Steve Rhode is a Fraud Says Joe Truth

I get the odd attacks from time to time but one today from an anonymous reader who identifies himself (not sure if it is a he or she since comments from both Joe and Jane have come from that IP) as “Joe Truth” deserves to be discussed.

Joe Truth Says

Here is the statement submitted:

I have watched you slander hundreds if not thousands of companies over the last 6 or 7 years since you have monopolized fear mongering journalism online…You get a mailer from a “tipster”, spend some time digging online and then make false claims based on your “10 minutes of online investigations”.

You have no conscious of the job loss you create or the companies you destroy as long as you can drive traffic to your site and make millions off of google ads. You are a fraud, my guess is that you have hundreds of enemies created by your fraud investigations.

How many businesses that you did your “DUE DILIGENCE” (which amounts to a 10 minute online investigation) have you destroyed or caused tremendous damage to those businesses by spreading your “educated guesses”? You pick winners & losers based on who pays you the most and you have caused hundreds of hard working innocent people to lose their jobs.

I would also guess that some of those enemies that you have created are looking for revenge. I bet that you look over your shoulder every time you set foot on the street wondering when will be the day that YOU have to pay the price for destroying good peoples lives. One of these days they will see you on the street and they will get their retribution. Hopefully they will do it in a way where Steve Rhodes disappears from your stranglehold online presence.

You destroy good companies based on “your investigation of maybe 10 minutes” then you find another one to investigate for 5 minutes then you go on to your next victim causing tremendous job loss with your recklessness.

Have you ever been face to face with a company owner or employee to whom you have destroyed their lives? If you haven’t yet, some day you will. You are a Fraud. My guess is that you have multiple slander lawsuits against you.

You make CRAZY claims based on a few online searches and then say “if I reported something that is not correct show me.” A company should never have to prove whether or not you are correct, YOU should have to PROVE that YOU are correct!!

I am confident that you will run up on the wrong person or that the wrong person will run up on you and then all of us will finally be free from your venom that you spray everyday! ONE DAY STEVE πŸ™‚ ONE DAY πŸ™‚

My Response

Not to be an alarmist, it does appear the poster is threatening me with physical violence by others.

This expression of opinion about the stories on the site is typical in the fact it states an opinion but never supports any of the claims with specific facts.

I’m happy to publicly discuss any article written and how I came to the conclusion I did and look at the facts in the story.

As always, if any fact in any story is wrong or incorrect there is a link on every story to report the error. If a statement is submitted I will gladly and promptly publish it with the story.

So to Joe Truth, who posts anonymously, stand up, tell us who you are and let’s discuss a specific story you feel is in error.

I welcome your participation and you are more than welcome to examine any of the sourced facts on any story to see where the facts came from.

Rather than accuse me of “spraying venom” let’s have an open discussion because the facts in your rant are not supported.


The anonymous Joe Truth finally pointed out an article that concerned him/her. He linked to this one in his comments.

However when pressed for what he claimed was an error in the post he said, “I am not claiming any errors were made.” He also refused to take a shot at answering the reader question himself to offer up an alternative response.


You are not alone. I'm here to help. There is no need to suffer in silence. We can get through this. Tomorrow can be better than today. Don't give up.

Damon Day - Pro Debt Coach

I can always use your help. If you have a tip or information you want to share, you can get it to me confidentially if you click here.

Steve Rhode

92 thoughts on “Steve Rhode is a Fraud Says Joe Truth”

    • Don’t flatter yourself, I was only pointing out that Joe Truth is pointing a finger at the wrong person. Steve’s articles raise the questions but your attacks are aimed at discrediting everyone who might take away your business. .

      • My business is to educate consumers and expose companies who are taking advantage of them. Only people who have ever been upset with me are the ones that don’t like the fact that I raise uncomfortable questions that they can’t answer.

        If by discrediting everyone you mean explaining how their service actually works, then I guess you got me.

        • Let’s not kid each other, your business is to make money to support your family and you use this site to gain more business by bashing everyone who stands in your way.

          • Of course I make money to support my family. I gain a lot of business from this site because it is a nice platform to reach a lot of consumers with my simple message.

            Get a second opinion before you make a major financial decision based on the advice of a commissioned sales person.

            Why is that a bad thing?

          • Umm, You alleged that I make money to support my family. I agreed. You alleged that I use this site as a platform to get more business. I agreed.

