When I filed my initial complaint with REMAX of Indiana, Jonathan Nicholas had the following designations: NAR, CRB, CRS, and GRI.
As I mentioned earlier, my initial complaint included documentation of Loan Steering and Predatory Lending. Likewise, I informed Jonathan that Scott Veerkamp removed my property from the MLS without my permission.
Please take time to review this important information:
1. Jonathan Nicholas refused to meet with me and discuss my experience with the REMAX Central Sting Operation. 2. Scott Veerkamp made approximately $26,000 on a $120,000 property with a "land contract scam." 3. Scott refused to conduct an open house on this property. 4. Scott lived "one block down the street" from this property. 5. Jonathan Nicholas presented Scott Veerkamp with a "Lifetime Achievement Award" for misrepresenting the value of this property and stealing my money. 6. Scott used the award to recognize himself with another advertisement in Christian Phone Book. 7. Apparently, this is supposed to be an example of how to "protect and promote the interest of your client." 8. In reality, this felt like a "mafia hit" on behalf of the REMAX organization. 9. This "mafia hit" included the following components: A. Loan Steering B. Predatory Lending C. Inflated property value D. Land contract with a "due on sale" clause. E. $26,000 "heist" for Scott Veerkamp.
The information above provides additional documentation that REMAX and the National Association of Realtors are participating in a "pattern of deception" with the public.
Warning Letter To Scott Veerkamp From The Office Of The Indiana Attorney General...
ReplyDeleteWarning Letter.pdf (51 KB)
Scott Veerkamp is the President of the Franklin Township School Board and a member of the National Association of Realtors. Please ask Scott to post a copy of his WARNING letter from the office of the Indiana Attorney General. In addition, please encourage Scott to provide a written response to items 1-16 on this website.
Items 1-8 in group A: 1. I have documentation of a WARNING letter that was sent to Scott Veerkamp from the office of the Indiana Attorney General. 2. This letter was sent to Scott in November of 2008. 3. Here are the questions I have regarding this letter: A. Is a WARNING letter supposed to be an example of how Scott Veerkamp was "exonerated" by the office of the Indiana Attorney General? B. Can Scott post a copy of his WARNING letter for the public to review? 4. Please explain how a $1,440 Yield Spread Premium "protects and promotes the interest of your client." FYI: The federal government has banned the use of YSP. 5. Please explain how a $4,799 Yield Spread Premium "Serves Others First." This is in reference to your OTHER client in Wanamaker, IN. 6. Please provide documentation that shows how you "protected and promoted the interest of your client" when you attempted to sell a $120,000 property on a land contract with a "due on sale clause." 7. Please explain how you honored your fiduciary responsibility to your client when you made approximately $26,000 on a $120,000 property listed with REMAX Central in your own neighborhood. 8. Please provide documentation that shows how you "did your very best" when you refused to conduct an open house on a property located "one block down the street" from the house you were living in.
Items 9-16 in group B: 9. Apparently, $26,000 was not enough money to justify Scott driving "one block down the street" to conduct an open house on the $120,000 property. 10. David Worley used to work for Scott Veerkamp at REMAX Central. Scott had an appraisal conducted on the $120,000 property in response to my complaint. The appraisal was conducted by Bill Worley. Are David Worley and Bill Worley related? 11. Scott refers to me as licensed real estate agent. I would like for Scott to provide documentation that supports this statement. 12. Please explain why you removed my property from the multiple listing service after I filed my complaint with MIBOR. How was I supposed to sell this property if you refuse to conduct an open house? How was I supposed to sell this property if you remove it from the MLS? 13. The National Association of Mortgage Brokers stated it is not necessary to pay an application fee. Please explain how a $960 application fee keeps the interest of your client "first and foremost." 14. NAMB says processing fees are a violation of their code of ethics because "they're generally not related to any actual service performed by a broker." Please explain how a $500 processing fee "protects and promotes the interest of your client." 15. Scott ran an advertisement in Christian Phone Book with the following statement: "We will do our very best to help you get the lowest possible interest rates at the lowest possible price." A. Please provide documentation that explains how a $4,799 Yield Spread Premium represents "the lowest possible interest rate." B. Likewise, please explain how a $960 application fee represents "the lowest possible price." 16. ISBA Code of Ethics: Please provide documentation that shows how you "met the responsibilities to your community" when you steered people into high cost loans.
I look forward to a written response from Scott Veerkamp on items 1-16.
Jim Bruggenschmidt
scott veerkamp warning letter, scott veerkamp warning letter, scott veerkamp warning letter,