Mara Hedy Feldman-Fox's Professional Associations ... or LACK Thereof!

Several years ago, we ran a check of professional associations Mara Hedy Feldman-Fox claimed to be a member of on her bio page...
She was not a current member of any of the professional associations she listed.
Last year we decided to update the information since she still lists the organizations on her page.
These were the responses from the organizations she lists...Note: these are actual quotes...
CAI: Community Associations Institute

Mara Feldman-Fox or the firm she represents is not a member of CAI-IL.  We have no knowledge of her or her firm.

I do not have a record of her being a current member.

NAHC: National Association of Housing Cooperatives

NAHC is a not-for-profit voluntary membership organization and by organizational policy we do not divulge or confirm membership information with the public for individuals, housing cooperatives or any business, even for credentialing checks.

However, since you are looking searching for a Mara as a professional member, we do provide the public with an online professional directory. The professional members listed on our website are public record and are in good standing with their membership. 

http://coophousing.org/resources/professional-directory/?type=3
Fox Management is not a member.

ACFA: Assocation of Certified Fraud Examiners 

She is not an active member with the ACFE, therefore, I have forwarded this to our legal department.

Interesting, eh?
What does that say about her ethics and morals?

UPDATE 1/9/15:
Mara Feldman-Fox no longer appears anywhere on the website of McGovern/Greene!

The $30.000 Condo Con

Back in 2012, the Condo Board, supported by Fox Management, tried to impose a $5,000-$10,000 special assessment, ostensibly for security cameras...despite the fact there was no need for them since there was no crime (as detailed HERE)!
We managed to stop them by sending a flyer detailing the facts of the matter to the unit owners, who protested by e-mail and snail mail, though none actually showed up at the meeting besides M and myself.
The craven cowards of the Board and Fox Management backed down...never officially posting that the matter had been defeated in the Minutes, of course.
The Board and Fox Management then took their wrath out on M and myself with fines based on false and unproven charges along with outrageous legal fees.
We knew that, after we sold our unit and moved out, it was only a matter of time before the Board and Fox Management would try such a sleazy scheme again...
This past weekend, I met up with a current Claremont condo owner who informed me about Mara and the Board's most recent depredation...a $30,000 special assessment, ostensibly for a new boiler!
Without us to organize resistance to the matter, no one spoke up (or probably even showed up) to contest the matter.
Here's an interesting question: Would a new boiler for a 13-unit complex cost $30,000?
Or, is it far less...and someone (Guess who) is pocketing the difference?
Or, is it all a con?
Here's a bit of speculation...
What if the whole "boiler replacement" premise is a sham, and the property manager and Board are using it to mask acquiring a desperately-needed $30,000 cash infusion without explaining the true reasons?
Makes more sense than a special assessment for a boiler that might never be purchased and installed.
Considering only Board member / art therapist Eddie Foss has a key to the Boiler Room, no one else will see if the Boiler has been replaced!
They could say it's been done, even though nothing at all was actually done!
And the money might go to cover shortfalls caused by possible mismanagement or fraud on the part of the Board and management company.
Remember, it's only speculation...but it makes a frightening amount of sense.

The Empire Gets Struck Back

My response to the letter from Mr Pearlstein:

Mr Pearlstein (& Ms. Kida):

With all due respect, after three decades in publishing (both fiction and non-fiction), I'm well aware of what constitutes libel (and slander).
If anything, your client has slandered and libeled me to numerous third parties including the Better Business Bureau.
I have documentation on all of it, which I will happily produce upon request (in fact, most of it is on the blog).
Plus, I don't post anything that can't be verified seven ways from Sunday with documentation, including the ultimate smoking gun, your own client's e-mails and letters.
I've been a professional archivist with, among others, Collier's Encyclopedia, and thus, know the value of verifiable documentation in legal matters.
I always use the proper wording to invoke opinion, not fact, when I speculate on various matters.
And, as they say, "Never say something you can't back up."

