By Mandelman
My article was nonsense? Well, that would certainly be disappointing, I thought to myself. I wasn’t aware that I had ever written an article that was considered nonsense by anyone. I’m not saying that everyone likes what I write or the way I write it, but no one ever challenges the facts presented in my articles because… well, because they’re FACTS, that’s why.
However, I was certainly willing to debate the issue with Michael, or anyone else for that matter, so I wrote back offering to post his rebuttal article on Mandelman Matters and he replied saying, “that would be great.”
I waited in anxious anticipation for him to straighten me out, and about 90 minutes later his article arrived in my inbox. You’ll find it in its entirety below… followed by my discussion of what he had to say.
(Isn’t this fun? I don’t know about you, but I’m having a great time!)
~~~
Don’t Be Concerned Martin is Dead Wrong (by Michael Pines)
Martin Mandelman wrote a feature story entitled “GLASKI TAKES A HIT: California Court Rejects Reasoning in Glaski Decision.”
GLASKI TAKES A HIT: California Court Rejects Reasoning in Glaski Decision
Respectfully, nothing could be further from the truth. (Sometimes I think Martin writes articles to sensationalize, rather that provide information. This isn’t the first time I have e-mailed Martin about clearly incorrect statements made on his site, including one I wrote in the last few weeks all of which were ignored. Although Martin states: “… I love hearing from my readers”, I guess he doesn’t love hearing from me. This time he went way to far.)
Martin goes on to state things like Glaski was “rejected” by the court and similar statements implying Glaski would not be followed by that court, or others. He also says that the court relied on the Gomes and Jenkins cases. Nonsense; as are most of the other statements in the publication about this. Other websites have also published statements saying there is a “conflict” in the law, worried about Glaski. (For example, see:
So, this morning I posted an article about the Glaski decision, which I first wrote about just after it became a “published decision” last August. In my article this morning I wrote about the Glaski case having “taken a hit,” when another California court chose not to follow the reasoning from the Glaski decision and dismissed the borrower’s complaint as a result.
My point was to make sure homeowners knew that just because Glaski prevailed last August, it doesn’t necessarily mean that any other case will, and there’s a link to my article below.
Well, my article was only posted for maybe an hour when I received an email from Michael Pines saying that my article was… well… nonsense. And he said that because of my article, he would now have to write an article to correct what I had posted, and post it on a site by the name of StopForeclosure.com. His email to me is below…
My article was nonsense? Well, that would certainly be disappointing, I thought to myself. I wasn’t aware that I had ever written an article that was considered nonsense by anyone. I’m not saying that everyone likes what I write or the way I write it, but no one ever challenges the facts presented in my articles because… well, because they’re FACTS, that’s why.
However, I was certainly willing to debate the issue with Michael, or anyone else for that matter, so I wrote back offering to post his rebuttal article on Mandelman Matters and he replied saying, “that would be great.”
I waited in anxious anticipation for him to straighten me out, and about 90 minutes later his article arrived in my inbox. You’ll find it in its entirety below… followed by my discussion of what he had to say.
(Isn’t this fun? I don’t know about you, but I’m having a great time!)
~~~
Don’t Be Concerned Martin is Dead Wrong (by Michael Pines)
Martin Mandelman wrote a feature story entitled “GLASKI TAKES A HIT: California Court Rejects Reasoning in Glaski Decision.”
GLASKI TAKES A HIT: California Court Rejects Reasoning in Glaski Decision
Respectfully, nothing could be further from the truth. (Sometimes I think Martin writes articles to sensationalize, rather that provide information. This isn’t the first time I …read more
Leave a Reply