Is Neil Jenman still ethical & relevant?

[Aceyducey]

Hi,

Yesterday I was referred to Neil Jenman's latest comments on an aspect of the property market (in this case wrapping) and was shocked at how he approached the topic.

In my opinion, he was highly subjective, slanting the material heavily and clearly has defamed the people named.

Worst of all, it appears to me that he's abandoned his ethical position to play media games.

If the named people took actions regarding defamation Jenman would get a media platform to continue spouting his views and say 'see they're trying to shut me up because I'm right!'

If they did nothing, Jenman would be able to say 'see they're not refuting anything I say because I'm right'.

Anyone else like to add their opinion on whether Neil Jenman still has a place in attempting to direct the ethics of the real estate industry - or whether his recent behaviour shows him as also lacking the ethics he claims to espouse.

The article I refer to is at: http://www.jenman.com/NewsNews1.php?id=220 (replicated below):

WRAPPERS UNWRAPPED
Meeting reveals nasty home truths.

A meeting of property loan sharks did not go as well as planned in Melbourne last night.

The first hiccup occurred when the guest speaker failed to show. The loan sharks – known as wrappers – were expecting Ian Clyde, the chairman of the Uniform Consumer Credit Code, to address their meeting. The wrappers were told that Mr Clyde had misunderstood the location of the meeting. Perhaps he was working late on the dozens of complaints about the wrappers.

Without the dignified presence of Mr Clyde, the wrappers heard from three of Australia’s biggest wrap experts – Steve McKnight, Michael Gruber and Rick (“buckets-of-cash”) Otton.

Mr McKnight said he “did not normally speak for free”. Thinking they were in for some complimentary tips, many wrappers were shocked when McKnight discussed the method of charging consumers for the payments on wrap loans.
It seems maths is not a strong topic for the property loan sharks. While most knew the interest rate to charge, few knew how to calculate the exact payment amounts, especially the components of principle and interest.

The audience heard that many loan contracts may be legally voidable. This means that consumers who have signed wrap loan contacts may be entitled to a refund of all their payments.

“Anyone using Excel to calculate the loan payments is probably getting it wrong,” the wrappers were told. Most were using Excel.

It was also announced that a delegation of wrappers had “a meeting with the government” yesterday. However, it seemed that Consumer Affairs Victoria was more concerned about consumers than wrappers. Let’s hope so.

In order to improve the plummeting image of wrappers a suggestion was made that profit margins should be “capped”. This would prevent wrappers charging more than a set percentage above standard interest rates. It would also limit the mark-ups added to the price of homes.

This suggestion met with a resounding no from the audience. As one observer noted, it was as if several wrappers were thinking, “If I get a real dummy, I want to be able to charge any mark-up I like.”

For consumers, the most frightening aspect of the meeting, however, was that these wrappers are the ones who claim to be concerned about what they call their “industry”. They were the best of the property loan sharks.

For the sake of consumers, it is time to close down the property loan sharking industry.

FYI: I am not a wrapper & I have for a long time supported the Jenman ethical position regarding real estate agents, although I have found on several occasions that the practice of Jenman agents does at time fall short of their ethical claims.

Cheers,

Aceyducey

 

[see_change]

It is interesting to note that recently Steve Mcknight announced he was going to donate all of the profits from his book ( a six figure sum ) , to charity, in order to put something back into the community .

I would be interested to know if Neil Jenman was prepared to make a similar commitment to donate the profits from his latest book to charity .

I don't know Steve and only know Rick casually from meeting him at early Freestyler meetings so I can't personally comment on them , however along with many people on this forum I know Michael very well. He is one of the few people on this forum who I would trust implicitly. ( there arn't many outside the forum either )

On a lighter note , I can see future advertisements containing words along the line of

"Presented by Michael Gruber , recognised by leading realestate advocate Neil Jenman , as one of Australia's leading wrap experts "

BTW I have no involvent wrapping.

See Change

 

[ani]

Hi,

Yesterday I was referred to Neil Jenman's latest comments on an aspect of the property market (in this case wrapping) and was shocked at how he approached the topic.

In my opinion, he was highly subjective, slanting the material heavily and clearly has defamed the people named.

Worst of all, it appears to me that he's abandoned his ethical position to play media games.

If the named people took actions regarding defamation Jenman would get a media platform to continue spouting his views and say 'see they're trying to shut me up because I'm right!'

If they did nothing, Jenman would be able to say 'see they're not refuting anything I say because I'm right'.

Anyone else like to add their opinion on whether Neil Jenman still has a place in attempting to direct the ethics of the real estate industry - or whether his recent behaviour shows him as also lacking the ethics he claims to espouse.

The article I refer to is at: http://www.jenman.com/NewsNews1.php?id=220 (replicated below):



FYI: I am not a wrapper & I have for a long time supported the Jenman ethical position regarding real estate agents, although I have found on several occasions that the practice of Jenman agents does at time fall short of their ethical claims.

Cheers,

Aceyducey

Acey

A very good post and I totally agree.

The article concerned was sensationalist rather than factual.

Jenman does seem more interested now in publicity at any cost; forget the ethics. All the above article does is stop me taking his "ethics in real estate" philosophy, or anything he says, seriously.

I have no interest in wraps - in fact the brain fogs at the mention of the word (sorry mg!)

cheers
ani

 

[Sim]

We do have a no-Jenman policy on this forum because of the litigious approach Jenman has when it comes to people saying things about him.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to close this thread before it gets out of control like many previous threads on this subject have.

I personally know Michael Gruber very well, and I too trust him implicitly - I have found him to be extremely ethical in all of the dealings I have had with him. Neil's assertion that Michael is unethical in his business dealings and is nothing but a "property loan shark" is unconscionable, in my opinion.

I object to the manner in which Neil chooses to slander people by association without any regard to the facts. I know that Michael was instrumental in helping to get the Vendor Finance Association off the ground and in forging communications with various government authorities to address any concerns that may arise from wrapping - in particular dealing with the consumer credit code. Michael's desire to provide a valuable service to the community in an honest, ethical and transparent way has been very obvious to me, and I am saddened by claims from some people that bring his reputation into question.