The Anna & Jack’s Treehouse website says the company, owned by Rob and Christina Rubicco, started in 2013 as a home-based, basement childcare facility, and has “48 employees and over 158 families between the locations in New Rochelle & Norwalk and there are active plans to open new centers in Pelham & Greenburgh, which will add another 50 employees and 160+ families.”
The New York State Office of Children and Family Services license child care services in New York. OCFS says it uses “a range of tools to help bring child care programs into compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements” including enforcement actions such as denial, revocation, or suspension of a child care program’s license or registration as well as fines and requiring Corrective Action Plans. OCFS stops referring families to a program if a program’s license or registration is closed, revoked or suspended.
We obtained license-related records from the OCFS database for Anna & Jacks Treehouse (License/Registration ID: 753272) except information on any fines and/or Corrective Action Plans. The OCFS website says such information can be obtained by calling the regional OCFS office. We called — and emailed — OCFS repeatedly. After a week of false promises and stonewalling by OCFS, we referred the matter to Governor Cuomo’s office, but have not heard back.
Our belief is the stonewalling at OCFS has to do with the issue of whether this license should have been issued given the owner’s criminal history.
We believe the public has a right to know if criminals are running day care centers.
We have now submitted an expansive Freedom of Infrastructure request to obtain every record associated with OCFS License/Registration ID: 753272 (Anna and Jack’s Treehouse), Robert Rubicco and Christina Rubicco from 2012 to present. We will update the story accordingly.
In federal court records seen by Talk of the Sound, Rubicco is described as someone who “owns and operates child day care centers and play places” which indicates under federal and New York State law Rubicco is required to undergo a comprehensive background clearance as it relates to his ownership of Anna and Jack’s Treehouse. With OCFS no longer responding to our questions, we cannot be certain, but this appears to us to be at issue.
The federal Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 2014 requires all operators, directors, employees, volunteers, and household members living in a family or group family day care home age 18 years and older who were existing prior to the new regulations and cleared under the prior process to complete the comprehensive background clearance requirements listed above in accordance with a schedule set forth by OCFS.
OCFS published an unofficial compilation of New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations as New York State Child Day Care Regulations (effective January 6, 2021) which includes: §418-1.2 Procedures For Applying For And Renewing A License; (a) Applicants for a license must submit to OCFS; (16) a sworn statement by the applicant indicating whether, to the best of the applicant’s knowledge, the applicant has ever been convicted of a misdemeanor or a felony in New York State or any other jurisdiction, and fingerprint images to comply with the requirements of §413.4.
Later, the same document says if an applicant discloses in the sworn statement that he or she has been convicted of a misdemeanor or felony, the child day care center must inform OCFS and provide a copy of the statement to OCFS so OCFS may take appropriate action in conformance with the provisions of §413.4 Criminal History Review. We have seen no record that this happened.
§413.4 Criminal History Review says as part of any initial application for any child care license or registration the application shall include the submission of fingerprint images for the owner and as part of any renewal application for any child care license or registration the renewal application shall include the submission of fingerprint images for any owner who previously did not have a criminal history record check performed. §413.4 goes on to say OCFS shall perform a criminal history record check regarding any owner who previously did not have a criminal history record check performed in accordance with §413.4 shall have such a criminal history record check performed when the program or facility applies for a renewal of its license or registration.
If OCFS is made aware of the existence of a criminal conviction or pending criminal charge concerning the owner of a child day care center, such conviction or charge may be a basis to deny, reject, limit, suspend, revoke or terminate the license or registration. This may explain OCFS stonewalling us.
When OCFS is made aware of a conviction or charge OCFS shall or may deny the application, depending on the definitions in section 390-b of the Social Services Law, namely whether or not it’s a “felony conviction at any time for a sex offense, crime against a child, or a crime involving violence, or a felony conviction within the past five years for a drug-related offense,” unless OFCS determines, in its discretion, that approval of the application will not in any way jeopardize the health, safety or welfare of the children in the facility or program.
For Current Licensee or Registrants where the criminal history record of a current licensee or registrant of a child care facility or program reveals a conviction for a crime, OCFS shall conduct a safety assessment of the program, and take all appropriate steps to protect the health and safety of the children in the program. OCFS shall deny, limit, suspend, revoke, reject or terminate the license or registration based on such a conviction unless OCFS determines, in its discretion, that the continued operation of the center, home, or program will not in any way jeopardize the health, safety or welfare of the children in care.
Anna & Jacks Treehouse website says the business was operating from 2013 to 2016
OCFS records state Anna & Jacks Treehouse was first licensed on July 5, 2016.
It is not clear whether the Rubiccos operated a child care program without a license for three years or obtained a license through another entity or in their names, but Anna & Jacks Treehouse did not have a license from 2013 to 2016. We have requested this information from OCFS but were stonewalled on this too.
Since obtaining its license, Anna & Jacks Treehouse has been issued 30 violations, an average of 6 per year, including two major violations pertaining to child abuse, one pertaining to background checks, 13 Fire Safety violations of which 3 remained today marked as “Not Corrected”.
