The Sterns:
AMREX victims
For the record, we do not know this couple, nor have we been in contact with them. We learned of their official complaint when we received the BBAS updates from the ODJFS in February 2007. The couple’s name was on the official document from the ODJFS. In the complaint document it stated they wished their names to be known publicly.
We are presenting the complaint in full, in both the words of the Sterns and the ODJFS. Yet again, no rule violations were found (because, as usual, there are so few rules that none occurred).
They stated they do not wish to remain anonymous. Judging from the Complaint Report, the Sterns spoke with an attorney. Following proper guidelines, they also made a complaint to the Akron Better Business Bureau (which is all anybody can do against an adoption agency in Ohio).
The persons from Building Blocks named in the complaint were:
Denise Hubbard, Building Blocks Adoption Service Executive Director
Rick Marco, Building Blocks Adoption Service Attorney
Linda Saridakis received the complaint from the Sterns on July 31, 2006. The Sterns sent the ODJFS the following letter explaining their situation. It is similar to other complaints from BBAS Russia clients – or any other Amrex family.
Complaint Report #4-30-06
Specialist #44
Name of Complainant:
Jeff and Suzie Stern
We entered into a contract with BBAS in November 2004 to adopt a child from Russia. At contract signing, we paid BBAS $3,500.
Upon approval of a referred child in March 2005, we paid an additional $16,800 to cover Program and Child Commitment fees. We were told to expect a summer ’05 travel date to meet the child, but by the end of the summer, were told that the Russian region in question had discontinued its program.
In August [2005] BBAS strongly urged us to cancel our commitment to that child and transfer to another, more efficient region. This new region does not conduct “referrals”, meaning a family travels to Russia without knowledge of a specific child. It’s only when arriving in the country that they make a decision from a list of available children.
After two months of no updates [October 2005] I asked about our delay in early November. I was told to submit our passports in anticipation of the visa applications that were needed for what they expected to be a December travel date.
By mid-December, we had not received an invitation to travel. I requested our passports be returned to us. I also asked about the potential (consistent with language in our contract) to transfer our $16,800 in Russia fees to another country that might move faster.
After a one month delay, BBAS indicated that only $2,800 of the $16,800 would be refundable to us. Since then, BBAS has also gone on record refusing our further compromise that we would remain in the Russia program provided they agree to meet stipulated milestones/updates.
We are now 23 months into our process. For perspective, it’s taking the average US-based agency just 4.5 months to send clients to Russia to meet a child. We have lost faith in BBAS ability to facilitate our adoption. BBAS has refused all attempts to resolve our matter in any commercially reasonable way.
To be clear, we do not believe BBAS is treating our $16,800 in fees with fiduciary responsibility. Indeed, the majority of fees paid were for a child referral that no longer exists [if the child existed at all – ed]. BBAS is unwilling/unable to report on the disposition of our funds (i.e. whether they sit in an escrow account, have already been paid to Russian officials, etc).
Our position is that we should have received a refund of our Amrex fees when we declined the referral in August, since there was no longer “commitment” of a child.
We are seeking a termination to our contract, with a refund of the $16,800 Russia fees. Although we do not believe BBAS has earned their $3,500 agency fee, we are willing to let them keep it as yet another compromise attempt.
Linda Saridakis writes what happened next:
This Specialist contacted the Complainant on August 14, 2006. The Complainant had already discussed the allegations with my Supervisor, as I had been on vacation from the time the complaint was received until the time I had contacted the Complainant.
This Specialist discussed the complaint with the Executive Director of Building Blocks and the Building Blocks Attorney, as well as the Complainant throughout August and until September 15, 2006.
The Agency and the Complainant were able to come to resolution on this date. The disposition letter was sent on September 25, 2006.
The disposition letter was addressed not to Denise Hubbard, but to Ms. Karen McFarland and cc’ed to Elizabeth Dellinger, Board President, Denise Hubbard and Mary Reasor.
Linda Saridakis wrote:
I have talked with the complainant and your agency, as well as reviewing documents submitted. The review has resulted in no verifiable rule violations. It is my understanding your agency and the complainant have come to an amicable agreement regarding this situation.
Since we do not know any particulars about this case, more questions are raised. Did it register at BBAS that after dealing with the Sterns and their attorney, things at Amrex were that bad? Here were the Sterns, angry enough to put something in writing to the ODJFS, the Akron Better Business Bureau AND hire their own attorney — you would have thought Denise smelled something bad coming from Alpharetta.
Lost referrals. No referrals. Unofficial referrals. No court dates.
Stringing Russia clients along for over a year with no referrals or travel dates was not working. Weren’t those all indication Amrex was in desperate straits? To most people, yes. But not for Denise, because those are standard business practices for her.
It was convenient for BBAS to reach a settlement with the Sterns before Amrex’s official bankruptcy declaration. BBAS knew they had to refund the clients money. For if one Amrex client acted this way, BBAS knew other BBAS Amrex clients were reachable with a few mouse clicks and keyboard strokes.