Jason Rose

Hi! I'm helping raise money to help fight cancer. I'm taking part in the 25th Annual American Cancer Society Relay For Life on June 13 and 14, 2009. Almost everyone, including myself, has a friend or family member who has been affected by cancer. I'm hoping to get as many donations as possible for this event (no amount is too small), and I'm hoping that some of my fellow ActiveRain members might be willing to help out.

Would you be willing to donate to my fundraising efforts? Please check out my personal page to find out more info or to make a secure tax-deductible contribution. Donations are made directly on the American Cancer Society's website through the link to my personal page (click in the "Donate" circle).

About Relay for Life

One in three people will be diagnosed with cancer during their lifetime. The American Cancer Society Relay For Life is an event that brings together more than 3.5 million people across the country each year to celebrate the lives of those who have battled cancer, remember loved ones lost, and fight back against a disease that takes too much.

Relay For Life is a wonderful community event that raises money to combat this disease and to spread awareness about how we can protect ourselves from cancer. It is a fun-filled event that brings together people of all ages to camp-out and take turns walking around a track for 24 hours to signify that cancer never sleeps. It's a time of celebrating those who have battled the disease, remembering those who have died and a chance to fight back against a disease that takes too much from too many.

About the American Cancer Society

There's never been a more exciting time to get involved with the American Cancer Society. Today, the number of people dying from cancer is dropping, despite our growing population. Fewer people are being diagnosed with cancer and fewer people are dying from the disease. We know more about the causes of cancer and its treatment and cures than ever before. And we are helping to save lives every day.

The work of the American Cancer Society over many decades has helped us make amazing strides against this disease. Every dollar you provide to the American Cancer Society goes toward eliminating cancer as a major health concern. Your donation is essential to supporting the American Cancer Society's mission, which fights cancer on four fronts: research, education, advocacy, and service.

The Relay for Life is more that just a fundraiser. It's a chance for caring people in a community to come together to support each other. And support is crucial for those who have been touched by cancer. At the American Cancer Society, the funds raised through Relay for Life not only go to research, advocacy, and education, but also for vital programs and services that give people hope and answers.

Please Help Me Raise Money

I've set the ambitious goal of trying to raise a total of $3,000 for this event. I'm hoping that my fellow ActiveRain members will help me reach that goal through a tax deductible donation. No donation is too small. Every $5, $10, $20, etc. will help the American Cancer Society. Please visit my personal page and make a secure online donation through the American Cancer Society's website (click in the "Donate" circle).

Thank you for your support!!

Here is a summary of a settlement in an antitrust lawsuit that was brought by the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) against a MLS provider. I try to post lawsuit/settlement summaries in order to provide timely updates to real estate agents and broker.

This afternoon (Monday, May 4, 2009), the DOJ reached a proposed settlement with Consolidated Multiple Listing Service Inc. (“CMLS”) that requires CMLS to change its rules to allow low-priced and innovative brokers to compete with traditional brokers in the Columbia, South Carolina, area. The DOJ alleged that the rules caused consumers to pay more for residential real estate brokerage services in the Columbia area.

A multiple listing service (“MLS”), like the one operated by CMLS, is a joint venture of real estate brokers that combines its members’ home listings information into an electronic database that is made available to all member real estate brokers. This database serves as a clearinghouse for the members to communicate important information among themselves, such as descriptions of the listed properties for sale and offers to compensate other members if they locate purchasers for those listings. In addition, the database allows member brokers who represent buyers to search for nearly all the listed properties in the area that match the buyer’s needs.

Because the MLS’s database is the primary source of home listings information on virtually every home listed for sale in a given area, access to the database – and therefore MLS membership – is critical for any real estate broker seeking to serve clients successfully in the MLS’s service area. Consequently, the rules adopted by the MLS governing who can be a member and how members must behave can have a significant impact on competition among real estate brokers in the area served by the MLS.

In May 2008, the DOJ’s Antitrust Division filed a civil antitrust lawsuit against CMLS in federal court, challenging policies and rules that restrained competition among brokers in Columbia in several ways. According to the lawsuit, CMLS imposed burdensome prerequisites to membership that prevented some real estate brokers, such as those who would likely compete aggressively on price, from listing homes for sale in the MLS’s database, ensuring that those brokers could not compete in the Columbia area. CMLS required applicants for membership to discuss the nature of their businesses with a committee of incumbent members and reserved the power to deny membership to brokers who they feared would compete too aggressively. CMLS also stabilized the price of brokerage services by forcing its broker members to provide a full set of brokerage services regardless of whether a client wanted the required services. The DOJ alleged that those rules prevented consumers from receiving the full benefits of competition, discouraged discounting, and threatened to lock in outmoded business models.

The proposed settlement with CMLS requires it to change those rules and prohibits it from adopting new rules that exclude real estate brokers from membership based on their business models or price structures. CMLS must allow any broker holding the appropriate license under South Carolina law to become a member and cannot continue to exclude brokers based on their business models. The settlement requires CMLS to repeal rules that denied Columbia-area home sellers the ability to hire a real estate broker to perform only the specific services the seller desired, at a lower cost than the seller would pay a traditional, full-service broker. CMLS also will repeal its requirement that its member brokers use only the single contract approved by CMLS, which blocked home sellers from alternative arrangements that allowed them to avoid paying any commission to their broker if the sellers found buyers for their homes.