            How exactly am I “way off topic?”

          • Now your gonna play the “What did I do” card? See my “Focus Damon, Focus” comment above…welcome to the conversation.

          • I posted it twice but you clearly dont have your listening ears on so I will post it a 3rd time to be as clear as possible.

            “Im talking about you immediately bashing and labeling everyone in the industry a scam and attacking insiders without doing any research.

            Im talking about your inability to engage in meaningful conversation because you are afraid of competition so in order to capture as much business as you possible can you vomit on everyone and try to pass yourself off as some kind of hero.”

  1. Angelo, I do not receive any revenue from Damon’s consults. He has had a right to state his opinion, just as you have.

    I don’t get between your mutual battles because you both seem to express your respective points with equal vigor.

    What has been interesting is it seems any company that might be the subject of comments you might not agree with doesn’t seem to be the one pushing back at Damon.

    You two have developed quite a sparing contest that I refuse to get in the middle of. My personal opinion, you two just need to hug it out and start over.

    • I agree that no one is pushing back, I actually made that claim in the previous conversation. Most wont engage because they know better. Maybe Im just a fool, but seriously, how can any one push back when he relentlessly attacks with baseless claims, lies and constant twisting of facts? I still stand by my claim that his actions are what shuts down all insider dialog on this site.

      • Ya, I love to twist your words by copying and pasting your own contradictory comments.

        I am the reason that scammers don’t like to openly discuss their scams?

        It couldn’t possibly be that they don’t want to openly discuss their scams, because, um…hmm. uh… oh ya, they don’t want to draw attention to their bleeping scam.

        • Thats the problem and the whole point of this article. You don’t openly discuss… you attack, lie, twists claims and are argumentative with everyone without doing any research.

          The article should have been titled “Damon is a scam says Joe truth” because while you are the self proclaimed “protector of the people” all your vomit is for the benefit of gaining your consulting fees, meanwhile it takes most settlement companies a minimum of 8/9 months just to break even yet THEY are all scams??

          • Well your opinion is incorrect but I will leave that up to consumers to decide for themselves.

            The point of my “vomit” as you call it, is to offer a differing point of view to consumers from someone who isn’t trying to shove a program in their face.

            Why are you so afraid of a consumer simply having a conversation with me? I encourage consumers to talk to as many sales people as they want and suggest that it is a good idea to call me before they end up signing a contract that they will likely regret.

            If they don’t like my advice, don’t think that my help was anything special, or saved them thousands of dollars by helping them avoid a big mistake, then there is no fee for my service.

            So why are you so afraid of consumers hearing what I have to say?

          • Focus Damon, Focus…Im not even talking about your conversations with consumers or the advice you provide and why on earth would I use my real name and put myself out there on this site if I had anything to hide?

            Im talking about you immediately bashing and labeling everyone in the industry a scam and attacking insiders without doing any research.

            Im talking about your inability to engage in meaningful conversation because you are afraid of competition so in order to capture as much business as you possible can you vomit on everyone and try to pass yourself off as some kind of hero.

          • I do not know enough about your services to make form an opinion however, I strongly disagree with your malicious marketing tactics.

          • Yes, please pass my complaint to you wife, maybe she can knock some sense into you.

            thank you…I’m here till 11… try the veal.

          • Im thinking you twisted the message when you relayed it to the boss. Are you telling me that she said it was ok for you to continue to lie and bash every competitor so you can get more business?

          • You continue to allege that I lie about and bash every company with no reasonable basis, yet when asked, you can’t even produce one example of where this has occurred.

            Seems like the only baseless allegations are your allegations that my allegations are baseless.

            PS. You made a fun little joke and I went along with it in good spirits, but moving forward I would appreciate if you would leave my wife out of your comments.

          • Settle down Frances….it was just a joke and the only reason I made the joke was because of your comment about taking my complaint to your boss. Hell, even Steve thought it was funny, stop being such a baby.

          • By the way, you repeatedly have said I lie and attack companies with baseless accusations. I am not aware of any time I have ever done that. Can you please give me an example of I time I accused a company of something with no reasonable basis for doing so?

            I would be happy to correct any errors I may have made.

          • Really? You claim that I call every company a scam and go after them with baseless accusations, and yet you can’t even come up with one example where I unjustly called out a specific company without any reasonable basis for doing so?

