BrokerScience Mortgage Marketing Blog » Legal

LeapFish / DotNext CEO, Ben Behrouzi Defeated

Trace Richardson — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 05:22:26 +0000

On October 22nd, 2008, Ben Behrouzi / Eperks /LeapFish’s atorney, Ronald J. Cook filed for dismissal of their complaint against Vlad Zablotzkyy. This is yet one more embarrassment for Ben Behrouzi in addition to the public humiliation and ridicule that has already befallen him and his dieing brand ePerks, at the hands of the Real Estate community at large.

The withdrawal was likely the result of a settlement with Vlad (the terms of which have not been disclosed) in which Vlad was required to post a statement which is essentially a lawyer contrived “I’m Sorry”. One highlight is where “Vlad” requests that other bloggers covering the story print retractions. Vlad was outgunned and his willingness to settle clearly reflects that.

Considering that Ben Behhrouzi has threatened BrokerScience with threats similar to those he made against Vlad, we see this defeat as fitting, to say the least.

“Behnam “Ben” Behrouzi filed what’s called an “unverified” complaint against Vlad. That’s in contrast to a “verified” complaint, in which the plaintiff signs the complaint and declares under penalty of perjury that the statements in the complaint are true and correct. The lawsuit ended in settlement without Behrouzi ever making any statement under oath. Specifically, he never denied that he was responsible for the slander of Vlad.” – Brief Submitted to BrokerScience by Source that Wished to Remain Anonymous

While most intelligent CEO’s couldn’t attract the kind of bad publicity and ill will Behrouzi has managed to generate for ePerks on their worst day, this is an area where Ben truly shines. Then again, Ben has proven himself to be a tactless bully time and time again, so this is par for the course.

Ben’s reward for bullying Vlad Zablotzkyy with childish antics is the distinction of having negative results in 7 of the top 10 results for his name when googling “Ben Behrouzi“. Great job Ben! These will remain for YEARS and YEARS. A google search for “ePerks” shows 9 out of the top 10 results have negative content.

Spamming the Ben Behrouzi Way

To counter the extremely negative public reaction to his business practices in google, Ben began a spam / search engine dilution campaign in August by creating accounts with a large amount of service providers such as youtube.com, vator.tv and others in hopes these would replace the existing negative google results that come up when googling “Ben Behrouzi”. You can find the complete list at the bottom of this very unprofessional and amateur looking homepage Ben has created for himself here. Over time, these will end up being virtually useless for his end goal of spamming the results for his name.

He has also started maxstartup.com that was originally yet another ePerks splog until recently. Don’t laugh too hard when reading this gem from “MaxStartUp”:

I’ve had several failures in my life with some lessons that have left their spots, and have even been victim to online lies and an actual blog war instigated by the many that are motivated by the basest of human qualities.

Did Brabus Ventures Implode or is the Brand Simply Toxic?

It is worth noting that Ben Behrouzi’s parent company, Brabus Ventures has recently disassembled its corporate website at BrabusVentures.com including removing the Cultures and Values pages that Ben Behrouzi stole from Mervyns.com and Chevron.com. It seems that the root cause is that Ben Behrouzi is distancing himself from Brabus Ventures with a name change, after all a google search for “Brabus Ventures” shows 7 out of 10 listings have negative content regarding his company. We have no word yet on whether Ben plans on changing his own name to escape the embarrassment associated with it.

Simply Embarrassing:

Brabus Ventures Before Disassembly

Brabus Ventures After Disassembly

The New Face of Brabus Ventures - DotNext Inc.

The Next Generation of Fail: DotNext, Inc.

DotNext, Inc. is the new incarnation of Brabus Ventures. When most companies change their name, they give notice on their home page and redirect visitors to the new domain. Not Ben Behrouzi. His ability to single handedly destroy brands is the reason he is running from the Brabus Ventures name / reputation. When people think of Brabus Ventures, they think of Ben Behrouzi, when they think of Ben Behrouzi, they think of ePerks and when people think of ePerks, they think of ….. well you get the idea. Ben Behrouzi, his brands and his ongoing business practices are very negatively viewed in the Real Estate Community.

Notice that at BrabusVentures.com lists ePerks and Brabus as the only company properties. It is not until you go to dotnexinc.com that you see LeapFish, Ziddler and Ihype as properties with no mention of Brabus or ePerks. They are clearly trying to stop the bleeding and brand destruction caused by being associated with the Brabus Ventures / Ben Behrouzi names by isolating ePerks and Brabus together. Wow and sad.

On a final note, in recent months, current ePerks employees have been briefing us on Ben’s latest “secret” project, LeapFish.com, but to be honest we don’t care. We’ve wasted enough time highlighting the EPIC FAIL that is Ben Behrouzi already. Surprisingly, Ben has failed to garner any top search engine spots for “Epic Fail” yet, but it is one thing Ben is consistent with, so give him time.

Thank you to the community and everyone that did what they could to help Vlad Zablotzkyy defeat Ben Behrouzi / Eperks / Brabus Ventures!!! While there are too many to thank individually, an honorable mention goes out to Andy Beard and “Big Gun” Swann for putting their weight behind Vlad.

The Beginner’s Action Guide to Learning about ePerks / Ben Behrouzi vs Vlad Zablotkyy

Trace Richardson — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 04:57:14 +0000

1) Learn the ePerks Basics with the Seminal Piece on ePerks:

ePerks.com: A Case Study in Greed and Self-Imposed Brand Destruction

2) Read the Blog Post / Comments That Started It All:

ePerks- A Scam or A Gem?

