Why are we running around in circles here? I stated my position quite clearly in my previous rebuttal, as well as in the ones before that. As you may recall, I stated that I I "do not have a dog in this fight." And what I have levied so far can hardly be characterized as a "tirade."
I asked for SPECIFIC examples of something that would constitute fraud, which generally encompasses the obtaining of goods or services under false pretenses, but can certainly include the mis-use of the judicial system to achieve an illegal foreclosure or benefit therefrom (this is technically called a "fraud upon the court").
Whether I am an attorney is beside the point because, by posting these rebuttals, I am not acting as an attorney. But, since you're curious, yes I am. Hence my curiosity.
But without any specific allegations, it seems like what I'm dealing with is a group of people who think that, so long as they write "fraud" in big letters enough times, the rest of us will simply accept the allegation as fact.
So again: what is the F R A U D?
Now on to the questions posed in your latest rebuttal:
1) Tim: Which law firm do you work for, is it: Marshall Watson? Mr. Stern's? Florida Default Law Group or who???
ANSWER: I am a "contingent attorney." I am contracted by multiple small firms in the West Michigan area to consult in the area of debtor's rights and remedies. Ironically, a big part of my practice involves helping people avoid foreclosures.
2) Our group had another group discussion about your tirades...
COMMENT: It's nice to hear that my work is gaining such notoriety! But your characterization of a civil questioning of your statements as a "tirade" only speaks to the unreasonable nature of your position. Why attack me with insults when you could actually refute my statements?
3) we hope & pray that you are NOT practicing Law without a license but perhaps you may be a lawyer in disguise on this site!
COMMENT: I am not practicing law without a license. In fact, what I do is not even considered the practice of law. I advise other attorneys, I don't represent individuals. And I am not a "lawyer in disguise." In fact, I make several references in many of my postings here to the fact that I am a lawyer.
4) We are well aware this site & at least two of the other five sites are being read by the others (some foreclosure mills)! So if they are not in the wrong why not say so?
COMMENT: Good question. Why the hell am I doing the dirty work for lawyers I've never met? I do it out of academic interest and for the entertainment value. In other words, this is fun for me.
But the answer, as far as I can tell, is that lawyers, as a rule, like to say as little as possible when they or their client is under attack. It's akin to the "anything you say can be used against you" phrase. So as long as you're not affecting their bottom line, they aren't likely to refute your claims. If you look through the categories on this site that encompass attorneys, you'll see that lawyers generally don't personally respond to complaints against them.
5) Tim, are you trying to protect them? Or are you just trying to practice law yourself (if you are not a lawyer)?
No, I'm not trying to protect them per se. I AM trying to protect them if your complaints amount to nothing more than mere allegations by consumers who are unhappy with the outcome of a perfectly legal scenario. But my primary purpose, as I've stated several times, is to get YOU to tell us what the basis is for your allegations of fraud. And nothing about that consitutes the practice of law in the first place, so I'm confused as to why you keep bringing up the "is he or isn't he a lawyer" lines.
So, again, give us an example or two!