Able Forensic Investigations $2500.00 Retainer N0 Invoices & NO Results, But Wants More Money to Finish Cheating me Del Mar California

I've been doing some research the last few days and found that the "Trust" that's affiliated with "Junior Gym" is 107 years old and is called the "Kathleen Kierba Kiernan Trust." Sometimes it's refered to as the "Kathleen Trust Kiernan."

The really odd thing is that all or most of the people affiliated with this trust use many different alias names; primarily distinct variations on their legal names.

My husbands relatives and business partners all use many alias names and this habit appears to have increased since he died. The list I have of all the alias's used is long and I have cross-referenced and double-checked them - what in the world are these people up to? I've never seen anything like this.

Interesting that Howard Eisemann found NO pertinent information but after spending a few hours researching through public records online, I found this trust which has the business address of "Junior Gym" listed under it along with a bunch of other properties it apparently owns. What the heck ?

Mr. Eisemann finally sent what's left of my original documents and I received them today. On first glance I immediately saw that all of the certified copies of real estate records are missing with the exception of 3 records.

I paid $300.00 to Ventura County to get the certified copies, which I have receipts for. All of the real estate records were originally in the file I gave Mr. Eisemann to use as reference in the investigation. Now they are gone.

In addition two file holders were returned completely empty and my original typed list of all names, addresses, and other pertinent information are also missing.

I am beginning to wonder if this is a case of collusion. Either that, and/or Howard Eisemann is a vicious individual who has not one drop of integrity.

To see the background information on Junior Gym of Los Angeles, please enter "Junior Gym" into the search box on ripoffreport.com.

Mr. Eiseman's Rebuttal is almost as bad as his report.

I have requested a full refund from Able Investigations and asked that he return all my original documents. (again)

My name is Howard Eisemann and I am the owner of Able Forensic Investigations. The following constitites a rebuttal to a complaint filed by Jessics **** with respect to the performance of certain investigative initiatives.

Firstly, all Private Investigators in California are licensed and activitiies governed by the Department of Consumor Affairs Bureau of Investigative Services. Additionally, and at a mimimum, Private Investigators are requirred to provide a Client with a Retainer or Agreement for Services, a Report of Activities performed as well as a Statement concerning fees charged. Ms. **** was benefited by a Retainer Agreement, Report and Statement of fees charged.

Ms. **** signed and agreed to the terms of a Retainer Agreement. This Retainer Agreement states clearly that all investigations will be haulted once the Retainer is depleated and will not resume until the Client replensihes the Retainer. Ms **** also was was provided with a Investigative Summary as well as a Statement listing fees charges against the inplace Retainer.

Ms. **** asked for and received the Investigative Summary as requested on July 20, 2008.

I received an e-mail from Ms **** on July 21, 2008 in which she stated certain concerns and objections as to the nature and content of the Summary, namely the lack of definitive information concerning the object of the Investigation.

I stated to Ms **** on numerous occasions, prior to and on January 15, 2008, the date she signed the Retainer Agreement, that an investigation of this sort would involve a minimum of 25 hours of investigative initiative and that the initial $2500 Retainer would not allow exculpatory findings. She agreed to this stipulation and promised to increase the retainer so that the investigation could be completed appropriately. I would not have taken the Case if I was aware that you would not be in a position to replenish the retainer as necessary.

I contacted Ms **** in late March 2008 and informed her that the Retainer had been depleated and that she would need to replensih the promised additional funds so to continue. I received an e-mail from her, in which she stated that she understood the situation and agreed again to replenish the retainer. The retainer was never paid and the Case Investigation was put on hold.

Ms **** stated in an e-mail in early July 2008 that she was meeting with her lawyer and needed the findings of the unfinished Case Investigation . I informed her that I was on vacation and would have the findings prepared as an Interim Summary and sent to her on my return. The report she received on July 20, 2008 constituted the findings as of the date the investigation was haulted.

The Interim Report contained only material we were able to verify. Clearly, there was a considerable amount of work still to be completed. This work was not completed nor able to be verified within the time allowed and was accordingly not reported.