3) Read the Cease & Desist Letter, Threats and Lawsuit from ePerks CEO Ben Behrouzi:

Cease & Desist Letter: Chilling Effect: How A Behemoth Company Can Silence A Blogger

Read: BrokerScience Commentary on Suit

4) Read Vlad’s Response to Being Falsely Accused of Child Molestation:

How Far Do You Go To Silence A Blogger And When Does It Become Too Far? (Post deleted per Vlad’s Settlement)

5) Listen to the Shocking Ben Behrouzi Voice Mails:

ePerks CEO Ben Behrouzi Voicemails Exposed: Threatens to Blackball and Sue Employee

6) Learn about the ePerks Link to Vlad Zablotzkyy:

ePerks IP Address Link to Vlad Zablotzkyy: When the Hunter Becomes the Prey

7) Read about Behrouzi’s Threats Against BrokerScience

Ben Behrouzi Insinuates Legal Action Against BrokerScience, Cites “Damages” and his confirmation to take action against BrokerScience on Inman. Read BrokerScience commentary on Inman piece.

ePerks: A Case Study in Brand Destruction:

(These are the “minions” ePerk’s Attorney infamously referred to in the Inman Article.)

ePerks v Vlad: Strategies to Avoid a Viral World War

ePerks – I Am Not A Minion Mr Cook

Im Mad As Hell-You Will Be Too When You Read About Vlad Zablotskyy and ePerks

ePerks & Freedom of Speech?

An Open Letter to Ben Behrouzi

Real Estate Radio USA Interviews Mary McKnight

Vlad Zablotskyy V. ePerks The Cliffs Notes Version

Vlad Zablotskyy – A Martyr for Reputation Management

Do I look Fat in This Lawsuit?

Nominee for PR Blunder of the Year – ePerks

5 Ways to Support Vlad Zablotzkyy

Suport Vlad Zablotskyy in his defense against ePerks.com frivolous suit

Some companies are stupid, and eperks may be the stupidest

ePerks: A brand going down in flames

ePerks vs Blogger Vlad Zablotskyy, Freedom of Speech in Cyberspace at Stake

Suport Vlad Zablotskyy in his defense against ePerks.com frivolous suit

ePerks Sues Real Estate Blogger

Ben Behrouzi’s Fair Darts

Blogger Is Sued for Business Disparagement

Write a post supporting your fellow real estate blogger, Vlad Zablotskyy, in his battle with ePerks and I will give you a blog

ePerks Sues Real Estate Blogger, Blogosphere Unites to Destroy the ePerks Brand

RSS Pieces provides a rundown of how ePerks is destroying its own reputation

Want money back at closing?

Is ePerks.com’s Ben Behrouzi, infamous for trying to censor a real estate weblogger, stealing content from Mervyns and Chevron?

Support the Vlad Zablotskyy Legal Defense Fund: A real estate weblogger is being throttled by corporate bully ePerks.com. The free speech rights you will be fighting for are your own…

Memo to ePerks.com: You idiots! Trying to censor a real estate weblogger is a poor way to defend your reputation — such as it is…

ePerks To Sue Blogger – Freedom Of Speech Threatened

Looking for lawyers…

Blogger is Sued for Business Disparagement

Sometimes everybody’s gotta take a side

ePerks: What Were They Thinking?

Blogging and Freedom of Speech

Blogger Get “Cease and Desist” from ePerks

iHype & ePerks – How To Kill A Startup

Memorial Day and the Plight of a Blogger

Open Letter to ePerks.com

ePerks Shafts Realtors

Are ePerks Spammers?

Real estate rebates and referrals with a twist

ePerks & iHype – Legal Kneejerk – Sues Blogger

LeapFish / ePerks CEO Ben Behrouzi Voicemails Exposed: Threatens to Blackball and Sue Employee

Trace Richardson — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 00:05:23 +0000

Leapfish / Ben Behrouzi Bombshell

Since BrokerScience first began covering LeapFish and ePerks CEO Ben Behrouzi, we have received a lot of reader submitted information in the form of: stories of first hand experiences with LeapFish / ePerks / Ben Behrouzi (as employees and customers), emails, voice mails, and other miscellaneous information and data relating to Ben and company. We have published virtually none of it and do not plan on publishing it in the future unless it is pertinent to the facts involved in our coverage. The following voice mails are an exception. They help establish a pattern of legal harassment by Ben Behrouzi that goes all the way back to his days at Reply.com.

One common theme among all current and former employees we speak to that have worked under Ben Behrouzi at Reply.com or ePerks.com is that they fear the consequences involved with sharing their story. The legal harassment and worse that ePerks critics such as Vlad Zablotzkyy (link removed due to page removal as part of terms of legal settlement with Ben), Dennis Pease and BrokerScience have endured are a testament to those concerns.

One person that is not afraid of Ben Behrouzi is former Reply.com employee Scott Chestnut. Scott worked under Ben Behrouzi (who was the Chief Technology Officer despite the fact that he was still in school working on a philosophy degree) as a Senior Network Engineer. While building out what was to be a million dollar network, Scott realized that working for Ben was an unworkable situation, so he walked out in frustration. The following voice mail from Ben Behrouzi chronicles Ben’s threats to blackball Scott and insure he is unable to gain employment, insinuating this will affect him for life and have deep reaching effects.

“My new goal in life is going to become to ruin your name across this entire East Bay……..you can take that to the bank, you can put your future kids or your girlfriend or whoever you want to put on it.” – ePerks CEO, Ben Behrouzi to employee that left the company

Ben Behrouzi Threatening to Blackball and “Ruin the Name” of Former Employee

http://brokerscience.com/files/2008/06/benscott.mp3
Later, Ben left another message regarding a vendor, CDW. He again makes false allegations and threatens legal action. Even though he claims he is in the process of preparing legal action, no legal action ever took place, an experience similar to what others have faced.

Ben suggests “using dollars” to make up for the indiscretions he accuses Scott of, similar to the verbiage he used when he threatened BrokerScience and tried to set up a conference call to discuss “damages“.

At some point after Scott walked out, Ben and his team were reportedly let go from Reply.com and Scott was again offered his position back at Reply.com.

Ben Behrouzi Threatening Legal Action Against Former Employee / No Action Was Ever Filed

http://brokerscience.com/files/2008/06/benscott2.mp3
Conclusion. These voice mails are more evidence documenting a pattern of legal harassment and threats by Ben Behrouzi against anybody that gets in his way. While I am not familiar with the legality of of blackballing I am somewhat certain that “ruining someone’s name” for the purposes of insuring they cannot obtain employment is nothing short of defamation. Ben’s actions are consistent with the lack of ethics we have seen ePerks and iHype exhibit. There is now no question that in our opinion, Ben Behrouzi operates without an ethical or moral code.

