# SG again..........Invasive Tactic in Foreclosures Draws Scrutiny



## BPWY

Barry Tatum returned to his home in Chicago in December to find that his front and back doors had been torn from their hinges, leaving his possessions exposed to the frigid winds that whipped through his neighborhood.
Terrified that he had been robbed, Mr. Tatum, who had fallen behind on his Bank of America mortgage, raced inside only to discover an unlikely source of the break-in, he said: a subcontractor for a property management firm hired by the bank. A letter from the subcontractor informed Mr. Tatum that the bank had the right to enter and secure the property, according to a copy reviewed by The New York Times.



“It’s the most depressing thing,” said Mr. Tatum, who ultimately got the management firm, Safeguard Properties, to replace the doors.






http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/09/09/invasive-tactic-in-foreclosures-draws-scrutiny/?hp&_r=1&


----------



## Craigslist Hack

I think for some of these clowns signs of occupancy and signs of loot must be the same thing?


----------



## Cleanupman

I published about how SGP LPS and 5Bro...all have lawsuits and other types of litigation against them...
Gotta wonder if this part of the banks dirty little mortgage secret is "To Big to Fail"....

This has to be the ballseist statement...

Diane R. Fusco, a spokeswoman for Safeguard, said that the company had not received the lawsuit.....I call BS...
Safeguard, she said, follows a rigorous system to determine whether a property is vacant before starting any work. “We adhere to the highest standards in the industry and are proud of our record of quality,” she said, adding that the firm takes errors seriously.

@Safeguard's Diane R. Fusco....Seriously??? You can not be serious...


----------



## GTX63

I know firsthand how they handle issues like the above story, and it is how you think.
I also know that if I ran a national and could turn every legal claim against me into my subs insurance, I could still continue to boast about how ethical and by the book I run my company.


----------



## notanymore

In retrospect, what I feel has been the most injurious in having been transitioned (read: SOLD) from BoA to SGP has not been the fact that BoA pared me off, it's that my reputation instantly became sullied from guilt by association by being in SGP's employ.

If I had complete control and made a conscious, duress-free, choice to accept their offer I'd accept the consequences. However, having a family that counts on me and not being able to just become unemployed on short notice, they had me over a barrel and they knew it. They used that duress to maximum advantage. I'm sure it's not an unfamiliar scenario to plenty of vendors that have accepted their work.

Fortunately I was able to leave and I'm proud to have left. I'm a survivor. Everyday is better than the one before, the reputation is recovering, and everyday I look smarter as the ship continues to sink. I worry for those (select ex-coworkers and vendors) still on board when it finally goes under.


----------



## notanymore

My favorite: "Safeguard, Ms. Fusco said, closely monitors its contractors and takes “corrective action if we find that policies have been violated.”"

Translation: "We rolled out a new memo to the vendor network and instituted some new P&Ps that the VPAs and field QC will hold vendors accountable to, so I'm pretty sure our  is covered..."


----------



## BPWY

notanymore said:


> My favorite: "Safeguard, Ms. Fusco said, closely monitors its contractors and takes “corrective action if we find that policies have been violated.”"





Official spokespersons sure told a number of whoppers in that article.


----------



## BPWY

SG's official retort.







> _We are sharing this communication that Safeguard issued on Monday regarding a lawsuit filed against Safeguard Properties by the Illinois Attorney General to provide our perspective to the industry._
> Yesterday afternoon, we received a call from a _New York Times _ reporter requesting comment on a lawsuit that was expected to be filed later in the day against Safeguard Properties by the Illinois Attorney General. At the end of the day Monday, we were able to obtain a copy of that lawsuit. Last evening, the attached article was posted by the _Times_: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/09/09/invasive-tactic-in-foreclosures-draws-scrutiny/?_r=0
> Please be assured that Safeguard will vigorously defend against this lawsuit, as this is an industry-wide issue, at the center of which is the very challenging public misunderstanding about a mortgage company's right to protect a property believed to be vacant prior to the foreclosure sale. In defending this lawsuit, we plan to raise awareness about both the important role of the mortgage industry to protect and preserve properties, and the challenges of doing so. We all know that the mortgage industry is "between a rock and a hard place" when it comes to protecting and preserving vacant properties, particularly in pre-sale status. Defaulted borrowers and plaintiff's attorneys challenge the right of a servicer to enter a property pre-foreclosure, while cities across the country levy stiff penalties against mortgage companies for failure to do so.
> 
> The New York Times article and the Illinois AG lawsuit reflect the common misperceptions of the public with regard to securing vacant properties. As a matter of policy and following industry best practices, we adhere to a rigorous procedure of checks and balances to verify occupancy prior to securing a vacant property. For example, at least two sets of eyes verify a property's vacancy status. The inspector reporting a property vacancy is different from the contractor who performs the securing and lock change.
> 
> It is also important to emphasize that we recognize the need to be vigilant to deliver the highest quality and most professional services on your behalf. As you are aware, we participate in thorough and regular audits to assure that our policies and procedures adhere to all regulatory requirements and the internal requirements of our clients.
> 
> Additionally, we have made a significant investment in industry-leading mobile technologies for our inspectors and contractors to improve the accuracy and quality of the services they perform. We require background checks of all contractors and crews, carefully monitor the performance of our inspectors, and take immediate corrective action if policies are violated. We closely monitor all of our processes to continuously improve quality. We take instances of error, damage and loss seriously and not only work to correct and resolve those issues with homeowners, but fully investigate the matter internally to identify and address the root cause.
> 
> We will keep you advised on this matter as appropriate, and welcome any questions you have. Please be assured that Safeguard will continue to work in your best interests to keep your properties safe and secure.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Alan
> 
> Alan Jaffa
> CEO
> Safeguard Properties