On June 2, 2017, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2017-I-YRO-034926 for violating 418-1.11(i)(9) pertaining to vermin on the premises. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On July 25, 2017, National Bank Association filed for foreclosure against Robert Rubicco, Jr., et al. for the property at 3 Kensington Oval.
On June 30, 2017, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2017-I-YRO-041360 for violating 413.4(d)(4) pertaining to failure to obtain and submit fingerprint images for OCFS background checks on job applicants. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On June 30, 2017, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2017-I-YRO-041360 for violating 418-1.8(a) pertaining to leaving children without competent supervision, where “competent supervision” includes awareness of and responsibility for the ongoing activity of each child. It requires that all children be within a teacher’s range of vision and that the teacher be near enough to respond when redirection or intervention strategies are needed. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On June 30, 2017, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2017-I-YRO-041360 for violating 418-1.10(a) pertaining to abuse or maltreatment of a child as defined in Section 412 of the Social Services Law: a day care center must prohibit and may not tolerate or in any manner condone an act of abuse or maltreatment by a staff, volunteer or any other person. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On June 30, 2017, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2017-I-YRO-041360 for violating 418-1.10(c)(1) pertaining to making an immediate report to the Statewide Central Register of Child Abuse and Maltreatment by telephone, followed by a written report within 48 hours to the child protective service of the social services district in the county in which the child resides. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On July 11, 2017, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2017-I-YRO-042824 for violating 418-1.11(c)(2)(iii) pertaining to obtaining professional assistance in emergencies. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On July 11, 2017, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2017-I-YRO-042868 for violating 418-1.5(n)(4) pertaining to children’s use of developmentally appropriate equipment and apparatus. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On July 11, 2017, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2017-I-YRO-042868 for violating 418-1.8(k)(2)(ii) pertaining to exceeding the maximum group size of eight children. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On July 14, 2017, OCFS removed Anna & Jacks Treehouse from the OCFS Referral List. Their license was marked “Pending Revocation”.
On June 15, 2017, Christina Rubicco was named to the 2017 Business Council of Westchester 40 Under 40 Rising Stars list.
EDITOR’S NOTE: According to the Anna & Jack’s Treehouse website, Christina Rubicco was named to a “40 Under 40” list by 914 INC, a Westchester magazine publication. We checked, there is no such award. We spoke with Westchester magazine. We were told neither Westchester magazine or 914 INC published a “40 Under 40 List”. They said they do offer a “Wunderkinds” awards to honor local Westchester professionals under the age of 30. They said “bless her little heart, Christina confused “Wunderkinds” with the “40 Under 40 Rising Stars” list put out by the Business Council of Westchester. We checked. Christina Rubicco is on the 2017 Business Council of Westchester 40 Under 40 Rising Stars list.
On June 6, 2018, Rubicco was sued in by Big Apple Barbecue, a supplier of BBQ grills, smokers, outdoor kitchens, and patio heaters.
On June 14, 2018, Christina Rubicco was named to the Board of the New Rochelle Chamber of Commerce.
By July 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was restored to the OCFS Referral List and their license to provide child care service was no longer “Pending Revocation”.
When an email was sent in 2018 to residents of San Souci with links to documents filed in the HOA lawsuit, Rubicco responded on September 22, 2018, with his own email claiming “the gist and majority of the content & ‘supporting documentation’ in this ‘argument’, is defamatory in nature and a red herring meant to distract the reader.”
I did not read anything that made me think I should consider their view on the $100 issue, nor did I see anything that backed up any of their accusations, which should be the goal of any cross motion/submission to the court.
Unfortunately, the goal it did achieve was it being a personal attack against my self and my family and I think it shows a non-existent moral compass for these folks.
However, as it does contain very, very personal details about a particularly tough time my family and I were going through (that no one outside of my family should even know about) and that have nothing to do with lawsuit or raising the $100, and because I am your President, who will continue to pour his blood, sweat and tears into Sans Souci — if anyone has any questions about anything mentioned in their submission, please feel free to call me, Christina, or just swing by — as you know, our door is always open and we would be more than happy to take a phone call to address any questions or concerns.
We sincerely look forward to speaking to anyone who wishes to call us.
Thank you for your continued support of us, and the board, as we remain steadfast,
At the time, residents supporting the lawsuit against the HOA (and Greco and Rubicco) expressed amazement that given his track record of arrests, probation violations, drug and alcohol abuse, and federal incarceration, Rob Rubicco would believe he was in a position to question anyone’s “moral compass”. They noted that Rubicco’s criminal history was neither a red herring nor a private matter that “no one outside of my family should even know about” but rather a matter of public record in the recent past that directly informed the manipulation and financial malfeasance alleged in the lawsuit.
The current “Child Care License Registration Period” for Anna & Jacks Treehouse, located at 136 Center Avenue in New Rochelle, is July 5, 2018 to July 4, 2022. Anna & Jacks Treehouse is authorized to have a Total Capacity of 44 children (7 Infants, 12 Toddlers; 25 Preschool).