Feedback: Do you have a negative or positive LeapFish / ePerks / Ben Behrouzi story you would like to share as an current or ex employee, colleague or customer? We can’t guarantee we will publish it, but appreciate your feedback and it may help bloggers like Vlad Zablotzky fight against Ben Behrouzi and company. Contact us here.

Ben Behrouzi / ePerks.com: A Case Study in Self Induced Search Engine Brand Destruction

Trace Richardson — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 03:25:08 +0000

When BrokerScience published our analysis of ePerk’s brand destruction ( ePerks.com: A Case Study in Greed and Self-Imposed Brand Destruction ) on May 30th, we did not know that just nine days later, Vlad Zablotzkyy would be served with a lawsuit from ePerks/ CEO Ben Behrouzi.

Quite frankly, in light of the growing attention and coverage Ben Behrouzi’s cease & desist letter and legal threats to Vlad, we didn’t think Ben and company would be so foolish stupid as to continue in such a self defeating manner. We have a lot to learn. Ben has continued his tour de force of driving ePerks into the ground by threatening BrokerScience with legal action and following up with a lawsuit against Vlad which will ultimately prove to be his coup de grace.

Online Reputation and Brand Destruction. Ben’s actions have exponentially increased the numbers of outraged bloggers and real estate professionals linking to Vlad’s blog. The result is that the very blog post that Ben / ePerks fought to suppress now ranks #2 in a Google search for ePerks, right below ePerks.com. Seven of the top 10 results contain negative commentary on ePerks. Even paid blog posts sponsored by ePerks are overrun by negative comments from unhappy ePerks users. Eight of the top ten results for “Ben Behrouzi” are negative. BrokerScience ranks number four and five for “ePerks.com”, number six and seven for “ben behrouzi” and number two for “iHype.com”. It is my opinion that this case will be referenced in future studies and textbooks dealing with online reputation and brand management. One thing is for sure Behrouzi and company are panicked and they should be.

Recognized SEO Expert Aaron Wall on the Brand Damage ePerks Has Caused to its Domain Name:

Lots of links will flow, but unfortunately their brand is destroyed. Perhaps they can later 301 redirect their site, but the PageRank is probably going to be worth less than the negative karma associated with the conflict.

Game Over. As bad as the ePerks situation has become, the greatest damage is likely still to come. If Behrouzi drops the case against blogger, Vlad Zablotzkyy, there will be a tidal wave of attention on his defeat. If he moves forward against Vlad, he will likely lose, if his case does not get thrown out first. More importantly, if a direct IP address connection is made between the false child molestation allegations, Ben and company will face not only civil action, but more importantly criminal fraud charges and intense media scrutiny and coverage. Of course, all of the negativity will also haunt Behrouzi in future projects such as his failed to launch startup, iHype.com and virtually guarantees his inability to attract investors in the future. His brand, name and reputation are in short, toxic. All of this damage done and the story has not even gone national yet. The real fallout occurs when the New York Times, LA Times, or similar carry the story, which is looking sooner rather then later. A likely trigger for this will be if Ben follows up up on his threats to BrokerScience or when the right person finally notices the story.

BrokerScience Acquires BenBehrouzi.com

Trace Richardson — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 18:56:20 +0000

In yet another blow to embattled ePerks and Brabus Ventures Corporation CEO, Ben Behrouzi, BrokerScience has acquired exclusive ownership of the following internet domain names:

BenBehrouzi.com
BenBehrouzi.net
BehzadBehrouzi.com
BrabusVentures.net
BrabusVentures.org
BrabusVentures.biz

Internet domain name case law provides that these names can be used in a capacity that does not create confusion in the market place. In the future they may be used to host and support a Defense Fund for bloggers that are sued by ePerks / Ben Behrouzi / Brabus Ventures Corporation. Have an idea for what we can use them for? Drop us a line!

We left BehnamBehrouzi.com (Ben’s legal name) for Ben if he so chooses to use it. We’ve also left most of the Behzad (Ben’s Brother, “Director of Product for Brabus Ventures”) domain names untouched. We are disappointed to report that Behzad’s preferred pseudonym (as anonymously reported by current ePerks employees), Kevin Morris is not available as a domain name.

Beginning of the End: ePerks CEO Ben Behrouzi Sues Blogger, Confirms No Strategy in Place

Trace Richardson — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 18:15:31 +0000

When ePerks.com CEO Ben Behrouzi originally hired blogger Vlad Zablotzkyy of Go-Beyond-MLS.com to write a paid review of ePerks.com, he never expected the barrage of user complaints that were posted in the comment section of Vlad’s blog and he never expected the fallout that would occur when he threatened Vlad and sent him a Cease & Desist letter to take down the comments.

While it is not uncommon for CEO’s to be upset with criticism that their companies receive, it is highly unusual, perhaps unheard of, for CEO’s to follow the path that Ben Behrouzi has in single handedly destroying his reputation, brand and likely becoming liable for slander and defamation. The secondary effect that is as the story continues to grow it only serves to increase his exposure to growing murmurs regarding a Class Action lawsuit by dissatisfied ePerks users. To date: 8 of the top 10 results in a Google search for “eperks.com”and likewise “ben behrouzi” point to content that has negative commentary or comments about ePerks and ePerks CEO Ben Behrzouzi.

This morning, Vlad Zablotzkyy was served with a civil action from Brabus Ventures Corporation (ePerks parent company, owned by Behnam Behrouzi) claiming unspecified damages for posting information on his blog about a false child molestation allegation that was made against him. Vlad made no accusations but simply presented anecdotal evidence indicating that ePerks was possibly linked to the false charges. The evidence showed that user names used by the person posting false child molestation allegations matched user names used by persons leaving comments on Vlad blog originating from ePerks.com corporate IP address.

Fluff. The purpose of a Cease & Desist letter is to forewarn of pending legal action in lieu of compliance. When legal action is taken, the actions should be consistent with the items cited in the Cease & Desist letter if they have validity.