----------



## Irnhrse5

That's not bad. He admits it happens and says they are working to resolve it. I think this is a policy shift on Safeguards part. Usually they ignore all bad publicity.


----------



## GTX63

A policy shift? I think they passed out warm blankets, clean clothes and hot meals to all the prisoners before the reporters arrive.


----------



## Gypsos

GTX63 said:


> A policy shift? I think they passed out warm blankets, clean clothes and hot meals to all the prisoners before the reporters arrive.


As long as the reporter isn't Jane Fonda we might learn some truth.


----------



## Wannabe

This IS a huge problem. The bank does have the right to protect their "secured interest" (understand the bank does not own the home until the foreclosure). The question is: to what extent can they protect the asset?


----------



## GTX63

Wannabe said:


> This IS a huge problem. The bank does have the right to protect their "secured interest" (understand the bank does not own the home until the foreclosure). The question is: to what extent can they protect the asset?


The problem isn't about restricting the bank's right to protect their property. I would want my rights as a lender as well.
The National is paying $3 for an inspector to drive by the house and $25 to rekey a door. Are those the layers of confirmation this woman is talking about?
Using Julio and Lupe from the HD parking lot to determine personals and interior conditions? Really? Your suprised stuff is missing? I don't care how many background checks they say they require, I was at two properties yesterday and came across a grass cutting crew and some guys boarding windows; if everyone of those guys were felony free then I'm a pizz poor judge of character.
I'm at auction sales at least twice a week across 4 states,and I know darn well there are preservation crews dropping off personals all the time for resale.
I know of crews that have gone in on initial secures and hauled away valuables for craigslists, ebay, whatever.
A company in Ohio is paying sub poverty wages to sometimes unskilled/unqualified subs to confirm the location and occupancy of a house in New Mexico, Washington, etc and then they reassure their followers of the due diligence they go thru for the correct results...yeah.


----------



## BamaPPC

Wannabe said:


> This IS a huge problem. The bank does have the right to protect their "secured interest" (understand the bank does not own the home until the foreclosure). The question is: to what extent can they protect the asset?


Some reading material on that subject:

http://usfn.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=USFN_E_Update&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=4272


----------



## GTX63

The link to the article posted by the OP isn't about lender rights, it is about 400 complaints per the Il Attorney General of homeowners having their doors rekeyed, winterized, personal's removed, while they still occupied the property, or may not have even had a loan with that specific bank. Lenders skipping the personal property eviction and going straight thru to the initial services and trashout.


----------



## BamaPPC

I just read the lawsuit (posted on foreclosurepedia.org) and if the Illinois AG gets her way, SG will no longer exist in the state of Illinois.

But, the folks that will really be hurt are us. The contractors. If what the suit alleges is proven, the contractors will pay the fines. (our insurance). And, SG will fold up and there will be lots of PPI contractors really struggling to replace that income.

And, taking it a step further, this will set a precedence for other states to file suit and then we're off to the races on just how far it will go and who will be affected.

I'm confident that my company has never locked anyone out of an occupied dwelling. I also have a high degree of confidence that we have never stolen any property as described in the suit. I'm not present at every property 100% of the time, but I have high confidence in my employees and the training I have provided.