For the record; My wife has always met her financial obligations to the Association, never missing an assessment payment, unlike most (if not all) of the other unit owners, including most (if not all) of the Association Board members (and yes, I have Mara's own documentation to prove that).
That being said...

Problems dealing with Mara Feldman-Fox and the Board have been going on for the past seven years, ever since we moved into Claremont...
1) Your client, Mara Feldman-Fox, charged us $75 per hour for condo financial information requests (which you, Mr Pearlstein, pointed out was illegal in a recent Tribune column, IIRC)

2) She consistently sends assessment bills less than ten days before they're due, creating a situation where payment can't possibly arrive on time (the first of the month) by normal means, creating late fees.
(We always send out payments via Priority Mail with Delivery Confirmation which proved vital when Mara falsely tried to bill late fees.
We proved with the Delivery Confirmation receipts [which we always use in correspondence with her] that she received them on time, and she was forced to retract and apologize.)

3) We have not seen the 2011 Condo Association profit/loss statement as of this date, April 18th 2012, and the previous statements have become progressively less detailed over the past few years.

4) According to the Board Meeting Minutes, there has never been an outside audit of the Association's finances, which you, Mr Pearlstein, recommended in your column be performed at least every five years, IIRC. (None has been recorded in the Minutes)

5) Condo Association Board meetings are held miles away from the condo, in locations my wife and/or I cannot reach without undue hardship since we don't have a car.
Mara and the Board are well-aware of these physical limitations.

6) On April 3rd, 2012, Mara Feldman-Fox and the members of the Board appeared, unannounced at our front door, during our dinner, ordered us out of our unit, then surrounded us and harassed us, reducing my wife to tears.

That's just the tip of the iceberg.
There's lots more...

To clear up one of your charges...

Recently, he sent more than twelve (12) e-mails to Fox Management on one (1) day which is a blatant attempt to stop the operations of the management company and the Association.

The e-mails were sent because your client, Mara Feldman-Fox, claimed she hadn't received an e-mail with a required document that I had sent the previous day.
I re-sent the document in various formats (jpeg, pdf, etc.) both within the bodies of separate e-mails, and as attachments on others, to be certain she received it one way or another.
It was done to expedite matters, not delay them.
You did read the entire e-mail chain, including attachments, not just the excerpts Mara provided...or her unconfirmed statement of such?
I can provide or forward the entire chain, with verifiable dates and transmission data (which your techies can confirm).

I can also refute all your other charges.
I hope I'm not being naive when I say that "Truth is it's own defense."

We are currently without a functioning bathroom, largely due to Mara's refusal to communicate with the on-site coordinator (me), as she was instructed to do from the beginning.
She chose instead, to continually call my wife, who works full-time in a very detail-oriented position, forcing my wife to interrupt her work to contact me, delaying anything getting done, especially if my wife is away from her desk for a meeting or project consultation, resulting in even longer delays. (Phone and e-mail records will verify these facts)
I work from home and am easily reachable, and thus am the logical person to contact.
Unfortunately, your invoking this additional attempt to forestall communication will only add to the time and fiscal costs of the project, creating both a financial hardship for us both and a physical hardship for my wife, who is middle-aged, has bad knees (knee surgery a couple of years ago), and is currently using a portable camping toilet to relieve herself.

Your client is not the aggrieved party here, and I can prove it.

If you have questions, I'll be happy to talk.
We, unlike your client, Mara Feldman-Fox, have nothing to hide.

Respectfully,
B

PS: Love your column. It's must-reading every Sunday!

NOTE: I never heard from Mr Pearlstein again.

The Claremont WhistleBlower Always Rings Thrice

You may wonder why we have three different blogs about the same subject
Claremont WhistleBlower is the original blog, which began on 6/19/08
However, the published posts there only cover from 4/19/12 to 12/18/13.
Return of the Claremont WhistleBlower which began operation on 4/19/12 contains the original  6/19/08 to 4/19/12 posts.
And of course, there's this blog, which will recount what happened between 12/18/13 and the present.