Break down of Specific Complaints in ePerks C & D Letter vs. Actual Complaint:

C & D: “Your only goal is to cast ePERKS in a negative light for personal gain…………your blogs deceptively fail to inform the reader that you are motivated by an undisclosed proprietary interest in an ePERKS competitor.” Not Included in Complaint.
C & D: “Having researched the content of your blogs, we have come to conclusive proof that a substantial number of your postings are bogus, in that they frequently describe experiences that never happened and people who do not exist.” Not Included in Complaint.
C & D: “Our research also shows that negative remarks are not only invited, but are posted without a challenge.” Not Included in Complaint.

Central Complaint:

“Defendant Zablotskyy published an accusation on his blog website that plaintiff was responsible for an anonymous internet posting alleging that defendant was a child molester. Said post by defendant is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”. At the time the Exhibit “A” post was published, defendant had no reasonable basis to accuse plaintiff, or its internet name ePERKS.com of being the author of the child molester post.”

Stupidity. ePerks is going after Vlad for accusing them of being behind the child molestation allegation on Yahoo Answers. The fact is that Vlad did not accuse them as such, he simply presented anecdotal evidence. The irony is that the single piece of information that will confirm what IP Address the Yahoo Answers post originated from and will likely invalidate ePerk’s complaint is one subpoena away and is the also the single piece of evidence that will provide Vlad with an airtight Libel and Defamation case against ePerks should it link ePerks to the allegation.

On June 5th, one day after ePerk’s complaint against Vlad was filed, BrokerScience laid out the connection between ePerks and the Yahoo Answers child molestation post. While the link will only be definitive once Yahoo is subpoenaed, the anecdotal evidence points strongly to ePerks. One thing is for sure, it is very likely that Ben Behrouzi and company are panicked in light of the IP Address link to ePerks presented by BrokerScience only one day after their complaint was filed.

If ePerks was so unhappy with Vlad’s assertions, how will they feel about ours? Will BrokerScience be served in the coming days? Our fingers are crossed. An ePerks case against BrokerScience all but guarantees the story goes national, gaining exposure to Vlad’s plight and consumer complaints against ePerks.

The Complaint:

Barabus vs Zablotskyy – Upload a Document to Scribd

Realtor.com Hacked Day 4: No Announcement, Users Wait in Silence

Trace Richardson — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 02:22:04 +0000

(Previous Realtor.com coverage – Realtor.com Hacked Day 1 / Realtor.com Hacked Day 2 / Realtor.com Hacked Day 3 )

In an unfortunate turn of events, Realtor.com has failed to acknowledge its website and or servers were breached and has failed to inform users whether or not personal data was compromised. This is disturbing on a number of levels. While the breach may have been as simple as a flawed wordpress plugin or much worse, nobody can know for sure due to Realtor.com’s failure to communicate.

Realtor.com Failure to Communicate Fallout:

It signals to users that they are not valued and builds distrust and disloyalty in users.
Fails to inform users if their data was compromised, on a legal basis, my guess is that users have a right to be informed as such.
Is counterproductive to fostering community.
Shows lack of leadership on the part of Realtor.com team members.
Gives credence to criticism that Realtor.com does not act in members’ best interests.

Common Courtesy. After repeatedly informing Realtor.com that their website had been compromised, they failed to acknowledge our requests and failed to give us any feedback on the situation at hand. Oddly enough, despite their lack of communication with BrokerScience and Realtor.com users, their IP Address, 209.74.96.62, shows up as one of the most frequent visitors in BrokerScience traffic logs.

To be more specific, the IP Address of HomeStore.com shows up. It is not clear whether HomeStore is now considered a parent or partner of Realtor.com or whether it only shows up because the ARIN record has not been updated since 2001. It does, however, serve as a reminder of Realtor.com’s past and may provide a clue to the company culture that exists that would allow such a basic, preventable and unheard of gaffe to occur.

BrokerScience IP Address Traffic Log



NetRange:   209.74.96.0 - 209.74.127.255

OrgName:    Homestore.com, Inc
OrgID:      HOMEST-7
Address:    30700 Russell Ranch Rd
City:       Westlake Village
StateProv:  CA
PostalCode: 91362
Country:    US

Ben Behrouzi Updates Company “Values” and “Culture” Web Pages. Only One Problem: They’re Stolen.

Trace Richardson — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 08:22:45 +0000

Brabus Ventures (BrabusVentures.com), owned by embattled CEO Ben Behrouzi and parent company of ePerks.com, LeapFish and DotNextInc has updated it’s website and added new “Values” and “Culture” pages to combat the barrage of negative publicity their business practices have earned them. There is only one problem: the pages are STOLEN virtually verbatim from Chevron.com and Mervyns.com. Oh, the irony, in stealing “Values” and “Culture” pages.

This is no surprise, CEO Ben Behrouzi and his companies have a proven track record of engaging in unethical behavior and marketing and his latest debacle of adding “copyright infringement” to his resume are par for the course. This is a time that one would think, as CEO, he should be apologizing to the victims of his harassment and focusing on his failed startup, iHype.com which one of his employees humorously defended as a “soft launch” when it failed to launch as announced on June 2nd.

BrabusVentures.com Steals Culture Page from Mervyns.com

(Click Thumbnail Below For Full Size Image)

Screenshot of Original Mervyns.com Page / Screenshot of Offending BrabusVentures.com Page

BrabusVentures.com Steals Values Page from Chevron.com

(Click Thumbnail Below For Full Size Image)

Screenshot of Original Chevron.com Page / Screenshot of Offending BrabusVentures.com Page

Dissasemble. I really want to make this story go away, but it’s the gift that keeps on giving. I REALLY want to write some positive stories here.

While it is fairly common for content to be recycled on real estate and mortgage websites (especially privacy pages, legal pages, glossaries and even basic content that define general concepts) it is never ok for a CEO or Founder to steal a Mission Statement, Values Statement, or Definition of Company Culture. Never. Ever.

These are the documents that define the moral, ethical and business code of your company and are the basis for the culture that is created through the actions and leadership of company founders and management. These are to be created with care, sensitivity and purpose. Without positive core beliefs, philosophies and morals, one is truly lost.

