A Puzzle For Those Who Could Lose Their Homes In This Crisis

[anthropositor]

Here it is, April, 2009 and I'm still living in the home they tried to take away six months ago.  Still no guarantees, but I have generated some new tactical ideas for assuring that I won't lose the place to a third party lender.  Time will tell.

[anthropositor]

I went to trial for the ticket on the puppies.  Tried to hash it out with the prosecutor, a young woman of no particular talent I could discern.  Got nowhere.  I owed a hundred dollars and she would give me up to four months to pay it off.  So I went back into the courtroom prepared to fight the case.  But the details had apparently spread around a bit.  When the junior D.A. came back in, my case was called.  I rose to begin to fight.  The judged motioned the prosecutor over to the bench and had a few brief unknown words with her.  He frowned.  She stepped back.  He called me by name saying simply that my case was dismissed.  I said, "Thank you, Your Honor," and turned to go, wondering what I was going to do with my excess adrenaline.  Then the judge said, "Did you dress that way to come to court?"  (I was dressed in one of my tux's.  It may have put my case on the top of the stack.  Who goes to court in a tux?  All the defendants were dressed in total grungies, and I was even better dressed than the lawyers who were there)  I said, "No, Your Honor, I was hoping to get to Church for the Memorial Service."  I thought it impolitic to add that I was an agnostic attending in honor of my wife's faith.

[anthropositor]

There is still some more that I have to do in this matter but I can't really telegraph my moves here.  Loose lips sink ships.  It is certainly important not to get overconfident, or to think that because they now smile, wave, or greet me, they have nothing further up their sleeves.  Of course, speculations by others are still welcome.   

[anthropositor]

About seven months into the battle for the house.  Been fairly quiet.  Yesterday the process server returned with new papers signifying that the sellers were preparing to declare the contract null and void, with a sixty day notice to quit.  No new issues were presented.  Just the formal notice that they were intending to attempt to get a court to sign off on the abrogation of the contract.  While nothing is ever sure in a court of law, I am on solider footing in this sort of issue than I really need to be to prevail, if the issues are heard in a fair court.

I will be brainstorming for a few days and then getting with my lawyer.  I may not be checking in here too frequently.  The borrowed laptop I have been using for the past few months since I got my sight back will be going back to its' owner and I will be sorting out a new dial-up modem for my PC.

I still encourage questions and speculations, and I still will eventually address them.

On the good side, since the original modem fried, I have spent much less time on the computer.  And of course, having my sight back, I have unlimited reading to get caught up on.

Let me leave you with a principle in chess that applies in this case.  Remember that this dispute started with a surprise attack; the attempt to simply summarily evict us in ten days.  Then later, there was all the harassment with the dogs.  And now, a second attempt has been initiated to evict us in sixty days.  I think we are extremely likely to prevail here as well.

The chess axiom is this: "An attack repelled favors the defender."

In the initial attack, hundreds of people around here heard about it.  In the second, dozens of local residents of our little town learned of the issues.  And some of these people are the movers and the shakers of the town.  They would not have, if the harassing had not happened.  A merchant being shown to be unscrupulous will certainly lose some business.  Whereas two old folks being put out of their home without cause, cannot be hurt too much by publicity which is generated by the conflict.  Particularly if the two old people play by all the rules.  Our big disadvantage is that the resource base of our opponents is very large and ours is very small.  But in the public opinion battle, that too has some advantages. 

Currently I am entirely in defensive posture.  What would you do next?   

[andyb]

Anthro - does your local community have a newspaper? If so, I would be interesting to know if your plight and the various run-ins you've had with the owners has been reported, and if then so, how fairly?

You mention that 'two old folks being put out of their home without cause, cannot be hurt too much by publicity'; which indicates to me that you might be willing to go to the media to promote your case. I suppose it would depend how 'private' you wish to be over the issues but, as you say, public opinion has an effect and it would almost certainly have a negative effect on a business that was shown to be underhand/less than scrupulous. Especially if, as you say, you are playing by the rules and the paper reports fairly.

