Chapter Twenty-Seven
Lying to Linda Saridakis Again
The Towells’ Complaint to the ODJFS
#4-15-02 – April 4, 2002
Alysha Towell filed a formal complaint against Building Blocks Adoption Service, Inc. on March 28, 2002, with the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services. She spoke with Linda Saridakis, BBAS Licensing Specialist about their ill-fated adoptions for Oleg and Elena.
In the official report, Linda Saridakis wrote Alysha contacted the ODJFS because she had “concerns about the business practices of Building Blocks Adoption Services. She stated the agency misinformed her regarding information, timelines, interpretation of events and made excuses as to why actions did not occur. She would like her $22,000 returned.”
Alysha told Linda their story. Unlike us, she did not provide sufficient documentary evidence to prove her allegations against Denise Hubbard, Wendy Stamper and Amrex. The only documentation provided to the ODJFS was the signed BBAS contract from November 2000 and the Amrex Exhibit C, signed on June 8, 2001.
Linda Saridakis, following procedure, began her report right after Alysha called.
To begin her investigation, Linda first attempted to reach Thomas Rotunda, BBAS “Administrative Director” by telephone. Unfortunately, Thomas Rotunda did not work at the office in Medina, so she left a message on BBAS’s voicemail.
Since she knew, as a practical matter, who really ran the ship at Building Blocks, Linda called right back and asked for Denise, who was out. Linda called Denise back, after having received no response from her on April 1. She and Denise were able to arrange a meeting the next day, on April 2.
Thomas Rotunda, again unsurprisingly, was not present for this meeting. But Denise Hubbard (Owner/Executive Director) and Ms. Wendy Stamper (Consultant) were in attendance at BBAS offices. Denise reviewed Linda’s written notes concerning Alysha’s allegations.
It was, as the reader familiar with Denise’s behavior when put on the spot by the state of Ohio, or anyone for that matter, will naturally expect, an unbroken string of opportunities to lie. Denise would bat well over .500 this day.
But what it also offered was a rare peek at just how Amrex, by then rapidly gaining market share, dealt with its client agencies.
She began her usual song and dance routine, explaining the current status of an unaccredited agency like BBAS working with Amrex:
Ms. Hubbard explained that Russian adoptions are done through an accredited agency. She stated that AMREX is a business located in Georgia who provides representatives (facilitators) overseas. They are not accredited and the adoption is filed as an independent adoption through the facilitator or under an umbrella agency.
Denise admits here a lack of control over her own Russian program:
Videos are sent from Russia to AMREX to Building Blocks Adoption Service and then to the family.
In essence, then, BBAS’s main function is filtering Russian videotape and medical referrals from Amrex to clients.
BBAS is a very sticky filter to a client’s pocketbook, however. Why is BBAS, or indeed any other Amrex agency, considered an “adoption agency” if all they do is just pass along videos and claim to have such great personal connections in Russia?
Their services then amount to a glorified reception and handholding service. Worth hundreds, perhaps, if competently done (which, as you should know by now, is a lost cause where BBAS is concerned), but not thousands.
Regarding the agency’s Russian accreditation:
Ms. Hubbard and Ms. Stamper stated they did not inform [Alysha] that their agency was accredited in Russia. Building Blocks Adoption Services does tell families that if they use the name Building Blocks in Russia, it causes confusion with Russia and the representatives from AMREX.
But then why, in February 2001, had Denise stated on her website that “We are accredited to complete adoptions”?
Although, when confronted, she told Linda Saridakis the truth — that BBAS was not accredited in Russia to place Russian children, it does not hide the fact she did LIE to prospective clients such as Alysha when she first contacted BBAS after seeing Oleg’s photo on Precious In His Sight.
The clincher is Denise admitting she tells clients not to use the name “Building Blocks” when they are in Russia adopting their children!
Why are clients told to LIE in a foreign country? I can’t see how “confusion” is generated for the Russians when a Building Blocks client travels to pick their child up. That is one cock and bull story.
And why should any parent have to lie about anything when they adopt? What’s to hide? Especially about something so innocuous as the agency’s name.
It isn’t long, however, before Denise lets off a howler entirely of her own making:
She stated that adoptive families can only receive videos after their homestudy is approved and after they have committed to a child.
Really? Why, then, had the Towells been sent Oleg’s referral video after one telephone call with Alysha? The Towells hadn’t had a homestudy when they first looked into adoption.
The Blevinses, too, had also been given Maria’s referral after seeing her on adoptablekids without a homestudy. Neither of these two families had a completed homestudy when they saw their children on the photolistings.
Both Wendy and Denise lie to Linda about how Alysha came to contact Amrex.