UPDATE: BrabusVentures.com has been abandoned due to bad press with no redirect or mention to the new site at Dotnextinc.com.

LeapFish CEO Ben Behrouzi Insinuates Legal Action Against BrokerScience, Cites “Damages”

Trace Richardson — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 00:31:11 +0000

BrokerScience Response to LeapFish CEO, Ben Behrouzi:

In the transcript below, we asked you to provide us proof of any factual inaccuracies we have published, you failed to do so.

You state that what we are publishing is “completely false and now damaging the company“, yet failed to list even one “false item” or “fabrication” and failed to prove how we are damaging your company.

More importantly, you have failed to take responsibility for your own actions, those of your employees and the consequences that have befallen you as a result of the behaviors you engage in.

While your harassment of bloggers like Vlad Zablotkyy, Dennis Pease, myself & others speaks volumes about your character, the feedback I have been getting from your employees is even more telling. While I have been given the green light by my legal team to share my conversations with a handful of your employees, it is not my intention to do so at this time.

You claim that I have threatened a suit against and harassed your employees. That is categorically false. For the record, my only complaint against your employees is that they suck for sending me spam.

You claim that I have shown up at one of your employees’ homes. That is categorically false. In a conversation with one of your employees (the conversation lasted one and a half hours), I indicated that I had seen proof that the domain name they personally owned and sent ePerks spam from was registered to a private residence, not a business. I simply used Google Maps Street View to make this confirmation. If they falsely concluded that I trekked from Los Angeles to San Francisco to see their home, they were mistaken.

If you care to continue this dialog in the courtroom of public opinion, it will be my pleasure to disassemble you and your argument at will using nothing more than your own words against you from here on out.

If you are so stupid as to think you have something to gain by continuing this dialog in Superior Court, I want to thank you in advance for the recognition, traffic and revenue you will bring to BrokerScience as the story goes national and you become personally responsible for being the tipping point that puts BrokerScience.com on the map.

Trace Richardson / BrokerScience

Email Transcript

ePerks IP Address Link to Vlad Zablotzkyy: When the Hunter Becomes the Prey

Trace Richardson — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 22:37:52 +0000

When Vlad Zablotskyy of Go-Beyond-MLS.com received a Cease & Desist letter from ePerks.com (which was shortly followed up by the threat of a lawsuit form ePerks CEO, Ben Behrouzi) he had cause to be concerned. In addition to the threat of litigation, somebody was also libeling Vlad has a child molester. (You will find a complete ePerks rundown here.)

Vlad wrote on his blog that he noticed that many of the fake positive ePerks comments with different names were all originating from the same IP address range (starting at 76.206.0.160) and using the same email address of sadighij@yahoo.com. This same IP address range has also been traced to forums where ePerks has posted false positive comments or shill comments as documented by Andy Beard.

1) Fake Comment Posted to Vlad’s Blog Using IP Address 76.206.0.161 / sadighij@yahoo.com

The comment above is very telling:

It mentions the notion of a lawsuit before Vlad has received a C & D letter or threat of litigation from ePerks.
Indicates a “blog about Vlad will also begin”.

2. Later, This blog (update: blog content removed, so we have removed link to it) by “Marco Hernandez” (blog deleted but archive screen shot here) appeared promising information about Vlad and suggests that readers search Yahoo Answers (where a false allegation of child molestation was later made, see below) From the blog, “If you search online on Yahoo Answers you will already get a glimpse of what I am talking about.”

3. When Vlad emailed the person leaving comments above at sadighij@yahoo.com to notify them that they were banned from making any further comments on blog. The following dialog took then place:

From: Jaffar Sadighi sadighij@yahoo.com
To: Vlad Zablotskyy vladzablotskyy@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 2:48:08 PM
Hehe. Vlad, I want you to know I eat people like you for breakfast. You are simply pouring fuel. I will enjoy this one.
—– Original Message —-
From: Vlad Zablotskyy vladzablotskyy@gmail.com
To: Jaffar Sadighi sadighij@yahoo.com
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 2:48:08 PM
Subject: One word for you: BANNED

You are banned from leaving further comments on my blogs. Enjoy your life.

4. Shortly Thereafter “Jaffar S” (note: Jaffar Sadighi is same name / email used in original comments to Vlad’s blog from IP Address 76.206.0.161) Posted the Following to Yahoo Answers:

Since Jaffar Sadighi is a unique name, it is reasonable to conclude that the liklihood that the Jaffar Sadighi that was posting fake pro ePerks comments on Vlad’s blog from IP address 76.206.0.160 and the “Jaffar S” that posted the child molestation claims on Yahoo Answers shortly thereafter are likely one and the same. The only way to positively make this connection is for Vlad to subpoena Yahoo Answers to get the IP Address of the person that posted the child molestation claims.

Bombshell

BrokerScience has obtained an email sent by an ePerks employee that was sent from IP address 76.206.0.160, the same range used by the person caught posting fake positive ePerks comments as “Jaffar S” to Vlad’s blog and is suspected to have been involved in posting the false child molestation allegations against Vlad on Yahoo Answers as “Jaffar S”.

The following email header (extracted from a customer service representative’s response to a general inquiry BrokerScience made) shows that this email originates from IP address 76.206.0.164, thereby connecting the ePerks corporate IP address range to the harassing comments on Vlad’s blog and and to fake positive ePerks comments on other forums as previously documented. BrokerScience has also obtained other emails associating ePerks with this IP Address range. For the less technically inclined, an email header allows you to track the exact point of origination for an email and the path it follows until it gets to its destination.

Email Header Confirming ePerks is Source of IP Address 76.206.0.164

What It All Means. The consequences of the IP address link to ePerks and the associated activity involving Vlad Zablotzkyy are as follows: If Vlad chooses to subpoena Yahoo Answers for the IP address used to post the slanderous false claims of child molestation against him and the post is found to have originated from ePerk’s IP address, then Vlad has a very clear case of slander and defamation that he can pursue against ePerks if he so chooses. While ePerks CEO, Ben Behrouzi threatened litigation on clearly baseless claims with nothing to gain, but everything to lose (how do you think we heard about ePerks?), Vlad stands to gain quite a bit if he takes them to task. In fact, there is speculation that Vlad has a strong case without a direct link to Yahoo Answers post. On a side note, many of the marketing activities we have shown that ePerks engages in have become illegal in England, only time will tell if the same becomes true in the United States.