This could be the downfall of a company we all know has done evil, unethical, morally wrong, etc., things to people and properties. But, it could also be the downfall of many good hardworking people as well. Both PPI contractors and employees of SG...or is that the same thing? :whistling2:


----------



## Zuse

GTX63 said:


> The link to the article posted by the OP isn't about lender rights, it is about 400 complaints per the Il Attorney General of homeowners having their doors rekeyed, winterized, personal's removed, while they still occupied the property, or may not have even had a loan with that specific bank. Lenders skipping the personal property eviction and going straight thru to the initial services and trashout.



Agreed, i had a property just last week a national was asking us to secure, it was up for sale active listing and everything, power on water on. But there was no personals in the home, we could see threw the windows. so we called the realtor which told us don't go in it was under contract but the national insisted anyway. So we told the realtor to call the bank and tell them what was going on and to get the bank to call the national, of course that set off a sh*t storm and it "was on" after that. 

Of course the job was cancelled but only after getting chewed out.

screw them, my guys always proceed with caution and walk away if there is any doubt.


----------



## BamaPPC

I have on numerous occasions called from in front of a dwelling I just could not determine to be occupied or vacant. I always request that the client be contacted and let them make the call on entry.

For example: Tall weeds (1-2ft) in the front and back yards. power off, water on. kinda new bbq grill on rear porch. few kids toys in the drive way. no way to see inside the dwelling, all the blinds are pulled down. old car with no tires in back yard. Outbuilding has lots of boxes-clothes, Christmas stuff, couple pieces of unbroken furniture.

What do you do? There are indications that the property MAY be vacant. But, there are signs that it MAY NOT be vacant. Could be that Momma got sick, and the family is on an extended visit with no other local relatives to look after the place. Shut the power off to save money and end one reason a fire could start in their absence. 

Let the client make the call. Get that decision in writing. Back off if once inside the place is fully furnished.


----------



## mtmtnman

Zuse said:


> Agreed, i had a property just last week a national was asking us to secure, it was up for sale active listing and everything, power on water on. But there was no personals in the home, we could see threw the windows. so we called the realtor which told us don't go in it was under contract but the national insisted anyway. So we told the realtor to call the bank and tell them what was going on and to get the bank to call the national, of course that set off a sh*t storm and it "was on" after that.
> 
> Of course the job was cancelled but only after getting chewed out.
> 
> screw them, my guys always proceed with caution and walk away if there is any doubt.



The nationals HATE when you do that but piss on them!!! I have to live here, THEY DON'T!


----------



## Wannabe

Whats NOT funny is when YOU are asked to determine if its occupied.... Occupied does NOT matter in MOST ALL States. The word that meets the definition if the bank can take steps to safeguard the property is: Abandonment.

HOW DO YOU DETERMINE IF IT IS ABANDONED?

You don't!!

We got sued for what this thread is about. We LOST or should I say we Settled? Either way it cost us.

House empty, utilites off, 4' of snow in driveway with NO tire tracks OR footprints (except ours going around to all the windows and doors trying to see if empty). It was empty. We secured and winterized (no problems there) and 2 months later the lawyer for the homeowner is calling wanting to know where the $5,000 Professional Keyboard was, the $10,000+ in other professional musical equipment and miscellaneous items. 

We fought it and since the homeowner stated that he drove by the home weekly checking on it then it is not Abandoned. He won we lost. Insurance paid minus the $5000 deductible. 

If I was a lawyer I would be rich rich rich suing all the P&P contractors  Sucks to say but every P&P guy is a sitting duck.


----------



## JDRM

Same here, they dont want to hear "occupied", because there is no money in it, they want us to get in, after all, the liability is on us at that point! We have recently been told we must have a photo of someone to call it occupied, gonna have to start bringing costumes for my helpers.......:whistling2:


----------



## Gypsos

JDRM said:


> Same here, they dont want to hear "occupied", because there is no money in it, they want us to get in, after all, the liability is on us at that point! We have recently been told we must have a photo of someone to call it occupied, gonna have to start bringing costumes for my helpers.......:whistling2:


This assumes people will let you photograph them.


----------



## MNanny

I refused an initial secure order twice because of the amount of personals at a property. The response was they had been cutting the grass for a month and the power was off so do it. We went the third time and asked a neighbor to witness that we changed one lock and took pictures. Sure enough, 3 weeks later we got a call from the local sheriff that the owners were 90 and handicapped and were in assisted living and came back to remove their personal items 3 weeks before the sheriff's sale and found 1 lock changed and signs on the door. Immediately they were missing 5 handguns and tens of thousands of dollars worth of tools and computer equipment. My response? Why is it always guns? They have to be registered and only a fool would steal them. Long pause. I offer that the neighbors of 20 years witnessed the lock change. Well, he says, you dodged a bullet on that one. And yes, the guns are always the first claim. No-one knows why.


