Bill Bauer

Bill:
There ya have it, a COMPLETE and UTTER lack of understanding! Why youâ??ve done a masterful job of proving my point, YOU HAVE NO CREDIBILITY! Because you see, Iâ??m not an attorney at law, which thwarts your whole diatribe of court dispersions and distortions of fact. I am, however, an agent of the California Courts authorized to practice under the law!

Now as far as making â??a smart comeback,â? howâ??s this one taken from 15 U.S.C. §1679..?

• 
  15 U.S.C. §1679b, DEFINITIONS
  â?¦
  (3) Credit repair organization. -- The term 'credit repair organization'â??
  (A) means any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails to sell, provide, or perform (or represent that such person can or will sell, provide, or perform) any service, in return for the payment of money or other valuable consideration, for the express or implied purpose ofâ??
  i) improving any consumer's credit record, credit history, or credit rating; or
  (ii) providing advice or assistance to any consumer with regard to any activity or service described in clause (i)

Or how about this from 15 U.S.C. § 1679c, PROHIBITED PRACTICES...?

• 
  (a) In General.--No person may--
  (1) make any statement, or counsel or advise any consumer to make any statement, which is untrue or misleading (or which, upon the exercise of reasonable care, should be known by the credit repair organization, officer, employee, agent, or other person to be untrue or misleading) with respect to any consumer's credit worthiness, credit standing, or credit capacity to--
  (A) any consumer reporting agency (as defined in section 603(f) of this Act); or
  (B) any person--
  i) who has extended credit to the consumer; or
  ii) to whom the consumer has applied or is applying for an extension of credit;
  â?¦
  (3) make or use any untrue or misleading representation of the services of the credit repair organizationâ?¦

Do I make myself clear, Bill, or must your obtuse attitude require a more meaningful response?

Thanks Roger, I appreciate the heads up! [;-)

 

Well, I most definitely think you are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy off base here.

And here is why. I don't do credit repair for anyone under any circumstances. Junum and Lexington both do that and they both charge in advance for their work and they most definitely charge in advance regardless of the results of their work. If they get the job done, fine, and if they don't, OH WELL. They keep on charging anyway.

Again, I don't do credit repair for anybody except myself and my wife or other relatives and of course, I don't charge them anything at all because they are family.

All I do is tell people how I think they should go about getting their desired accomplished and if they think that my advice is not for them, I'll gladly give them their money back because I don' want anybody paying money for my advice and then come up unhappy with it.

And I don't mind admitting that there have been exactly two people that I have had to refund their money to, and given the number of people that have been happy campers, that doesn't even come close to 1/1000th of 1 percent of those who have requested my advice.

So if that's breaking the law, then Junum and Lexington and the rest of them are also breaking the law big time. Yet I don't see you jumping down their throats over that issue.

Why not?

 

Bill:
There ya have it, a COMPLETE and UTTER lack of understanding! Why youâ??ve done a masterful job of proving my point, YOU HAVE NO CREDIBILITY! Because you see, Iâ??m not an attorney at law, which thwarts your whole diatribe of court dispersions and distortions of fact. I am, however, an agent of the California Courts authorized to practice under the law!

Well, Anthony, I got my complete and utter lack of understanding about you from your posts. You falsely led me and I am sure many others to believe that you were an attorney. Yes, as I recall, you did make some bland statement back on some now obscure post that you were an agent of the court as well as having some kind of connection at the U.S. Department of Justice or some other federal agency.

Those kinds of statements along with your seemingly obvious knowledge of the law would lead almost any unknowledgeable person to believe that you must be an attorney or officer of the law. As a matter of fact, stating that you are some kind of "agent of the California Courts authorized to practice under the law" would easily create in the legally unsophisticated mind the impression that you must be an attorney of some sort.

Your aspersions to your position and your obvious knowledge of the law was more than sufficient to cause the average person to accept you as an attorney.

Now, in a ludicrous attempt to discredit me, you expose yourself to some small extent.

Creating false impressions is the same as blatant lying.
No difference whatever.

Well, at least now people will have the advantage of knowing what you are rather than thinking you are something you are not.

Go blow steam at somebody else, I'm sick and tired of it, and I imagine there are others who will be quite dismayed to learn that someone they looked to with respect has played the same dirty trick on them that you've played on me.