          • Ah, yes… you did have a reasonable basis for calling my settlement company and the Legal Plan a scam….because I hurt your feelings.

            Not one claim you made was accurate, not one and while my claims are backed by data and experience, you (think) win conversations by barking louder. Maybe those who have something to hide will not engaged but I can back my claims so I’ll keep calling you out on your unethical, bullshit marketing tactics.

          • Actually, I did not proactively go after you. What I said about your company was in response to you claiming that I never offered specifics. So your allegation that I go after everybody simply to drum up business is baseless, otherwise I would have gone after you years ago.

            What I said about you was that in my opinion, your program puts consumers in a greater than necessary risk of litigation so that you can turn around and up sell them “insurance” to “protect” them from the bad advice you just gave them.

            I was very specific and clear. You don’t agree and that is your right, but there is a very clear basis for my opinion and most reasonable people that are not in the business of selling programs like yours would agree with me.

            That being said, what you or I think doesn’t matter. My job is to give my opinion to my clients. It is up to them to determine if what I am saying is logical and has merit.

            So, again, can you provide me just one example of a company that was just minding their own business that I lied about and proactively went after with baseless claims just to get business?

            I mean if I do it to everyone, you should have an example right?

          • It took me 15 minutes just to find the article where we had our previous discussions and I don’t have the time to look through every article to find an example where you attacked another company but I will surely point it out when it happens again. In the meantime, I’ll address your twisted bullshit again…

            you wrote…”Not one claim I made was accurate? Well, I claimed you put people in 3 and 4 year settlement plans and then also sold them legal insurance to try and “protect” them from getting sued by their creditors while on your plan.

            That was an accurate statement. Do you deny that is what you do?”

            Yes, I deny this is what I do and once again, thanks for proving that you twist facts and make baseless claims.

            1) I offered data that shows consumers receive more lawsuits within the first 24 months than after 24 months. This alone should have opened your eyes but you completely ignored it!!

            2) The plan defends creditor lawsuits, it does not protect anyone from getting sued.

            3) “putting people in a program that increases the risk of being sued”…another made up twisted fact – anyone who defaults is at risk of being sued, a settlement program is not what trigger lawsuits. Why cant you get this through your head?

            I tried having this debate with you in the past but you seem to ignore data and stick with your antiquated argument. There’s nothing wrong with you sharing your opinion but at the least it should be backed by facts not just attacks to gain more business.

          • So just so I am clear. You repeatedly claim that I lie and make baseless accusations about every debt relief company out there, have been doing it for years, and not only can you not find one instance of this ever occurring, you can’t even think of a time I did it?

            So, if you have no basis for making this claim about me, isn’t it ironic that you are clearly doing what you are so adamant that I do, even though I always have clear reasons for stating my opinions.

          • Sad diversion Damon, you asked for an example of you making baseless claims and lying and I gave you 3 and told you I would point them out moving forward.

            At least try to defend the points which back my claims that you lie, twist and spin instead of ignoring them and then ignorantly asking for an example.

            ….Damon taking his foot out of his mouth, take two!!!

  2. @disqus_lbNvX1uE8v:disqus The unfortunate part of Anonymous Joe’s continued comments is the apparent accusation I do not publish correct information. In fact I bend over backwards to publish information and provide the source documents for those facts I state so readers can make their own determination about the source of the fact.

    I also have a zero tolerance policy for errors and take it so seriously to get items I publish correct based on the facts at hand that I provide a link on the left side of every story to report errors. Generally when companies are contacted in advance for a comment on an issue, 99.99% of the time they never respond.

    Here is the odd part of Joe’s complaint, if I’ve engaged in the type of reckless reporting he alleges then why have no companies contacted me to report an error or ask for a correction? And why can’t he give us a specific story with a specific fact that is wrong? If I was wrong in some story I want to talk about the issue and look at the facts behind the claim.

    Stories don’t start with me making up information out of the air, they can consist of three parts:

    1. Information from others, like a court case, or opinion. I will report on those events at times. Example:

    2. A reader question and answer, as in the single example Joe provided at… Joe could not identify any errors in that article.

    3. A research piece or educational piece about a broader topic like student loans, repossession, etc. Example:

    I never base a story or start a story from complaints elsewhere by others.

    And I agree with you, if a company has a problem from something I reported, is the issue the reporting or the problem that was reported on.

