Verde Valley Elders- Is this Ethical??? (page 2)

jgnat

Is the property worth 265K, can the shell trust flip the property for its true value?

redvip2000

I understand now. I obviously missed that detail. They didn't actually buy a KH, but a piece of land. Disgraceful!

Since the property has several trustees, it means that the other elders are in on the deal as well, since they had to agree on the sale.

sir82

I wonder if these sorts of things were becoming commonplace, which in turn led to the centralized nationwide oversight of all KH building projects.

Well, that, and the prospect of raking in 10's or 100's of millions in a shameless money grab.....

@redvip: To make analogy, let's say i want to buy a house for $265K. I ask my family to please lend me the money, which they do. So i buy the house for $265K, then a year later i sell the house to myself for $110K without them knowing. How did I make any money here? The previous owner kept the $265K and now i actually owe a least a part of the 110K.

--

Your analogy makes no sense.

1. If you borrow $265,000 from your family to buy a house, and they expect to be re-paid, you now owe them $265,000.

2. You cannot sell a house to yourself that you already own

3. If you purchased a house for $265,000 with money you borrowed from your family, and you then sell that same house for $110,000, you've just taken a $155,000 loss....money that is owed to your family.

4. Since your family expects to be re-paid and you haven't told them you've lost their money, that's a scam. The money wasn't yours to lose in the first place, and making a foolish decision doesn't excuse the loss.

.

[edit] I see you posted above and understand the situation better. This further explanation should help.

Witness My Fury

Are you factoring the date of 2008 which was around the crash, surely property prices fell after that bubble burst?

I'm not saying all is well with this deal, I'm saying it may not be as bad as it 1st appears.

AndDontCallMeShirley

WMF: valid point. If the land was purchased at the top of the market in 2008, then it's bad timing. But I think the issue here centers on a few key things:

1. Was there any real emergency to sell the land immediately and take a $155,000 loss? If not, and the situation was put to the congregation for a vote (you know, asking the opinion of the people who actually paid for the property in the first place !!), maybe the consensus would be to simply wait for prices to come up or to see if competitive bids are offered if listed through a realtor for 6-12 months.

2. Was the land even put on the market and bids considered? If not, then selling it to an elder/trustee seems to be a backroom, sweetheart deal for no other purpose than personal gain.

3. The congregation has not been told about any of this. Why??? If all is being done honestly there is no reason not to keep the congregation informed, or better yet, allow them to vote BEFORE decisions are made. It's their money.

4. I'm wondering if the sale is even legal? Can a trustee for a non-profit buy property that he is entrusted to sell, especially if that property is sold at a huge loss to the people he's supposed to be looking out for?

problemaddict

The scandal here, is the lack of transparency. There is really only something to see here, if the fair market value (FMV), is MORE than the 110 paid.

The mistake everyone is making here, is that a property or land does not have to hold the value that was once paid for it. 2008 in my humble opinion seemed to be AFTER the serious crash in real estate, so someone was not very savvy to make that purchase when they did initially.

Is the land now worth 40% of what it was paid for originally? Without a land appraisal it is hard to know. If for some reason 100 is the current FMV of the land, then the congregation took a loss for making a bad real estate investment, but that doesn't mean specifically the elder whos name is on both docs specifically made that decision.

I'm not saying this is being blown up......at the LEAST it is asevere case of dimwhitted buffonery. But it may not be quite the conspiracy it looks like at first glance.

The unknowns that need to be known are...

1) Who did the congregation originally buy that land for, and was it purchased for FMV?

2) What was the purpose of selling the land at a 60% loss and at whos direction.

3) Did the person who purchased the land, have anything to do with the initial purchase of the land at the inflated rate?

4) Did the person that purchased the property do so for the market value of the land, or did he get a "deal". Land should not fluctuate down that fast. That is the shadey part of things to me.

problemaddict

ADCMS,

I am pretty sure its legal, as long as it is disclosed in the process. It has to be an "arms length" transaction, or the underwriters would not allow it. Of course this guy probably paid cash.

There is alot we don't know.

KateWild

I'm wondering if the sale is even legal? Can a trustee for a non-profit buy property that he is entrusted to sell, especially if that property is sold at a huge loss to the people he's supposed to be looking out for?-ADCS

Of course it's illegal, but he listed himself as a company in the official records, anyone investigating this fraud will see the papertrail as easily as Mike and Kim did. The problem is professionals sometimes see this as a victimless crime, because the charity WT were scammed, not really the cong members. In reality though this cong is probably still making repayment to WT for the $265,000. They have employed the new everlasting loan system, so they will never repay back the loan to WT.

This was a total unethical and illegal scam. It thought that corruption existed amongst BOEs, and it couldn't be just the GB. It's nice to see them exposed, but JWs are being taken advantage of all over the world and it pains me to see this happening to my loved ones.

Kate xx

Vidiot

"Everlasting Loan System"

I love that; kudos to you, Kate.

Verde Valley Elders- Is this Ethical???

Share this