BANGOR, Maine — Dueling lawsuits filed in state and federal court that pitted a well-known local real estate against a Veazie couple for whom she marketed a house and their lawyer has been settled, but the details will not be made public.
Last July, Mark and Brenda Michaud sued Tricia Quirk and Dawson Inc., in Penobscot County Superior Court, alleging that Quirk told a couple ready to sign a sales agreement that she could build them a house for the $325,000 they had offered for the Michauds’ home.
Quirk on Dec. 1 sued the couple, their Bangor attorney, A.J. Greif, and his firm, Gilbert and Greif, in federal court, alleging the Michauds illegally recorded Quirk’s conversation with the potential buyers.
A confidentiality agreement prevented attorneys on both sides from commenting on the terms of the settlement. Greif and John Lucy, who represented Quirk and Dawson, declined to comment.
The clerk’s office in U.S. District Court in Bangor was notified of the settlement Thursday, according to the docket for the case available through the federal court system’s Electronic Case Filing system. The clerk’s office at the Penobscot Judicial Center received the same notification on the same day, a clerk there said Tuesday.
The lawsuit filed in state court alleged that Quirk breached her duty to represent the Michauds in the sale of their home. It also alleged that Quirk violated the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act.
The Michauds’ home had been on the market with an asking price of $349,000 for more than a year when in November 2009 a couple visited the Veazie house with Quirk in preparation for making a final offer of $325,000, according to the complaint.
The Michauds sought a minimum of $150,000 in damages from Quirk, the difference between the $175,000 they originally paid for the home and the $325,000 they would have received from the couple.
Lucy, on Quirk’s behalf, sued the Michauds, Greif and his firm in federal court, alleging the Michauds “secretly and unlawfully intercepted numerous private oral communications of Quirk and others through the use of a hidden electronic recording device.”
Lucy alleged that by recording people in their home without their permission, the Michauds violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986. The law, also referred to as the wiretap act, protects wire, oral and electronic communications while they are being made, are in transit, and when they are stored on computers, according to the U.S. Department of Justice website. A section of the law “prohibits the intentional, actual or attempted interception, use, disclosure, or ‘procure[ment] [of] any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept any wire, oral or electronic communication,’” the website states.
Greif said in December that the recording was made with a “nanny cam,” a hidden camera system marketed to parents who want to keep an eye on their children and their caregivers while the parents are at work or away from home for other reasons.
I guess Ms. Quirk got caught this time and didn’t like it. Evidently she didn’t deny it just that they taped her. Good for them. At least it was brought out publicly and she will be much more careful the next time.
Like a wary weasel
Award for best headline disguise of a news story about a prominent person goes to BDN.
Interesting indeed… I wonder if any of the higher-ups at the BDN ever deal with TQ or any of the Q’s professionally.
In other news . . .
Tricia Qurck Dodges Public Court Judgement
So who won in court?
You can assume that by having a non-disclosure agreement, she pays them most of their demand, and in exchange they say NOTHING of her, or the incident whatsoever. If they speak, they forfeit what she’s paid them. At least, that seems to be the most logical way to meet both their needs. She needed this *out* of the headlines. They wanted as much as she was willing to compensate for her underhandedness. So, essentially, both parties get something. Their lawsuit was reasonble though in that they only asked for the difference between their original purchase price, and what the couple desiring to buy was to offer before Quirk talked them into buying a different property she represented. Had it gone forward, they had everything to win, and she had everything to lose.
Explains A lot . I do not feel thier damages to be in the 100+k Range. At the original purchase price the house would have sold fast. Trisha should have bought the house from her at the sellers offer price and resold it. She might have been out 50k or so. Had she been smart enough made the deal with the buyer before it went to court. Its worth what its worth. Maybe a bit less to make quick sale. Not all people have the highest level of integrity . I stick my foot in my mouth sometimes .
If your practices are of the highest quality, you don’t have to worry about who overhears them or how.
Recording a conversation in their own house, I guess Quirk should have been a little more discrete, I hope the Michaud’s got their money
So what about us and the other couples who were recorded without permission. Are you willing to taped at any time whenever you enter someone’s house?
Yeah, so if I have a security camera in my home then I can’t take action against someone who breaks the law in my home and is caught on camera? I don’t think so! That sure would put a lot of camera and security companies out of business. LOL
(They should start putting nannycams in confessionals.)
Security cameras in business and such require notification of those being monitored. It is illegal to make a copy of even a phone conversation without the knowledge of those being taped. Since I was one of the couples unknowingly taped I have a decided different take on the Michauds behavior.
Thanks and I sympathize with your situation, but surely you must have realized you were in a private residence, not a business.
It doesn’t matter private home or not is it illegal to tape any one, even recording a phone call without the other party being aware. Are you aware of the wave of laws that make it illegal to tape police action in public by a cell phone, video camera,ct?