Recall that Alysha contacted Amrex after reading Veronika Barash’s name on Brian’s visa application before he traveled to Amur. She had never, ever heard of “Amrex” prior to that.
Look what Wendy and Denise say in response:
According to [BBAS] records for [the Towells] they were aware of AMREX through Ms. Stamper’s conversations and electronic mail with [Alysha] in December of 2000 and March 2001 and had signed a power of attorney for the AMREX facilitator in January 2001. Ms. Hubbard stated that [Alysha] had even sent an electronic mail to AMREX in March of 2001.
They say these documents exist (and perhaps were shown to Linda Saridakis), yet no copies are present in this file of the Towells’ emails with Wendy Stamper in Dec 2000, nor the “signed power of attorney” in January 2001. Even if the Towells had been aware of Amrex in December 2000, it would not have made any sense to them.
Next, there seems to be a disagreement about what Alysha was told after she broke her leg and it appeared that Brian would have to travel on his own to Blagoveshchensk.
According to Ms. Hubbard … the Doctor stated [Alysha] should not be able to travel for eight weeks and requested that her husband travel with her mother-in-law. Ms. Hubbard stated that [Alysha] was informed by the agency that she had two choices. The choices were that she could send her husband, but this was not guaranteed because Russia prefers both parents to be present or they could postpone the court date … Building Blocks and AMREX advised [Alysha] on March 27, [2001] that both the husband and wife should travel together, per Russian law, although they were checking further. On March 29, 2001, Ms. Stamper informed [Alysha] that the Russian judge agreed to [Brian’s] attending the court hearing alone, but they would need a letter from her physician that she could not travel.
But BBAS claims that, since working with Amrex, they have no direct contact with the Russians. How then, did they have word from the Russian judge that Brian could travel alone?
And the request for the letter that was never shown to the judge by Tatyana? Who told them this? Tatyana? Amrex?
Wendy tells her side of the story regarding
Oleg and Elena’s appeal:
Ms. Stamper also informed [the Towells] [on April 24, 2001] that an appeal to the Supreme Court in Russia takes time and that there was not a guarantee that they would be able to adopt the children. She suggested to [Alysha] that [Brian] come home and they view children in other regions of Russia and sent a note to AMREX requesting information on the process to petition the Supreme Court and the cost.
Instead of contacting Amrex, Wendy and Denise should have contacted a Russian
attorney or put the Towells in direct contact with Amrex or at least
Beacon House whose accreditation Building Blocks was using.
It is obvious they were over their heads and also beholden to what Amrex
was telling them.
Ms. Stamper spoke with [Alysha] again on April 25, 2001 about [Brian] coming home, the risks of the appeal and that they had to redo their dossier because it had been archieved.
The next claim is invidious. Following the pattern established in her attempt to respond to our complaint, Denise changed the circumstances of Brian’s ill-fated trip back to the orphanage to visit Oleg and Elena after the judge denied their adoption. She gives Amrex credit they don’t deserve:
Ms. Hubbard stated that AMREX made arrangements for [Brian] to see the children through the orphanage director, after the first hearing, without the knowledge of the prosecutor.
Wrong. Brian took it upon himself to visit the children; he did not ask Amrex’s permission to visit the orphanage after the court case. He had asked Tatyana, who denied him the chance.
He found his own way to the orphanage, where he promptly ran into Tatyana who was escorting the other families with their children. Brian Towell took the initiative. Not Amrex, not Tatyana, and certainly not Denise Hubbard.
The next part is the most revealing in the entire report.
In essence, Wendy Stamper blatantly admits that Building Blocks is nothing but a way station for documents on their way to Russia via Amrex. Since all arrangements are made through Amrex in Alpharetta, what good is it to send important documents to Medina where they’re only given a cursory review?
Why not just send them directly to Amrex, or better yet, send them directly to Russia? But doing so would cut BBAS out of the money chain.
Again Wendy lied to Alysha about any and all
dossier documents the Towells were sending to BBAS. Wendy was just glancing at them, or so she told Linda Saridakis.
Yet she told Alysha that her documents were “fine” when they were
received.
Ms. Stamper sent the requested information from [Alysha Towell] to AMREX by facsimile on this date. AMREX then sends the information to Russia. Ms. Stamper stated that she does not send any information to Russia directly, but always through AMREX. Building Blocks does not know what information was given to [Brian Towell] in Moscow.
That’s not how Alysha remembers it. She said that Tatyana had told Brian not to appeal the children’s adoption, that Wendy Stamper had FedExed the information to Moscow directly from Medina and that Brian had been denied the visit to the children as previously stated.