    As you can see, I am more than willing to discuss any story, accept any error report, publish any correction if ever requested, and engage in an open dialog to help readers get clarification on any story I’ve written.

  3. OK Joe, you wanted another opinion? You sure give Steve a lot of the blame (credit?) for shutting down these debt relief companies. Could it be that they themselves, had something to do with their own demise? Maybe, just maybe they shut down for reasons other than an online blogger like Steve? I think you give Steve too much credit. From what I have seen, most of these guys brought their downfall on all by themselves and their employees need to look at their bosses for failing them, not Steve. More to the point, Nazi Germany employed thousand who lost their jobs at the end of the war. Does that alone mean we should not have stopped their operations? Or how about Bernie Madoff? Point is that the argument that people will lose their jobs is not adequate rationale for allowing bad operators to continue. The real issue is: is a particular business a bad operator or not? This takes a factual analysis. Forget the hyperbole Joe, just give us facts.

    • I agree with Fitz, most of Steve’s articles are about companies that had already been caught harming consumers or the blatant loopholers who’s consumer complaints caused the exposure.

      I see nothing wrong with Steve posting a readers concern about a company and asking for feedback either, harmless by itself but at the same time I do understand Truth Joe’s frustration but it’s unfortunately misdirected at the wrong person.

      After years of following this site, time and time again it’s actually Damon who is creating the fear mongering that Joe Truth is talking about by attacking, shutting down conversations with lies, false accusations, unsubstantiated claims to try and discredit any company that dares try to defend themselves.

      Now, I doubt very much Damon’s rants are capable of shutting down companies but readers do see his comments which unjustly questions credibility and quiet honestly is irresponsible.

      So while I dont think its right to blame Steve for Damon’s reckless actions, Steve does allow Damon to continue so after years of the same behavior one cant help but to ask if it’s a combined effort or does Steve just turn a blind eye to Damon’s marketing tactics?

      Steve, just please tell me you don’t take any revenue from Damon? That would be like learning there is no Santa all over again πŸ™

  4. Obviously no. The disqus commenting system has flagged you as a spammer and keeps dropping them into the spam file. I have to manually go in and approve them, which I have been doing.

    Just so you are aware, unless you have a verified email address with disqus this will continue to happen automatically.

  5. The post is long on speculation and accusations and very short on specifics. Steve has “destroyed or caused tremendous damage” to what businesses? Insults without evidence do not create arguments.

    • I don’t think anyone could calculate how much damage that he has done to various companies over the years?..I wish I could give you that number, trust me it would blow your mind away…Here is a fact, in some cases Steve conducts 40 minutes of “online research” that a child could do and then publishes an article that causes real damage to whatever company that is on his current hit list…Am I speculating when I say that this would alarm some readers?…I was specific when I said that Steve has filed bankruptcy, I was specific when I said that Steve received a cease & desist demand letter in California for his nonprofit debt company…People are looking at Steve like he is the debt expert…I feel that they need to know the truth!…40 minutes of google searches to publish the types of articles that Steve posts both myself and many others would consider irresponsible at best…Some courts could consider it slander…Is that specific enough for you?..Let me guess you work for New Era Debt or another Damon cronie?..Someone who receives leads or gets business from Steve?..Let me be clear, I am not making accusations, just asking a simple question?

      • Steve makes no secret that he’s filed for bankruptcy. So what? I am a bankruptcy attorney. So what? I think most debt settlement companies are a scam. So what?

        No, you have not been specific enough. Name one company that Steve has damaged by false accusations…just one. Then let’s go through the specific allegations to see if your conclusions are justified. Until then, your vague accusations are just that…accusations.

        • “So what” is your response to everything?..Real intelligent response!..It is a beautiful that you do not get to decide what is specific enough, Steve’s readers do…Of course you are a BK attorney…That makes perfect sense to me now!..I am concerned about Steve’s readers…The last thing I care about is some loud mouthed BK attorney that is totally biased…Go ahead and continue to embarrass Steve with your strategy of so what!

          So what you are a BK attorney, so what? so childish!

          • Pay attention Mr. “so what” BK attorney!..BTW I like how you skipped over “so what Steve received a cease & desist letter from CA?”…My comment was quote “Here is a fact, in some cases Steve conducts 40 minutes of “online
            research” that a child could do and then publishes an article that
            causes real damage to whatever company that is on his current hit list.”

