|1 year Subscription to Real Estate Investor's Monthly
|Best Practices for the Intelligent Real Estate Investor |
|Distressed Real Estate Times
|How to Get Started in Real Estate|
|How to Order|
|Here is an email I got from Jack Larkin on 10/8/99.
We see from your bio that you are a US MILITARY ACADEMY GRAD. We spent 30 years in the Air Force and are now retired and living in Florida. We would like to send Michael Warren to Marine Boot Camp, with us as the TI. Michael has, or has had, at least four Seminar Programs that we know of and some other promotionals that he has, or has had on his web site. We understand his ACLF Adult Congregrate Living Facility Seminar has been given and purchased by a lot of people, many of who want their money back. We don't know how much it costs. We paid him $2,400.00 for his Bad Debt an Judgment and Liens Seminar which we attended. It turned our to be a trifecta(like betting on horse races) operation where he gives you a little bit in each as a come on to take the next and promises the big jackpot in the third CORPORATE Judgment and Liens Seminar, to the tune of an additional $4,000.00 or so, Most of the information contained is all three is the same and could easily be done in one, and then you wouldn't get much. This is bad enough, but to top it off at the J&L Seminar we attended, he pitched a guaranteed turn-key Automated Teller Machine (ATM) program that cost approximately $13,000.00 for Machine and location and services, all provided by or through him. Four of us just at that Seminar invested, myself for one and the other three for 13 machines and location for a total of approx $200,000.00. We were also led to believe in writing, although not guaranteed that each would generate revenues of $3,000.00 per month. NONE MADE ANYTHING!! We could go on and on about this as he has refunded NOTHING to us and one other, only partial to the other two and who knows to the others that must have invested in other seminars. He took our hard earned IRA money and won't give it back!! We have reported him to the FL Consumer Protection Agency, the FTC, the Colorado Attorney General and the Colorado District who has agreed in writing to do an investigation. If you could assist us any further with any info you have received on him or provide contact for us to others, we would appreciate it. We need as much evidence as we can get for the Colorado District Attorney. We believe we have possibly conned all the way and fraud may be involved. We can provide you more and copies of anything if you like.
Jack Larkin requests that anyone that has had experience or knows anyone who has had experience with any of Mr. Warren's Seminars or services, Good or Bad, Especially Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs), contact him at e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org, he would certainly appreciate it.
This is in response to the e-mail of Jack Larkin dated October 8, 1999, regarding Michael Warren.
In May, 1998, Mr. Larkin attended a seminar given by Mr. Warren at which time the potential private ownership and operation of ATM machines was presented. Subsequent to the presentation, Mr. Larkin and three other individuals expressed interest. In June, 1998, Mr. Larkin entered into an "Automated Teller Machine ("ATM") Management Agreement" (the "Contract") with Unified Services Corporation ("Unified") of which Mr. Warren is president. The Contract provided in part that Mr. Larkin was responsible for determining the machine's location; that Mr. Larkin purchased the ATM machine from International Investments, Inc. ("III"), a company completely unrelated to Unified; that Mr. Larkin had completed his own due diligence before entering into the agreement; that Unified was acting as Larkin's consultant; and that Unified had not made a guarantee regarding the revenue potential of the ATM machines.
In his e-mail Mr. Larkin implies that Unified guaranteed certain revenue. That is simply incorrect and contrary to the terms of the Contract. There was however a "Buy-Back Agreement" provided by III that Mr. Larkin does not mention. That agreement stated that if an ATM machine was in "actual operation" for 180 days III would repurchase the machine. Unified, in its invoice to Mr. Larkin, reiterated that agreement. Mr. Larkin also does not mention that the ATM machine he purchased from III was not in "actual operation" for 180 days.
Mr. Larkin then suggests that Unified has refused to return his money. Again, he is incorrect. In fact, once concerns were raised about the lack of profitability of the ATMs, Unified promptly began discussions with three of the four people who purchased ATMs from III, including Mr. Larkin, regarding how the situation might best be resolved. The fourth has never contacted Unified expressing dissatisfaction. Unified quickly and satisfactorily resolved the concerns of two of the four.
With respect to Mr. Larkin, Unified has repeatedly attempted to resolve his concerns in spite of the campaign initiated by him against Mr. Warren. In February, 1999 Mr. Larkin made an offer to settle. In March, 1999 Unified advised Mr. Larkin it accepted his offer However, Mr. Larkin then advised Unified he would not consummate the settlement and that he was entitled to almost $10,000.00 more than his initial offer. Mr. Larkin now claims he is entitled to almost ten times his initial offer! The foregoing illustrates that, contrary to Mr. Larkin's contentions, Unified and Mr. Warren have acted reasonably and have been willing to address the situation even though they do not believe they have acted wrongfully in any respect. It is Mr. Larkin who has and is acting unreasonably and who has and is preventing a resolution.
Only after Mr. Larkin failed to complete the settlement and continued spreading misleading information about Unified did Unified demand arbitration pursuant to the Contract in an attempt to obtain a final resolution. In the arbitration, which is being administered through the American Arbitration Association, Mr. Larkin will have a complete opportunity to present his version of the facts. Unlike Mr. Larkin, Unified and Mr. Warren are eager to have the matter resolved by a neutral third-party regardless of the outcome. It is frankly striking that Mr. Larkin, who was, by his account, duped by Mr. Warren, is the one who is disinterested in resolution.
Finally, although Mr. Larkin has filed complaints against Mr. Warren with a number of governmental entities, Mr. Warren has addressed those complaints in the same straightforward manner he has attempted with Mr. Larkin. As of this date, Mr. Warren has not been advised of any alleged wrongdoing on his part nor has be been advised that any governmental entity intends on taking action against him. At least two of the entities to which Mr. Larkin complained have closed their files already.
|On 10/14/99, I got an email from Mr. Larkin saying he disputes Mr. Warren's response.
I will leave Mr. Larkin's original email to me and Mr. Warren's response up for a couple more days to be fair to Mr. Warren, then I note that there is a dispute between them and will invite interested persons to contact Mr. Warren and Mr. Larkin directly for each's account of their relationship.