Complaint Review: Jill Jones Soderman The Foundation For The Child Victims Of The Family Courts The Open Mind - Nyack New York

Jill Jones Soderman's recap of the events that took place in the Clark/Sirgant matter is a complete fabrication of the truth and shows Soderman's true evil character.  This woman is a sociopath.  Her delusional mind makes Soderman a dangerous person and not an individual who should be assisting families.  No proof exists that she has ever done anything favorable for any family recently!  In fact, one of her patients alleged that it was Soderman's lies that ended her long custody battle, where Soderman's claim that she is a licensed therapist, lost her custody of her child.  Soderman's letters and reports were thrown out in court, when the opposing attorney proved that Soderman was a fraud and her opinion in this case was of no value to the judge.  Soderman is NOT a PhD yet she adds those letters to her name on every document. Soderman has lost her license to practice in multiple states, yet she continues to misrepresent her credentials. She is a scam artist.  

She states that in the Clark/Sirgant case they desperately needed her help, when in fact, recorded phone calls prove that Clark/Sirgant simply called Soderman for advice and it was Soderman who insisted that Clark/Sirgant had a multi-million dollar law suit that she and and her collegues would represent in a law suit. Soderman states that Sirgant acted out and made threats, when in fact, Clark/Sirgant have recorded phone calls and voicemail messages from Soderman with her out of control and screaming, after Clark/Sirgant revealed she was a fraud.  When Clark/Sirgant asked to speak to the attorney affiliated with their case, Soderman refused to allow it and stated that Clark/Sirgant were required to pay Soderman $10,000 and the attorney $10,000 before work would continue.  When Clark/Sirgant called out her foundation, who did work for other litigants for free, Soderman backed down on the $20,000 and said she would take less money paid in installments.  Clark/Sirgant paid Soderman her initial fee of $1,000, so the fact that Soderman states here that they did NOT pay for services, is a complete lie - the file contains a cancelled check from Soderman. I am working closely with Clark/Sirgant on their case and Soderman wrote egregious letters to Clark's judge, which contained threats and accusations towards the very judge who would preside over an upcoming hearing. Soderman's letter infurirated this judge and Clark's attorney had to go to great lengths to prove to the judge that Soderman was out of her mind and sent that letter without Clark's approval.

Clark notes in his file that Clark/Sirgant were summoned to Soderman's "office" which was actually her home. Soderman's health was as such that she cannot walk up/down stairs and was unable to answer the door when Clark/Sirgant arrived. Soderman yelled over the numerous barking dogs for them to let themselves in. Once inside Soderman's home, they were hit with a wave of foul odors of animal urine/feces. The filfth was apparent and overwhelming.  Clark/Sirgant note that they "hesitated to sit on the dining room chairs as they were riddled with filth, badly stained and smelled like urine."  The file notes that Soderman was unable to articulate a sentence. She attempted to speak in legal terms, but was making no sense in her statements. Go to You Tube and search for Soderman's videos and you will see proof of this.  At this meeting, Soderman was unable to type or use a laptop and directed Sirgant to type notes and letters as she spoke. Clark/Sirgant could not make sense of her letters and spent 4 hours with Soderman that day editing and rewriting letters and briefs to the court.  Soderman was not the least bit concerned that Clark had an upcoming motion and her lack of urgency was concerning. One of Soderman's letters to the judge, she inserted herself into Clark's case improperly. In fact, attorneys who have reviewed this file were appalled at the manner Soderman alerted the court that she was a third party in this case. There is a certain protocol that is followed and Soderman obviously had no knowledge of this protocol.  Soderman wrote the letter in such a way that the average person would have no idea what she was asking and either did the judge.

Soderman may (or may not) have been a therapist in her past, but the woman today is not a therapist and does not know what she is doing.  Soderman is infamous with attorneys and known as "crazy" and has no significance in a court room.  Soderman tries to insert herself in high profile cases by attempting to speak law language, when really she is just speaking in circles and makes no sense.  The fact that the Clark/Sirgant file shows proof of all Soderman's lies above is concerning and disturbing.  It shoudl be mentioned that after Soderman completely botched the Clark case, Clark/Sirgant requested a refund of their initial $1,000 retainer and Soderman refused to refund it.  Soderman did absolutely nothing in this case, in fact, Soderman had Sirgant type up the letters and briefs after giving an excuse that she was unable to type that day. Soderman is slow, she repeats her words constantly, and there is something mentally wrong with Soderman. Don't be scammed by Soderman and don't allow her to touch your case as it will turn to dust. Clark/Sirgant fully trusted Soderman and all her empty promises and until Soderman showed her true colors, her lying, her misrepresentation of her credentials, and her outrageous behavior once she was "caught" that's when Soderman decided to rewrite the history of this story.  Soderman is a fraud!! 