BrokerScience’s Biggest Fans.

A quick glance at BrokerScience June visitor logs shows that the #3 and #4 most frequent visitors to BrokerScience also originate from the same IP address range associated with ePerks. We’re flattered. Really.

Countrywide CEO Mozilo Calls Homeowner Disgusting? Not so fast.

Trace Richardson — Wed, 21 May 2008 04:16:30 +0000

Dan Bailey is a homeowner facing foreclosure. He emailed a letter to 20 Countrywide employees in hopes of arranging a a deal that would prevent foreclosure of his home. In response, he was accidentally sent an email purportedly from none other then Countrywide CEO, Angelo Mozilo. The email reads: This is unbelievable. Most of these letters now have the same wording. Obviously they are being counseled by some other person or by the Internet. Disgusting.

After mild chatter throughout the blogosphere regarding the matter of how Mozilo is calling homeowners disgusting, I commented on Bloodhound regarding what a couple minute google search turned up:

While Angelo was wrong to pass judgment without the full facts concerning the borrower, he was right about one thing: The borrower is using a standardized hardship form letter that is circulating around the internet. The owner of the forum you have cited above at loansafe.org has posted this very form letter / cookie cutter hardship letter on his Active Rain page here: http://tinyurl.com/3t7vxz and you can find it circulating around the internet in places like here on sites like iamfacingahomeforeclosure.com : http://tinyurl.com/3m95b6

I would imagine that if you are seeing hundreds or thousands of versions of the same letter, the letter would tend to lose its credibility over time……and might appear to be more of a tactic then a genuine letter asking for help….

This evening the story hit the LA Times and Blown Mortgage as well. It will likely make national headlines in coming days given the sensational potential of the headline in and of itself.

There are couple important points to be made:

The email timeline given is incomplete. There is an email communication between a couple parties with a random “quote” attributed to Angelo Mozilo, this isn’t just strange, it doesn’t add up. I still can’t get a complete picture of exactly what the timeline of the discourse is after a handful of reads.
Angelo Mozilo is referring to what appears to be a new wave of such standardized cookie cutter form letters as being disgusting, not the borrower. As I mention above, it would be very hard to take a form letter seriously after you have received it hundreds or thousands of times. It is very likely that among the many sincere homeowners Mozilo deals with on a regular basis that he also sees many that are simply trying to fraudulently get out of loans or catch breaks on the basis of hardship. This is to be expected.

Come to think of it, who writes their hardship letter over email? Perhaps many, but in my mind if you are in a tough spot and are asking and pleading for help to save your home, common sense would dictate that a real letter is in order. If you don’t write a real order when your home is at stake, when do you? In any case, you are well advised to NOT send any email correspondence in any business matter to 20 employees of the company you are attempting to correspond with as this gentlemen has done, that is called spamming and is not how you endear people to your cause.

The point is that the story is lacking credible evidence at its surface and even if the email is proven credible, Mozilo’s comments don’t appear to have been directed at the homeowner in the first place. From what I have read there is plenty of dirt on Mozilo to write about, but this isn’t it. Let’s do our homework here folks before we start yelling fire, a simple read of the email itself would indicate all is not right with this story. Let’s see how the national media runs with this headline.

Richard Gaylord, NAR President Comments on HVCC, Says Nothing

Trace Richardson — Fri, 16 May 2008 22:48:55 +0000

Richard Gaylord, President of the National Association of Realtors has provided his response to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae regarding the Home Valuation Code of Conduct (see below). His response includes his comments and suggestions for change to specific aspects of HVCC.

Of all the serious flaws in HVCC that stand to hurt consumers, Realtors, appraisers and lenders, Richard fails to address even one of the primary deal breakers that make HVCC a non-starter in its current form. When given the opportunity to name specific recommendations, Richard gives three specific examples:

Recommendation for change in verbiage regarding “partial payment”
Requests change in verbiage so that “licensed and trained” employees are required as opposed to “appropriately trained and qualified” employees
Requests change in HVCC guideline that lenders may not use appraisal company that they have a 20% or more stake in so that lenders must have 0% stake in any company they use

Fair enough, three sensible suggestions until you consider that he has failed to address any of the real issues on the table that stand to detrimentally affect consumers and real estate professionals including those he represents, Realtors. While Realtors stand a very real chance to be hurt by HVCC in its current form, Richard’s comments to the GSE’s fail to even touch on the most pressing issues within HVCC but instead waste an opportunity by nit picking verbiage. One might characterize these oversights as a clear lack of leadership in representing the best interests of consumers and Realtors.

#########

LETTER SENT TO FREDDIE MAC AND FANNIE MAE:

April 30, 2008

Home Valuation Code of Conduct Response
Attn: Ray Romano, Senior Vice President, Credit Risk Oversight Freddie Mac
1551 Park Run Drive, Mail Stop D2Z
McLean, VA 22102-3110

Dear Mr. Romano:

On behalf of the 1.2 million members of the National Association of REALTORS®, I am writing to provide comments on the implementation of the Home Valuation Protection Code. NAR has approximately 30,000 appraiser members from across the country and approximately 750 retain our Residential Accredited Appraiser (RAA) and General Accredited Appraiser (GAA) designations.

NAR supports the independence of appraisers and the integrity of the appraisal process. We applaud the New York State Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo and both government sponsored enterprises (GSE), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, for their efforts to address appraisal fraud in the mortgage industry. While the agreement addresses appraisal fraud, we have concerns with the implementation of the proposed “New Home Valuation Protection Code” through the newly created “Independent Valuation Protection Institute.”

