Explore, connect, thrive in
the expat community

Expat Life: Local Discoveries, Global Connections

Apartment Rental Stay away from this apartment rental

BeliCaise

New member
My six-month sojourn in Buenos Aires concluded on a sour note this past Tuesday when I fell victim to a scam, losing the deposit for the apartment I had rented for three months starting in August. The owner of the apartment, Valeria de Santos, is associated with a unit in Recoleta, situated at Larrea 1393, at the intersection of French, specifically apartment #PB2. I discovered this rental opportunity on Craigslist and, enticed by the prospect of living in a nice area at a reasonable cost, decided to go for it. In hindsight, opting for a rental through an agency or a referral might have been a wiser choice.

On the day of my departure, I informed Valeria that I needed to check out at noon due to a prearranged cab waiting to take me to the airport. She arrived late, accompanied by her mother, and conducted an inspection of the apartment, ensuring everything was in order (which it was). Valeria then informed me that my deposit was awaiting me at her mother's office, purportedly just a few blocks away, off Pueyrredon and Santa Fe. She asked if her mother could ride in the cab with me, disembarking at her office to retrieve the deposit and return it to me.

Having interacted directly with the mother earlier when I first moved into the apartment, I didn't find her suggestion suspicious at the time. However, in retrospect, I recognize several mistakes on my part. Firstly, I handed back the keys to Valeria before receiving my deposit. Secondly, I failed to accompany her mother to the supposed "office" after dropping her off at the corner, choosing instead to wait for her in the cab with my luggage.

The mother disappeared down the street and never returned. After waiting for 45 minutes, making numerous unsuccessful calls to Valeria, and realizing I couldn't miss my flight, I reluctantly left with the driver. I tried reaching Valeria multiple times at the airport, followed by emails, all without any response. I finally connected with her on Wednesday, and despite her assurance that she would wire the funds via PayPal that same day, the transaction never materialized. Subsequent attempts to contact her have been met with silence. My frustration escalated to the point where I threatened to board a plane the next day and confront her, a notion I'd entertain if I were confident in tracking her down.

What perplexes me is that Valeria and her mother were pleasant to deal with throughout my three-month stay in the apartment, promptly responding to calls and emails and addressing any issues promptly. It's bewildering that they would resort to such deception at the very end.

My relentless pursuit of justice involves continued calls, emails, and any form of harassment directed at Valeria and her mother until I recover my money. Perhaps I'll find myself back in Buenos Aires sooner than expected. For now, my aim is to share my ordeal on every relevant forum, shedding light on my experience and, hopefully, preventing others from making similar mistakes.
 
I've lived in Buenos Aires for many years but never got into the groove of hanging out with Ex-Pats. After I moved here I don't think I ever had the desire to hang out with Ex-Pats. I visited this website forum many years ago but I saw a lot of fighting so I never joined.

But I found this page from a link on Trip Advisor and wanted to say I'm impressed with all your hard work on this girl that conned this tourist. Shame on her.

Keep up the good fight.
 
This whole this doesn't make any sense. Why would a person rent out an apartment cheap (apparently under market) to make $200US at the end of the rental period?
 
This whole this doesn't make any sense. Why would a person rent out an apartment cheap (apparently under market) to make $200US at the end of the rental period?
Some possibilities:
1. Arrogance; self-delusion:
A landlord who knows he's a very special person who deserves way more from life. The world will just have to adjust to this. No victim with half a brain will object because the very fact that he's been humiliated so easily proves that the landlord is smarter and more deserving.

2. Jealousy; bitterness:
Why should these foreigners who deserve less than me have more money when they're trash? It's a badge of honour and success, and completely justified to deceive and defraud jerks.

3. Addictive personality, opportunistic, anti-social:
A landlord has become addicted to risk-taking and needs the high it gives him when his so carefully laid trap (no rental contract, a nice-guy facade, impeccable focus on the con) come to fruition in that irrevocable second when the victim discovers with a jolt that he's misplaced his trust and can't do a thing about it. Don't forget to chill the champagne for tomorrow night! ....It's not about the size of the treasure but the size of an ego, and an inability to change unless caught, exposed and penalized.
 