A note on trying to bully us:

Having faced the brutal retaliation of the courts and related government agencies set out to defame, discredit, undermine the credibility of the FCVFC and staff, even questioning that the Foundation exists as a non-profit agency, we chose not to respond to the bullying tactics of liars and cowards.

We ignored blackmail threats expecting that the public would not give any credibility to an anonymous threat. Further, our position has been that anyone who gave credence to vicious, false statements were not clients with whom we would want to engage. Taking on the blood sport tactics of the courts does not square with dealing with clients who are naive or suspicious given the publishing and record of the Foundation's work.

The Foundation has concrete proof of the blackmail threats of individuals who were not clients of the Foundation. Our new resolve is to begin posting the names and facts surrounding this.

When the Foundation files complaints against authorities, complaints are filed with permission of the client and the name of the complainant filing a well documented statement of facts.

A note on threats:

Sometimes people who make threats follow through!

The Foundation and our staff will never give in to threats whether it be with anonymous fraudulent complaints on Rip Off Report ( Refer to the Blog of May 7th 2008 " New York & Thoughts on Jill Jones --Soderman posted below)

or an e mail address set up to collect false complaints through advertising on the internet written by Christine Sirgent the vindictive girl friend who was denied participation in meetings dealing with consultation on her boyfriend's high conflict custody case which had been ongoing for many years. The girl friend was not a party to the action, was not married to the litigant and could potentially testify against the litigant.

The litigant Joshua Clark never paid for an initial extensive document review begun 5/10/2014 and a five hour consultation at the office of an accountant 5/29/2014. The accountant, a member of the Foundation Board wouldhave been a critical part of the forensic team that would have worked on Mr. Clark's case for a minimal fee based on a minimal payment plan offered by Mr. Clark . Mr. Clark and Ms. Sirgent called our office repeatedly, spoke to staff of the Foundation. Out of sympathy for their pleas to meet with us we agreed to review documents and see what help could be offered based on an evaluation of the case. Mr. Clark never paid any part of fees charged by the Foundation though Mr. Clark and Ms. Sirgent placed in writing demands for money from the foundation with the threat that if we did not pay they would write negative comments about the Foundation.

Mr. Clark was dismissed as a client in part because his girl friend Ms. Sirgent proved to be completely out of control as to her demands and interference in the case. In reviewing documents on Mr, Clark's case it appeared that the Court in which his case was being litigated felt the same way. We have a full compliment of the documents, e mailed demands then threats sent by Ms. Sirgent, whom often wrote e mails as if she was in fact Mr. Clark, a fact easily discernible in comparison of writing styles of Ms. Sirgent and Mr. Clark.

While it had been our policy not to respond to cyber bullying, blackmail, various threats, the Foundation Board has currently ruled that any threats to any of our staff will be referred to the police and to our attorneys to avoid the ability of malevolent individuals to anonymously file complaints so they can avoid responsibility for their false allegations. In view of the fact that we have a complete set of documents from which we can prove our position, we have no problem responding to false allegations of those who may run but cannot hide!

Jill Jones-Soderman

Executive Director

FCVFC.ORG

Commentary on Rip Off Report

Actual words of Karl Hindle

×

1 / 0

❮ ❯

Is everyone crazy who disagrees with the poster?  Is everyone Jill herself or her cousin/niece/mother/aunt?  What a rebuttal.  People have different experiences than you, deal with it.  What a horrible person you must be to not allow for a difference in opinion.  My experience was far different from yours.  Sorry if that makes you rage.

If Soderman did not write these rebuttals herself, then whoever wrote them is delusional. Soderman is a fraud and a fake. She preys on vulnerable individuals to take any and all money they may have for a promise to FIX their corrupt family case. She is nothing more than a woman who thinks she talks a good talk, but the bottom line is she has dementia and repeats herself constantly and forgets important facts. She is a complete fraud and people need to stay away from her. She runs from state to state to escape the chaos she creates wherever she goes. 

I have known Jill Jones Soderman for almost forty years and was present while she was a graduate student. After her PHD she persued further post graduate training in forensics. I was also present when Jill was developing the Foundation.

I am aware of people who attempted to extort money and services from her. As a client, I know that she does not deal with insurance companies in order to protect client confidenciality. Clients are billed for services rendered. In all the years I've known her and referred clients to her, I've never known her to engage in unethical or illegal action.

Both I and the clients I referred have benifited from her services.

Jill helped  me and my ex husband weather a very emotional divorce.  Even my ex thinks she is amazing.  Neither of us has ever had a better therapist.  Fearlessly, she has gone after the courts in NJ and elsewhere, and these lies have popped up quite coincidentally... not.  Also, she is the one who gets ripped off all the time by patients who do not pay her!  I have personal knowledge of at least one of them!  She is generous and very very smart.  She couldn't rip off someone if she wanted to.  it's just not in her makeup.