For reasons unknown, Denise didn’t personally
handle the Towells’ case. Wendy
Stamper, Adoption Consultant (or is that “International Director”,
“Russian Program Director” – it’s hard to tell what or why Wendy has any
title to her position – she does thingsthat could really be done by Denise or
the client and has no professional
credentials other than “adoptive mom”) handled it,
lied just like Denise:
On May 2, 2001 Ms. Stamper talked with [Alysha Towell] regarding the dossier and advised her that fees could be transferred to a new child but they could not obtain a refund from AMREX.
Why couldn’t a refund be obtained from Amrex? Amrex has refunded money to clients in the past (most notably the Adoption Alliance client who got hit with Slava from Revda), so why not work with Amrex for the Towells refund?
And keep this in mind.
After Alysha went berserk getting the dossier together that Denise/Amrex had
requested for the appeal (in the space of mere days) in June, Wendy claims she
did look at the revised documents. Here
is her version:
Ms. Stamper received the revised documents from [Alysha Towell] on June 14, 2001 and advised [her] that certain documents required revision.
Who told Wendy these documents needed revision is not mentioned.
[Wendy Stamper] sent the documents to AMREX on June 15, 2001 and June 18, 2001. Ms. Stamper stated that she just ensures that the required documents are present and that representatives of AMREX review the documents. She stated that she would not have stated that the content was fine.
Wendy Stamper is lying here. Say anything to mollify the client when they are seeking answers. We can only hope she took the knowledge she gained from working for Denise Hubbard with her when she left BBAS in October 2005. Good-bye to trash like Stamper.
Amrex received Alysha’s updated information on June 26, days after Denise Hubbard originally told her the documents had to be done or they would lose the opportunity to appeal.
On July 19 Wendy told Alysha to stop calling other adoption agencies. Wendy says it was a few weeks later, on Aug. 9, that she told Alysha the case was at the court being reviewed.
A week and a half after that (Aug. 22), Amrex informed BBAS that there had been a new judge assigned to the case, but that the judge did not look at the dossier. Alysha says this new judge never received the new dossier to review in the first place.
Denise and Wendy told Linda Saridakis:
AMREX requested that [the Towells] write a letter stating that they were going to stop all proceedings on [Oleg and Elena], since they had selected another child.
Alysha says this was a requirement, not a request. Then Denise told Linda about Alysha speaking directly with Amrex (which is bunk — Veronika never responded directly to Alysha, but merely forwarded on to Denise any and all information that Alysha had emailed them):
Ms. Hubbard stated that [Alysha Towell] then began communicating straight through AMREX and was requested by both AMREX and Building Blocks that she should be communicating with Building Blocks.
In her version, Denise claims the Towells accepted Alexander’s referral on Aug. 27 and states BBAS “could complete this adoption.” I believe this would have happened only if the Towells had dropped Oleg and Elena’s appeal. Denise could have pulled Alexander’s adoption out for them.
From this report, the date Alysha Towell told BBAS of Irina O’Rear’s involvement was on Sept. 5. By then she had found out about Amrex and its workings.
Two days later, Linda’s report states, Alysha talked to Wendy and “indicated that they wanted to continue with [Alexander] but refused to drop the appeal procedures on the siblings.”
During this conversation, Wendy informed Alysha that they would need Irina’s name so she could communicate directly with Richard J. Marco, Jr. BBAS/Amrex was going to need another dossier, since, he said, “if they obtained the previous one from the Russian courts it might interfere with the current adoption, since they were denied.”
Then Denise and Wendy confirmed that Amrex did send “Set A” documents to Russia on Sept. 12. Why hadn’t the Towells been informed of this?
Denise and Wendy also admitted that they tried to dissuade the Towells from using Irina for the appeals process:
On
October 18 and 19, 2001 Ms. Hubbard and Ms. Stamper talked with the complainant
advising her not to pursue the appeal and that her outside council was
jeopardizing [Alexander’s adoption]. They
requested again that she have her attorney talk with their attorney.
They confirmed the following:
They also informed her that the children were being placed with a private Russian family.
When Wendy received Alysha’s email of Oct. 22, she stated that she spoke directly with Amrex and Amrex “indicated that they would not continue with the current adoption and asked them to look at a refund.”
Say that again? This contradicts the earlier statement in this report – “On May 2, 2001 Ms. Stamper talked with [Alysha Towell] regarding the dossier and advised her that fees could be transferred to a new child but they could not obtain a refund from AMREX.”
BBAS claims here that Amrex was telling them to refund the Towells for the lost children. They knew the appeal was lost and the children were being adopted by the single Russian woman, so it would seem they thought a refund would be in their best interest. But not to Densie Hubbard. BBAS in its GREED did NOT refund the Towell’s money, even after Amrex specifically told them to do so.