The agreement signed between the New York State Attorney General and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac expires in 28 months. The newly created Independent Valuation Protection Institute will be funded by both GSEs for 5 years. The agreement is silent on how the GSEs will operate with respect to appraisals after the agreement expires. There is no indication from any party involved in the negotiations that the agreement will continue after 28 months, if one or both of the GSEs will return to pre-agreement appraisal requirements, or if a third option will be explored. It is also unclear how the Independent Valuation Protection Institute will be funded after 5 years or if more than the $5 million allocated by the GSEs is required to fund its operations.

NAR recommends the Independent Valuation Protection Institute be affiliated with an already existing appraisal organization. This will help to ensure that the code is implemented in such a way that it adds value to the appraisal process rather than becoming a duplicative layer of bureaucracy. If properly implemented the code will compliment, rather than duplicate or contradict, already existing appraisal codes such as the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). Further, the Independent Valuation Protection Institute will be better positioned to work in conjunction with appraisal organizations and state regulatory agencies to ensure the independence of appraisers and the integrity of the appraisal process.

There is concern that GSEs will increase their reliance on automated valuation. While this would appear to address appraiser influence in a transparent way, a deeper look at automated valuations generally reveals they are not able to consider qualitative factors with the same level of reliability that professional licensed and certified appraisers produce. Professional appraisal organizations and licensed and certified appraisers should work closely with the GSEs to ensure the highest quality appraisals remain the preferred method of valuation for residential real estate transactions.

The agreement reached between the New York State Attorney General and the GSEs, including the valuation code, does not address the costs of the real estate transaction. Appraisers will now have to consider their obligations to USPAP and the Appraisal Foundation and the additional burden of ensuring the Code, in conjunction with the institute, is being adhered to. This may also be an issue for lenders. The creation of a new set of standards to follow and a new oversight organization may lead to increasing cost of the real estate transaction. The GSEs and the institute should work to ensure this agreement is implemented without increasing costs of the real estate transaction.

Several items in the Home Valuation Code of Conduct should be clarified. NAR recommends the following modifications to the Code:

Section I. 1) should include the term “partial payment” and should read “withholding or threatening to withhold a timely payment, or partial payment, for an appraisal report;”.

Section V states that any employee of the lender be “appropriately trained and qualified in the area of real estate and appraisals.” The word qualified is not defined and does not necessarily mean that the employee must be a licensed appraiser. If the employee is not licensed, then the individual may be operating under the broad scope of “appraiser” without liability to be disciplined while acting like an appraiser. The employee should be licensed and certified by the state in which the property to be appraised is located. The same requirement should hold for employees of appraisal management companies as well.

Section VI states that lenders or affiliates of lenders cannot use an appraisal report obtained by or through an appraisal management company that is owned by the lender or affiliate of the lender and that this prohibition does not apply where the lender has an ownership interest in the appraisal management company of 20 percent or less. Lenders should be prohibited from using an appraisal report from any appraisal management company where the lender or the lender’s affiliate maintains an ownership stake. Allowing lenders to obtain appraisal reports from appraisal management companies where the lender has a stake in ownership does not meet the spirit of this agreement and does not uphold the independence of the appraisal process.

Thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the National Association of REALTORS®. These comments are also being provided to Freddie Mac and the U.S. Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. If you have any questions or comments regarding this letter, please contact our Regulatory Policy Representative Jerry Nagy at 202.383.1233 or jnagy@realtors.org.

Sincerely,

Richard F. Gaylord, CIPS, CRB, CRS, GRI
2008 President, National Association of REALTORS®

NAR Assessment Cuomo / GSE Settlement

Trace Richardson — Fri, 16 May 2008 21:15:15 +0000

NAR Assessment of Cuomo Settlement with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac:

The Cuomo/GSE Appraisal Deal April 30, 2008

New York State Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (government sponsored enterprises) reached an agreement on March 3, 2008, to change appraiser selection criteria that will help eliminate conflicts of interest on mortgage appraisals. The agreement has the support of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO). There are three main components to the agreement:

Establishment of the New Home Valuation Protection Code
Banks will be required to adhere to the Code
Formation of the Independent Valuation Protection Institute

The requirements will have a significant impact on appraisal practices by lenders as they will have to comply with the new requirements agreed-to by the government sponsored enterprises (GSE) if the lenders sell mortgages to the GSEs. The parties have agreed to get comment and concurrence from the federal banking regulators and HUD, as they move to implement the Agreement and the new Code of Conduct. The GSEs have agreed to implement the new Code beginning January 1, 2009. During 2008, the GSEs will get comments from market participants, and changes to the Code are possible.

Home Valuation Protection Code
A Home Valuation Protection code will be implemented establishing standards on solicitation, selection, compensation, conflicts of interest and corporate independence. Mortgage brokers are prohibited from selecting appraisers. Lenders will not use “in house” staff appraisers to conduct initial appraisals and will not use appraisal companies owned or managed by the lender. The code entitles the borrower to one copy of an appraisal report, free of charge, within 3 days of the closing of the loan.

Banks Will Adhere to the Code
Starting January 1, 2009, GSEs will no longer purchase mortgages from lenders that utilize internal appraisers for appraisal reports. Lenders will be required to represent and warrant that the appraisal report was obtained in a manner consistent with the New Home Valuation Protection Code.

Independent Valuation Protection Institute
A clearinghouse of appraiser information will be created, with a separate board of directors, to monitor complaints from appraisers and consumers. All lenders will be required to provide post-purchase copies of appraisal documents to the clearinghouse. Lenders will establish a telephone hotline and E-mail address to receive complaints from appraisers and users of appraisal services on the improper influence or attempted improper influence of appraisers. The Institute will be headed by a Board of Directors with members having no financial connection with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, or lenders with whom the GSEs engage.

Frequently Asked Questions
Does this agreement concern only mortgages in New York State?
No, this agreement applies to mortgages across the country. After January 1, 2009, the GSEs will not purchase single-family loans from mortgage originators in any state that do not agree to adopt the Home Valuation Protection Code.

Does this agreement apply to all lenders?
GSEs may exclude lenders that meet the definition of “small bank” according to 12 USC§ 2908 and which the GSE determines would suffer hardships from the provisions of paragraph VI, subsections 1-4 of the Home Valuation Protection Code. However, excluded lenders must otherwise comply with the other provisions of the Code and meet appropriate standards of appraiser independence.