            My point is that Steve does all of this in some cases based on 40 minutes of online research…What does the name of a company have to do with that concern that some readers may have? 40 minutes? Trust me, I am not the only one who is concerned about his due diligence…Hundreds of others have expressed the same concern on this site…Do you say “SO WHAT?” to them as well?

          • You can’t even name one company that has been harmed by Steve. You might even work for one of them. Even if I believed your claim about a cease and desist letter, that doesn’t mean a single thing. What were the allegations? What did Steve say that was false?

            Yes, i say “so what” to anybody that makes vague accusations without supporting evidence. Just because you repeat allegation over and over again doesn’t make it true.

            There are people who believe that the Apollo program never put men on the moon, that it was all a hoax. There might even be hundreds that believe that. But the overwhelming evidence is that we have put men on the moon. I say “so what” to them too. To the people who insist on using insults instead of providing facts, i say “so what”.

          • Read above Mr “SO WHAT?” BK attorney…Steve has his “EXCUSES” well documented about his cease & desist letter and then switching the name of his “NON-PROFIT DEBT SETTLEMENT” company to his wife’s name to allude the state of Ca…if you think “most debt settlement companies are a scam” what do have to say about Steve’s previous “DEBT SETTLEMENT” company?????????????????????His case is even worse because he purported to be “NON-PROFIT!!!!!”. What else do you need to possibly believe that Steve’s motives are misguided at best and certainly not to “PROTECT THE CONSUMER” from the big bad debt settlement industry that the state of CA ran Steve out of…Steve left the state Mr. “SO WHAT?” BK attorney guy!…Steve left the state of Ca as a result…Ask him about that?..Please remember that if you chose to foolishly accept his “EXCUSES” they are simply that…EXCUSES !! Bring it on baby !! I will give you specifics tomorrow….It’s family time for me…Good evening Sir!

          • It’s a bit silly to call me out on something I’ve talked openly about for years and in the grand scheme of things was really a non-issue.

            It is frustrating to be accused of not doing research by someone not doing research.

          • Read below Mr “SO WHAT?” BK attorney…Steve has his “EXCUSES” well
            documented about his cease & desist letter and then switching the
            name of his “NON-PROFIT DEBT SETTLEMENT” company to his wife’s name to
            allude the state of Ca…if you think “most debt settlement companies
            are a scam” what do have to say about Steve’s previous “DEBT SETTLEMENT”
            company?????????????????????His case is even worse because he purported
            to be “NON-PROFIT!!!!!”. What else do you need to possibly believe that
            Steve’s motives are misguided at best and certainly not to “PROTECT THE
            CONSUMER” from the big bad debt settlement industry that the state of
            CA ran Steve out of…Steve left the state Mr. “SO WHAT?” BK attorney
            guy!…Steve left the state of Ca as a result…Ask him about
            that?..Please remember that if you chose to foolishly accept his
            “EXCUSES” they are simply that…EXCUSES !! Bring it on baby !! I will
            give you specifics tomorrow….It’s family time for me…Good evening

          • Instead of insulting me, why don’t you answer my challenge? I asked you to provide the name of one company that was harmed by false allegations made by Steve…just one. I am not going to simply accept your accusations that are not supported by any facts. I want to see for myself of the allegations have any merits. I choose to make my own conclusions, not just listen to your claims. is it too hard to comply with that simple request?

          • I will give you a handful of companies tomorrow…And we can do exactly as you wish…Steve is in the process of having to deal with slander suits from multiple companies…My guess is that he already is facing a multitude of law suits…BTW I don’t owe you a damn thing…I am concerned about Steve’s readers…You are of no consequence to me…If you can’t tell by now I am an attorney as well…I don’t think that I am special because I am an attorney…The courts will decide what Steve is liable for, not you Mr. “so what guy?!!!” I wonder what your current clients and future potential clients would think of your “SO WHAT?” approach….My opinion is that It reflects your true character, others are welcome to share their view of Mr “SO WHAT?” BK attorney guy?

          • I responded to you, but Steve’s site blocked it…I guess he is censoring facts about his past now? I will get another IP in another state tomorrow πŸ™‚

          • Mr Starrett I just found your email address…I will send you the info tomorrow that you requested…Steve is censoring my posts now…I will be back if not on this post then I will be on another post…Steve may be filtering all comments on this thread now…There are many ways to skin a cat πŸ™‚

  6. What are you claiming in in error in that post?

    You will see the post consists of a reader statement sent in, screenshots of the website in question, and public record information about domain ownership.

