by imallgrowedup 53 Replies latest watchtower scandals
Imallgrowedup... great research, thanks!
Jeff and Sara Tamayo are still alive, so the property was not willed to the WT.
The transfer value from the Tamayo Trust to the Watchtower Society was $0. So I would assume that the property was actually gifted to the Society by the Tamayos (via their trust).
The interesting thing, as far as I can tell, is that the Society then sold the property to their lawyer for $50,000 below the assessed value, and gave him a private mortgage on it.
I should add that I don't think that there's anything scandalous about the Society paying for legal services. Jim McCabe is a Witness, however(my father knows him personally); so presumably his service was officially "volunteer work". But the Society found a way to pay him... and tax-free, to boot.
Thanks Farkel and onacruse!
Farkel, it's AWESOME that you can get someone out there to check the guy out! PLEASE keep us posted! If you're interested, I'll give you a few other choice questions to ask the guy. Might stop him dead in his tracks!
Onacruise - I suspect that the property came to the WTBTS as a "Quit Deed", but I don't know that for sure. And why would these people do that? They have mortgages on other property, so you would think that they would want to get some cash out of the "farm" to pay off other mortgages.
Again, I think the key to this has something to do with the lawyer! Why isn't his name on the Sales Record, yet it is later added to the deed? Why does he live in San Diego, about 8 hours away from this property? Why is there a Fictitious Business Name filing that doesn't mention his name? If he's being paid for legal services, why isn't he allowed to benefit from whatever business is transacting there? Or, is he after all, but he doesn't want anyone to know about it? Why is the WT going to the flock and asking for more and more money, when I can guarantee you that property is worth at LEAST $750k or more! Sure would be some great cash flow for them! Again, go check out his website. One of the services he offers to his clients is "Wealth Transfer Strategies." I could be wrong about all of this, but given the WT's track record, something just tells me that there is something going on that they don't want us to know about. When I hear back from Farkel, you'll see why.
Again, thanks for your support!
growedup
Euph -
You may be right! This could be all on the up and up. Time, and Farkel's friend will tell!
growedup
Greetings!
Actually if you pay attention to the transfer dates/sales dates and the transfer amounts you can pretty much see what occurred.
Evidently, TILTON acquired the property and evidently owned the property in Fee Simple> Since TILTON didn't pay anything for it it was probably left by will to them. Evidently, TILTON set up a trust to hold the property in this manner, most likely for beneficial tax reasons.
They then sold the property in 2000 to TAMAYOs (for $400,000) who evidently then set up a similar trust.
The generous Tamayos evidently transferred the property to the WTBTS just before the end of 2000 (no doubt getting a very nice Tax Deduction themselves for the market value) although the WTBTS evidently paid nothing ($0) for the transfer.
Naturally the WTBTS has no use for relatively small orchard (vineyard) so a couple of months later on February 23, 2001 they sold it to the LEHRERS for $300K (below market value which is somewhat surprising but not much below - property in this area of California is not as valuable as you would think, especially for a small vineyard because the larger growers own all the market and specialty growers/small wineries are having a tough time.). Evidently, the Society has retained a 270K mortgage on the property so it in reality still owns it until it is paid for.
Note that the SAME DAY, February 23, 2001, a further transfer occurs whereby the Lehrers add McCabe as an owner.
The reason for this is most likely so that the Society acting through its legal agent (McCabe) can control exactly what happens. In other words, the Lehrers can't turn around and sell the property (or do something else with it) at say a huge profit for $500K to a $1 Million?! for example should the market skyrocket WITHOUT McCabe's approval.
Most likely, the WTBTS has some side agreement with McCabe that in the event of the above scenario, McCabe would pass along any future profits from such a sale.
Actually the whole think is pretty savvy of the Society and I would point out perfectly legal. Although as a fellow attorney I hope that McCabe has followed through in all of his ethical duties and obtained all the necessary waivers, etc. since the deal is on paper at least obviously self-dealing.
However the reality is that this is not a loan to McCabe and in fact isn't a loan to the Lehrers either. The WTBTS in acting as the Lender has only insured that it holds the mortgage on the property which is certainly very business savvy of them.