 

Bill: under the law!

Now as far as making â??a smart comeback,â? howâ??s this one taken from 15 U.S.C. §1679..?


15 U.S.C. §1679b, DEFINITIONS
â?¦
(3) Credit repair organization. -- The term 'credit repair organization'â??
(A) means any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails to sell,
provide, or perform (or represent that such person can or will sell, provide, or perform) any service,in return for the payment of money or other valuable consideration, for the express or implied purpose ofâ??
i) improving any consumer's credit record, credit history, or credit rating; or
(ii) providing advice or assistance to any consumer with regard to any activity or service described
in clause (i)

**********************************
Yeah! That's a smart comeback alright.
Now go blow your smoke at Junum, Lexington and all the rest of those actually doing business as credit repair organizations.

File a few complaints with the FTC.

Have a ball, break a leg.

Telling people you are an attorney or creating the impression that you are or might be an attorney or saying you are licensed to practice under the law ought to raise a few eyebrows too.

People who live in glass houses ought not to throw stones.

 

My credibility sucks?

Not nearly as good as someone who falsely makes others think he is an attorney and may actually be licensed to practice under the law and then come to find out about it admits he's been misleading people all along.

And don't say you didn't just admit it because you just did.

 

Anthony,

What is your point in "Bashing" Bill. Are you accusing him of performing Illegal Acts. If so, how many complaints have been filed against him? Are there any victims that you know of? Who do you know that intends to prosecute this case?


Or, are you accusing him of being totally ignorant in this field of knowledge?

If you are accusing of him of performing illegal acts, you might better focus your energy and resources on "Real Criminals".

If you are making the accusation of total incompetence, I think you are way off in regards to this thought. He may not have a "Law Degree" but he sure has a program of "Practical Knowledge" which I find very valuable.

As I see this board was designed to help people in a time of crisis. Most people coming to a place such as this are desperate to get there lives put back together financially. It is very confusing as to what an individual should do to better there situation. I have come up with some of the following avenues for such a person to pursue.

1. Do nothing. Wait it out.
2. Try to do it yourself. Which Book???????? $ 40
3. Hire Junum. $200
4. Hire Lexington $350
5. Hire various other attorneys to help you. $500
6. Use Bill's Credit Wrench. $ 49

It appears to me, you would like to see option 6 removed as a possible choice for anyone.

I for one am appreciative that a program like Bill's exist. I personally think that each of these programs will work if a person is willing to stay with it a sufficient amount of time.

As I said, I will keep you posted whether this program works of not.


roger

 

Okay, you wantta play hardball..? So be it, you just bit off far more than you can chew Mr. Bauer! Since youâ??ve publicly inferred that Iâ??m a fraud, please point out the post or posts where I have expressly stated being an attorney at law? Where I have intentionally misled one to believe I have some level of expertise that I, factually, do not? Where I have negligently purported some issue as fact, which is patently false?

Iâ??ll give ya until Tomorrow, say, 12:00 noon Pacific Time to inform us all where these falsehoods are. Now if you canâ??t or fail to do that, be prepared for action on behalf of California consumers naming you and others with specific aim to Cease & Desist unlawful conduct. In other words, put up or suffer the consequences!

`Nough said, other than; I can back-up what Iâ??ve stated. Can you?

 

If you think for one minute that you are going to put me on the run looking through all your posts trying to defend you, think again.

As far as your California consumers and your threats of some kind of action is concerned, I've been there before and I've worn that kind of T-shirt before, probably long before you were ever born. Never been hurt yet, not even years ago by some Attorney's Generals who once tried an action against a TV repair organization I used to own. And even before that, the Los Angeles Police Department tried to nail a former boss of mine who was pulling some really dirty stuff on his customers. They too failed miserably. Regetfully, he ended up behind bars for a few months because he also blatently hid assets from the Bankruptcy courts. The Los Angeles Police Department tried to pull a fast one on me and get me trapped for defrauding the customers, but I caught onto their ploy and taught them that they were not quite as cute as they thought they were. They tried to claim that I had ruined the TV set they planned to use for entrapment purposes, which I did do big time. All they got out of it was the pleasure of spending more taxpayers money to go buy themselves a new TV set they could use to trap someone else.
not quite smart enough to see through their schemes. Back in those days (1958 - 1960), TV repair scams and frauds were almost the norm, so they had good reason to try to clean up the mess in Los Angeles. Their problem was that they called up a shop that was doing a real number on poor unsuspecting people. I had just arrived in L.A. a few weeks before and I was desperate for a job and had no idea what was going on. I had been on the job for less than a week and I was already seeing how vicious the racket was and I was ready to quit and go get a job where I didn't have to rip people off to make a living. I just happened to get that phony "service call" and the trap was obvious, so I "fixed" their little red wagon for them and then they had the audacity to go try to nail the boss for their loss. Problem was that they didn't have a leg to stand on when I got done with them.