The resource base of your opponents may be very large but it may be undone somewhat if you have the community on your side. 

A merchant only remains successful if he can continue to sell to willing buyers...

[anthropositor]

Good point and good question Andy.  I'll break it up into a few parts.  First, when you are the aggrieved party, you are anxious for as many people to know it as possible, particularly if it is a merchant family that is doing it to you.  

But on the other hand, I just want to save our home.  I am trying to avoid an enduring feud.  Not only that, for as long as they own the contract, it is in my interests for them to remain in business.  So, while I have privately talked to several hundreds of people in the area about the ongoing events, that is a drop in the bucket compared to the much wider public the reach with their routine paid advertising.

But let us look at another perspective when it comes to attracting media.  If I were to drop in at the big local paper and relate what has happened so far, I think they would take notice of the fact that this furniture merchant regularly purchases advertising.  That advertising budget is not small.  And newspapers are already dropping like flies.  The likelihood of the editor doing a story of this sort is not high, and if they did, they would lean over backward to represent the facts in the best light for the advertiser.  It might not be fair, but I can't say I would blame the newspaper too much.  These are hard times, and the paper is just trying to survive.  On those occasions when I might place a classified ad, it will be brief, only run for a few days, and not have any frills.  Not much money to be made for the paper.

Another factor which makes such a story a problem is that it is not an easy one to put in short form.  And yet another problem is, there is nothing really "newsy" about it.  Most of the action is behind the scenes, and the typical reader is not all that conversant with the elements of the law involved.  And the fact is that a whole lot of people have been getting thrown out of their homes without good justification.  If it is happening to millions of people at once, it is no longer news.  That's odd, I know.  But we respond better to the picture of one victim of a disaster than to the knowledge that the same thing is happening to millions.  That is why some charities will send you a picture of one individual who you are helping "personally" along with some background information about the recipients circumstances.  

Newspapers know this as well.  There has to be something newsworthy, preferably something providing a photo-op for the paper.  A juicy photo can make an otherwise bland story into an above the fold, front page story.  And the stories that are read most are those about people, not statistics.

And finally, going for the throat with publicity can backfire against me if it is too successful.  It certainly would do me no good to drive their business into the ground.  Considering the way we have been treated, we might get some small satisfaction out of that, but it could even increase our chances of losing the house.  So getting even can even be counterproductive.

That does NOT mean that I will never go in the direction of publicity to a greater degree than I already have.  I will just do it carefully and with proper preparation.  It is certainly not the first thing on my agenda.  The central thing is not to lose our home and all the equity we have accumulated in over nine years.  Compared with that, getting even is of no importance whatsoever.

There are two kinds of publicity that are extremely focused and confrontational, and entirely legal.  At the appropriate time, these are very likely to be brought into play.

Here is a question up for grabs.  Have my opponents hurt themselves in the fight so far?  How did they do with their harassment getting Sox snatched by the dogcatcher and getting me ticketed?  I did not ultimately have to pay the $35 bail to get Sox out of jail.  I had to get him a rabies shot.  The truth is, I had already given him a Mexican rabies shot, but did not have a vet's certification to that effect.  So my cost was $10 for that.  If I had not won on the ticket when it went to trial, that would have been $100.  But I did win, so that was zero.

Meanwhile, I made sure everyone involved with the city knew the details of what had been going on.  So, for the cost of $10, I was able to represent our position to good effect within the city, and it is far, far less likely that there will be official cooperation with future skulduggery of the same sort.

In chess, one of the principles I mentioned earlier is; "An attack repelled usually favors the defender."  So far, I have neutralized or repelled the attacks that have been brought against us, and have ultimately gained some advantage from the attacks having occurred.  In some varieties of martial arts, one deliberately waits to be attacked, to better use the opponents energy of attack against themselves.