    What are you objecting to?

    For the record, I never knowingly publish anyones home address. But I do publish listed business addresses. If someone lists their primary business address as a home address that would have been silly on their part.

    As far a virtual offices go, it is relevant only because a company claims to have a big presence and solicits money from consumers but never describes where exactly they operate.

    It is never a deciding factor in my opinion but another issue that should be considered by consumers when deciding who they feel safe working with.

    I even publish these guides to help consumers research companies.

    I would recommend that anyone considering using such a company should read the following free guides.

    The Ultimate Consumer Guide to Checking Out a Debt Relief Company Before You Sign On the Line

    10 Must Do Steps to Find the Best Credit Counseling or Debt Settlement Company for You

    How to Check Out a Business or Company to Avoid Getting Scammed or Ripped Off

    • I am not claiming any errors were made. I just want you to inform your readers of exactly what is it that you do when you do your investigations? That is not an unreasonable request is it? I certainly hope that you don’t take that as a physical threat of violence?

      • So if there are no errors then what is the issue?

        Again, every story or post is different and there is no standard time each take.

        In the case of that link you gave me I described where the facts I published came from. In that post it probably took 40 minutes from start to finish and included whatever time it took to read the website in question, capture the source screen shots and use any one of a number of public whois databases like

        • Thank you very much Steve. I just wanted the readers to know that you spend an entire 40 minutes of online searches before you slander a company. Everything that you find on the internet is true right? Some of the companies that you slandered have been in business before you owned your debt company that you switched into your wife’s name when you received a “cease & desist letter from the State of CA. I’m sure that your readers will feel at ease once they find out that you make your ridiculous claims against companies after just 40 minutes of internet searches. That just screams credibility to me! Do you have a staff that helps you with all of these 40 minute investigations or is the 40 minute investigation all done by little ole you? I have to go now Steve my date with a french model just showed up, I met her on the internet. bonjour! lol

          • You sound like a broken record Steve. I was only interested in the amount of time you typically spend when you do your “research.” The reason I said that you make “ridiculous claims” is because in my opinion (Which I am entitled to) is for anyone to spend only 40 minutes of online research which everyone knows is a crap shoot as to what is true and what isn’t on the internet is at best irresponsible. People work at the companies you slander and those people have families that they are trying to support and for you to slam them after only 40 minutes of research that my 12 year old child could do is ridiculous. But I guess I am making “unfounded assumptions?”

          • How much time it takes to research is like asking how long is a piece of string. They are all different. But once again, I’m happy to specifically talk about specific posts and answer questions about research on a specific post.

            I don’t get what your problem is with that post at

            You are not claiming it has any errors and you are unwilling to provide how you feel the readers question should have been answered.

            If the answer is factual then is can’t be slanderous.

          • If it’s based on 40 minutes of online research in my opinion it can only be construed as slander. In my opinion which I admit is just “my” opinion, no one could possibly come with anything credible in only 40 minutes of research! Remember we are talking about the credibility of businesses some who have been in business longer than you have had this site based on 40 minutes of “online research” Online research is garbage and you know it! I am sorry, but I believe destroying a companies credibility is worth more than 40 minutes of your online research! Again, just my “unfounded assumption!” You seemed to think your 40 minutes of online research justifies damaging companies credibility which I am positive has led to job loss ect…ect…I say 40 minutes is totally irresponsible!! Some of your readers may agree with me and I am sure some may disagree. Either way it is good for people to know that you put such a tremendous amount of time into your research before you post your articles causing irreversible damage to the company and it ‘s employees and their families!

          • So how long would it take you to answer the readers question then? I’ve offer you a chance to answer it, you’ve refused. I told you what the research was on that story and you don’t dispute the facts.

            If online research is garbage and the majority of time on that article was spent reader the companies website the reader asked about, are you saying their website is/was garbage?

  7. Just so there are no surprises, my attorney saw your threat of apparent physical violence you sent in and previously posted in another comment. He asked me to file a police report so don’t be surprised if you are contacted.

    I’m happy to continue the discussion but without such threats.

