

Kruger hired an attorney and sued Windermere Northeast, Realtor George Rudiger, and broker Joan Whittaker [case 02-2-28184-2 SEA].  He spent $40,000 on legal fees. 

Windermere then filed a summary judgment motion and Kruger's attorney demanded another $25,000.  But Kruger had run out of money and couldn't pay.  So his attorney dropped him and the judge threw out Kruger's claims, despite the facts of the case.

When Kruger spoke publicly about what had happened, Windermere sued him for defamation and "trade libel."  In both cases, Windermere was represented by Matt Davis (see below).

Vila Pace-Knapp trusted Windermere, but never again.  In 2001, Windermere Agent Dick Pelascini offered to save her home from foreclosure.  The home soon belonged to Pelascini, and Pace-Knapp and her handicapped son were evicted (see Trial Brief).  "She ultimately lost the home to the speculators who set her up," said Judge Barnett.  Pace-Knapp won the case in court (Seattle Weekly, April 01, 2008).

Windermere appealed the decision, but still failed to get the desired dismissal.  In December, the Washington Supreme Court refused Windermere's petition to review the case yet again.  For details, see the Windermere Gallery. 

Believe it or not, the Windermere agent, Dick Pelascini, still works as a Realtor for Windermere Bellevue Commons.

Matt Davis, of Demco Law, represents Windermere and Paul Stickney.  In papers filed with the court, Davis asserted that  "Stickney is not an agent for Windermere."  If Davis is telling the truth, the curious reader might wonder whose listings are these?  And why is the Windermere legal counsel representing him?  For details, see the Windermere Gallery. 

Davis made the same argument when defending Realtors David Hopkins and Joann McCann, agents of  Windermere Northeast.  The two Realtors with their broker, Joan Whittaker, were accused by  dissatisfied customers Julie Campbell and her husband of forging a legal description of their land:  In the very pleading in which Davis was defending the agents, he denied that Windermere had "any agency relationship with" the agents.

While Davis dishes up such nonsense to the court, he tries to get real evidence ignored.  In our case, Davis  asked the court to strike two of our Declarations from the court's consideration.  The court decided against Davis.  To see the Declarations Windermere wanted ignored, click here and here.

Of course, we had to answer Davis' motion, and up go the legal costs.  When Davis did not get the decision he wanted, he asked the court to characterize comments from the bench as rulings, and THAT motion had to be answered.  And up, up, up go the legal costs.

For more information on the Windermere legal tactics, see You Take Us to Court? We Bust Your House!

Dr. Jekyll had "the highest of ethical standards" and "uncompromising honesty and integrity."  But what of Mr. Hyde?  (image: Fredric March, 1931)

John ("so sue us") Demco, founder of the Demco Law Firm, legal counsel to the Windermere corporate hydra.  For details, see the Windermere Gallery.

Gagging dissatisfied customers is of "utmost importance to Windermere," according to the Demco Law Firm.  See Windermere's Dark Clause in the central panel.

Douglas A. Schafer, a Washington lawyer, discovered that his client was buying favors from a Pierce Count Superior Court judge.  Schafer blew the whistle on the judge to the Supreme Court, which then had Schafer suspended from the Bar for violating attorney-client privilege. 

Washington - a state where no good deed goes unpunished.

Washington Supreme Court Justice Bobbe Bridge was arrested on charges of drunken driving and hit-and-run after leaving the scene of an accident about a mile from her home in the Magnolia neighborhood of Seattle.  See Seattle Post-Intelligencer, March 2, 2003, Bridge arrested for drunken driving

Bridge admitted and apologized for her actions, but continued on the Court for about four years, to retire in 2007.  Charges against Bridge were dismissed by the District Court.

Bridge is also noted for creating double-barreled factoids when she wrote a majority decision denying a motion brought by Tacoma lawyer Doug Schafer (above).  Schafer's law license was suspended for six months when he reported  that a Pierce County judge was on the take.  He appealed the decision.  In the opinion, Judge Bridge wrote:

"Judge Anderson ruled that Schafer's petition was frivolous and without merit, and assessed $ 1,000 in attorney fees against Schafer's client." 

Schafer asserts there was no such ruling, and that he had written no such petition.  See To Kill A Messenger

Justice Brent D. Benjamin of the West Virginia Supreme Court refuses to recuse himself from $15 million case between two coal companies.  Justice Benjamin cast the deciding vote in the case in favor of the larger company — having earlier accepted more than $3 million in campaign contributions from the CEO of the same company.  With accusations of impropriety from another judge on the same court and cries of outrage from coast to coast, the case went to the Supreme Court of the United States.  That court decided that Judge Benjamin should have recused himself.

"If the public believes that judges can be bought," said Keith R. Fisher, a lawyer for the American Bar Association, "that is really poisonous and undermines public confidence in an independent judiciary."

Public confidence may be very important to Mr. Fisher (since he is in the trade), but for the rest of us, a judiciary free of corruption takes higher precedence.

Edith Hollan Jones, Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, told the Harvard Law School in a February 2004 address that the American legal system is corrupt beyond recognition.

"An increasingly visible and vocal number [of lawyers] apparently believe that the strategic use of anger and incivility will achieve their aims.  Others seem uninhibited about making misstatements to the court or their opponents or destroying or falsifying evidence," she claimed.  "When lawyers cannot be trusted to observe the fair processes essential to maintaining the rule of law, how can we expect the public to respect the process?"

She also stated, "Lawsuits are brought that ultimately line the pockets of lawyers rather than their clients.  The lawsuit is not the best way to achieve social justice, and to think it is, is a seriously flawed hypothesis.  There are better ways to achieve social goals than by going into court."

Roger C. Cramton, Professor of Law Emeritus at Cornell University, wrote in the 1970s that "the ordinary religion of the law school classroom" is "a moral relativism tending toward nihilism, a pragmatism tending toward an amoral instrumentalism, a realism tending toward cynicism, an individualism tending toward atomism, and a faith in reason and democratic processes tending toward mere credulity and idolatry."

John F. Molloy, former Chief Judge of the Arizona Court of Appeals, is the author of The Fraternity: Lawyers And Judges In Collusion.  In that book, Judge Molloy lamented usurpation of power by the legal Fraternity.

"Judges were simply not intended by our Founders to have the power to make laws.  It is impossible for any rational person to read our nation's Constitution without finding a clearly expressed intent that the powers of government be apportioned between its three branches, the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary.  The lawmaking power was crystal clear — not delegated to judges." (pg. 17.)

Molloy also lamented that the legal fraternity has fallen away from pursing the ideals of truth and justice to become a money-making ventures, with top spoils going to the cleverest debaters.

"The unique symbiotic relationship between bench and bar has resulted in making a game of our trials, a game played by clever and expensive lawyers whose skills in technical rules and in salesmanship control the outcome.  Today's judges do not interfere with the games lawyers play.  In my early contacts with our judicial system, I witnessed much more of an independent, truth-seeking attitude from trial judges ..." (pg. 14.)