In one of my favorite training chess openings, I bring my bishop to G5, (often on the second move in the game)  specifically because it is so easily attacked by my opponent's F or H pawn.  There is considerable pressure for the opponent to do this, and even strong players often succumb to the temptation.

In my Real Estate battle, my engaging in my No Till Farming experiments are an extreme annoyance to the Patriarch next door.  From his perspective, I should have a landscaping crew come in to mow, weed-eat, apply weed killers and insecticides to large areas as he does.  And no blade of grass should ever be over four inches tall.  In previous years, during the time of the year they were interested in obtaining or renewing existing loans on our land, they just sent over a landscaping crew to "polish" my yard.

I, on the other hand, do not like them borrowing on my land, and can't currently prevent it.  If I am engaging in ecological experiments that the loan assessment officer is not likely to understand, the amount of money he is willing to lend will be considerably smaller. 

Certainly, the structure of the bioswale ecological experimentation would change in some important ways, if I were to receive a written assurance that our home would never again be used as security for loans received by the seller, and that any existing loans had been paid off, there would be a considerable difference in our landscaping.  This assurance is among my important objectives.  But in the meantime, one can expect my landscape to be exceedingly natural in appearance.  Things which I can eat are an ever larger proportion of the plant life surrounding the house.  I now have several different crops which are doing extremely well in spreading on their own.  Nothing in the contract says anything about the Seller being able to dictate to me anything at all about the character of my landscaping.

From my opponents perspective, the landscaping I have chosen is unlawful.  It is not.  But it provides a central element of their attack.  (Sort of like putting my Bishop on G5, drawing attack from the pawns.)

[anthropositor]

On Friday I received a letter from the seller expressing his intention to refuse my house payments, and to terminate our contract now into its' ninth year.  This was several days after a process server presented me with some papers from his lawyer expressing the intent to terminate the contract.  My lawyer said I need do nothing.  He would take care of it.  But I am a little more proactive than that.  Today was the due date.  I took my check down to the furniture store and found the young rascal himself right in front with several other people.  I walked directly up to him with a brief greeting, and put the check in his hand.  Of course I expected him to refuse it.  Had he done that, I would have simply asked that he give me a record of his refusal by writing "refused payment" on the face of the check, and signing or initialing the refusal.

But apparently I caught him by surprise and he didn't quite know what to do.  Perhaps he had it in his mind that I might cause a scene of some sort.  But those of you who know me realize that I would never do that.  In any case, he went directly to the receipt book, as if he was hypnotized, and wrote me out the receipt.

Any ideas what else I might do to increase my odds of winning this battle?

[andyb]

I had to laugh when I read this, Anthro! - sounds like you put the 'fluence on him! 

Actually, I wonder if acceptance of monies tendered by you (and in front of witnesses) waives his Notice of intention to refuse monies from you?

AndyB

[anthropositor]

Yes, I believe that once you have given notice of an intent, which you subsequently fail to carry through on, I think you are back at square one again.  Another element of this is that the paperwork given me by the process server references the date of first service as showing intent to unilaterally cancel the contract (although it did not specifically say that).  The contract requires 60 days from the alleged breach.  Of course, I am disputing that there has been any breach at all.

I suspect that they were just trying a longshot.  You would be amazed how many people would have simply assumed that the payment would not be accepted, and simply have left it to the attorneys to sort out.  These people may be affluent merchants, but clearly they are not swimming in the swiftest part of the stream.  If they were, they would have realized already by this point, how tenaciously I was prepared to fight for my home.  These people mostly try to buffalo their renters, people who have built no equity whatsoever.

Their reputation was certainly not Sterling when I first did the house deal with them nine years ago.  But they were not entirely notorious.  I had to make a few phone calls before I got some cautions about them.  But before this matter is concluded, considerably more people will realize how they operate.  Not just hundreds of people.  Thousands of local people.  Potential customers.  Even in this past half year, several hundred people, a few dozen of them in positions of influence, have learned the details of this blatant attempt to force us out.  The longer this goes on, the larger those numbers will be. 

