For over a month now, Purdy Enterprise has been parading around as if they wrote their own US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Management and Marketing (M&M) Field Service Manager (FSM) 3.10 Contracts and basking in that glory without what may be proper disclosure. As any court in the land would document through the process of discovery, Purdy Enterprise had outside assistance in the writing of their Technical Proposal. The question which presents is precisely whom helped Thomas and Lila Purdy and whether or not pricing information was shared between the two competitors. The list of those whom write HUD M&M FSM Contracts is short — extremely short. And surmising which Companies had the most to gain is even shorter when you begin to look at the Award Map, to date. The clean sweep of Indiana, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Alabama was not by luck and I submit were in conjunction.
The irony is that it is a fine line between triggering the legal standard for unethical conduct and collusion and it is even more expensive to prove it in Court. Here is what HUD had to say to Foreclosurepedia’s inquiry,
It would depend on their access to the pricing content of the proposal prior to award. As part of the Section K “Reps and Certs,” Offerors are required to sign a Certificate of Independent Price Determination, which basically says they did not have access to any of their competitors pricing. If they did in fact have access prior to award, it would violate collusion regulations. However, there is no restriction on the technical portion, hence the reason why you see proposal writers pop-up to help offerors pass the technical bar. It was more difficult this time, due to the responsibility docs, but not impossible. I’ve often considered the possibility of requiring oral presentations to combat it altogether, but it’s not unusual to get 100+ offers for FSM contracts. Can you imagine trying to schedule or having to sit through that many presentations? If used, I’d probably use it for Final Proposal Revisions, after narrowing down to a competitive range. — HUD to Foreclosurepedia
Without the legal ability to subpoena email communications and phone records, it is extremely difficult to make a legal argument whom Thomas and Lila Purdy hired to consult upon their two awards. And while I know full well the answer to the who, I am bound by journalistic integrity to protect my Source, through whom that person was identified to be. That the unnamed person is connected at the very top of the HUD M&M FSM food chain may or may not have had an influence on over $300 Million in HUD M&M FSM Awards is a question to be pondered over for awhile.
And therein lies the rub, as the bard would say. You see, HUD is specific about pricing information. For an architect to work for two different and competing firms whom both competed on the same areas strikes me as unethical, at best. It is impossible to say that this same person did not have discussions about pricing in both occasions.
And what about the biggest losers, Minority Females and Labor? You see, Foreclosurepedia is being told that Market Ready is contemplating the use of an Order Mill to come in and handle their heavy lifting. That most assuredly means that Minority Females and Labor will receive less money. And as Purdy Enterprise has neither the technological nor in field capability to handle four states, the reality is that there will be borderline if not outright collusion in putting together this unholy alliance covering nearly the entire Southeast.
A simple dumping of email logs puts everything to rest. The reality is that a once stellar rise is going the same way that most National Association of Mortgage Field Services (NAMFS) careers go when greed enters into the equation.
Thomas Purdy has leveraged his Consultant to lean upon Foreclosurepedia for nearly a month now. At every juncture, since the presumptive Award in Indiana – Kentucky, this individual has pleaded the case for Thomas and Lila Purdy. Anyone whom has ever dealt with Foreclosurepedia understands two things: a) I am not your friend, your buddy, or your pal; and b) I am a Friend of Labor. I have sacrificed everything in an attempt to create a semi level landscape for Labor. The manifestation of the HUD Contract today is due, in large part, to Foreclosurepedia’s fight to remove the illegal electrical backfeeding and to ensure that small businesses had the opportunity to compete. What remains impossible to do is buffer the change in mindset once small businesses obtain wealth. That is why Foreclosurepedia maintains email archives; phone recordings and transcripts; and a document repository that rivals many state sponsored intelligence agencies.
The stories of Market Ready’s battles both within and without their infamous relationship with BLM Companies will come to light when appropriate. And the truly ironic thing is that the owners of Market Ready are probably not even aware of that which has been brewing underneath their roof for years now. We sent this over, several days ago, with respect to allegations that a senior level Market Ready employee had assisted both they and Purdy Enterprise upon drafting contracts for the HUD M&M FSM 3.10 contract,
I am releasing an article later this evening about any employee of yours whom has had an extremely close relationship with Purdy Enterprise before, during, and after the HUD Bidding process. My question is did Market Ready, its agents, or its employees provide any technical or pricing data or allow such to be provided to Purdy Enterprise?
To date, Market Ready has not been forthcoming with a reply. It is par for the course especially when you take into consideration the allegations that a senior level Market Ready employee, with direct access to the Director of the Management and Marketing (M&M) program in Atlanta financed an Operation to keep BLM Companies safe during the HUD M&M FSM 3.8. That motivation was based only upon ensuring continued revenues to Market Ready.
If I were asking questions, I would ask two: 1) Did Market Ready run upon the same territories which Purdy Enterprise ran upon; and 2) Who all knew the pricing data and had the most to win. You see, some people do not just write for a flat fee — they write for continued gross revenue based upon the Award.
