Tuesday, November 08, 2011

More things that get my goat: Property Investors

I have to admit, nothing gives me satisfaction quite as much as being part of the process of bringing a person down a peg or two - particularly if said person is a bit of a douchebag.

Like property investors.

Not content with their new-found wealth, they always seem to be hungry for more and eventually take that one risk too many which the market cannot sustain. They are the very epitome of greed. Worse, they have the arrogance but without any actual talent. Kind of like the Kardashians.

And then, like the Right Hand of Karma, someone like me comes knocking at their door with documents of their pending bankruptcy or foreclosures.

Such as this morning for one Sarah Nichols* of Submarine Property Investments*.

Along with the documents, I was supplied with a copy of a full-page advertising feature from some glossy magazine featuring Sarah Nichols seated on a leather divan, a bottle of expensive champagne and flute at her feet. In the article she enthusiastically gushes that she believes the future is in property and it's the best thing for long-term financial security...

Oh dear, Sarah. Did you really think that? Doesn't seem to have worked out so well for you.

Anyway, she loves to travel and can't do without her Louis Vuitton and designer shoes.

I'm thinking you won't be travelling too far these days.

Interestingly, perhaps tellingly, is her comment that one of the safest and powerful ways to build wealth is through property because you don't need any cash to start.

Hmmmm, correct me if I'm wrong Sarah, but perhaps this philosophy might have led to your current predicament? Your bank is concerned that your exceedingly overdrawn account hasn't had any deposits made into it in quite some time, despite your numerous assurances, and that you have fallen quite behind in a number of mortgage repayments.

Hence the foreclosures.

Anyway, this morning I made my attendance to the registered office of Submarine Property Investments to find a gathering of well-dressed people sipping Veueve Clicquot and nibbling at hors d'ouevre. The men were wearing morning dress in blacks or greys, the women in tasteful dresses and elaborate hats.

Wedding? Funeral? No, it's Race Day!

I was immediately accosted by a florid-faced 'gentleman' sailing (at least) three sheets to the wind. What was my business, he enquired? By this stage everyone was staring at the stranger standing at the door who wasn't attired in a suit, as is customary amongst certain types on this very day.

"I'm looking for Sarah Nichols," I stated loud enough for everyone to hear.

The gatekeeper was in the middle of saying "Why, yes, she's right..." when a woman in the middle of the room dropped her champagne flute (it was full, I noted) and hurriedly interjected "She's not here right now".

Really? Because you look a lot like that person in the advert, I thought to myself.

However, I figured that I probably shouldn't embarrass her further in front of her distinguished guests. Well, any more so than I had already done so, in a conciliatory tone, stated "I'll be back later".

The fact that I've probably ruined her day, at the very least, brings a joyful smile to my face. I'll get her again tomorrow.

Meanwhile, she's spending the bank's money keeping up appearances of her affluent lifestyle.

* Not their real names, obviously.


  1. You should have served the documents. You are going soft.

  2. Good point you raise (and I hope my generosity doesn't come back to haunt me as Sarah evades service in future) but sometimes you just have to be diplomatic. And tactful.

    I can pretend to be both of those.

  3. Damnit!

    Sarah flew the coop and is no longer in the city according to one of her employees.

    I knew I should just have thrown the docs at her feet!

    That's it, I'm *never* going to give someone a break ever again. Ever!

  4. A case of lesson learnt? and if someone in the future asks as to why you are being a hard-arse, tell them...

    Good luck with tracking down Sarah

  5. Yeah. A case of 'fool me once,...' and all that.

  6. Aren't you able to serve them over Bookface yet or, if she's a Twit, send them in 140 characters or less?

  7. No, sadly.

    I guess it's possible that once all reasonable attempts had been made, when the lawyers apply for substituted service (usually by way of affixing to front door of their residence and/or published in the press) they could ask that it also be served by way of FB *but* the default settings these days are usually to 'private' and it's unlikely they'll friend an unknown PI and, at least in several states in the US using a false profile to befriend someone on FB in order to pursue other legal action has been getting a bit of a slap down by the Courts.

  8. Also, I should add, in this particular case the docs are a stack several inches thick, so that would be a hell of a lot of tweets.