How could that possibly be true for a private home, when it is legal to kill someone trespassing in your home? What about security cameras in stores? P.S. no I am not aware that it is illegal to record a police action with a cell phone.
Google the police pubic recording laws it is scary, and the basic the tenant of the law is that the victim of the police action did not consent to being taped, that way the police don’t have to say the law is to protect them from having their actions publicly aired on You Tube, ect.
It’s not illegal to tape a conversation when one of the participating parties knows (participant-private home owner in his case)…However, a 3rd party can not tape conversations they are not a participant, or party to.. In this case..Home Seller’s private home makes this legal…
I think you should google it rlhoward3rd it is LEGAL to record police as long as it is in public no matter what they are doing!!!as to Mrs Quirk bottom line is she got caught doing something that she was NOT supposed to do and was completley unprofessional and unethical !!also a question for you rlhoward3rd where did the figure of $325,000.00 come from it you never mentioned it???they just made it up???NOT LIKELY but i suppose you have not talked to Mrs Quirk since then either right??LOL
You’d think that if they had a real case against her that the real estate commission would have dealt with her already. I’ve never seen a state of Maine agency wait around to take somebody’s money…interesting case for sure.
I have purchased and sold homes through Tricia Quirk, and found her to be one of the most professional and ethical real estate agents I have ever had the good fortune to deal with. More importantly, I know Tricia personally, and I believe that none of these negative comments are reflective of her in any way, shape or manner. It seems to me that it is unethical for people to make derogatory comments without being willing to share their actual names, rather than some silly, made-up “screen name” that they use to hide behind. Shame on you all! Maria Weinberger
Hasn’t anyone ever told you it is not wise to put your full name on the internet? Who do you think you are, the assistant town manager of Orono or something?
Sounds like you’re a real suck-up for her. Maybe you didn’t get the deal you thought you did through Ms TQ? Now that you’ve tipped your hand, all the bath salts druggies will be watching to see when they can crash at your home. You may want to install a security nanny cam now. Just don’t get caught recording because the crooks will sue you in court?
Silly Weinberger, so naive, as witnessed by your choice of “friends” and business associates.
Sad really, you will learn as we all have, but the hard way by your own mistakes.
Live and learn.
I find it very interesting that the reporter states as fact that “a couple visited the Veazie house with Quirk in preparation for making a final offer of $325,000” but never bothered to actually ask the couple in question if that is accurate. We are the couple in question and that statement is completely false. At no time were we ever near making an offer for the home in question. We have lived in three homes in the 25 years since I finished residency and all have been new construction. New construction has always been, and was at that time, our first and foremost option. It is also interesting that no one seems to be disturbed by the likely illegal taping by the Michauds. A weak argument can perhaps be made that Ms. Quirk was employed by the Michauds and thus may fall under the nanny cam argument, however my wife and I (and as I understand other couples as well) clearly do not fall under that category and the taping of our conversation is clearly, if not illegal, highly unethical.
It was Their Home and they did not broadcast the security footage publicly.
The only unethical action was by Ms TQ.
Word to the wise, find another agent. One that will work for your best interests.
To Lakesregion..Not necessarily….If you have someone who is intent on discrediting what ever you say, or do, especially, if there is financial , or other, gain for themselves to discredit you, AND especially if it can distract a negative situation going on with themselves…It’s convenient to shift the blame. I’m not saying Tricia is innocent, or guilty, I don’t know all the details.. But, I do know, people like to blame others, and by standers take joy in throwing rocks, regardless of facts and truth. To say highest standards of honesty and integrity save you from being wrongly accused, and the general public, peers, or media, will come to save you, is a huge illusion. Believe me you are not innocent until proven guilty, but quite the opposite, and it won’t ring true to you until you find yourself in a situation of being wrongly accused of ill-doing and spending a lot of time an money to prove otherwise…and, even when you do, they’ll be some that find it more entertaining to not believe the truth… As once said..some people just “Can’t handle the truth”..
Basically, it’s a loose-loose situation..With legal fees making the attorney’s the winners…
To say Tricia basically walks on water, without error and highest standards, MIGHT be an exaggeration, just as much as saying she is a crook.. No one really knows the whole story from each parties particular point of view….the small details may not be news worthy for a sensational story, but could be rather profound in the what was really going on… Why do people find it so necessary to attach themselves to such judgmental statements with so little information…either for or against either party?…Is it a reflection of their own fears, or own weaknesses?.. Focus on your own life’s.your own stories, your own highest (unconditional) integrity and honesty pure of any manipulation…That should keep you all busy enough to not notice everyone else’s imperfections…
So don’t read the Bangor Daily News . . . Inquiring minds want to know.