********************************************

www.123ConEd.com is the leading provider of online real estate continuing education in Michigan. All of our courses are fully approved and properly certified by the State of Michigan.

Copyright © 123 ConEd LLC 2009. All rights reserved.

Here is another example of a recent settlement of a Fair Housing Act lawsuit brought by the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”). I try to post case summaries in order to provide timely updates to real estate agents and brokers about the "dos and don'ts" under the Fair Housing Act, since fair housing is such an important issue

Yesterday afternoon (Thursday, April 30, 2009), the DOJ settled a Fair Housing Act lawsuit that was brought against the owners, a manager and a former manager of Cottage Manor Apartments (located in Lakewood, New Jersey) because they discriminated against tenants on the basis of religion, national origin and race.

According to the lawsuit, the defendants transferred or attempted to transfer Hispanic and African American tenants from their apartments located in its most desirable building to make room for Orthodox Jews whom they courted as new tenants from 2002 to 2004. The defendants then assigned the non-Jewish tenants to less desirable apartments in the rear of the property, which had fewer amenities and were less well maintained than the most desirable building at the front of the property. The defendants charged the incoming Jewish tenants less rent than they did to non-Jewish tenants for apartments of similar size. Segregating tenants and providing discounted rents based upon religion, national origin or race is degrading and discriminatory.

The lawsuit originated from charges filed by HUD on behalf of current and former tenants of Cottage Manor Apartments. The lawsuit alleged that the apartment owners of Cottage Manor Apartments, Triple H. Realty LLC, its principal manager Harry Kantor and former managing agent Vincent Ortiz, violated the Fair Housing Act when they discriminated against Hispanic and African American tenants.

HUD’s investigation found that non-Jewish, African-American and Hispanic tenants received little to no apartment maintenance as compared to the maintenance provided to Jewish tenants. For example, Cottage Manor Apartments management refused to properly exterminate a non-Jewish family’s apartment, as well as failed to perform adequate maintenance repairs in the family’s bedroom and bathroom.

HUD’s on-site investigation confirmed that the maintenance of the one building occupied by non-Jewish tenants was substantially different. The building housing many of the Jewish families had a well-manicured lawn in the front courtyard that was enclosed by a white picket fence. Conversely, the buildings with the majority of African-American and Hispanic tenants were not well maintained, had little or no lawn in the courtyards, and the courtyards were not enclosed.

Cottage Manor management also instituted different lawn policies for tenants that were not Jewish. African-American and Hispanic tenants were told that they could not leave any toys or personal items on the lawns, but Jewish tenants were allowed to leave personal items on the lawns.

Under the terms of the settlement, the defendants were required to pay a total of $170,000 to identified victims of discrimination and an additional $30,000 to the government as a civil penalty.

Fair housing laws require equal access to housing, including equal access for persons with disabilities. The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability and familial status.

********************************************

To learn more about fair housing issues (and many other real estate topics), please visit us at www.123ConEd.com. We are the leading online provider of Michigan real estate continuing education. All of our courses are fully approved and properly certified by the State of Michigan, and are offered online.

Copyright © 123 ConEd LLC 2009. All rights reserved.

Here is another example of a recent legal case involving mortgage fraud. I try to post case summaries in order to provide timely updates to real estate professionals on important issues.

A federal grand jury has indicted four defendants for their participation in a massive mortgage fraud scheme that promised to pay off homeowners' mortgages on their "Dream Homes," but left them to fend for themselves. The indictment was returned on April 22, 2009, and unsealed yesterday (Monday, April 27, 2009).

According to the indictment, from 2005 to 2007, the defendants allegedly used corporate names such as "Metropolitan Grapevine LLC," "Metro Dream Homes," "POS Dream Homes," and "POS DH LLC" (collectively, “MDH”) to target homeowners and new home purchasers to participate in a purported mortgage payment program called the "Dream Homes Program." To participate, an investor had to provide a minimum of $50,000 for each home enrolled in the program, in addition to an "administrative fee" of up to $5,000. In exchange, the program promised to make the homeowner’s future monthly mortgage payments, and pay off the homeowner’s mortgage within five to seven years. Thereafter, the homeowner and MDH would own an equal interest in the home.

The indictment identifies the following people and alleges that Andrew Hamilton Williams, Jr. was the founder and owner of MDH; Michael Anthony Hickson was the chief financial officer; Isaac Jerome Smith was the president; and Alvita Karen Gunn was the vice president of operations. The information alleges that Carole Nelson was the chief financial officer of POS Dream Homes.

The indictment further alleges that Dream Homes Program representatives explained to investors that the homeowners’ initial payments would be used to fund investments in automated teller machines (ATMs), flat-screen televisions that would show paid business advertisements, and "Touch-N-Buy" electronic kiosks that sold telephone calling cards and other items. To give the Dream Homes Program a veneer of legitimacy and financial success, the defendants marketed the program through live presentations at luxury hotels in Maryland, Washington, D.C., and Beverly Hills, California, among other locations. The defendants allegedly told some of the investors that they should not worry about the price of the homes or monthly mortgage payments because MDH would make mortgage payments on their behalf.