If she were to pursue legal action, her options might include:

  1. Danos y perjuicios (civil)
  2. Calumnia y injurias (criminal)
However, invoking injurias could be complicated, especially since one of the victims, Bradly, is aware of her real identity and could potentially file a denuncia policial. As for calumnias, it might not be applicable.

The primary recourse could be through danos y perjuicios. Nevertheless, considering the established fact that she used two other identities, and two individuals experienced similar scams with the same modus operandi, it becomes challenging to establish damages. The potential harm, such as facing difficulties in renting an apartment again or being known for using multiple aliases, may not hold strong in legal terms.

Moreover, there's the possibility, though unconfirmed, that her credentials may have been embellished.

Regarding whom to sue, the options are unclear. It could involve the webmaster in the U.S. or each individual who contributed information to the thread.

Despite Dennis posing a valid question about the collective anger resulting from numerous scams, it's essential to remember that the information shared in this thread will persist for five years. While she may not be comparable to Madoff, her actions have left a lasting impact. The thread serves as a resource for future reference, ensuring that any potential foreigner facing challenges in Argentina, especially in housing deals conducted online, can be redirected to this thread, providing a cautionary tale and guidance.

Cheers.
 
If she were to pursue legal action, her options might include:

  1. Danos y perjuicios (civil)
  2. Calumnia y injurias (criminal)
However, invoking injurias could be complicated, especially since one of the victims, Bradly, is aware of her real identity and could potentially file a denuncia policial. As for calumnias, it might not be applicable.

The primary recourse could be through danos y perjuicios. Nevertheless, considering the established fact that she used two other identities, and two individuals experienced similar scams with the same modus operandi, it becomes challenging to establish damages. The potential harm, such as facing difficulties in renting an apartment again or being known for using multiple aliases, may not hold strong in legal terms.

Moreover, there's the possibility, though unconfirmed, that her credentials may have been embellished.

Regarding whom to sue, the options are unclear. It could involve the webmaster in the U.S. or each individual who contributed information to the thread.

Despite Dennis posing a valid question about the collective anger resulting from numerous scams, it's essential to remember that the information shared in this thread will persist for five years. While she may not be comparable to Madoff, her actions have left a lasting impact. The thread serves as a resource for future reference, ensuring that any potential foreigner facing challenges in Argentina, especially in housing deals conducted online, can be redirected to this thread, providing a cautionary tale and guidance.

Cheers.
I've been following this thread for a while now, and while it's evident that this woman is involved in some form of scam, my concern lies in the lack of moderation regarding the content of this discussion.

My point is, the individual in question hasn't had the opportunity to defend herself against the alleged accusations and has essentially been subjected to what could be considered widespread criticism (albeit not necessarily in the legal sense). Frankly, this aspect troubles me. In the current situation, it's clear that this woman is likely not innocent. However, I can't help but wonder about the potential consequences if someone were to fabricate a well-constructed story to defame a business rival, a former employee or employer, a friend, and so on.

Crafting two or three user names and reporting a "similar" incident could be a relatively simple way to manipulate such situations. In cases where someone's reputation and livelihood could be permanently damaged, I believe there should be a bit more confirmation beyond anecdotal evidence and an opportunity for the accused party to respond before delving into extensive research on their public records.

Just sharing my two cents here, and I don't mean to come across as confrontational.
 
I've been following this thread for a while now, and while it's evident that this woman is involved in some form of scam, my concern lies in the lack of moderation regarding the content of this discussion.

My point is, the individual in question hasn't had the opportunity to defend herself against the alleged accusations and has essentially been subjected to what could be considered widespread criticism (albeit not necessarily in the legal sense). Frankly, this aspect troubles me. In the current situation, it's clear that this woman is likely not innocent. However, I can't help but wonder about the potential consequences if someone were to fabricate a well-constructed story to defame a business rival, a former employee or employer, a friend, and so on.