[anthropositor]

My opponents seem to be in some difficulties.  They no longer are running the TV commercials that used to annoy me multiple times a day.  This is only one of several indicators that they have some serious fiscal woes, which doesn't exactly bring a tear to my eye. 

A process server came by again with my last check for the property payment.  He has come often enough for me to have made him a friend.  I know that sounds incongruous, but one doesn't "kill the messenger." 

It cost their lawyer (and therefore them) $40 to send my payment back.  We will see what good it does them.

[andyb]

I assume you still have the receipt from when the payment was previously accepted, Anthro?

Not sure, but it might possibly be useful to hang on to that?

Andyb

[anthropositor]

Yes Andy.  I also have the paperwork and the uncashed check left by the Process Server.  This is shaping up to be a court battle almost certainly.  You know, I may give the impression I have it all together, but I am really learning by leaps and bounds as I go along. 

My lawyer has been very helpful in this regard, although he can make it painful at times.  The law, unfortunately, has some convolutions which are quite an enigma to me.  Our very home is at stake here, along with nine years of payments which add up to an irreplaceable amount of money.  And in the end, apparently, it is the letter of the law that counts, not right or wrong.  That is disturbing indeed.  I have learned, for instance, that I had the whole venue thing wrong.  This will be fought in my county, no matter what.  Considering the great influence, locally, of my opponents, this is a great blow.

[anthropositor]

Well, things are heating up a bit in the fight.  One of my dogs, the gentle one, Sox, was stabbed over the weekend.  He is dead.  I have been doing some things to get caught up to current events.  I am not very happy right now, but I am keeping myself well in check.  It is probably just as well that I do not know with certainty, who the assailant was.  More later.

[totalfolly]

One of my dogs, the gentle one, Sox, was stabbed over the weekend.  He is dead.

Oh, Anthro!  I'm so sorry!  How awful that Sox was used in such a wicked manner to try to intimidate you! 

totalfolly

[Bamawing]

That is shocking, Anthro!!!

[anthropositor]

Thanks dears,

The borrowed laptop I have been using fried its' WiFi card, or the slots that it plugs into, so I haven't had regular access lately.  But I went out and bought another brand of card, so when I return the laptop, it will be in better condition than when I borrowed it.  So currently, I am back in business.

The key question I had going before the first of the month was, since the clients were refusing payment, how could I make the payment due on the first?  To review: last month I had received a communication from the Seller, stating that he was going to refuse my payment.  As you will recall, I ignored it, took my payment down to their furniture store and handed it over, getting a receipt.  Well, a month has gone by and they won't fall for that again.  So now what?  Here are some hints.  In his letter to me, he referred to his attorney as his property manager.  Of course, being a property manager is considerably different than being a lawyer.  And under some circumstances, being a property manager also means that you are personally involved in the business, and therefore, cannot act as the attorney at trial.  A property manager who is personally involved in the business, could easily have a stake in the outcome of the trial, which would be a conflict of interest for an officer of the court.

Okay, enough rhetorical hints.  Rhetorical because I am not going to keep you all waiting for a few days so that one or two of you will come up with some ideas.  Here is my answer.  Knowing that I would be refused if I did the same thing again on the first of July, and noticing that they had a property manager who they have so conveniently identified, I elected to make this payment directly to said property manager.  The question was, how to get her to accept the check.  If I just walked into her office and tried to hand her the check, she will just refuse it.  So instead, I just put the check in a fancy manila envelope, along with the notarized paperwork which I supplied with it.  The envelope was sealed of course.  And I was carrying a clipboard with the receipt for the envelope to be signed by someone in the office.  It is worthwhile to note that no one in these law offices had any idea what I looked like.  And I took great pains to look just like a process server.  Then I walked up to the counter.  "Got a delivery for you.  Sign right here."  

"What's this?"