    • You contacted the police? lol I am sorry that you are scared Steve. It must be hard to sleep at night with that kind of paranoia. I feel sorry for you that you live in such fear. I guess that comes with the territory when you slander good people based on “internet searches” and then have to live looking over your shoulder worried about whether or not you will ever come face to face with them. Maybe you should try another line of work if you are so frightened? I never threatened you Steve and you know that. I made a prediction of what the enemies that you have made “might” do if they encounter you on the street, but even then there was no mention of violence, physical or otherwise? The police will read it & tell you the same thing.

      Very good deflection of your poor internet investigations though. Bravo Steve!

      • You make all sorts of claims about the site but the one here who fails to states the facts or gets them wrong, is actually you.

        I never said I was afraid, I said, “my attorney saw your threat of apparent physical violence you sent in and previously posted in another comment. He asked me to file a police report.”

        Why he asked me to file it is up to him.

        • Touche! You are correct, you never said that you were afraid. You are making a police report against me correct? Your readers can determine whether or not they feel that you contacted the police over a comment on your site out of fear easy enough. I am sorry, but I have never had any history of police reports or what they contain, but I am curious will they list your address when you make the report? I would never come to your house and I would never do anything to you, but I would like to post your address like you have done to others on this website. I welcome the police to inquire whatever they would like from me. I would guess that they have better things to do than waste man hours on constructing a police report over me and my purported threat. But that’s just my “unfounded assumption!”

          • Again, with the lack of correct information on your part. Go back and read the quote again.

            If you welcome the police report why don’t you just go ahead and publish your name?

            Right now you are nothing more than an anonymous bully standing in a dark alley. I put my name on my words, yet you don’t. You make all sorts of accusations but they are unsupported.

            Let’s take your sample article at and how would you have answered the readers question? You take a shot.

          • I’m not a fear mongering journalist so I am sorry I am not qualified to “take a shot”. The only thing that I wanted was to know what goes into your “research” when you slander a company and you reply satisfied my curiosity. Do you have any objection with me posting your reply on other posts on your site? I don’t want to be blacklisted for posting your 40 minute investigations.

          • That specific story probably took 40 minutes. Every story is different and I’m happy to answer a question about a specific story.

            “Take a shot” as in take a shot at answering the readers question. I don’t know how answering a reader question would make you a “fear mongering journalist.” That makes no sense.

            Cross posting will cause the Disqus commenting platform to mark you as spam.

            If you feel you need to comment on the research on that article the correct statement would be “Steve said it took him about 40 minutes or so to research his answer to the reader question at

          • Fair enough. Thank you. Can you give me an example of an article where you questioned a companies credibility that took you days to research? I just want to make sure that I am fair to you. The only reason that I mentioned “fear mongering journalist” is because I have read repeatedly on multiple sites online that you are a fear mongering journalist. I can believe everything I read on the internet right?

          • You’d have to identify a URL that you feel I called into question a companies credibility. Only you can determine when that occurs by your definition.

            And while you kept posting the link to that other site, were you also posting my answers to the questions raised in their posts? I gave you the link

            Seems to be you’ve engaged in a slanderous attack against me here with no research or stating the facts as you’ve been given them.

            You could also post

          • If nothing else I am happy that I have kept you busy responding to my comments. At least I have temporarily prevented you from a few of your 40 minute investigations and saved at least one company from the damage your articles create. For that, Thank you very much! I encourage all readers to question Steve’s motives as I and hundreds of others have done. Let’s work together to keep Steve busy and away from all of his 40 minute investigations! Every article that we help prevent Steve from publishing equals jobs saved, businesses spared of Steve’s venom ect…ect…Steve the Destroyer is a more fitting title for you than getoutofdebtguy by a long shot. Chime in people. I want to hear your thoughts on Steve’s 40 minute online research?