How did this unusual come about?
It all began when we received a lawyer's letter, supposedly from Mark D Pearlstein of Levenfeld Pearlstein LLC,  though IMHO it reads like something written by a precocious 14 year-old with a legal dictionary who was hopped up on a sugar rush from a package of double stuff Oreos and a 2-liter Classic Coke!

April 17, 2012

Ms. M
'60 Claremont

Re:

Claremont Condominium Association – Conduct of B
Our File Number -- 39033-90734

Dear Ms. A:

As counsel for the Claremont Condominium Association, I am advising you of the misconduct and violation of Association regulations committed by B, a resident of your Unit.
Over a period of more than a year, Mr. B has engaged in a consistent pattern of harassment of Fox Management Group, the managing agent for the Association. The misconduct consists of communications by e-mail and his blog which are false and defamatory.
The frequency of e-mails directly interferes with the ability of Fox Management to service the Association. Recently, he sent more than twelve (12) e-mails to Fox Management on one (1) day which is a blatant attempt to stop the operations of the management company and the Association.

Article XVII, Section 9 of the Declaration of Condominium Ownership and By-Laws, and the Rules and Regulations of the Association prohibit conduct by any resident which is a nuisance or an annoyance to others. Mr. B’s constant and obnoxious verbal and e-mail assaults on Association management will no longer be tolerated and constitutes a violation of Association regulations.

Effective immediately, and until further notice, management will not communicate with Mr. B and steps will be taken to block his e-mails from transmission to Fox Management.
Any and all communications concerning your Unit must be done directly by you. Mr. B is not an Owner and has no standing or legal right to communicate with management or the Board on any subject or issue.
Furthermore, we strongly suggest that Mr. B remove his blog from the Internet.
The contents of the blog I have read are not mere opinion but rather false
statements reflecting the business and personal reputations of management and the directors that fall directly within the scope of defamatory material.

The most recent series of inappropriate comments from Mr. Boerner relate to plumbing issues.
The plumbing problems do not relate to defects caused by the Board or management. The Board and its plumbing contractor are considering recommendations from your contractor Design Invention, Inc.
The Board must follow the Declaration on all expenditures.
Articles III and VIII of the Declaration distinguish between areas of the Common Elements and the Units.
The Association repairs and pays for maintenance or replacements in the Common Elements.

Certain plumbing issues affect your unit and are a required Unit Owner expense under the Declaration.

If Mr. B and you fail to comply with the foregoing directive, then based upon the provisions of Section 18.4 of the Illinois Condominium Act, and Article XVIII, Section 1 of the Declaration, the Board of Directors will take one or more of the following steps:
1. File suit against you and Mr. B to prohibit Mr. B from harassing Association
management and its Board of Directors.
Any and all legal fees arising from this litigation will be charged directly to you;
2. After further notice and an opportunity for a hearing, the Board of Directors may also asses fines against you based upon violations of the Association Declaration and By-Laws and Rules by Mr. B.
Note that all legal fees incurred by the Association to enforce the provisions of the Declaration, including this letter, will be charged against Unit.

The constant e-mails, including the repeated statement to management that, “Just think, you’ll be doing this for the rest of your life” and the erroneous allegations against Fox Management concerning the manager’s license, the requirement of owner telephone numbers and false allegations of financial misconduct, are outrageous and evidence an attempt to simply disrupt the operations of the Association.
The most recent posting also violates the Rules and contains inaccurate, reckless statements about building expenses and audits (not required by the Act).

I will remind you that unless you control Mr. B’s conduct, you will find yourself in a very
expensive legal confrontation for which no court will sympathize with Mr. B’s actions.

Very truly yours,

Mark D. Pearlstein
MDP/mlk

Cc: Mara Feldman-Fox (Via E-Mail)

You'll note the emphasis on how much any attempt to fight would cost us.
We'll delve into that aspect later.
Did Pearlstein actually write the letter?
Or was it "mlk", one of the office drones?
We may never know.

Be here tomorrow for my response letter to his letter, and what followed.