Dominique Grubisa's own AI bot calls her out on lies

It seems nothing will prevent the continued lies by disgraced property maven Dominique Grubisa and her associated businesses.

Not the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) saying she has a habit of not telling the truth. Not deputy president Bernard McCabe of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) saying her “short sale” strategy appeared to ‘rely on misleading or deceptive conduct’.

Nor Justice Ian Jackman of the Federal Court saying her conduct regarding false representations regarding programs sold through DG Institute was “deliberate and dishonest”. The misrepresentations never end.

Since IA’s most recent article about Grubisa, Property Lovers posted a video about a supposed profit by another Grubisa client. This time it was in relation to a property in Mt Druitt in Sydney, which was only listed for sale in late July and sold in August. Not by Grubisa’s student but the former owner who sold the property to Grubisa’s student at auction.

That didn’t stop Property Lovers proclaiming that the student had made a $475,000 profit. That profit was according to the video that has since been set to restricted viewing, to be made from demolishing the existing home and building new dwellings on the property. Perhaps a profit will eventuate, but it is clearly false is that this deal has resulted in a profit already.

Indeed, Property Lover’s GPT, “Erin the Estimator”, had some doubts about whether a profit would be made from the site based on comparable sales in the suburb, the land size and the price paid for the site. No doubt time will tell. However, contrary to assetions the deal has resulted in a profit, no profit has yet been made. This is a recurring theme for Grubisa and her associated businesses.

Property Lovers has again, in a different context, been loose with the truth. This time in a recent video (at around 16 mins and 15 seconds in), a claim is made that “Erin the Estimator” is “connected to every Bunnings store in Australia”. “Erin” apparently knows the “price of every nail, screw or bit of wood”.

Well, not surprisingly, “Erin” denied that was the case.

(Screenshot via chatgpt.com)

“Erin”, continued [IA emphasis]:

Under Australian Consumer Law, making false claims or misleading statements in advertising is considered illegal. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) regulates this and can take action if a company or individual engages in misleading or deceptive conduct. This includes making inaccurate claims about product features, such as stating that I (Erin the Estimator) have access to Bunnings' real-time data, which I don’t.

It was only in April of this year that Justice Ian Jackman determined that Grubisa’s company, Master Wealth Control Pty Ltd, trading as DG Institute, had made false or misleading representations that programs sold by that company had a “benefit” which it did not have and that Grubisa was knowingly concerned in that contravention.

When the determination of the Federal Court was brought to “Erin’s” attention, she suggested given the previous findings of misleading conduct, that the ACCC should take “swift action”. She also suggested that Property Lovers should undergo a thorough review to ensure that all claims, particularly those regarding its affiliations (like the claim involving Bunnings), are accurate and not misleading.

However, we’ve been here before. In his decision in the AAT, McCabe made numerous adverse findings about Ms Grubisa.

Despite two banning orders, Grubisa is relentless

Dominique Grubisa claims to be radically transparent, relentlessly marching on despite banning orders.

Mr McCabe said:

‘Ms Grubisa did not impress me as somebody who was across her legal obligations, notwithstanding her credentials. She also did not appear to have a commitment to orderly processes and procedures, like reviewing the content of websites.’

Speaking to Grubisa’s use of the personal details of parties to family law proceedings, he said:

‘Given the lax approach the applicant has demonstrated towards legal obligations in the past, there is every reason to believe she might fall short in the future.’

Mr McCabe has since been appointed as a judge of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

Since the determinations of Mr McCabe (now Judge McCabe) and Justice Jackman, Grubisa has gone on to continue to make false claims, such as repeated false claims about her asset protection strategy and false claims about what happened with her parents.

Grubisa’s habitual lying is simply off the charts. From claiming she had a patent she did not, to claiming legal documents were her creation when they were documents obtained from a UK based legal template company, to blatant plagiarism and appropriation of the work of others, time after time. It’s a web of false claims.

When it was suggested in the case before the AAT that false claims about the licences held by Ms Grubisa might have been the work of a copyrighter and not anyone within Ms Grubisa’s business, McCabe said in his decision:

‘Even if I accept Ms Grubisa was the hapless victim of a rogue copywriter, that does her little credit. This was a business that was closely identified with her. At a minimum, she should have had processes in place to review content on her website.’

More murky conduct from Dominique Grubisa and her parents

When it comes to disgraced property maven Dominique Grubisa and her parents, there seems to be no end to the deception.

Mr McCabe added:

‘I accept she may have learned lessons from this experience – or at least realised she must do more to forestall further regulatory action – but the fact she held herself out and has come to downplay the significance of that conduct is a matter of concern.’

We think she hasn’t learned such lessons as the continued misrepresentations show. Grubisa is closely connected with Property Lovers. She has been the face of the organisation. She has fronted the podcasts and has been the focus of the ‘Inside Scoop’ newsletters. She has been the public face of Property Lovers.

The name of Dominique's husband, Kevin Grubisa, the sole director of the company, barely appears on the website. Indeed, his name only appears in the context of Dominique mentioning how he put her on to watching Yellowstone, how it would soon only be Dominique and Kevin at home after two of their children left the family home, and how Kevin and Dominique excelled in the catering at an Easter Sunday family gathering.

Of course, Dominique Grubisa excelled. Could it possibly be any other way? Just as she was, in her words, “magnificent” in her unsuccessful audition at NIDA. Losing out to another hopeful applicant. Someone, who Grubisa described as a “scrawny, skinny girl with tippy tie-dyed clothes, blank greasy hair and yellow teeth” — Cate Blanchett AC. Grubisa claimed that Cate Blanchett was out there “living my life”.

Grubisa never doubts her own brilliance. Even, telling her “students” she was focused on the Dunning-Kruger effect where:

‘...incompetent people over-estimate their abilities, knowledge and skill in an area.’

Justice Ian Jackman said in the liability judgment in the ACCC case that the evidence put by the ACCC caused him to ‘doubt the legal competence of Ms Grubisa’. Indeed, His Honour said in his judgment that ‘he had not formed a high opinion of her legal competence’.

$20 million in penalties dished out to Dominique Grubisa and co

The Federal Court has handed significant penalties to wealth guru Dominique Grubisa and her company.

In the liability hearing in the ACCC case, Justice Jackman challenged Grubisa’s counsel, regarding how a rational person could make the claims that Grubisa did. That didn’t stop Grubisa, who was back at it again making false claims even after His Honour’s decision in the liability case.

It might be difficult this time for Dominique and Kevin Grubisa to explain away misleading claims as the act of an unnamed “rogue copyrighter”. Especially when it is their son Kristian who, according to his Property Lovers app profile, is a video editor of Property Lovers whose role is to:

‘design and create captivating, visuals, sizzle reels, and many many more pieces of collateral for members of the property lovers community.’

None of the regulatory action and adverse findings dissuades Grubisa, who, Trumpian in style, continues and refuses to engage in any act of contrition.

Back to the claims about Bunnings. Well not only did “Erin” deny the claim made by Property Lovers, but so did Bunnings.

In a statement, a Bunnings media spokesperson said:

‘We don’t have any association or business relationship with Property Lovers, including connecting the GPT platform with our stores.’

The question now is what will the ACCC and ASIC do about Grubisa? Disqualified from managing companies by the Federal Court of Australia and by ASIC, false claims continue to be made by the company she has fronted.