On May 21, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Renewal 2018-I-YRO-029660 for violating 418-1.3(o) pertaining to compliance with the applicable provisions of the Fire Code and Building Code of New York State or other applicable fire and building codes. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On May 21, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Renewal 2018-I-YRO-029660 for violating 418-1.4(c) pertaining to maintaining appropriate fire detection, alarm, and firefighting equipment. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On May 21, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Renewal 2018-I-YRO-029660 for violating 418-1.4(d) pertaining to inspection, testing, and maintenance of fire alarm and detection systems. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On May 21, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Renewal 2018-I-YRO-029660 for violating 418-1.4(e) pertaining to testing and maintenance of fire suppression equipment and systems. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On May 21, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Renewal 2018-I-YRO-029660 for violating 418-1.5(t) pertaining to operating carbon monoxide detectors and alarms located in accordance where children nap. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On May 21, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Renewal 2018-I-YRO-029660 for violating 418-1.15(c)(22) pertaining to having documentation from the local health department showing that the facility has been approved in accordance with the requirements of the New York State Department of Health. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On May 21, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Renewal 2018-I-YRO-029660 for violating 418-1.15(c)(31) pertaining to not having documentation from service personnel licensed by the New York State Department of State to perform fire alarm systems maintenance, repair, and testing which shows that the fire alarm and detection systems have been inspected, tested and maintained during the current license period in accordance with the applicable requirements of the Fire and Building Code of New York State. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On May 21, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Renewal 2018-I-YRO-029660 for violating 418-1.15(c)(32) pertaining to not having documentation from service personnel qualified to perform fire suppression systems maintenance, repair, and testing showing that fire suppression equipment and systems have been tested and maintained during the current license period in accordance with the applicable requirements of the Fire and Building Code of New York State. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On May 21, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Renewal 2018-I-YRO-029660 for violating 418-1.15(c)(33) pertaining to not having documentation from the local government authority having jurisdiction for determining compliance with the Fire and Building Code of New York State showing that the facility has been inspected and approved once every 12 months during the current license period for compliance with the applicable fire safety provisions of the Fire and Building Code of New York State. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On May 21, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Renewal 2018-I-YRO-029660 for violating 418-1.15(c)(34) pertaining to not having documentation showing inspection and approval of any steam or hot water boilers performed in accordance with the requirements of the New York State Department of Labor and service performed once every 24 months during the current license period on all other fuel burning heating systems and equipment and boilers not subject to the New York State Department of Labor requirements. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On August 9, 2018, the foreclosure proceedings with U.S. National Bank ended with Rubicco and his family still in the home.
On November 3, 2018, Christina Rubicco was honored by the New Rochelle Chamber of Commerce as a “Woman of Excellence”.
On November 8, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2018-I-YRO-056008 for the second time for violating 418-1.8(a) pertaining to children left without competent supervision (see above). The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On November 8, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2018-I-YRO-056008 for violating 418-1.8(k)(4)(ii) pertaining to exceeding the maximum group size of eighteen children. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On November 8, 2018, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2018-I-YRO-056008 for violating 418-1.15(a)(4) pertaining to failure to operate in compliance with the terms of the child day care center license, maximum number and age range of children who may be in the care of the child day care center at any one time. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On March 1, 2019, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2019-I-YRO-010982 for violating 418-1.4(f)(2) pertaining to keeping all corridors, aisles, and approaches to exits unobstructed at all times. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On February 12, 2020, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2020-I-YRO-021281 for violating 418-1.4(b)(1) pertaining to failure to hold monthly evacuation drills. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On February 12, 2020, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2020-I-YRO-021281 for violating 418-1.5(a) pertaining to take suitable precautions to eliminate all conditions in areas accessible to children which pose a safety or health hazard. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On February 12, 2020, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2020-I-YRO-021281 for a third time for violating 418-1.8(a) pertaining to children left without competent supervision (see above). The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On February 12, 2020, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2020-I-YRO-021281 for violating 418-1.8(k) pertaining to supervision ratios. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On February 12, 2020, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Complaint 2020-I-YRO-021281 for violating 418-1.8(l) l pertaining to group size and mixing different age children within groups. The issue was subsequently deemed corrected by OCFS.
On March 11, 2020, the City of New Rochelle was the first in the country to be designated a COVID-19 Containment Zone. As the country went into lockdown the United States federal government, through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act created the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), a $953-billion business loan program intended to help “certain businesses, self-employed workers, sole proprietors, certain nonprofit organizations, and tribal businesses continue paying their workers”.
The Paycheck Protection Program allows entities to apply for low-interest private loans to pay for their payroll and certain other costs. The amount of a PPP loan is approximately equal to 2.5 times the applicant’s average monthly payroll costs. In some cases, an applicant may receive a second draw typically equal to the first. The loan proceeds may be used to cover payroll costs, rent, interest, and utilities. The loan may be partially or fully forgiven if the business keeps its employee counts and employee wages stable. The program is implemented by the U.S. Small Business Administration.
On April 12, 2020, Rubicco’s business was approved for a $137,500 PPP Loan (source: ProPublica)
On June 30, 2020, Rubicco’s business was approved for a $20,833 PPP Loan (source: ProPublica)
In July 2020, Rubicco’s business was honored as “Best of Westchester — Childcare” by Westchester Magazine.
On October 13, 2020, Rubicco and his wife were honored as The Boys & Girls Club of New Rochelle “Family of the Year”.