The indictment alleges that the defendants failed to advise investors that:

• the ATMs, flat-screen televisions and kiosks never generated any meaningful revenue;
• the defendants used the funds from later investors to pay the mortgages of earlier investors (Ponzi scheme); and
• MDH had not filed any federal income tax returns throughout its existence.

The defendants also allegedly failed to advise investors that their investments were being used for the personal enrichment of select MDH employees, including the defendants, to:

• pay salaries of up to $200,000 a year as well as their mortgages;
• employ a staff of 10 chauffeurs and maintain a fleet of luxury cars; and
• travel to and attend the 2007 NBA All-Star game and the 2007 NFL Super Bowl, staying in luxury accommodations in both instances.

Nor were investors told that investor funds were allegedly used to:

• pay off investors in a prior failed ATM investment venture that Mr. Williams had founded called Bankcard Group;
• make multiple donations of up to $50,000 each to charitable organizations to allegedly give MDH the appearance of being financially successful; and
• fund investments in third-party businesses that had not been disclosed to investors.

On August 15, 2007, the Maryland Securities Commissioner issued a cease-and-desist order to Mr. Williams, MDH and other related companies directing them to immediately cease the offering and sale of unregistered securities in connection with their promotion of the Dream Homes Program. Despite that cease-and-desist order, the defendants continued to hold additional meetings in which they allegedly made additional misrepresentations about the financial success of MDH’s operations.

And, because these guys were not content to settle just for mortgage and bank fraud alone, they decided to also add perjury to the list of charges. On September 4, 2007, the defendants filed a legal challenge in federal court in Maryland to the cease-and-desist order. The indictment alleges that at a hearing on September 12, 2007, Mr. Hickson testified that the financial success of the Dream Homes Program did not rely upon new investor funds, when in fact Mr. Hickson knew that the sole source of meaningful revenue for MDH was new investor funds (hence, the perjury).

As a result of the scheme, more than 1,000 investors in the Dream Homes Program invested approximately $70 million. When the defendants stopped making the mortgage payments, the homeowners were left to attempt to make the mortgage payments MDH had promised to make in full.

An indictment is merely a formal charge by the grand jury. Each defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court. The four indicted defendants face a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison for the fraud conspiracy; 20 years in prison on each of the 15 counts of wire fraud (for a possibility of 300 years); and 20 years in prison for conspiracy to commit money laundering. Mr. Hickson also faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison for making false statements. Mr. Smith also faces a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison for bank fraud arising out of his alleged misrepresentation of his income in order to obtain a bank loan to purchase a new Bentley automobile. The indictment seeks forfeiture of the fraud proceeds, including $70 million.

This prosecution is being brought jointly by the Maryland and Washington, D.C. Mortgage Fraud Task Forces, which are comprised of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies in Maryland, Washington, D.C., and Northern Virginia. The Task Forces were formed to promote the early detection, identification, prevention and prosecution of various kinds of mortgage fraud schemes.

I will try to keep following this interesting case and post an update when the case is ultimately resolved, hopefully with all of the defendants getting long prison sentences.

------------------------------------------------

To learn more about a variety of real estate topics, please visit us at www.123ConEd.com. We are the leading online provider of Michigan real estate continuing education. All of our courses are fully approved and properly certified by the State of Michigan, and are offered online.

Copyright © 123 ConEd LLC 2009. All rights reserved.

Here is another example of a recent legal case, this time involving a criminal conviction of someone for interfering with the housing rights of a family. Although most of my legal updates involve missteps by real estate professionals, I decided to post this because it involved a charge of interfering with housing rights.

Yesterday afternoon (Monday, April 27, 2009), Justin Hanson, a twenty-one year old resident of Mason City, Iowa, plead guilty to interfering with housing rights of an African-American family (civil right violation).

In the plea agreement, Mr. Hanson admitted that on May 9, 2008, he placed a racially offensive sign in the yard of a neighboring African-American family and the next day he fired a B.B. gun into the victims' home, breaking a bedroom window. By placing the sign and firing upon his victims, Mr. Hanson was attempting to injure, intimidate or interfere with the family’s enjoyment of their home. Mr. Hanson admitted he placed the sign in the yard and fired upon the house because of his neighbors' race and because they were living in his "white" neighborhood, town and country.

This genius is scheduled to be sentenced in federal court on July 16, 2009. He was convicted of one count of interfering with housing rights and faces a possible maximum sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment, a $250,000 fine, a $100 special assessment, and three years of supervised release following any imprisonment.

The case was investigated by the FBI and local police. It was prosecuted by the United States Attorney’s Office.

------------------------------------------------

To learn more about a variety of real estate topics, please visit us at www.123ConEd.com. We are the leading online provider of Michigan real estate continuing education. All of our courses are fully approved and properly certified by the State of Michigan, and are offered online.

Copyright © 123 ConEd LLC 2009. All rights reserved.