Safeguard Properties and Mortgage Contracting Services were both named as Prime Vendors in the ongoing defraudment against Michigan Contractor Michael Barz. Barz along with many other Contractors were defrauded by Jason J Mazei, owner of Great Lakes Property Specialists.
Hey Paul, I did some research and I found that $9617 owed was issued by safeguard and $2974 owed was issued by MCS. I guess my next call will be to vendor management to both of these companies to find out if they are still issuing GLPS work orders. It was my understanding that it is the ultimate no-no to file BK in this industry and continue to accept work. Again, if I cant recover my losses, I want to make sure this asshole doesn’t ,make another dime.
Deja vu. Each and every case of fraud I report upon has a National Association of Mortgage Field Services connection. Eric Miller, the ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAR PLUS A YEAR mouthpiece Executive Director; Miller whom is consuming NEARLY SEVENTY PERCENT OF ALL NAMFS MEMBER DUES, is doing everything he can to keep the crimes hidden. Not on my watch!
Did we forget to mention that a Google Search of Jason J Mazei has Foreclosurepedia on the FIRST PAGE?! We are breaking all records of taking these people down. When we are done, simple Google Searches of these people will reveal the criminals they truly are for THE REST OF THEIR LIVES!
As you can see below, Mazei is such a scumbag, he filed in an attempt to restructure and then smoke screened the US District Court! Make no mistake that neither Safeguard Properties, Mortgage Contracting Services or Altisource is going to make good on the debts either! We have recommended that Barz simply Lien the properties and have offered to assist him. — Our thanks to a Reader whom sent the Order to us!
In re: JASON J. MAZEI, Chapter 11, Debtor.
Case No. 13-47127.
United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division.
August 26, 2013.
ORDER DISMISSING CHAPTER 11 CASE, AND DENYING UNITED STATES TRUSTEE’S MOTION TO CONVERT, AS MOOT
THOMAS J. TUCKER, Bankruptcy Judge.
The Debtor has not filed a plan and disclosure statement, which was due to be filed no later than August 6, 2013. Nor has Debtor filed a motion to extend the August 6, 2013 deadline, either by the July 8, 2013 deadline for such a motion, or otherwise. See Order Establishing Deadlines and Procedures,” filed May 1, 2013 (Docket # 22, the “Scheduling Order”) at ¶¶ 1(c), 1(i), 10.
The Scheduling Order states, in ¶ 1(i), that the deadline for the Debtor to file a motion to extend the time to file a plan is July 8, 2013. Paragraph 10 of the Scheduling Order states, in pertinent part, that:
Any such motion [to extend the deadline to file a plan and disclosure statement] must be filed by the deadline in paragraph 1i. The motion must demonstrate by affidavit or otherwise that the request is necessary due to extraordinary and unforeseen circumstances.
The Scheduling Order further states, in ¶ 2, that if the Debtor fails to meet the deadline for filing a combined plan and disclosure statement, “the case may be dismissed or converted to Chapter 7 pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(4).” See 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b)(4)(J); see also In re Tax Shop, Inc., 173 B.R. 605, 607 n.3 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1994) (“The Court’s authority to dismiss a Chapter 11 case sua sponte in appropriate circumstances is clear under 11 U.S.C. § 105(a), which grants bankruptcy judges the broad authority to take action `necessary or appropriate … to prevent an abuse of process.’”); In re Nikron, Inc., 27 B.R. 773, 777 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. 1983) (holding that “a [bankruptcy] court has the sua sponte power to convert or dismiss a chapter 11 case”)(relying on the court’s “inherent power and duty to control its docket, to preserve its integrity, and to insure that the legislation administered by the court will accomplish the legislative purpose”); In re Great American Pyramid Joint Venture, 144 B.R. 780, 789 (Bankr. W.D. Tenn. 1992) (“[A] bankruptcy judge may, under section 105(a), as amended, convert or dismiss a case sua sponte even though section 1112(b) explicitly requires that the request be made by a party in interest.”)
IT IS ORDERED that this Chapter 11 case is dismissed under 11 U.S.C. §§ 1112(b)(4) and 105(a).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States Trustee’s motion to convert this case to Chapter 7 (Docket # 30) is denied, as moot. 
 The Court notes that the United States Trustee’s motion to convert does not state any reason why conversion of this case to Chapter 7, rather than dismissal, is in the best interests of creditors.