On November 6, 2020, American Express National Bank filed a lawsuit against Robert Rubicco, Jr. in New York Supreme Court, Westchester, in White Plains, NY to recover $72,793.87 loaned by American Express to Rubicco plus the costs and disbursements of the action.
Rubicco claimed that without making a concession of liability but as a “business decision” because the $72,793.87 Amex sought in the Complaint was far less than the amount of the loan that was being held up, he reached a settlement with American Express on December 24, 2020.
The company denied such a settlement instead demanding Rubicco agree to pay the full amount sought by American Express.
On December 31, 2020, Rubicco filed to move the case to the U.S. District Court in White Plains, NY (which it was) and he filed a counterclaim seeks damages in excess of $75,000 and raising claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Rubicco claimed “the emotional distress of having the viability of a business that employs more than fifty people placed in peril by Amex’s conduct has weighed heavily on Mr. Rubicco emotion health and general well-being.”
In his lawsuit, Rubicco denied liability for the American Express account and claimed he had reached a settlement agreement with American Express, but accused American Express of reneging on the agreement.
Rubicco claimed American Express reported the account to Equifax, Transunion and Experian consumer credit bureaus and in so doing “damaged his otherwise excellent credit” and “was the reason why he could not obtain a Small Business Administration loan to keep his business afloat during the COVID-19 pandemic.”
His lawyer told the court “Mr. Rubicco owns and operates child day care centers and play places and has more than fifty employees,” and further that “The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a drop in business for Mr. Rubicco as many parents are keeping their children home to avoid exposure to the virus.”
“Mr. Rubicco was advised that if not for the derogatory information reported about him by Amex to the various consumer credit bureaus, he would have been approved for an SBA loan that would have provided substantial capital to allow his business to weather the pandemic.”
Rubicco’s application for a loan was eventually closed on or around December 28, 2020, because the loan could not be approved given the derogatory information about Rubicco that American Express reported to the various consumer credit bureaus.
On February 11, 2021, both parties signed a Stipulation of Dismissal.
The lawsuit did not specify what SBA loan far in excess of $72,793.87 was being “held up” by American Express.
While PPP Loan data is available in a public database, details on Economic Injury Disaster Loans are not. Under the EIDL small business loan program, the maximum loan amount available is $500,000.
Unlike the PPP, the EIDL advance, as well as the entire loan, is considered a working capital loan and may be used to pay fixed debts, payroll, accounts payable, and other bills that could have been paid had the disaster not occurred. These loans are not intended to replace lost sales, profits, or to pay for expansion and cannot be used to pay down long-term debt. They cannot be used to consolidate debt.
As part of the EIDL program, an advance of up to $10,000 is available for those who apply for the EIDL. The funds are made available following a successful application, and the loan advance does not have to be repaid.
Anna and Jack’s Treehouse LLC received an EIDL Grant for that amount, but the date is not indicated online. That the EIDL Grant for $10,000 was approved by the Small Business Administration suggests a larger EIDL loan was approved, which may be the loan far in excess of $72,793.87 that Rubicco claimed in his counterclaim was being “held up” by American Express.
On February 6, 2021, Rubicco’s business was approved for a $49,600 PPP Loan (source: ProPublica)
On February 10, 2021, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Other 2021-I-YRO-018691 for violating 418-1.3(o) pertaining to compliance with the applicable provisions of the Fire Code and Building Code of New York State or other applicable fire and building codes. The OCFS database lists this violation as Not Corrected.
On February 10, 2021, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Other 2021-I-YRO-018691 for violating 418-1.15(c)(31) pertaining to maintaining the following records in a current and accurate manner: documentation from service personnel licensed by the New York State Department of State to perform fire alarm systems maintenance, repair, and testing which shows that the fire alarm and detection systems have been inspected, tested and maintained during the current license period in accordance with the applicable requirements of the Fire and Building Code of New York State. The OCFS database lists this violation as Not Corrected.
On February 10, 2021, Anna & Jacks Treehouse was cited under Fire Safety — Other 2021-I-YRO-018691 for violating 418-1.15(c)(33) pertaining to documentation from the local government authority having jurisdiction for determining compliance with the Fire and Building Code of New York State showing that the facility has been inspected and approved once every 12 months during the current license period for compliance with the applicable fire safety provisions of the Fire and Building Code of New York State. The OCFS database lists this violation as Not Corrected.
Our questions to OCFS remain: did OCFS License/Registration ID: 753272 (Anna and Jack’s Treehouse) have any fines or corrective action plans associated with the numerous violations they received since 2016? On what date did their license go to “Pending Revocation” status and on what date, if any, was that rescinded?
Over the past year or so, according to the ProPublica PPP database, Rubicco’s business received $207,999 in federal loans. That figure may be far higher depending on any EIDL loan but is at least $217,999 based on the $10,000 EIDL Grant. It may be anywhere from $72,793.87 to $490,000 higher depending on the size of the EIDL loan.
During the same period, Rubicco —who only completed his federal sentence on a cybercrime conviction in 2017, got his house out of foreclosure in 2018 yet told a federal court he has “excellent credit” had the wherewithal to buy or lease more than $600,000 worth of exotic cars, a boat, spend an estimated $50,000 on major home improvements at 3 Kensington Oval and settle an American Express lawsuit for $72,793.87.
