Epstein Secrets

yer, but he has told lies constantly & I don't trust him. Is the wiser course to just pay the $60,000.00 and be done with it? - - On Mon, 10/31/11, Leanne Seibert > wrote: From: Leanne Seibert < Subject: Settlement To: mdrsram Cc: "Trent Steele" Date: Monday, October 31, 2011, 5:38 PM Trent asked me to

reclosure sale or negotiate with the bank after the foreclosure sale and the bank could still prosecute their case on the guarantees against you and Hardman. You indicated you wanted the matter resolved now and be done with it. If you want to pay nothing now we can go back to Kranz and make that demand,

the bank agreed to release you upon payment of the $60,000 now, without it being contingent on closing and they said they were not going to release Hardman's guarantee. Now we get the letter that says they are not requiring a payment from Hardman and will release his guarantee contingent on closing with

yer, but he has told lies constantly & I don't trust him. 1= the wiser course to just pay the $60,000.00 and be done with it? -=- On Mon, 10/31/11, Leanne Seibert < > wrote: From: Leanne Seibert < =; Subject: Settlement To: Thrsra— C=: "Trent Steele" <II > Date: Monday, October 31= 2011, 5:38 PM Trent ask

reclosure sale or negotiate with the bank after the fore=losure sale and the bank could still prosecute their case on the guarantee= against you and Hardman. You indica=ed you wanted the matter resolved now and be done with it. If you wa=t to pay nothing now we can go back to Kranz and make that demand,

31= 2011, 5:38 PM Trent aske= me to send you this information on the settlement. Kranz orig=nally said $100,000 plus closing costs to be paid .% by Hardman and by you contingent on the short sale closing. We agreed to pay =60,000 now, but only if they released you whether or not the short sale cl=sed.

yer, but he has told lies constantly & I don't trust him. Is the wiser course to just pay the $60,000.00 and be done with it? --- On Mon, 10/31/11, Leanne Seibert wrote: From: Leanne Seibert Subject: Set To: mdrsram Cc: "Trent Steele" Date: Monday, October 31, 2011, 5:38 PM Trent asked me to send you thi

eclosure sale or negotiate with the bank after the foreclosure sale and the bank could still prosecute their case on the guarantees against you and Hardman. You indicated you wanted the matter resolved now and be done with it. If you want to pay nothing now we can go back to Kranz and make that demand,

1, 2011, 5:38 PM Trent asked me to send you this information on the settlement. Kranz originally said $100,000 plus closing costs to be paid 1/2 by Hardman and 1/2 by you contingent on the short sale closing. We agreed to pay $60,000 now, but only if they released you whether or not the short sale clos

yer, but he has told lies constantly & I don't trust him. 1= the wiser course to just pay the $60,000.00 and be done with it? -=- On Mon, 10/31/11, Leanne Seibert > wrote: ca From: Leanne Seibert . 1.ig=; Subject: Settlement To: "'drsra"' C=: "Trent Steele" < • Date: Monday, October 31= 2011, 5:38 PM Tr

reclosure sale or negotiate with the bank after the fore=losure sale and the bank could still prosecute their case on the guarantee= against you and Hardman. You indica=ed you wanted the matter resolved now and be done with it. If you wa=t to pay nothing now we can go back to Kranz and make that demand,

31= 2011, 5:38 PM Trent aske= me to send you this information on the settlement. Kranz orig=nally said $100,000 plus closing costs to be paid .% by Hardman and by you contingent on the short sale closing. We agreed to pay =60,000 now, but only if they released you whether or not the short sale cl=sed.

at. If not, we can keep my offer in the table and if Trent advise=, up the amount gradually. Thanks for staying on top of it. --- On Wed, 10/19/11, Leanne Seibert < From: Leanne Seibert < Subject: F=: Letter of Intent To: —drsram < Date: Wednesday, October 1=, 2011, 3:42 PM FYI - Most recent exchange with

ent He doesn't want a settlement depende=t on closing the short sale. He is willing to pay the bank the $60,000 =ow plus sign over his interests in Hardman so the bank would not need his =pproval on any future offers if this one did not close for any reason. =f the property goes to a foreclosure sale, t

me in that it ain't $1.5 million= --- On Wed, 10/19/11, drsra < <mailto > wrote: From: drsra < <mailto Subject: Re: FW: Letter o= Intent To: "Leanne Seibert" < Date: Wednesday, Octo=er 19, 2011, 5:05 PM > > =>> > I would accept his terms, obviously, but would rather to= as you aptly put it, end this

ent He doesn't want a settlement depende=t on closing the short sale. He is willing to pay the bank the $60,000 =ow plus sign over his interests in Hardman so the bank would not need his =pproval on any future offers if this one did not close for any reason. =f the property goes to a foreclosure sale, t

er, but he has told lies constantly & I don't trust him. =Is the wiser course to just pay the $60,000.00 and be done with it? --- On Mon, 10/31/11, Leanne Seibert > =rote: From: Leanne Seibert Subject: S=ttlement To: "drsra" Cc: "Trent Steele&quo=; Date: Monday, October 31, 2011, 5:38 PM Trent asked me t

1, 2011, 5:38 PM Trent asked me to send you this informatio= on the settlement. Kranz originally said $100,000 plus closin= costs to be paid /2 by Hardman and % by you contingent on the short sa=e closing. We agreed to pay $60,000 now, but only if they released you =hether or not the short sale closed.

nk we have it done. Your thoughts?=nbsp; I think I should get the check. --- On Tue, 11/15/11, Lean=e Seibert <[email protected]> wrote: From: Leanne Seibert Subject: Settlement To: "Trent S Cc: "'drsra" Date: Tuesday, November =5, 2011, 2:47 PM Michael Kranz finally returned our many ca=ls. 1. The Ba

that you will not o=pose the short sale and will cooperate in signing necessary documents. 2. They do not care about preserving=your claim against Hardman and we can incorporate those changes into the s=ttlement agreement. 3. The bank follows the law and only=issues 1099's to the primary debtor but wi