Crafting two or three user names and reporting a "similar" incident could be a relatively simple way to manipulate such situations. In cases where someone's reputation and livelihood could be permanently damaged, I believe there should be a bit more confirmation beyond anecdotal evidence and an opportunity for the accused party to respond before delving into extensive research on their public records.

Just sharing my two cents here, and I don't mean to come across as confrontational.
She has had plenty of chances to defend herself before this thread really blew up. First when I called and e-mailed her at least 20 times with no response and before I decided to take this public, and then again after I posted this thread. It was clear that she saw the thread because not long after I posted it, all of her Craigslist ads, personal website, blogs, business sites, etc., were immediately deactivated, as were all of her multiple e-mail addresses and phone numbers. If she was in fact innocent and wanted to defend herself, she certainly had the opportunities to step up to the plate. Instead, she tried to cover her tracks. If you don't buy my story, I don't know what to tell you.
 
She has had plenty of chances to defend herself before this thread really blew up. First when I called and e-mailed her at least 20 times with no response and before I decided to take this public, and then again after I posted this thread. It was clear that she saw the thread because not long after I posted it, all of her Craigslist ads, personal website, blogs, business sites, etc., were immediately deactivated, as were all of her multiple e-mail addresses and phone numbers. If she was in fact innocent and wanted to defend herself, she certainly had the opportunities to step up to the plate. Instead, she tried to cover her tracks. If you don't buy my story, I don't know what to tell you.
It's clear you skimmed through my post rather than reading it. I clearly stated she did not appear to be innocent. If you can't read I don't know what to tell you.
 
It's clear you skimmed through my post rather than reading it. I clearly stated she did not appear to be innocent. If you can't read I don't know what to tell you.
You're right, I went back and you did say that, my bad. About her not being able to defend herself though, she really had many, many chances. This is a public forum and the door was open for her to call me on my bullshit if she wanted to. I think the thread would have taken on a different tone if she had come on here and said something like, for example, "I didn't return the deposit because the apartment was damaged." It would have brought some balance to the discussions and maybe readers would have started questioning whether I indeed had ulterior motives. I even tried sending her an e-mail with a link to the thread but at that point she had cut off all the contact info I had of hers.
 
She obviously knows this forum exists. She's registered here before, and even posted an ad advertising her services last year. It has since fallen off the deep end, so you'll have to take my word on that too. If I'm not mistaken, this is her account: http://baexpats.org/members/VerBuenosAires.html ... If she wanted to defend herself, she would have come out and said that we were all liars.

The information that's been posted on this thread is publicly available via various sites. Yes, let me say that again: This information is available publicly, for anyone to see. She'd first have to sue Google, her own government, and herself for posting all of the pictures of herself on her own blog.

Regrettably, I kept myself silent on this last year in this thread: http://baexpats.org/expat-life/7175-no-contract-strange-circumstances.html Perhaps if I would have said something, Bailey and others wouldn't have been scammed out of their deposits. But I erred on the side of caution, and never posted any specific information about the incident.

Everyone should be warned about her, and the fact that anyone would come to her defense (especially after reading this thread) is more worrisome than anything else. As Bailey said, she's had plenty of opportunities to defend herself. But she wouldn't even have had to defend herself if she had given me a contract, fixed my air conditioner, given Bailey back his deposit, or given the guy who they scammed before me (according to one of my neighbors in that building, as I reported in my thread in December of '09) his deposit back.

Read the thread again. With regard to myself, I think I've been more than fair with Florencia Marina Doud. She's lucky that I've kept my mouth shut for this long -- almost a whole year. Question is, how long has she been scamming people who ended up having the same attitude as me?
 
She obviously knows this forum exists. She's registered here before, and even posted an ad advertising her services last year. It has since fallen off the deep end, so you'll have to take my word on that too. If I'm not mistaken, this is her account: http://baexpats.org/members/VerBuenosAires.html ... If she wanted to defend herself, she would have come out and said that we were all liars.