Over the past year or so, according to neighbors, Rob Rubicco began driving a Porsche Taycan Turbo S with a Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price of $186,350.
Over the past year or so, according to neighbors, Christina Rubicco began driving a Cadillac Escalade with a Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price of between $88,170 (Luxury Package) and $97,305 (Platinum Package).
Over the past year or so, according to neighbors, Rob Rubicco began driving a Jeep Guardian with a Manufacturer’s Suggested Retail Price between $34,040 (Base Package) and $62,895 (High Altitude, Fully Loaded)
He also reportedly obtained a boat valued at $250,000. We are seeking to obtain details and photos of the boat, which we are told is moored at Castaways in New Rochelle.
On March 26, 2021, the U.S. Department of Justice announced action taken against COVID-19 fraud.
As of today, the Department of Justice has publicly charged 474 defendants with criminal offenses based on fraud schemes connected to the COVID-19 pandemic. These cases involve attempts to obtain over $569 million from the U.S. government and unsuspecting individuals through fraud, and have been brought in 56 federal districts around the country. These cases reflect a degree of reach, coordination, and expertise that is critical for enforcement efforts against COVID-19 related fraud to have a meaningful impact and is also emblematic of the Justice Department’s response to criminal wrongdoing.
“To anyone thinking of using the global pandemic as an opportunity to scam and steal from hardworking Americans, my advice is simple — don’t,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Nicholas L. McQuaid of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “No matter where you are or who you are, we will find you and prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law.”
On June 14, 2021, Rubicco took out a Building Permit from the City of New Rochelle for “Site Improv — Fence/driveway/patio/retaining Wall/walkway” at 3 Kensington Oval. In the Building Permit Application, the cost estimate is $50,000.
The documents are notarized by Giulia Colasuonno, a staff accountant at MC Tax & Accounting. She is the daughter of Philip Colasuonno, Treasurer of the Sans Souci HOA and Sans Souci Pool & Tennis Club. MC Tax & Accounting was formed in 2007 by Michael J. Colasuonno.
On May 17, 2021, the U.S. Attorney General established the COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force to marshal the resources of the Department of Justice in partnership with agencies across government to enhance efforts to combat and prevent pandemic-related fraud.
In July 2021, Rubicco’s business was again honored as “Best of Westchester — Childcare” by Westchester Magazine.
On July 22, 2021, the U.S. Department of Justice announced Twenty-Two Charged in Connection with a More than $11-Million Paycheck Protection Program Fraud Scheme.
Seventeen more individuals have been charged in connection with a fraudulent scheme to obtain approximately $11.1 million in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans and to use those funds to purchase luxury vehicles, jewelry, and other personal items.
After the PPP loan proceeds were deposited into the businesses’ accounts, the funds were distributed to conspirators through a series of transactions that were devised to disguise the origins of the funds and how the funds were spent. The defendants and co-conspirators used the PPP loan proceeds to purchase luxury goods, including two Range Rovers, an Acura NSX, and a Mercedes-Benz S-Class S65 AMG.
Among the charges were conspiracy to commit bank fraud and wire fraud, bank fraud, wire fraud, false statements to a federally insured financial institution, and money laundering in connection with involvement in loans obtained through the PPP Program.
Nightmare on the Isle of Sans Souci Series
Nice country America. Our tax dollars via PPP loans have provided a comfy lifestyle for this family. Disgrace!
As being a homeowner for 40 years in the neighborhood all I can say is that I am shocked from what I read about our neighborhood criminals. I have had the pleasure to meet both Christina and Robert and they are nice people however I had always a bad feeling about Robert. Christina is an angel and should leave this creep. Troublemaker from the day he moved into his parents old home till today. What makes this most shocking is the windfall of spending they have accumulated over the past 1 1/2 years between the purchasing of cars (which the author forgets to mention he owed a 100k Tesla for a few months before the Porsche), boats (two large boats in the past 1 1/2), renovations, parties, vacations and the sad part is they make it known to the neighborhood where it is seen by everyone. It is too obvious and he should be financially investigated by the government for this windfall of spending during COVID.
100% correct:
– the multiple references to “The Treehouse” is a dead giveaway as to their brand nomenclature – no parent refers to it this way
– the paragraph “ I hope you can stick to your claim that this isn’t about The Treehouse, Rob, or Christina and move on to the “big fish” you are after.” – who else would be privy to “your claim” other than Rob Rubicco himself given he was the one who claimed you’d made an agreement in the first place?
Instead of sending out his poorly written (grammatical/punctuation errors, curse words) email to the parents who use his services, his “attorney” should have advised him to resign effective immediately to distance himself from the daycare facility which has been Christina’s dream all along.
I can’t help but feel bad for Christina and their kids in all of this. Had he been a smarter individual, he would have driven a wedge in between himself and the business right now considering what has transpired.
His ego will be his demise.
You are so correct!! This sorry excuse for a journalist ”can try to insinuate all the filth that he wants but people who know Christina, her teachers and the families that go to the treehouse know that she has something very very special that she has built there and this garbage human Robert Cox will not be able to destroy it. Cox is trash.
Anna and Jack’s Treehouse is a home and a family to so many people. It’s for the kids only. Keep your filthy hands off.