The cops didn't like it one little bit when I refused to take even one penny for the service call or anything else.
They even offered to buy me a cup of coffee just to "show their appreciation", but I refused that too.

Yes, I've been "around the barn" many times, I've had the IRS gonna take me to the cleaners several times, and they haven't succeeded either.

So have a ball.
You complain about my slandering you, I've been sick and tired of your slanderous attacks on me for quite a while now, but I put up with them for the most part, and if you choose to continue them, that's fine with me too. But I'll bet some others are getting sick and tired of your vicious attacks too.

You seem to love to incite flame wars. Well you just go right ahead and flame away. I'll not stoop to your level.

 

Anthony,
The only thing that I do remember is you stating that you were an agent of the court. Since I dont know the extent of that statement, I never really made any assumption wether you were an attorney or not. From my best recollection, all that comes to mind is you stating that you have dealt with the collection end within the courts and you have never been beat. You have never stated that you were actually an attorney as far as I know. If the confusion is due to the"Agent of the court statement" then maybe others were under that assumption that you were a practicing attorney. From the context I thought that you were just very well acquanted with the law and the arguments of past cases. Also, I do not get how Bill is practicing credit repair if the only thing he is selling is his information. I guess that I was under the impression that he would give you advice through email for free. This was totally seperate from his CREDIT WRENCH. Now, I did hear that you have to purchase it in order to get the follow up advice. I dont think that would make him fall under the previous Federal Laws that you stated. Then again, I am not an attorney so this is mere speculation. Anyone can give advice, I guess it all boils down to if you can prove that his advice is actually what you are paying for or is it the information that you get. This is some what off the topic, but I was wondering if your creditdefense.com is a nonprofit organization?

 

Under the law, doesnt the credit repair company actually have to participate in the repair process?

 

So, if I do the math correctly, you are making approximately $3,650,000 per year on this Credit Wrench program. Isn't this the tax bracket that is getting all of the tax breaks?

Just curious.

 

Ok, I'd like to weigh in briefly. (And it's going to be really briefly because my wife needs some help with our new baby girl! This board is definitely addicting. I wish someone had warned me.)

Yesterday morning, I purchased Bill Bauer's advice. He contacted me this morning by email, provided links to some very unique and probably valuable information he's developed, and followed up with a 45-minute phone call. Do I think I've received my $49 worth? Actually, yes. Consultants without portfolio (he doesn't represent himself as a professional offering professional advice) who are good (still fairly unproven in his case) in most fields charge more for an hour, and Bill makes himself available on an ongoing basis without further charge. (Example: my wife had a relatively well-known Beanie Babie expert appraise a stuffed animal collection last year... yes, there are some foolish people still buying and selling that stuff... and she charged $75 for her trouble.) Will Bill's ideas work for me? I have no idea. But I can tell you that he sounds as cantankerous and intelligent -- an interesting combination -- as I expected he would. Without divulging the specific strategy he sells, here's how it works:

1) You pay via PayPal. Since Bill is what they call a "verified PayPal member," you are protected if you want a refund. (Go read their under-$200 protection info at PayPal.com.) Plus, Bill promises a full refund directly if you're not happy. Seems fair to me, although I have no idea how Bill would react to such a demand in real life. He did seem like a kind and reasonable -- albeit feisty, lol -- human being to me, for what it's worth.

2) Bill sends you an email with links to several web pages describing his "Credit Wrench" technique. There are some similarities to the public domain letters you see on this board and elsewhere, but his work has some interesting twists. I would characterize his technique with these adjectives: forceful, direct, CANTANKEROUS AND FEISTY (lol), combative yet polite, truthful yet slightly (and craftily) confusing, and goal-directed (i.e., unlike other stuff I've read, he has a plan with a beginning-middle-end).