Clearly, the information contained in the Report received by Ms. **** on July 20, 2008 is not a completed investigative case analysis and only presents the verifiable findings as of March 31, 2008. It is was to be confused with a finished Investigative Summary and was not intended as such.

I have expressed my concern and apology to Ms. **** that the investigative initiatives performed did not provide her with the evidence she need to pursue a certain legal matter further. Clearly, Ms **** was well aware of the limitations and constraints on our activities as a result of her decision to not maintain a retainer, as agreed to by her in the Retainer Agreement, from which we can be paid for our work.

Respectfully Submitted

Howard L. Eisemann

My name is Howard Eisemann and I am the owner of Able Forensic Investigations. The following constitites a rebuttal to a complaint filed by Jessics **** with respect to the performance of certain investigative initiatives.

Firstly, all Private Investigators in California are licensed and activitiies governed by the Department of Consumor Affairs Bureau of Investigative Services. Additionally, and at a mimimum, Private Investigators are requirred to provide a Client with a Retainer or Agreement for Services, a Report of Activities performed as well as a Statement concerning fees charged. Ms. **** was benefited by a Retainer Agreement, Report and Statement of fees charged.

Ms. **** signed and agreed to the terms of a Retainer Agreement. This Retainer Agreement states clearly that all investigations will be haulted once the Retainer is depleated and will not resume until the Client replensihes the Retainer. Ms **** also was was provided with a Investigative Summary as well as a Statement listing fees charges against the inplace Retainer.

Ms. **** asked for and received the Investigative Summary as requested on July 20, 2008.

I received an e-mail from Ms **** on July 21, 2008 in which she stated certain concerns and objections as to the nature and content of the Summary, namely the lack of definitive information concerning the object of the Investigation.

I stated to Ms **** on numerous occasions, prior to and on January 15, 2008, the date she signed the Retainer Agreement, that an investigation of this sort would involve a minimum of 25 hours of investigative initiative and that the initial $2500 Retainer would not allow exculpatory findings. She agreed to this stipulation and promised to increase the retainer so that the investigation could be completed appropriately. I would not have taken the Case if I was aware that you would not be in a position to replenish the retainer as necessary.

I contacted Ms **** in late March 2008 and informed her that the Retainer had been depleated and that she would need to replensih the promised additional funds so to continue. I received an e-mail from her, in which she stated that she understood the situation and agreed again to replenish the retainer. The retainer was never paid and the Case Investigation was put on hold.

Ms **** stated in an e-mail in early July 2008 that she was meeting with her lawyer and needed the findings of the unfinished Case Investigation . I informed her that I was on vacation and would have the findings prepared as an Interim Summary and sent to her on my return. The report she received on July 20, 2008 constituted the findings as of the date the investigation was haulted.

The Interim Report contained only material we were able to verify. Clearly, there was a considerable amount of work still to be completed. This work and was not comleted able to be verified within the time allowed and was accordingly not reported.

Clearly, the information contained in the Report received by Ms. **** on July 20, 2008 is not a completed investigative case analysis and only presents the verifiable findings as of March 31, 2008. It is was to be confused with a finished Investigative Summary and was not intended as such.

I have expressed my concern and apology to Ms. **** that the investigative initiatives performed did not provide her with the evidence she need to pursue a certain legal matter further. Clearly, Ms **** was well aware of the limitations and constraints on our activities as a result of her decision to not maintain a retainer, as agreed to by her in the Retainer Agreement, from which we can be paid for our work.

Respectfully Submitter

Howard L. Eisemann

Mr Eisemann is apparently very upset with me. Could it be that he's as upset as I was when I realized that he had no intention of performing any actual work on my case? Ripping off a recent widow has to be amongst the lowest forms of life on planet earth.

He's mad because I wouldn't give him more money and after he sent me that bogus report, he thought I would slide under a rug and disappear and I didn't. Thank goodness for forums like Ripoffreport.com where the rich and powerful can't buy a cover for their sleazy activities.

http://ableforensics.com/