The Latest On The Capital Werks Leasing Scandal

Mark McQuitty Page and Greenbridge Commercial Page Updated Saturday November 17, 2007

WHEN DOES THIS SITE GETS UPDATED?

I've gotten many emails asking "how often will the site be updated?" I’ll update the site when I learn of new developments. Sign up for free email updates. No spam. No Ads. Sent only for a major development. Sign Up at the Bottom of Page.

“I Quit Because I Could Not Sleep At Night”
Inside Capital Werks
Ex-Employee Comes Forward
“Raeder Running New Company Under Different Name”
“Most Employees Quit When FBI Probe Began”

Crooks Get Justice
I saw your website and my first reaction was laughter. 
Not because of your idea, but due to me being a former Capital Werks employee.  You brought back many memories and it’s really good to see these crooks finally get their justice. 

Raeder/McQuitty Running New Company
Like Leasing Guru said in a previous response, these con artists operate under a new name in the same location. 
That name is Select Business Credit. 
So maybe you should add that to your list of companies. (See: BBB Report)
Select is run by Jim Raeder and Mark McQuitty thru their puppets on paper, Andy Petty who you mention on your site and "GM" J.C. Siddiqui. 
You might want to look into the criminal record of (name witheld)
When I was at CW, I overheard him talking about the time he spent in prison.
(Editor Note: The BBB Report says that the office of “Select Business Credit” is located in the same building, and on same floor as Capital Werks)

When FBI Rumors Surfaced, Employees Vanished
Roughly 13 months ago, Capital Werks was operating under Preferred Lease with roughly 60 sales people.  Once the rumor got out about an investigation, most of us jumped ship to legitimate banks or leasing companies. 

Capital Werks “Dirtiest Player”
Not everyone in the industry is dirty. 
But CW is the dirtiest player in the game. 
Many former CW sales people have started leasing companies under the same business model they learned under Jim Raeder and Mark McQuitty. 
From, the fax blasting under pseudo company names similar to their own. thru Canadian servers with fake sales people names on a "pre-approved" lease line, to the “bump,” an industry term for low-balling proposals only to raise the payment once the deposit check clears, to simply “check jacking,” another term that refers to simply getting a deposit check for commission knowing there is no chance at approval, these companies do it all. 

Confession
I admit, as a CW employee I did “bump” some of my clients.  The reason why I left CW is my conscience wouldn’t let me sleep.  I now work for a publicly traded bank and we fire people for doing what employees at CW were trained to do.

A Warning to Others
Thanks for posting this site. I hope it helps naive small business owners understand that sometimes what they hear is really too good to be true.

We have sent both a fax and a certified letter to “Select Business Credit” asking for comment. When/if we get a comment, we will post it.

News Release From US Attorney

Inside the FBI Sting

SIGN UP FOR UPDATES

SIGN UP FOR UPDATES

Neither the domain name for this page, nor the website is for sale to anyone, at anytime, for any price. This website does not generate any revenue and is run solely for informational purposes only. This website is fully compliant with anti-cyber squatting laws. Repeat: The domain name is NOT for Sale. The website is NOT for sale.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996) is a landmark piece of Internet legislation in the United States. Section 230(c)(1) provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an "interactive computer service" who publish information provided by others:
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
In analyzing the availability of the immunity offered by this provision, courts generally apply a three-prong test. A defendant must satisfy each of the three prongs to gain the benefit of the immunity:
1. The defendant must be a "provider or user" of an "interactive computer service."
2. The cause of action asserted by the plaintiff must "treat" the defendant "as the publisher or speaker" of the harmful information at issue.
3. The information must be "provided by another information content provider," i.e., the defendant must not be the "information content provider" of the harmful information at issue.
Courts across the country have upheld Section 230 immunity in a variety of factual contexts and on numerous legal theories, including posting defamatory information, private information, false information, pornographic information, and discriminatory housing ads.

Legal Notice Concerning The Contents of This Website, Your Privacy and Our Terms of Service.

Link Back to Leasing Company Fraud