3) The old man (sorry, Bill, hehe... but I suspect he's a few years older than my 40 years) is very willing to discuss things through by telephone and makes it clear he's willing to do so as desired. He also made it clear that he's not doing my credit repair work for me. Instead, he offered his ideas based upon how I described my particular issues. He also made it clear that "only you know your situation best, though, so don't just go out and do what I say without personally assessing whether this will help or not." In other words, Bill makes it clear that he's an "idea guy" but that if you have doubts you should seek professional advice.

4) There is no printed product. (I was surprised at that and suggested that he assemble his many web pages into a 20 page pamphlet and mail a physical item to new customers.) The "Credit Wrench" is a set of ideas and suggested templates that he makes available on the web in addition to his personal friendship (for lack of a better word) by telephone and email.

5) Basically, Bill is spelling out a series of very clever steps for getting a CA or a CRA to violate one or more laws (clearly something they're happy to do every day), and then steps 2 and 3 involve calling them on it big-time. I can see where this could work. A couple of rounds of this, and the CA/CRA will likely see you as a horrible non-frivolous nuisance (there's no frivolity here, I can attest to that) that would be best handled by simply making you go away. I picture Bill Bauer as a cranky yet highly intelligent old-yet-apparently-wise fellow (if I'm wrong, Bill, just sue me... oops, don't... hehe) who is basically bottling his "Cranky Senior Citizen Technique" with what appears to be some probability for effectiveness and showing the rest of us how we can be cranky and wise as well. Two things -- this isn't for those who aren't responsible enough to keep following up, and it's not for those who aren't afraid to take a combative (yet polite) stance.

So, nutshell so far -- Bill's customer service seems good so far. His ideas are interesting enough to try. That's all I can say. Oh yeah, I like the guy personally very much. He gets points for likeability. I'm a fairly critical guy vis-a-vis outcomes, though, so more to come.

As for those who bash people who offer their advice for pay, get a life. I'll say no more along that line.

Doc

 

Oops, that wasn't "briefly." Sorry.

 

Daddy-O:
Bingo (at least in part)! For clarity, checkout Doc's post above? (I love it when evidence is handed to me on a silver platter!)

 

Bill:
Please add the emphasized portion of the above to tomorrowâ??s deadline? Specifically, any and all instances where I have falsely and with malice, issued â??slanderous attacksâ? on you or anyone else? Thanks in advance for your cooperation.

Oh and, just two things more for the recordâ?¦

1) I have no intention of filing an action for slander against you or any one else, because for one thing (or as is more applicable, generally but not specifically) â??libelâ? would be the appropriate cause of action. But since I intend to do neither, irrespective your bravadoâ?¦ 2) As a consumer advocate Iâ??ve a certain responsibility to see that sham offers and related issues, are dealt with accordingly.

Call what Iâ??m doing the insurrection of a flame war if you will? But that still doesnâ??t negate the fact youâ??ve yet to prove me wrong, based on factual material readily available (if existent) to those with Internet access. Soooooooo in the most gentlemanly tone I can muster (convey at this time); PUT UP OR BE FORCED TO SHUT UP!

Thanks for your time.

 

Stepping between two barking dogs is a dangerous way to play, but what the heck...

Anthony, how did your war with Bill get started? Will it only be resolved if he quits selling his ideas, or is it something more personal? Inquiring minds want to know, since you guys seem insistent upon carrying this on in front of those same minds.

Second question for Anthony. What is CreditDefenses.com (or what's it going to be)? I notice that your site currently says "Release date 12.31.02" -- so even though it's around 18 months away, can you give me a hint about what's planned?

Doc

 

godaddyo:

There is no product involved with "credit wrench" so I don't have any actual product to sell. I have tried to make that perfectly clear in many other posts.

A new "client", "customer" or "subscriber" suggested today in a phone conversaton that I actually do go ahead and produce something I could actually mail out. I've thought about doing that before and at the conversation with that person, I am giving very serious consideration to doing as that person suggested. That way I would have an actual "product" that I could sell. There would very likely be a lot of benefit to me if I do that.