----------



## Wannabe

MNanny,

Got 1 better than that. Crew was in Chisago City to verify occupancy before doing the initial, got stuck in the snow and was in the process of shoveling themselves out when the Deputy showed... Deputy went and got a couple sandbags out of the trunk of Sheriffs SUV and helped spread sand. Crew changed the 1 lock with Deputy parked along road watching. YEP the homeowners came back 2 weeks later saying their large air compressor and tons of tools stolen AND MCS didnt even call us to ask what happened. They turned claim into our policy. THE LAW firm representing our E&O Policy did call and when we supplied the pics of the Deputy there with us they crapped and PAID the claim....less hassle to pay it then fight it PLUS it was our deductible monies plus insurance proceeds.


----------



## jfullen

Here is one from this mornings Today show......

http://www.today.com/news/home-brea...s-accused-cleaning-out-wrong-homes-8C11296802


----------



## smiles

*When Safeguard crumbles....*

What is going to happen to all the work when Safeguard finally goes out of business? Who do you think will scoop up the work for BofA? Think BACFS will step back in? Who do you think is the next National that might have a good enough reputation, or relationships, to take over the properties?

After SG took over, we tried them for about 2 months, but all our REOs were taken away, and we watched our former properties get maintained (and heard from Agents who worked with them) by one guy in a small clunky toyota, residential mower, a shovel, and a crowbar(you get the idea) take our work. We had over three years excellent service reputation with BACFS and that was a major slap in the face to see these inexperienced people coming in, taking half the pay, and doing beyond shoddy work and giving Property Preservation companies that actually care a very bad name. For that reason, I despise Safeguard and will be ready to pick up the work when they lose it all....we all know its just a matter of time. 

Agree? Who will get the work?





BamaPPC said:


> I just read the lawsuit (posted on foreclosurepedia.org) and if the Illinois AG gets her way, SG will no longer exist in the state of Illinois.
> 
> But, the folks that will really be hurt are us. The contractors. If what the suit alleges is proven, the contractors will pay the fines. (our insurance). And, SG will fold up and there will be lots of PPI contractors really struggling to replace that income.
> 
> And, taking it a step further, this will set a precedence for other states to file suit and then we're off to the races on just how far it will go and who will be affected.
> 
> I'm confident that my company has never locked anyone out of an occupied dwelling. I also have a high degree of confidence that we have never stolen any property as described in the suit. I'm not present at every property 100% of the time, but I have high confidence in my employees and the training I have provided.
> 
> This could be the downfall of a company we all know has done evil, unethical, morally wrong, etc., things to people and properties. But, it could also be the downfall of many good hardworking people as well. Both PPI contractors and employees of SG...or is that the same thing? :whistling2:


----------



## StigCOO

*issues with safeguard*

None of these horror stories from out in the field have anything to do with safeguard. Our company runs into ridiculous situations (in the midwest) every single day, and they are all caused by lazy or dishonest vendors working for safeguard. Don't get me wrong, safeguard does tons of stupid things, but they all relate to their terrible software for invoicing and their employees who can never help when you call the bid desk or customer service. If you read safeguards regulations regarding vendor conduct at houses, especially at initial inspections, they are really thorough for the most part; vendors just don't follow them. I have issues with safeguard every day, but subcontractor screw-ups are just that, the fault lies with the contractor.


----------



## BPWY

StigCOO said:


> None of these horror stories from out in the field have anything to do with safeguard. Our company runs into ridiculous situations (in the midwest) every single day, and they are all caused by lazy or dishonest vendors working for safeguard. Don't get me wrong, safeguard does tons of stupid things, but they all relate to their terrible software for invoicing and their employees who can never help when you call the bid desk or customer service. If you read safeguards regulations regarding vendor conduct at houses, especially at initial inspections, they are really thorough for the most part; vendors just don't follow them. I have issues with safeguard every day, but subcontractor screw-ups are just that, the fault lies with the contractor.





Nice job carrying water for SG, but the reality is some what different.

Are there PLENTY of screw up hacks?? Sure thing. Lots of em.
Is there also PLENTY of blame to fall on SG's shoulders??? Yup, sure there is!


----------



## thanohano44

BPWY said:


> Nice job carrying water for SG, but the reality is some what different.
> 
> Are there PLENTY of screw up hacks?? Sure thing. Lots of em.
> Is there also PLENTY of blame to fall on SG's shoulders??? Yup, sure there is!


Yeah. He just signed up today.