The information that's been posted on this thread is publicly available via various sites. Yes, let me say that again: This information is available publicly, for anyone to see. She'd first have to sue Google, her own government, and herself for posting all of the pictures of herself on her own blog.

Regrettably, I kept myself silent on this last year in this thread: http://baexpats.org/expat-life/7175-no-contract-strange-circumstances.html Perhaps if I would have said something, Bailey and others wouldn't have been scammed out of their deposits. But I erred on the side of caution, and never posted any specific information about the incident.

Everyone should be warned about her, and the fact that anyone would come to her defense (especially after reading this thread) is more worrisome than anything else. As Bailey said, she's had plenty of opportunities to defend herself. But she wouldn't even have had to defend herself if she had given me a contract, fixed my air conditioner, given Bailey back his deposit, or given the guy who they scammed before me (according to one of my neighbors in that building, as I reported in my thread in December of '09) his deposit back.

Read the thread again. With regard to myself, I think I've been more than fair with Florencia Marina Doud. She's lucky that I've kept my mouth shut for this long -- almost a whole year. Question is, how long has she been scamming people who ended up having the same attitude as me?

It seems you and Bailey may be overlooking the core of my message. What I expressed has no connection to your specific situation with her. While you focus on your issue, my concern lies more with the moderation aspect. Let's move past it.

Adding to my earlier comment: there's nothing inherently wrong with warning the public about a potential scam, sharing personal experiences, and advising others on how to handle similar situations. For instance, saying, "I had a negative experience with this person renting out an apartment. I suggest avoiding business with them. They have a new ad on Craigslist, and here's the link for awareness." Offering practical advice, such as reporting to AFIP, is also acceptable. However, when individuals swiftly delve into uncovering photos, numbers, law associations, etc., within hours, it becomes problematic, especially if accusations haven't been thoroughly verified. This involves meddling with someone's career and reputation, which could have enduring consequences.

My primary point is that this is where moderators should have intervened to establish boundaries. It appears to have turned into a free-for-all, driven by board members rightfully angered and frustrated after falling victim to scams in Argentina. The ease of access to public records might be what discomforts me. To reiterate, I'm not suggesting this woman is innocent; I'm addressing concerns about potential situations in the future. Anyway, good night, and feel free to continue as you see fit.
 
This whole this doesn't make any sense. Why would a person rent out an apartment cheap (apparently under market) to make $200US at the end of the rental period?

Some possibilities:
1. Arrogance; self-delusion:
A landlord who knows he's a very special person who deserves way more from life. The world will just have to adjust to this. No victim with half a brain will object because the very fact that he's been humiliated so easily proves that the landlord is smarter and more deserving.

2. Jealousy; bitterness:
Why should these foreigners who deserve less than me have more money when they're trash? It's a badge of honour and success, and completely justified to deceive and defraud jerks.

3. Addictive personality, opportunistic, anti-social:
A landlord has become addicted to risk-taking and needs the high it gives him when his so carefully laid trap (no rental contract, a nice-guy facade, impeccable focus on the con) come to fruition in that irrevocable second when the victim discovers with a jolt that he's misplaced his trust and can't do a thing about it. Don't forget to chill the champagne for tomorrow night! ....It's not about the size of the treasure but the size of an ego, and an inability to change unless caught, exposed and penalized.
 