          • There you go with your “assumptions again!” I said “I was happy that I have kept you busy”…I never said that that was what my goal was!..My goal was not to waste your time…My goal was to find out exactly what research you do when you publish your articles. The time you spent
            finally answering that question was just a byproduct that I was happy with…Jeez Steve you take things so personally and so literally! lol

          • You blocked me earlier, but I do appreciate that you did not block this IP address…IP’s are a dime a dozen…Going forward I will do my best to keep my comments to a level where you don’t feel the need to block me…It is your site, you call the shots so let me know the parameters in which you will continue to allow me to engage with you….I think that is is obvious of what my opinion is about the type of journalism that you participate in so I will just leave it there and move on…The biggest complaint that I have ever had against you Steve is the damage that you cause to companies credibility based on very little due diligence on your part…You have a huge online presence, I commend you for that…When you publish your articles real peoples jobs are lost or their income is directly affected…Real people with real families are being impacted when you publish your articles…40 minutes on one, an hour on another, 10 minutes on another of “online research” many people would agree that you are irresponsible with your articles just based solely on a few google searches…I have seen hundreds of people respond to your articles expressing the same concern…It is no secret that you make money of this site…I believe that you are accountable for hurting real people working at legitimate companies and you do it without conscious…Online research is a joke when we are talking about people losing their jobs because their companies credibility is destroyed and you only spent 40 minutes to accomplish that…It is just wrong…You have a hard on for debt settlement I get it…What I don’t get is that you have owned a debt company and it did not end well with you in CA, but yet you finger point based on 40 minutes on google searches that my 12 year old child could do?..It’s like Jose Conseco calling out his fellow juicers!..At least Jose actually knew what the facts were and didn’t use google to base his “assumptions.” I am very curious for more information from you on how you conduct your investigations because based on what you have told me so far would be very alarming to your readers in my opinion…Going forward my only questions would be trying to learn more about your research that you conduct…You don’t owe any explanations to me, but I think you would agree that your readers deserve to know?

          • Waste time comment came from “Let’s work together to keep Steve busy and away from all of his 40 minute investigations!”

            Want to know what will not get you blocked, talk in specifics and use examples rather than broad accusations.

            For example, what specific company was harmed by what specific post?

  8. I think Steve probably makes enough to cover his expenses. I doubt he’s raking millions. I’m nothing more than a fan and sometimes commentor on the site.

  9. For the record, I will not assume you are related to the post you pick, who knows what others will assume.

    But we can’t talk about facts unless we have a specific post to discuss since every post is different.

    As you will see in most stories, source documents are generally either statements made on the company website or public record information.


      I was trying to find a link where you google map an address sometimes even positng someones home address and then make a statement “guessing” that the company is not really there or that is must be a virtual office because it was leased by Regus. “ALL” Regus clients never actually reside in the offices that Regus leases right? I will keep looking through your thousands of posts and provide with you with a link that properly shows what I am referring to, but this should be enough to get us started.

      Just for giggles, how much time did you spend “investigating” the above link?

      You said “As you will see in most stories, source documents are generally either statements made on the company website or public record information.”

      Based on your statement above your investigations are simple online searches that my middle school kid could make? That is the extent of your research before you slander a company? BTW the link I provided could very well be as you say “a bad actor” . I am just curious to how you investigate the companies that you slander. I am not saying they are a good company, but please enlighten you readers about your “AMAZING” research that you do before you slander them.

  10. If I pick a link then some how you will “ASSUME” like you always do that some how I am affiliated with that company. Please pick any link of your choice then tell your readers exactly what your investigation consisted of and exactly how much time did you spend on your investigation before you slandered them. If you refuse to pick one I suppose I can pick one if you promise not to “ASSUME” that I am associated with them. I guess I could do that much for you. I will give you a chance to respond with a link of your choosing 1st. I want to be clear what my intentions are. I found many websites slamming you and calling you a fraud so I posted one on previous posts that you made to enlighten your readers of what some say your real motives are. Back to my point, I have read hundreds of your articles and seen the responses from your opposition which left me very curious as to exactly what your investigations consist of? Are they simply online searches that a high school kid could do (which can obviously be as false just as easily as they could be true)? Everything you find on the internet is the truth right? Or do you conduct legitimate investigations that would stand up in a slander suit? Or is it somewhere in between? Both myself and your readers deserve to know what do your “investigations entail.” Is that such a difficult question for you to answer?

    • Are you suggesting that Steve runs this website with all of it’s ads for free? I’m sorry, but I know the kind of traffic that is driven to this site and I know how much money can be made off of google ads for sites that receive the amount of traffic that this one does. I obviously do not know exactly what the revenue amount is. If I said “those thousands that you make from google ads” would that still be funny to you or would you care more about the claims that many have made that Steve is a fraud? Do you make money from Steve or receive leads from Steve’s site? I’m asking questions that you could easily say is none of my business. I am just curious as to what is so funny to you?


Leave a Comment