The Treehouse is not one persons “business.”
It’s love, care, comfort, learning, friendship, growing.
People are NOT running out of The Treehouse or pulling their kids after reading your articles. They stay and their children stay. This family is only stronger now.
I hope you can stick to your claim that this isn’t about The Treehouse, Rob, or Christina and move on to the “big fish” you are after.
Families of the Treehouse have always been told when there has been a violation (Fire Safety like burnt cupcakes in the oven you mean?) or when so so sadly, a loving teacher made a terrible mistake. Because they are human.
Anyone’s past has not been a focus. Growth, communication, love and an open door was much more important.
Write all you want, The Treehouse isn’t going anywhere. Treehouse Strong ❤️
Family Always 👊
This post has multiple indications that this came from the Rubicco household. I am detecting a pattern. Whatever.
Mr. Cox,
Lets hope something comes about this matter. If you take your facts from your article and do a little homework (google) with forensic accounting it clearly concludes without a doubt PPP and EIDL fraud. If we are able to see this imagine once the Inspector General or Homeland Security along with the IRS does a major investigation looking into the personal and business accounts they can seize then you will see people going to jail along with paying back a lot of money.
Clearly something is really wrong here financially and will be reported to the OIG for review of fraud…..
This series is what I call a “road map” series. I have done such road map series before which have resulted in criminal prosecutions, civil litigation, terminations, etc. Cases include the stabbing of Ethan Jordan at NRHS for which I provided plaintiffs with an affidavit and may be deposed and testify, the child rape lawsuit against CSDNR in Jose Martinez case in which I cooperated with the plaintiff and their PI, felony conviction and federal incarceration of John Gallagher of Aramark/CSDNR, felony conviction of Mauro Zonzini — in the Gallagher/Zonzini case I spent about 10 hours with USDOJ, FBI, IRS, USPIS and provide about 10,000 records, plus surveillance photos/video and a detailed “mind map” connecting all the dots, a civil lawsuit against Flavio LaRocca/LaRocca and Sons for which I was deposed yesterday, a series on school corruption that resulted in the “separation” of 42 CSDNR employees, federal ADA lawsuit against CSDNR, DA misdemeanor conviction of Richard Fevang of DPW, the state investigation into Apex Credit Recovery Fraud and others.
Longtime readers know that if I write a “Who is….?” article that things tend to not end well for the subject.
You never know what will catch law enforcement’s eye. That said, if I were aware law enforcement was looking into possible criminal or civil violations based on my reporting I would not be the one to make it public until indictments were handed down and arrests were made as I would not want to hinder prosecutors.
I would suggest you let things play out but anyone can contact various agencies to make LEAs aware of information that may be a crime. Check the websites for the DA or FBI or DOJ or IRS or whatever and you will finds links on how to submit tips.
Robert,
I’m writing to ask for some clarification on a written response from Rob Rubicco to the families who use his day care facility rebutting any and all claims you have made in this and other articles – he wrote (among other things) the following after your Part 2 series piece came out:
“He told is that this multipart series was/is 100% focused on another individual and we were originally only Part 2 of it, given our close relationship to that individual. However, because OCFS started stonewalling him regarding records, he decided to split the information and make us Part 3 of his series. He has assured us that neither my-self, Christina or The Treehouse will be brought up again and that it’s over for us”.
He continues, in emboldened lettering:
“we sent him this paragraph, in parentheses, and he approved it to be sent out in this correspondence”.
I find this interesting for two reasons:
1. he’s telling the truth and you decided to continue with Part 4 disregarding your agreement with him given you mentioned him again after “agreeing not to” (allegedly)
2. he’s full of shit and he’s doing what he does best: choosing to lie and cheat his way out of a situation instead of owning it
He went on to say in this same email, referring to you again:
“He has made some pretty bizarre implications and we do have time set up with him this Sunday (after our Pelham open house) to set the record straight and he assured us that if everything checks out (which it will) he will update the article.”
Is the Sunday in question last Sunday, August 1st, or this coming Sunday, August 8th? Or, as my gut is telling me, another Rubicco yarn.
If you refute any of Rubicco’s claims in his lengthy email to the families who use his facilities, they have an absolute right to know.
Do the right thing here, Robert.
Thanks,
Concerned Westchester parent
I cannot speak to whatever anyone else says, you or him. He is free to write what he wants as are you.
The overall Nightmare/Sans Souci series is about Chris Greco which is what I told him and I think should be obvious to anyone who reads the completed series.
It is accurate to say I had written one part about Rob Rubicco but after telling me they would answer my questions by 2 pm last Wednesday OCFS asked for more time. I told them I could break the story into two parts and publish one Wednesday and one Friday. They agreed I would get my answers by 2 pm Friday. As a result I published one part on Rubicco’s criminal history. OCFS subsequently reneged and insisted I make a FOIL request to get the information they had promised twice to deliver. From experience, I know a FOIL request to a state agency can take a long time — a month, or two or more. I published what I had left on Friday while mentioning the OCFS issues in the article (and to Rob Rubicco on the phone).