LA to BA:
Re your comments of:
“But when people start digging up photos, numbers, law associations, etc etc within a matter of hours I think that's a problem”,
“You seem to be stuck on your issue, but what I find troubling has nothing to with that. It was more about moderation.”
“You are messing with someone's career, with someone's reputation that could have lasting consequences.” And
“Hey it could just be the fact that public records are so readily accessible is what makes me uncomfortable.”
Clearly, you don’t need to worry. The fact that this thread is intact and online implies that it has been properly moderated and that defamation has not occurred. You seem to think that people should start from a blank slate of having no information and remain uninformed because you call searching and finding published information “digging” and a “problem”. Didn’t you have to conduct research during your education?
No victim in connection with warning others of danger by reporting a crime has to sustain alone the impact of that by not finding out how that person has been conducting her business affairs, who else has been hurt and how, and generally the extent of dishonesty, and how to redress it. Ditto readers and contributors.
When we’ve known for over a decade at least how quickly info can be accessed, how genuine can our surprise be? It’s impressive, yes, to see what we understood beforehand occur in real time. Perhaps a century ago some felt it dangerous or uncouth to get from point A to B so quickly in a car but we probably didn’t tell this new kind of driver to stay home, ride a horse or cover the car with a blanket so as to not shock our sensibilities by moving so far so fast. A decade later, Henry Ford was mass-producing cars for the middle class. Quicker and broader access to published info is just another development in speed and breadth.
There is no duty of secrecy owed to the perpetrator of this fraud by Bailey, the defrauded renter, nor by we readers and contributors in respect of the published info reprinted, linked and shared here. We don’t live in China. Freedoms that exist only in important documents and that “shouldn’t” be exercised wouldn’t deserve the name.
Are you aware that this temporary rental industry being unregulated means that a landlord receiving rent doesn’t even have to provide the temporary tenant a written rental contract? Or that Argentina’s court system is not practically accessible to any visitor who must fly home as soon as a fraud is completed because the fraud was designed to separate the victim from all access to justice?
It’s easy to do nothing about injurious acts committed upon people. All one has to do to justify turning a blind eye to anything or everything is to propose a hugely generalized ‘what if - oh dear’ scenario as you have so as to ignore, in this instance, the significance of a fraud and its impact upon Bailey, a traveler like you and me. This thread with its mixed fact and opinion has stayed respectably clear of theory and speculation in order to not make wild suppositions or rash and unbased judgments about anyone. I think we’re proud of that. We’re examining a real event, not a theory or notion as you are. This is called “focusing on the problem” and not, may I argue, as being “stuck on our issue”. Focusing reduces the urge to defame or blow off steam. By the way, if you should temporarily rent in BA, this is your issue as much as yours as anyone if you respond to apartment ads.
It’s preposterous to be told that the human ability to read, find published facts, analyze, compare them and then draw or question one another’s and one’s own conclusions – something humanity has been doing since the birth of text - could potentially be an affront to modern society and a fraudster’s good reputation just because we don’t have to trek with 200 pounds on our back uphill thousands of miles to reach far-flung sources of published information . Especially when a lot of that info is out there because the perpetrator advertised her services and high standards towards clients to glean more business. She has been involved in offering online to the foreign public language training, cooking lessons, short rentals of her own property and other tourist services. She has advertised proficiency as a practicing lawyer on 3 continents in order to attract more clients. Thereby she held herself out as being formally bound to a higher than usual standard of care in her dealings with members of the public.
No acts but the perpetrator’s own can or have hurt the perpetrator’s reputation. Her choice of behavior is doing that, presuming it has been sullied. The burden of being personally responsible for one’s acts and their impact does not shift and convert to a duty to secrecy incumbent those hurt or incensed by that fraud.
Compiling and dispersing published info by using a computer available in even the most backward spots on earth is not wrong just because it exposes an intentional fraud by an individual who happens to have a business and used it to commit that fraud.
 
SnowKuper's post is so on target. The mere fact that this unethical woman deleted all her websites and didn't respond to the allegation speaks volumes. It would be common sense for her to post her side of the story if she really had another side and Bailey's post was not true. Instead, she immediately tries to delete all trace of her existence online.

IMHO, if she truly is a lawyer I believe she should lose her law license. In the USA, she would probably end up in jail. She is fortunate that the judicial system here in Argentina is broken.
 
I hate the whole process. I'm currently fighting for $400, and whether its $200, $400, $2000, $10000, the whole point is that it's YOUR money, NOT theirs, they have absolutely no moral (or legal) right to keep any of it.
 
Back
Top