Who is responsible for applying the new Valuation Protection Code?
The government sponsored enterprises will apply the new code to lenders selling mortgages on the secondary mortgage market.

Will appraisers have to help fund the Independent Valuation Protection Institute?
No, the institute will be funded by the GSEs. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will each contribute $12 million over five years beginning in 2009.

What does this agreement mean for the independent appraiser?
Independent appraisers and appraisal companies not owned or managed by lenders or settlement companies must continue to meet appropriate standards of appraiser independence, including following Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) and maintaining relevant state certifications.

What does this agreement mean for REALTORS® ?
Individual REALTORS® cannot serve as a third party between a lender and appraiser. This includes selection, retention, and compensation of an appraiser.

Broker REALTORS® that offer services as a lender or affiliated lender and appraiser services must comply fully with the Home Valuation Protection Code if there is an expectation that their loans will be purchased by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac after January 1, 2009.

Is NAR going to provide comments and recommendations on the agreement?
Yes, NAR will provide comments and recommendations to OFHEO on the Code and its implementation. NAR will comment on the creation of Independent Valuation Protection Institute; which should likely be affiliated with the Appraisal Foundation. Finally, NAR will comment on the impact this agreement will have on its members and the overall real estate industry.

Can lenders continue to own appraisal management companies (AMC)?
Yes, lenders can continue to own AMCs. According to the agreement, if a lender chooses to obtain appraisal reports from an AMC that is owned by the lender, or an affiliate of the lender, the lender must: 1) maintain 20 percent or less ownership in the AMC, 2) have no involvement of day-to-day business operations of the AMC, 3) the AMC is operated independently, and 4) the lender has no role in the selection of the appraiser.

Is this agreement federal law?
No. This is an agreement signed by two government-sponsored corporations, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the New York State Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo. The federal regulator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) also signed the agreement. No legislation was passed or signed into law with respect to this agreement.

Are real estate agents prohibited from communicating with appraisers?
No. There is only one portion of the code that applies directly to real estate agents. Part III states that third parties, including real estate agents, cannot select the appraiser or compensate the appraiser. A third party, including real estate agents, can still ask appraisers for additional information, provide additional information to an appraiser, or ask for corrections of factual errors.

Can lenders work only through appraisal management companies?
No, lenders that utilize in-house appraisers can still order appraisals as long as they are independent of the loan production staff and do not ultimately report to an officer who manages loan production.

HVCC Update From a la mode

Trace Richardson — Fri, 16 May 2008 20:59:46 +0000

Update from Dave Biggers on HVCC:

To: Our colleagues
Re: Thank you for speaking up about the HVCC
From: David Biggers, Chairman, a la mode, inc.

Prior to the April 30th deadline for commentary on the proposed HVCC regulations, I wrote you asking for your help in alerting our government officials and the private sector to the damages which would be brought onto the real estate industry if the HVCC was implemented as written.

Amazingly, more than 31,000 of you responded within 48 hours. That exceeded our projections by tens of thousands. Frankly, I would have been pleased if 5,000 of you spoke up. But 31,000 in such a short time is absolutely unprecedented, and it’s gotten the attention of the people in D.C. and New York involved in the HVCC’s drafting and implementation.

The response spanned all sectors of the industry. Over 17,000 appraisers, more than 10,000 mortgage brokers, and more than 3,000 real estate agents signed up and forwarded comments on to the powers that be. Over 500 lenders even added their voices, as did hundreds of attorneys, homeowners, title agents, and more. Plus, nearly 12,000 of you added your own comments to our pre-written appeal to reconsider the regulations.

And rest assured, we delivered your words. By the April 30th deadline, we printed and delivered to OFHEO, Fannie, Freddie, and the New York Attorney General’s office a massive shipment of 127,169 pages of letters.

It’s a good thing that we printed and physically mailed them, because the e-mail servers at OFHEO and Freddie Mac almost immediately began blocking your messages. To Fannie Mae’s credit, they initially blocked the e-mails, but then proactively called us, worked out a solution, and subsequently accepted all of your letters. We’re going to assume based on Fannie Mae’s professionalism that they will pass the comments on to OFHEO as promised. To make it easier for them to incorporate your ideas, and to contact you if needed, we also delivered a CD to each entity with all of your suggestions and contact information in convenient database format.

You can read more details of the HVCC protest, and the full text of the critique that our law firm in D.C. sent (along with other letters submitted to OFHEO), in our AppraisalPress newspaper website at http://www.appraisalpress.com/news/hvcc. Look it over and tell us what you think.

But, I don’t want this “thank you” letter to mislead you – while it’s nice to see such response to our call to action, the fight to stop the HVCC is far from over. You’ll be seeing more from us in the coming days, because we now need to help you get the word directly to your members of Congress, in written form, by phone, and ultimately in face to face visits, as Congress comes home over Memorial Day weekend. You will receive an alert shortly with information on when and how to contact your members of Congress. There will be local media opportunities as well, as we outline the local economic impacts and provide you with key talking points to get their attention.

The bottom line is that solutions are clearly needed in response to the problems which have plagued the mortgage industry, but the HVCC is the wrong regulation, done the wrong way, at the wrong time.

Thank you for reading our bulletins and newspaper, for speaking up, and for the kind words you’ve sent our way in this fight. With your help, we’ll continue to do our best to protect our industry and our nation’s homebuyers at the same time.

Dave Biggers
Chairman
a la mode, inc.

TAVMA Weighs in on Home Value Code of Conduct

Trace Richardson — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 22:14:41 +0000

The Title / Appraisal Vendor Management Association has weighed in regarding HVCC. The report, written a over a week ago has gone under the radar as most things HVCC have. This topic just cann’t seem to get traction regardless of how important it might be.

If the GSEs implement the Code as currently drafted, it will cause a major
disruption in the lending community due to a serious interruption in appraisal services.
Such a disruption ultimately will increase consumers’ closing costs and their ability to
obtain financing in a timely manner, or at all.

Hat tip to Rick Grant.

HVCC: How It May Negatively Affect and Change Real Estate as We Know It