In the likely event that I do actually produce something, I think I might tend to want to name it something else other than "creditwrench" or "credit wrench" because that is the name of my website. I don't even think it's a very good name but rather was born out of the sheer necessity of contriving some name for the website that was regesterable with the registrar of domain names. Choosing a unique name for a website dealing with credit repair and credit is not an easy task due to the huge numbers of "gurus" who got out there before I did, all having the chance to grab onto the name of their choice long before I came along. So I had to make do with whatever was left that sounded fairly good to me.

Another problem was/is/ever shall be/ that there are only a limited number of variations out there in such items as validation letters and other dispute forms. There are also so many "gurus" out there, each with his/her own version of what basically amounts to the same re-heated bowl of goulash .that there is very little possibility of coming up with something completely and totally original that one could, in total honesty, truly call his/her own new invention. So the great majority of them sadly end up basically foisting the same old re-re-re-heated stew upon those who hunger for help and information. Oh sure, maybe they add a bit more garlic or onion salt or bay leaves or whatever and calling it their original recipe, but any reasonable scrutiny quickly reveals what the actual basic contents are, the same old bowl of carbohydrates and vegetables and seasoning with the only real change being the amounts of each.

I was determined that it should not be ever so. I thought that some different tactics needed to be introduced, so I did just that. Then I put them to actual practice with me being the lab rabbit. And when I found out for myself how effective my thinking on the subject turned out to be, I began to build a website to teach others what I had learned the hard way as usual. But the original "form letters" are nothing but the usual that have been posted here with a few unique twists that I have come up with, tried and found to withstand the test of time and experience.

I don't feel like it's fair for someone to come along and charge people money for that which is readily available ad infinitium, ad nauseum "everywhere" on the net and in the bookstores unless I personally add something of value to what is already publicly available, thereby making it uniquely mine. Even then, I didn't want to charge people for some dumb form letter, so I had nothing left to sell with a clear conscience but my time to help people understand what they are getting and how best to use it.

I sell my time and nothing more. I don't need to make my living selling my time, but it is time I might well spend doing something else. so I might just as well at least get something to help defray my expenses of doing so.

As with many things, when one does things because they enjoy doing them, they are usually much more successful than those who are forced to do what they do out of sheer necessity.

But again, I charge for my time, and that's all. And I don't even charge very much for that. After all, I'm not an original genius. All I have done is exactly what mankind has done since the beginning of time and that is to try to build something a bit better out of what others have done before him.

Personally, I fail to see anything wrong in that.

I'm quite sure by this time that there will be those who disagree with me. So what else is new?

 

Doc:
Iâ??m really not going to get into the thing between Bill and I, other than to say Iâ??m not angry, this isnâ??t a war and Iâ??m anything but a ravenous dog out for blood. (Many prior posted statements support this, so feel safe ah-steppin in?) Correspondingly, Iâ??ll address this issue lightly. Whereas I hope Bill realizes that the more he states here (in any respect), the stronger a basis for a case becomes. So maybe heâ??ll stop perpetuating certain events? That statedâ?¦

iBAC (the system basis for CreditDefensesâ?¢) is founded upon almost 40 years of combined asset recovery/collection management/legal background experience, covering a vast variety of credit & collection topics. Other than this Iâ??ve got to keep a tight lip, because documentation for some of my patents hasnâ??t been completed yet. Iâ??m sure you understand discretion is necessary.

It then may suffice to say that I am very passionate about the consumerâ??s good, and hope the consumer stage of the CD project offers a widely felt invaluable service. Therefore, Dr., you may appreciate the followingâ?¦ Behaviorally people do not act in ways that contradict their essential character, even when such conduct may bring about ridicule from the woefully misinformed. [;-)

 

Have you considered that "rogerjones" could be Bill Bauer's new alternate identity. In looking at the time of post and style of writing I wouldn't be at all surprised if they are from one and the same person.

While their IP addresses vary, Bill himself stated in the beginning of this thread that he was having trouble with his primary ISP and tried going through 2 other ones to get net access. This suggests he has multiple accounts, which would of course explain a difference in IPs.

I'll be the first to admit I have absolutely no way of proving this. It's merely a hunch. But if there's one thing I've learned it's not to ignore my gut feeling. And right now mine is telling me rogerjones is Bill Bauer.

 

Would it be too much to say..? I do! [;-)