By the way you can also see McCabe's listing on the Cal Bar website. He was admitted in California in 1972.
later,
Eduardo
I'm trying real hard to follow this and finding myself feeling very 'blonde'. Some thing doesn't feel right.
Oroborus -
My turn to be impressed! Great to see someone with some legal knowledge on here! Your input is greatly appreciated! Your assessment of the situation certainly sounds plausible, although I might have to disagree with you on the market value. Land is land is land is land. My little 9000 square foot lot has doubled since 1999, and I'm not too far from where this land is located. I am sure this land has done at least as well with two extra years on me. Even if it has only increased 50% in value, that still makes it worth more than the market value at the time of the transfer.
May I ask you what you meant by this - I'm not quite sure I understand.
I hope that McCabe has followed through in all of his ethical duties and obtained all the necessary waivers, etc. since the deal is on paper at least obviously self-dealing.
Again, thanks! I'm compiling another list of questions. Would love your input on them.
growedup
Hi Imallgrowedup,
Well I don't want to speculate much, not knowing any of the facts (beyond what you presented) however, my presumption is that McCabe (or one of his associates) was likely the one (lawyer) that also handled all the PAPERWORK involved in this little tricky scenario.
As you noted, McCabe is the WTBTS lawyer for all intensive purposes since he serves as the agent for legal process in California at least. His client is the WTBTS which is another way of saying that.
Generally speaking, a lawyer is not permitted to enter into a Self-Dealing transaction with a client. (For example drawing up a WILL whereby the lawyer receives something in the WILL or engaging in other businesses with a client.)
This general ethical prohibition is due to the central Duties an Attorney has of Candor, Loyalty to the Client, and the obligation to engage in fair unbiased counsel to the client.
A lawyer who is benefiting by some transaction with the client (other than fees for his work of course) might be compromised in how she advises her client and may not always use the best judgement and in serious bad cases, might even misadvise the client to the client's harm in order to benefit the lawyer.
Thus in any self-dealing transaction, a lawyer typically must get a signed Waiver from the Client (WTBTS) or she will find herself in a bad position should the Client ever raise a fuss. Many lawyers have been disciplined including being disbarred for failing to obtain such a waiver.
In this case, too, I probably would obtain a signed Disclosure and Waiver from the Lehrer's also acknowledging what they probably already know of course that McCabe is the Society's lawyer, especially if McCabe handled the Purchase Agreement and other paperwork.
There are probably other things that I am forgetting at this late hour but you get the idea.
This is certainly unusual in the legal sense and few purchasers of property would go for this arrangement --it is bad enough to have a Lender holding a large mortgage over your head but then to be made to add a legal representative of the Lender on the deed as a purchaser so that subsequent sale or even making significant changes to the property would require the Lender representative's approval is a bit much in the normal world. Obviously, the Lehrers understand and are in agreement with it all and probably this the only way they could acquire the property anyway.
take care,
Eduardo
Eduardo -
I am SO glad you found this thread! Your information has been invaluable! I know it's late out here in CA, but I am so fired up about all of this, because this is just the beginning of what I have found on the WTBTS and my adrenaline is going! Thanks for staying up late and posting to me when you could be sleeping instead!
Anyway, can you tell me how someone could verify whether there is a signed waiver between McCabe and the WTBTS and/or the Lehrer's? Would that be public information, or a private document? For what it is worth, I have found something else related to this deal, but want to check it out further before I post it. Would love it if you get the chance to look at it and tell me what you think!
Also, are you aware of a list of congregations and/or baptized members that is publically available? I am wondering if the either the Tamayo's or the Lehrer's are witnesses, because if they are not, then why would one be willing to give some land to the WT, and why would the other allow the WT to hold their mortgage with their lawyer on the deed if they weren't?
My eyelids are drooping - gotta go, but thanks for your insight so far, and for any future help you may be able to give!
growedup
You may be right! This could be all on the up and up.
Thanks! I didn't mean to imply that it's completely on the up-an-up, since as I said above, it still qualifies as compensation to a man who's officially supposed to be a volunteer. So IMHO, it would still turn out to be interesting even if it is relatively innocent.
But those are interesting possibilities Oroborus has raised!