----------



## BamaPPC

StigCOO said:


> None of these horror stories from out in the field have anything to do with safeguard. Our company runs into ridiculous situations (in the midwest) every single day, and they are all caused by lazy or dishonest vendors working for safeguard. Don't get me wrong, safeguard does tons of stupid things, but they all relate to their terrible software for invoicing and their employees who can never help when you call the bid desk or customer service. If you read safeguards regulations regarding vendor conduct at houses, especially at initial inspections, they are really thorough for the most part; vendors just don't follow them. I have issues with safeguard every day, but subcontractor screw-ups are just that, the fault lies with the contractor.


I've been with SG for several years. I read your statement and have to agree there is a lot of truth in what you are stating. However, SG's hands aren't clean. And their sh*t stinks just like the rest of ours. A lot of the problems that occur are due to SG's work order instructions. They contradict themselves over and over. Contractors are supposed to shuffle through the instructions and also remember two year old memos that add even more confusion to the work order. 

SG and the clients keep changing the rules, making it tough...no impossible...for any new contractor to be in compliance.


----------



## PRO-CUT Lawns

*SG*

I am a grass cut vendor in Indiana who worked for StigCOO last season mowing SG properties . Great guys to work for, was always paid on time, ( weekly ) I only had to take 12 pics. I don't understand why so many nationals expect 30+ pics ( F-ing ridiculous )for grass cuts. I never received a chargeback or had to return to fix anything, probably because, we always do things right the first time. I was told recently that Stig filed a lawsuit aginst SG. I am not sure the reason, I am now looking for another company to get work from, does anybody have a suggestion. I will not be one of the FNG causing problems in this industry instead I am talking with my congressmen to try and get some regulation for these nationals. This is one of the only industries that I know of that the Subs get 10-20% and the ones with the work get 80-90% of the $ when its suppose to be the other way around. Too many hands in the till.


----------



## PropPresPro

PRO-CUT Lawns said:


> . . .I was told recently that Stig filed a lawsuit aginst SG. I am not sure the reason. . .


I going to go out on a limb here and say it is because they were not paid for any grass cuts because they told SG that their requirement of 30+ pictures for a grass cut was F-ing ridiculous and only submitted 12?


----------



## PRO-CUT Lawns

*Pics*

No it was not for mowing, I am sure of that, They got paid weekly from SG, they also do full PP work and repairs. I think it had something to do with the repair side. about 5yrs ago I worked for a SG vendor as an employee doing GC and we only had to take 20 pics back then.


----------



## Racerx

PRO-CUT Lawns said:


> I am a grass cut vendor in Indiana who worked for StigCOO last season mowing SG properties . Great guys to work for, was always paid on time, ( weekly ) I only had to take 12 pics. I don't understand why so many nationals expect 30+ pics ( F-ing ridiculous )for grass cuts. I never received a chargeback or had to return to fix anything, probably because, we always do things right the first time. I was told recently that Stig filed a lawsuit aginst SG. I am not sure the reason, I am now looking for another company to get work from, does anybody have a suggestion. I will not be one of the FNG causing problems in this industry instead I am talking with my congressmen to try and get some regulation for these nationals. This is one of the only industries that I know of that the Subs get 10-20% and the ones with the work get 80-90% of the $ when its suppose to be the other way around. Too many hands in the till.


Why don't you ask Stig what happend personally?,he was singing Safeguard's praises in a posting on here back in November now he suing them?....weird...:huh:


----------



## DueyCheatem&HoweLLC

Our contract doesn't do trash outs and I take lots of pictures and report if there are items of value. I just feel as the contractor, we carry the most liability.. And there are more corrupt delinquent home owners than corrupt contractors.. Just doin our jobs. Hey.. I certainly don't steal. We get paid plenty to the jobs to mess up our relationship by taking somebody else old crap! My thinking is anybody can go in and do the wrong thing.. It's not always the contractors


----------



## JordansRenovations

the nationals/regionals need to do a better job on vacant property determination!! In March alone I enetered two houses (unlocked) full of property but did look abandoned. Changed one lock and did a wint. Came back the next day to do an exterior clean and inspection to have the property owner threatening lawsuit and police. WHOA!! Had to take the work order down to the police dept. We took nothing but of course she said we did. What the hell is going on. Its had to determine if I property is truly vacant. I have been in house where it is full of personal property and been vacant for years. I love it when a neighbor comes and ask me what the hell I am doing before calling the police, it allows me to know if someone has truly moved out. There was one THANK GOD i couldnt get in. Saw the realtor sign and he told me it was even on the foreclosure list.


----------



## GTX63

And many times a contractor has been put in harm's way based on a $3-$8 inspection. I can't imagine the attorney for safeguard having to explain to a judge what they paid for an occupancy verification.


----------

