Delusional Grubisa wont stop misleading her 'students
Dominique Grubisa is utterly delusional. There are no other words to describe her, as IA reports.
BARELY TWO DAYS after the judgment of Justice Jackman in the Federal Court case brought by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), Grubisa was back misleading her students, claiming to be "right" about her discredited asset protection product.
In a session with her students on 11 April [at around 59 minutes in], Grubisa spoke about persuasion techniques, reciting a story she had told many of her students before. How when she started speaking at multi-speaker events, she used to watch other speakers who had the audience in the palm of their hand.
Grubisa is talking about seminars that were promoted by Stuart Zadel through his company, TGR Seminars (now called Zadel Property Education). In marketing for seminars run by Zadel's company, Grubisa described herself as 'Australia's #1 Debt Specialist Barrister' and 'Australia's number one debt expert'. In contrast, Justice Jackman said he had not formed a high opinion of Grubisa's legal competence.
ACCC ends Grubisa's fraud and deceptions - and vindicates IA's long investigations
In her recent session, Grubisa said that people might think it is dishonest to persuade people and she used to think in those terms.
She went on to say [IA emphasis]:
Grubisa wasn't right. Indeed, in the ACCC proceedings, Grubisa's senior counsel submitted that she prepared the asset protection documents 'incompetently despite her best intentions' and that she 'fundamentally failed to understand the structure at its most basic level'.
Justice Jackman didn't accept that it was as simple as that and said he was 'comfortably satisfied' that Grubisa had actual knowledge of the false and misleading nature of the representations that were made.
Grubisa playing a "flat bat" (albeit now established to be based on false and misleading claims) didn't seem to work for her in the early days, so she had to turn to persuasion techniques to have people buy her asset protection product. Grubisa's persuasion techniques for years have involved putting fear into people but then telling them that her asset protection system was the solution.
Hopeless regulators allowing deception to continue
Whether it was seven years ago, predicting an impending economic crisis bigger than the Global Financial Crisis, the suggestion that the Government might take people's superannuation, fears of job losses and business failures from the economic fallout from COVID-19, or rising interest rates and the 'day of reckoning', there was always some fear-mongering behind her sales pitch.
Seven years ago, Grubisa was telling her viewers that: "It is really, really troubled times, desperate times, desperate measures ahead"; that it was "each man for himself when the plane goes down"; and "There's a limited window of opportunity for you to get your house in order, and your ducks in a row".
In that same video, Grubisa claimed that the information she was sharing was something that "very, very few other lawyers would know".
In relation to Grubisa's claims about her somewhat exclusive knowledge, in his judgment, Justice Jackman (referring to one of Grubisa's Real Estate Rescue videos) said [IA emphasis]:
'Rather surprisingly' seems a very polite comment.
Grubisa's recent education on persuasion techniques was based on the principles from a book by Blair Warren, The One Sentence Persuasion Course, based on a concept that:
Grubisa, drawing upon the inspiration of Warren's book, showed a slide saying these insights are not only the tools for madmen, but for (amongst others) seducers and evangelists. Clearly also for those who engage in misleading and deceptive conduct.
Grubisa's fearmongering to potential "clients" had to be backed up by other claims to "allay people's fears". The very fears she was good at creating. No good in putting fear into people unless you can cash in on that fear. And that's where the false claims about the efficacy of her system came in.
In his decision, Justice Jackman referred to a statement from one of Grubisa's videos [IA emphasis]:
In her sales pitch from seven years ago, Grubisa was telling people [IA emphasis]:
Indeed, if you falsely tell people that they can protect everything they have and that they can't ever lose what they earn, then no doubt people might do anything such as paying large sums of money to Grubisa or her company. A company selling a legal service despite not being a law firm. Perhaps they might engage in transactions with the false understanding that there was no risk to them.
EXCLUSIVE: Dominique Grubisa offers 'protecction' amid scathing criticism
If persuading people didn't work for Grubisa, then there was a more aggressive option. Namely, shaming people into buying. An example of this strategy played out at a seminar for the Flipping Houses Australia program held in February 2020. The section on asset protection starts around 43 minutes and 40 seconds into the video.
In the seminar, Grubisa said [IA emphasis]:
What's the reference to the Porsche you might ask? Well, at 41 minutes and 10 seconds in, Grubisa spoke of a client who had apparently had a motor vehicle accident and was uninsured.
About her, Grubisa said:
ACCC ends Grubisa's fraud and deceptions - and vindicates IA's long investigations
Grubisa went on to say [IA emphasis]:
Putting fear into people and then making false claims that they would have nothing to worry about if they had a motor vehicle accident and had no insurance is disgraceful.
Grubisa's continued claims she was right are scandalous, or to adopt terms used by Grubisa's barrister in the heating of the ACCC case: perverse, outrageous and brazen. Especially when she seems to be getting assets out of her name.
Grubisa clearly doesn't care about those she has misled. The ACCC claimed she wasn't right. Her barrister agreed her company made false and misleading claims. Justice Jackman concluded not only was she not right but also that she knew that to be the case.
The ACCC case only dealt with people who bought into her false claims from April 2017 to November 2022. Grubisa has, however, been at it since 2011. Assure Lawyers seems to be still at it.
In her video seven years ago, Grubisa said:
False scarcity is another persuasion technique that Grubisa has used for years. It's a shame this nonsense wasn't over seven years ago, for the thousands who have been misled since.
Follow Independent Australia on Twitter at @independentaus, on Twitter HERE, Facebook HERE and Instagram HERE.
Related Articles
- Hopeless regulators allowing deception to continue
- ACCC ends Grubisa's fraud and deceptions - and vindicates IA's long investigations
- Grubisa doubles down (again) after ACCC hearing
- Dominique Grubisa's company admits asset protection claims were misleading
- Stealing from the dead - fair game in Grubisa's world