What I told Rob was that in this current series there was no plans for another article about Anna and Jack’s Treehouse (or him) but if I ever did get the records I might do a story. I have no PLANS to do such a story and certainly not as part of this current series which I expect will be completed in the coming days. I cannot speak to what is in the OCFS record as, obviously, I do not know what is in the records, what they will actually deliver or when. It may well take so long that there is little news value in such a story. At this point I have no way of knowing.
None of this is remotely the same thing as never MENTIONING Rob Rubicco or Anna and Jack’s Treehouse just that they will not be the subject of another story in the series. That much is accurate.
Part IV was about Phil Colasuonno.
Part V will be about Taxes.
I may write some sort of summary piece but I have no current plans to do that.
Regardless I am free to write what I want and if I wish to MENTION Rob Rubicco or Anna and Jack’s Treehouse I will do so.
I did not “approve” anything to be sent out by the Rubiccos— why would I? That is their concern not mine. I see no reason for me to concern myself with their communications with other people.
I do not understand what you mean by “disregarding my agreement”. I have no “agreement” with the Rubiccos on what I can or cannot say nor would I ever enter into any such agreement with the subject of a story. It is a preposterous notion.
I did agree to Rob Rubicco’s request to meet — last Sunday. He cancelled Sunday afternoon.
Last weekend he made numerous requests to change my article or combine the two articles into one or to write additional articles on topics of his choosing. He also asked me to write articles about Anna and Jack’s Treehouse (so much for the idea I agreed to not mention him or it). I declined each of his proposals.
As I explained to him, I do not appreciate friends telling me what they think I should write (and he is not a friend so less so). I was not willing to re-write my articles to his liking or write new articles of his choosing but I was willing to give him an opportunity (with a word count limit, no cursing, no ad hominem attacks) to write his own article and I said I would publish it without edits and whatever headline and art (images) he wished. I had intended to make this offer at our planned meeting on Sunday. After he called Sunday to cancel our meeting, I offered to let him write a guest post limited to 700 words. As of now, he has not taken me up on that offer but the offer stands.
As for the truth of the articles themselves, almost all the series are based on public records, almost all of which can be found with a Google search. The rest mostly via websites of government agencies and courts. To that extent much of my work was to aggregate and organize material I researched online.
In New York State, a parent can access all sorts of information online about a day care center. The OCFS website contains much of it and more can be obtained by calling the regional offices around the State. There was no need to read my article to get this information on Anna and Jack’s Treehouse.
Generally speaking, I would think any parent would want to look up a day care center on the OCFS site before placing their child with a particular day care provider.
As far as you making a decision, that is entirely up to you.
Best of luck.
Mr. Cox great article and I am saddened on the fact that this family took advantage of the PPP and EIDL loans and used the funds to purchase all the luxurious cars boat and renovations totally over 600,000.00 (not including the debt payoff of AMEX of 72k) no less flaunting this all over New Rochelle.
These were emergency funds that were given to help businesses weather through the environment and this SHOULD BE REPORTED TO THE SBA. THIS NEEDS TO BE AUDITED BY SBA OR IRS…. SOMEONE NEEDS TO MAKE THEM AWARE.
Being an accountant for 40 years (retired) I had many clients who own (1 to 5) day care centers and make a good living BUT they do not generate money like this family to afford these toys NO LESS in such a short amount of time. Day cares have a set enrollment and generate a set income per month that pay expenses and what is left over is paid to the owners (with the exceptions of after school activities or summer activities that generate some extra income BUT NOT AS MUCH TO AFFORD THESE ITEMS). So the few questions you have to ask since this was all purchased through the pandemic times are:
1. How long were they shut down during the pandemic?
2. When they opened did they pay their staff CASH off the books and use the PPP funds for their own good? Also since the PPP was extended from 8 to 24 weeks this gives them enough time to cover their forgiveness period when fully operational again and accepting all students.
3. Did they use EIDL or PPP for the expansion of another business in the next town over and how was this paid for especially during the pandemic? Apparently the husband’s credit was in poor standings so I cannot see this being a possibility with a bank since they are strict with lending. Something like this could be seen with the Building permit in the town.
This is just a low blow to us tax payers and this needs to be looked into. Kudos Mr. Cox to exposing this fraud to the public and hopefully this goes to the correct authorities.
These are all good questions.
There are others raised by my reporting.
In the past, law enforcement and litigators have used my reporting as guides to pursue cases. I will not be surprised for that to be the case here but I also may be the last to know.
We shall see.
Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should. You’re being being a pretty crappy human for no reason.
Fake
You are a bad writer. Articles are so boring and poorly written. Kind of middle-schooler style. Come on.
I’m hoping for the family that everything is on the level. It looks pretty bad to have all those toys during a pandemic. My friend is a partner in a restaurant and got 2 PPP loans that will not have to be paid back. He also got a low interest loan from the SBA. He is using it for payroll and to keep the restaurant open. I don’t want to pass judgment but I hope those toys are not paid for with loans and other money intended to operate a daycare. Who knows? People inherit money. I don’t know the source. But it does look really bad to be driving a Porsche and Escalade and a boat.
Thank you
Fake
I spoke with Henry.
Henry absolutely did not post comments to this site regarding anything to do with Sans Souci or anything else. Some bad actor did so to stir up trouble. As a result I am deleting the comments and replaced them with this note.
