Tag Archives: Wanke Industrial Commercial Residential Inc

EMAIL FROM Ex- WICR CLIENT SHOWS REASON WHY EVERY POTENTIAL CLIENT  SHOULD WALK AWAY FROM WICR

We just got an email that blows up WICR’s claim that WICRleaks.com caused them to lose a 50K contract. In our lawsuit that we are defending against WICR, they claimed we have caused them to lose business. Maybe, but that’s only because consumers, when they have full access to all information, can make good decisions.

The email that was sent to WICR

I emailed the WICR client after noticing that WICR’s lawyers didn’t do a good job of redacting his email address and asked him why they decided to not do business with WICR. The answer is revealing, and one that every WICR client should take to heart and run away from this firm.

Good afternoon XXXXX,
I got your information from a WICR document in a court filing (they, XXXX  that is) who is suing me for a million… He really hates wicrleaks.com. 
W i c r presented as “evidence” your short email from December 9th claiming because of my website he lost a 50k contract. 
To me a plain reading of your email appears to be a goodbye and good riddance to an asshole letter…
Wondering if you could comment on your intent as I’d like to use that in my defense against WICR and XXXXXX. 
I attached a copy of your email for review. Your certainly did dodge a bullet passing on wicr as your contractor. 
PS I’ve done work in the past for xxxxxx up here in shell beach…
Thank you Bill Leys

The client’s reply-

“Bill,

We passed on WICR because their contract protected only them and not us.  WICR played a bait and switch with their initial minimal page proposal and their “war and peace” length final contract.  When they sent over their final contract we decided to forgo working with them as it had so many pages of legalese protecting them from any liability and giving us no recourse if the job was not properly performed.  It was because of the contract, the lack of guarantee for the waterproofing and the odd way Mr. XXXXX communicated that I informed him we would not be contracting his services.

After this decision was made, and because of the red flags raised by the contract, I started researching WICR on the internet.  First on the CSLB and then on your site . The information I found on the CSLB was all I needed to confirm WICR was not a company with which I wanted to do business.   The information found on your site was just additional confirmation of my initial perception from their contract that WICR was quite familiar with litigation and that we had already made the correct decision in not working with them.  Your site did not influence my decision, it was only a small bit of information with the CSLB being the main red flag besides the contract verbiage that confirmed my decision was the correct one.  WICR’s contract was the deal breaker and I told Mr. XXXXX that more than once.  So now WICR is involved in litigation with you.  No surprise to me at all.”

Run, don’t walk away from WICR.

As to Peter Lindborg and his client-see you in court you lying pieces of shit.

“If it can be destroyed by the truth, it deserves to be destroyed by the truth.”  Commencing Operation Destroy in 3, 2, 1….

Devastating Reviews of WICR Waterproofing and Construction From Yelp! & Google… And now WICR is threatening it’s reviewers with suits!

All these reviews are found on Google reviews and Yelp! On Yelp be sure to scroll down to find reviews not currently recommended to see many hidden reviews.

We have a reader who posted a review telling us that their contract has a clause in it that there is a $10,000 penalty for leaving a bad review on Yelp. They said they received a demand letter to remove the review or else they would be sued. WICR may sue, but you can probably prevail given that consumers have rights to review and criticize businesses.

So that readers are aware and know their rights there is a “right to review law” in California. Part of this law makes it illegal to insert clauses in a contract that fines or otherwise penalizes a consumer for writing reviews on Yelp!, Google, Angie’s List etc. Known as the Yelp right to review law from a Utah case, this law gives consumers a way to fight back against unscrupulous companies like WICR. If you receive a demand letter because you wrote a Yelp review… File a complaint with the CSLB and send them a copy of your illegal contract… And while you’re at it you may want to file a complaint with the attorney general’s office as well. Do not let WICR’s attorneys letter threatening you with mayhem deter you. You can file a complaint with the State Bar that a licensed attorney is attempting to sue over an illegal clause. I don’t think the state bar will like that to much.

Take heed…
Take the advice and run the other way.
Know your rights and fight back against WICR!
Do not take WICR’s lawyers seriously, if they wrote The contract that includes these illegal clauses then they have a big problem with the state bar because writing illegal clauses in a contract for a client is against state bar rules and laws. File a complaint against Peter Lindborg online at the State bar website.

CSLB Takes Disciplinary Action Against WICR Waterproofing

A letter of admonishment has been issued to WICR Waterproofing and Construction by the CSLB for taking an illegal deposit over $1000 from a consumer.

Senate Bill (SB) 486 permits CSLB to issue a letter of admonishment to applicants, licensees, or registrants as an intermediate form of discipline between an advisory notice and a citation. Those who receive a letter can either comply with its terms or contest it in writing. This bill modified Business and Professions Codes (BPC) 7099.2 and 7124.6

We are aware that they related to the same case; however, they are seperate case numbers and outcomes on the specific licenses.

David Mazor-Krubinski V Parex LaHabra 2007 Lawsuit

We have many of the documents filed during a lawsuit David Mazor filed against Parex-LaHabra after he was discharged from the firm after they took over Mer-Kote Systems. There are tons of filings, many hundreds of pages long, one is 1700+ pages, the second amended complaint filed by Krubinski.

These filing provide a great insight into Dave’s activities and involvement with WICR, indeed, one highlight as seen below is that Krubinsk was and may still be been a partner of Fred Wanke’s since 1997 and received monthly consulting fees every month since 1997.

Another highlight is the inference that Irina Drill (now Irina Mazor) may have tampered with witnesses.

WICR WATERPROOFING & CONSTRUCTION Contract Clauses Are A Consumers Nightmare!

Unconscionable Clauses Riddle The Fine Print

Clauses Likely Violate Business & Professions Code

Consumers Have Rights Enforced Through CSLB

We have a copy of a new contract from WICR, has anyone else received this contract?

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Fortunately the California Consumers Legal Remedies act protects you from this sort of contract… If you signed it. If you haven’t signed it, don’t. Run and go find a reputable contractor with a fair contract. Only sign a contract after your attorney has reviewed it!

We also have a copy of WICR’s Contract that was part of Bedros vs WICR lawsuit filed in San Bernadino County. We reviewed it and screenshot a number of clauses in the contracts fine print.

Click here to see amended complaint BEDROS COMPLAINT with WICR’s CONTRACT

My opinion is the WICR contract probably violates the Business & Professions laws enforced by CSLB and with such unconscionable clauses, probably violated the oath attorneys make to not write clauses that place a consumer in jeopardy or reduces their rights under state law or places them in a weaker position than the entity that wrote the contract.

My advice is DO NOT SIGN ANY CONTRACT FROM WICR!

Continue reading WICR WATERPROOFING & CONSTRUCTION Contract Clauses Are A Consumers Nightmare!