This message is a consumer warning to consumers and the thousands of DGI graduates who remain ignorant that there is a major flaw with the product, which could cost you everything you’ve invested in your property project, or worse - your life savings or your home. This is very real and current. This is not a joke. I’m writing this because I don’t want anyone else to suffer as we are.
We bought the Real Estate Rescue product (from Dominique Grubisa and her DG Institute) in Feb 2015. We became elite mentoring graduates in 2016. The product uses 3 methods to deal with distressed property. The first two are easy to understand. They are the ‘wholesale’ method and the ‘short sale’ method. The wholesale method works on the principle of finding and buying a property ‘off market’ for 10%-40% cheaper than retail. The title changes hands. The short sale is similar in that the house is bought by the graduate off market. The sale is termed ‘short’ because there’s no equity in the property. To build equity the DG Institute graduate has to convince the bank that it’s worth their while to sell to the graduate at a loss. The graduate is trained to make a deal with the vendor that might include a cash incentive, that the lender can’t know about.
The takeover method is the most attractive for graduates because there’s no need to get a bank loan and profits go up because there’s no need to pay stamp duty. The property stays in the name of the vendor while the deal runs its course. Now this might seem pretty scary as you don’t actually ‘own’ the property - you’ve merely ‘taken it over’ and are supposed to be standing in the ‘legal shoes’ of the vendor. The graduate is supposed to be protected through the DG institute’s legal tools, the most important of which is the ‘irrevocable power of attorney’ (POA). This is supposed to protect the graduate from the vendor changing their mind and seeking to take back the property after you’ve spent a lot of time, effort and money fixing it up for sale.
How do I know all of this?
I am currently living a nightmare caused by the failure of the supposedly irrevocable power of attorney (POA), which CAN easily be revoked. Our takeover project was going well until the vendor decided to take back the property. She simply broke into the house (2 weeks out from the auction to sell it), and changed the locks. She visited the land titles office and filled out the form to revoke the POA. It was that easy. The vendor has no legal training and didn’t have the help of a solicitor. She simply revoked the POA and we lost our right to sell the property and recover our investment.
This all happened back in October 2016. On the 27th February 2017 the QLD State Minister for the DNRM weighed in and supported the revocation of the POA. He made a written decree that the DGI POA is not valid at law. Any vendor that knows this can undo a takeover project with ease. The DGI customer who has bought the DGI Real Estate Rescue product has NO PROTECTION at law.
I wish this was a joke, but it’s not. We’ve now got $1m at risk because of the failure of the product. Importantly, we don’t blame the government for deciding to allow the POA to be revoked. As the government, they make the rules. Dominique Grubisa has claimed that the fault in the failure of her product lies with the government being wrong and not with her. She claims that because there have been 100’s of successful uses of the DGI POA then our case is an anomaly.
What she won’t say is that we were the very first time a vendor challenged her POA and it failed to provide the protection she sold. As such it has a 100% failure rate when challenged. That’s like saying that it doesn’t matter if the airbag in 100 of the same type of car doesn’t fail when you drive that car and don’t have an accident…the accident is an anomaly and that’s your problem as the consumer. Sounds crazy, but that’s what’s being said.
What remains a major problem for consumers is that Dominique Grubisa has known this is the case and has continued to sell the product regardless. As she is a licenced legal practitioner she has a duty of care to disclose the fact that the QLD State government won’t support the irrevocability of her product, and yet she refuses to do so. That’s like the surgeon operating on your family neglecting to tell you they might die and then saying, “it’s your problem” if they do. In an email she sent on the 11th January 2017 she stated that she’s not interested in defending her product and if there’s a loss, then that’s the consumer’s problem.
She also claims that because she has had her product reviewed by independent lawyers (who all agree with her that her product is sound in theory) that consumers should be comfortable with the theory regarding the viability of her product. As a licenced practicing lawyer she knows the only way to actually prove the viability of her product at law is by way of case law precedent. Judges and governments make the law - not lawyers! She knows this and yet continues to spruik that her product is tried and tested at law when in fact it isn’t. She’s also ignoring repeated requests to remedy the problem and acknowledge responsibility for the product’s failure.
How could this happen? It’s very simple. Dominique Grubisa hasn’t actually tested her POA prior to selling it. What’s worse, she has continued to sell the product (with sales topping $25m in the last year alone) SINCE she found out the product is flawed and should be withdrawn. She is effectively selling a product that could blow up in your face and kill you financially. The NSW, Victorian, SA and WA state governments have now all followed QLD in declining to support the irrevocability of the DGI POA. We even have an audio recording of Dominique Grubisa telling consumers the POA is irrevocable and that it will protect them, when she knows in practice it won’t.
We have pleaded with DGI to be compensated but have been met with threats if we disclose this information. Dominique Grubisa has repeatedly posted a video in which she claims the there’s no problem with her product and that she is the victim of lies and half truths. The acid test here though is that she is a lawyer with a big law firm behind her. If I was lying, how hard would it be for her to get an injunction to shut me up? She’s claimed that the government allowed the POA to be revoked because of unconscionable conduct on my part toward the vendor. Wow! That was a bold statement by her given her letter to the QLD State Government on the 28th February 2017 (which followed the government’s decision to allow the POA to be revoked) focused entirely and completely on the technical deficiencies of the POA.
Who in their right mind would buy a product that isn’t tested and which comes with the caveat that when it fails you will have to bear the burden of loss and then you will have to pay for the defence of the product. If she were selling a car with a faulty airbag she would be selling you the problem of dealing with the death or injury that comes from relying on it and then asking you to pay to defend its viability.
ALL of the evidence is free source and available at the facebook page DG Institute Graduates Independent. Please don’t just believe me. Please visit the page or ask for copies of the evidence for yourself. She is now under investigation by the NSW Law Society for professional misconduct. All of the evidence is there so there’s no excuse for anyone else to be harmed by this woman.
) Why would they want to develop competitors to themselves? Altruism?