"It's a delivery for (Property Manager's name)."  The receptionist signed for it and I left immediately as she went to deliver it to her boss.  Now, they may still not cash the check, but it has been delivered and I have a receipt.  And within the envelope, along with my check, is a fancy notarized statement.  And I must add that I did not write the check to the sellers, as all previous checks had been written, nor to an attorney, as such.  I wrote it to (name),Property Manager.  Not only will she very likely be exceedingly miffed at the designation of  property manager applied to her by her boss, she may totally miss the possibility that she may be forced to replace herself with another attorney for any eventual court proceeding.  And she may not have too easy a time finding an attorney to replace her.  She just lost one of the attorneys who was "of council" who left the state for a distant realm before the investigation of his behavior involving an alleged forgery relating to a $300,000.00 bonus which he had in essence, recommended for himself.  This only made the newspapers less than two weeks ago.  Certainly, I found it pleasant news.  

My guess is that he will skate on the charge by staying out of the state until the statute of limitations makes the matter a moot point.  I should point out that this fellow was exceedingly well connected, a major political power hitter and fund raiser.  I certainly was not looking forward to going to court against such a well known mover-and-shaker.  Although my understanding of the situation is that there is an ongoing investigation of this matter, I anticipate that, now that he is out of state, the investigation probably will not proceed.  He can't be compelled to return without other expensive complexities, not to mention potential embarrassment to other parties.  And I could care less.  As long as he doesn't get to muck around in my situation.

 

    

[anthropositor]

Ms. _____ _______,
Please be advised:
Due to the return of our last two property payment checks to us uncashed, by yourself and by the ______'s, we have opened a Property Payment Account with _______ Bank.  The Account (#000000000*******) now holds the two payments you have already returned without good cause, as well as the payment due on 8-1-09.  These payments are numbered chronologically, #109, #110 & #111, each in the amount of $***.**, currently totaling $***.**.  These monthly deposits will continue until such time that you voluntarily resume proper acceptance of the payments, or until a judge orders you to do so.  Please inform your bosses that these funds are immediately available to them and that we will continue to adhere to all contractual obligations, as we have since this contract was formed in the year 2000.

Yours,
(Anthropositor)

[anthropositor]

I just got a letter in response to my opening up the Property Payment account to hold all the refused payments. from the "property manager".  She said that she objected to my opening up the account, and that she considers the contract to have been canceled.  I can only think that she is hoping that I will fail to continue to pay into the account because she objected.  I will ignore the objection as being completely without merit. 

I will also continue to pay the property insurance as I have been doing these past nine years.  And, if memory serves, I have only about 42 days to pay the next annual property taxes.  Since I paid them last year, on the larger parcel, of which my two acres is only a portion, it is only logical to do that again this year.  It strikes me that if there were any legal basis for the attempt to throw us out of our home, they would have already filed a court action.  The fact that they haven't done so is an indicator that their cause is so faulty they could not prevail.  Eleven months is a really excessive period of time to go by, without actually filing a court action.

Clearly, at some point, if they do not take me to court, I will file suit for relief against them, for their failure to do anything in a court of law.  But meanwhile, I will give my answer to the property manager some careful thought for a few days, and then E-mail it on Monday. 

[anthropositor]

It has now been a year and a few days since the Sellers tried to take our home back.  Throughout the year, I have only been able to fight defensively.  Now things are about to change.  Last month I sent in another notice that a new payment had been made into the account I had opened to hold refused payments.  I pointed out in that letter that it had been nearly a year since the beginning, with no case being brought to court.  A process server came this month.  The case has been lodged.  I have a judge assigned.  I know nothing about him except his record of successful appeals is blemishless, a record he is very likely to be pretty proud of.  But I have also sorted out a way to go on the offensive.  So that is the new riddle.  How do I properly go on the offensive, instead of just fighting for my home?

[Bamawing]

I can't say I know, Anthro, but I can say I know you'll be successful. Those jerks don't have a chance.