We’ve been critical of Amrex, but here we have evidence Amrex wanted BBAS to refund the money.
This brings us to the question we have to ask: did Amrex, in fact, refund to
BBAS monies it had paid them for the Towells’ adoption ... and did Denise then
simply pocket those funds herself or for her agency? After all, she
did hang on to money she would have given back to us had we agreed to
her terms (money she had the legal, but not moral, right to keep in those
circumstances).
Denise confirmed she had Wendy forward Melissa Whalen’s post from the EEAC
list (but not the one from the EEAD list which we had), but denies adding “She
is a Fraud” to the heading of Ms. Whalen’s post:
Ms.
Hubbard did state that she sent information she found on a website about the
complainant’s attorney to her, for her information, and that she did not state
that her attorney was a fraud.
Regarding this alleged refund, Denise tells Linda Saridakis the following, which
was in direct contrast to what Alysha would learn from Richard J. Marco, Jr.
when she spoke with him days later:
On
November 1, 2001 the attorney for Building Blocks talked to AMREX about a refund
for [the Towells].
But it wasn’t until Nov.r 6, five days later that Denise informed Alysha to deal directly with Mr. Marco so he could “intervene” on their behalf.
How was it, then, that when Mr. Marco and Alysha spoke days later, Mr. Marco told Alysha he would speak directly with Amrex and get back to her?
If he had already spoken with Amrex , why didn’t he just come straight
out and tell her so they could have worked together on the refund?
Or at least told her of the gist of his conversation and Amrex’s
position on refunding their money from themselves or BBAS?
This is puzzling, but what one would expect from these people.
Linda Saridakis reviewed BBAS contract and the agency’s policies. She asked Denise what the $11,500 “adoption fees” meant. Denise told her “each country is different” and BBAS had individual contracts for each of its programs.
Linda Saridakis quoted Item #18 from the contract, and makes a note in
her report: “the case will be closed and no refunds issued.”
Item #18 in the contract states:
SOURCES:
The adoptive parents agree not to pursue other possible child placement through
other sources or agencies while this contract is in force.
If the adoptive parents receive a child assignment through any source
other than Building Blocks, the adoptive parents case will be closed and all
fees and expenses due to Building Blocks and the foreign source at that time
will be promptly paid. All fees previously paid will be retained by Building Blocks
or the foreign source and no refunds will be issued.
Denise “stated although the complainant violated the contract they continued
to work with her.” Wasn’t
Denise being so helpful in going against her contract?
Yes, another “source” was brought in to help the Towells with the appeals
process, but not to work on another adoption at the time.
The next financial issue discussed was the $6,000 “Orphanage and International
Fee” as mentioned in the contract. This
$6,000 had been Alysha’s bone of contention since the very beginning. Denise
told Linda that of that $6,000 “Orphanage and International Fee”:
Building
Blocks only retains $3,000 and the remainder of the money goes to AMREX.
AMREX is also the agency who would send any donations to the orphanage
and would be responsible for any refund.
Denise shifts all the financial blame to Amrex when in fact she had sold Alysha Towell on this money going towards the orphanage and those left behind who were unadoptable.
But Denise doesn’t know about any orphanage donations!
It’s all what Amrex tells her to charge!
She just doesn’t know! Blame
everything on Amrex, even though Denise lies through her
teeth about the money going towards the orphanages in Russia.
The $3,000 fee that Building Blocks retains is the “BBAS Program Fee.” They keep the $275 Application fee, so BBAS retains $3,275 per adoption.
Denise has been known to refund the $275 when, before a client signs the
contract, they back out (isn’t she generous?).
She did this for us when we started Anguel’s adoption, and three other
people have stepped forward to say Denise refunded their $275 when they were
unable to adopt one of BBAS kids – before they signed the contract.
Unfortunately for Alysha, and for the family who complained right after her,
Linda Saridakis sums up her complaint this way:
The
allegations of the complainant could not be verified. The majority of issues are not under the department’s
jurisdiction and are the complainant’s word versus the agency’s word.
Issues regarding allegations in Russia and AMREX were not verified.
The review of the contract between the agency and the complainant did
violate Item #18, but hiring a private attorney for child placement.
There were no rule violations verified.
Linda Saridakis could not cite BBAS for any “rule noncompliance…there were
no policy violations verified. There
was no rule noncompliance verified.”
Further: “The majority of the complainant issues were not verified and are not
regulated by this department. The
majority of the information obtained was the agency’s word versus the
complainant’s word.”
Because of Ohio’s minimal regulations for international adoption agencies, and resources for the job, this is the only conclusion Linda Saridakis could reach.
Thus was the conclusion of the Towell’s complaint to the ODJFS.