Ultimately, this is my mistake. I have known Henry for many years. I have always known him to be a straight shooter who will not hesitate to speak his mind directly to me (and presumably others). In hindsight I regret not calling him to confirm he had submitted comments and should not have responded until I had. Again, that is all on me.
I apologize to Henry.
I also apologize to readers who were mislead by some gutless coward as a result of my error.
In 13 years, I have not encountered this problem before but — lesson learned. I will be more careful in approving comments and will check first if someone is claiming to be a particular individual.
Robert Cox
914-325-4616
TALK OF THE SOUND
Publisher and Managing Editor
Talk of the Sound
If they’re in the internet, they are out in the public. He can use the picture without permission. However, Cox these are innocent children, be kind and use another picture without their faces!
It has nothing to do with images being on the internet dum dum.
There are 3 areas of media law that might apply:
1 defamation — in this case does not apply
2 privacy – there is no privacy
3 copyright – this would be a valid argument in some cases but would not apply here.
Copyright does not apply for a host of reasons — no attempt to pass of the work as my own, no confusion with some other business, not using/selling the image for financial gain, etc.
More importantly, I am commenting on the web site and this is an image of the website.
In sum, it is permissible for me to use the image.
As are as children, innocent or otherwise, I did not put their images online. I suggest you direct your concern to whoever put the images online.
Gotta’ say, had I known I’d be wheeling around New Rochelle in my Porsche Taycan, from my baby sitting business, I’d have made some different choices back in the day.
These folks are something out of a low budget documentary on ripping off the government. And this guy Colasuonno, with the armored car cash switch balance, to fake out Chase bank, is a scream!
But wait, “I’ll save you the time and inform you I’m a convicted felon” ? How’s that for an opening? Ya’ can’t make this crap up.
What we need here is a screen writer and a little talent to turn this thing into an independent film, possible Tribeca Film entry? Youz gotta’ see da big picsha here, dats all!
Love it…more Cox!
Lol
Are they still taking enrollment for 2021
“Cox didn’t kill himself”
My name is Katy Krassner. You can Google my name to see what I do and who I associate with. While you seem thorough in your research, I wonder what your motivation is? To ruin a wonderful family and hurt a strong business? The Rubicco’s are a young family with small children. Why would you choose to go after Rob? Did he do something to you personally? For what it is worth, even after reading all of your machinations, I’d still leave my child at the Treehouse any day if the week.
Mr. Cox,
No where did I request for you to write a story about me. Is this another one of your false statements.
Please go about your own business and leave people alone and trying to destroy people’s lives.
I respectfully request you do not spread rumors about me or I will consult with my attorney especially if you hit upon a wrong note.
Please judge yourself accordingly.
Thank you
I did not say that you requested a story only that I am happy to write one.
As far as intimating an intent to sue me for a story I have not published, that is an interesting approach. I wonder, has that ever worked before?
As a convicted felon there would be court records not “rumors” so no need to worry about that.
Please do send along your list of facts.
Phil
I do appreciate your putting yourself forward, identifying yourself as a convicted felon. I have most of the story now and will run a story tomorrow.
As you are threatening to sick your attorney on me if I “hit a wrong note” I want to be sure to be accurate in reporting out your rather involved criminal history. I may have a few questions.
Here are a few:
What is the name of the federal prison(s) where you were incarcerated?
Regarding your restitution owed to the IRS, on March 17, 2011, you owed restitution in the amount of $846,913.61 (as adjusted for interest). You were required to pay 15% of your income to the IRS (about a $1,000/mo).
My question is have you continued to make these payments, how much was your last payment and when, and how much (including) interest remains on the amount owed to the IRS?
As the Feds challenged your claim that it was a hardship to pay restitution on the grounds that you were spending money on unnecessary luxuries, do you have any undeclared income?
I do not suppose you care to discuss clients but I have questions there too — about the New Rochelle PBA, Christopher’s Voice, Christopher’s by Chef Joe, Greco personally.
Oh… and send along that last of incorrect facts I asked you for.
I appreciate your being forthcoming about your being a convicted felon. I did my best to not “hit upon a wrong note” but if you or your attorney have a quibble with my account of your criminal history please let know so I can look into any concerns you may have.
If you have any response to the article publish it in the comments or contact me.
I am especially interested in any undeclared income you may have.
https://talkofthesound.com/2021/08/01/nightmare-on-the-isle-of-san-souci-part-iv-who-is-phil-colasuonno/
I suggest that this idiot Robert Cox gets his facts straight and his source of information.
And by the way, I want to save you time and inform you that I am a convicted felon and I served my time and I was and still am a respected member of my community.
If your objective is to ruin people’s lives and their lively hood then you should be ashamed of yourself.
I’m sure there are many skeletons hiding in your closet.
Since most if your facts are incorrect, you owe all the people you mentioned and especially those people that live in the Sans Souci community an apology!!!
Phil,
I am more than happy to run a story on your criminal history. Give me a couple days.
In the meantime, send me a list of facts that are incorrect and I will take a look.
Call me and let me know why you are doing this. I must know. 6462961560
Take those pictures down of children you have no permission to post them. I do not you!