YOU'VE GOT MAIL

Rick Waters and Carol Smith were married on November 1, 2001. After a six or seven year marriage, Carol Smith Waters filed for divorce on December 2, 2007. On July 13, 2008, a divorce Judgment was entered, the marriage ended. There are no children from this marriage.

November 22, 2011, three years later - Rick is sitting at his desk and decides to open the daily mail. He finds it intriguing that it's a letter from the Sacramento Superior Court, family law division. To his astonishment, it's a court document called a Findings and Order After Hearing stating his divorce has been set-aside (set-aside is legal jargon meaning his divorce is null and voided).

He's no longer divorced?? Huh? What? This is freaking unbelievable! What hearing???

He had not heard from his ex-wife in three years and now he's no longer divorced? How could this happen without him knowing about it?

Rick then hired LEGWORK to find out how this happened and how he can get this court decision overturned so that he is divorced - again.

Off to the courthouse I go, pulling the case file and looking at every document Carol filed. There is a document called an ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (aka OSC, that she hired some paralegal to prepare), asking the court to set-aside her marital Judgment. She whines in this court document that she only has a GED, no college or legal education experience, she didn’t know what she was doing when filing for divorce back in 2007, and now wants the court to open the door so that Carol can go after Rick for property and spousal support. There is a marital settlement agreement originally signed by both of them in the file and all original paperwork appears to be in order. After reading the entire file, the lowdown is this: Carol had managed to somehow get six court hearings from the Sacramento Superior Court without Rick's knowledge.

In the last hearing, Carol got the Judge to sign off on her request to set-aside her divorce and this is the copy Rick received in the mail. What did Carol do in all these court hearings? How did she or the court get away with not notifying Rick of all these hearings?

Rick swears he was never personally served or notified regarding any court hearing and especially did not know about this ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. He had no clue Carol was even pursuing any legal action at all. Here are further facts from the court file, read it and be warned, this is a real injustice.

The first court hearing after initially filing the OSC was set for January 4, 2011, in Dept. 124 of the Family Law court. 

Carol attends this first hearing, and the Judge re-sets the hearing for a time in February because there was no Proof of Service showing that Rick received any kind of notification regarding this legal paper and hearing. Carol goes back to court in February, and the Judge again re-sets the hearing in March because there was again, no Proof of Service showing Rick had any notice of this hearing.

Carol goes back to court in March, and again this hearing was re-set for April 25th, because again, there was no proof of service. At the April hearing, Carol shows up and again the Judge would not hear it due to there being no Proof of Service. Another hearing date was then set for July 18, 2011.

In the case file, each hearing has its own notes of what transpired each time. Carol, in every hearing, told the Judge that she cannot find Rick to serve him and needs more time.

Rick had no knowledge of any of these court appearances by Carol and definitely did not know about the hearing in July. 

From April to July 18, 2011, a review of statements made by Carol in the case file, it appears Carol engaged in filing false information, thus allowing the court to believe certain things about Rick thus granting her what she wanted; she got the court to set-aside her marital Judgment, without Rick having any knowledge of this or a chance to defend himself.

Carol has known the whole time where Rick's business is located (she worked there at one time) and could have easily served Rick. His business is open to the public, when you come into the store his desk is in public view. 

One note in the case file is definitely misleading to the court. Carol states she hired a process server, some guy named Gary, to try and serve Rick the Order to Show Cause. According to this process server, he stated in a Due Diligence Declaration that he attempted to serve Rick at two different old addresses.

Carol knows that Rick hasn't lived at these addresses for years and could have sent the process server to his place of business.

At one of these hearings, Carol speaks to the court about getting permission to publish a document called APPLICATION & ORDER FOR SERVICE OF PUBLICATION. This is an action where you can legally serve a person by publishing the legal document in a newspaper. In this document she tells the court:

1. Carol cannot locate Rick to serve him documents regarding the hearings. (false)

2. Rick has some kind of outstanding legal action against him. (false)

3. Her "only choice" to serve Rick is by publishing this notice in a paper (false)

4. Carol states that Rick “will continue to take action to avoid service.” (false)

Based on these statements the court can only assume that Rick is avoiding service, that he can’t be found, that he has some legal action against him from somewhere and that he will continue to avoid this legal situation. (false)

Carol lies to the Judge and he signs the ORDER on May 23, 2011, now allowing Carol to publish this notice in the newspaper and she does so for four weeks in June 2011.

Rick or anyone else for that matter doesn't make it a habit to check the newspapers every day looking for this kind of legal notice in some small time newspaper. Would you?

Carol knew this notice would never be seen by Rick.

During this publication period of four weeks, Carol hires another process serving company. It is unknown why she would do this, she has already published, and the court requires nothing else to be done.

There is another time where Carol hired another process server, James. This process server goes to Auburn, CA. address seven times. She has James sign a Due Diligence Declaration that he went to this address and couldn’t find Rick. She files this with the court on July 18, 2011.

At no time did this process server come to Rick's work either.

July 18th, in the Sacramento Superior Court, Dept. 124 @ 1:30 PM, without Rick's knowledge, Carol tells the court Rick cannot be located and that she has no idea where he is. Therefore the Judge rules that the divorce Judgment is set-aside, issuing a FINDINGS AND ORDER AFTER HEARING, in her favor.

Carol then goes further by getting some female friend to serve Rick by just mailing a copy of this Findings and Order After Hearing. This female then signs a court document stating Rick was served by mail. But again, Carol gives this person an old address to mail it to. Rick has not lived there for almost a year but luckily, this court order was forwarded to him at his work address and here we are today. 

Rick now has to fill out court forms, obtain a hearing asking the court to set-aside the Order and Findings after Hearing per CCP Code 473 and impose Sanctions per PC 271 on Carol for purposely misleading the court as to Rick's whereabouts, including sanctions for causing him undue financial hardship for filing this Motion, including attorney, paralegal and court fees. 

In situations like this, it would cost thousands of dollars to litigate this mess. And sure enough, Rick decided after hearing what some attorney's and mediation fees were, he asked me if I could further assist him. I told him I wasn't an attorney but as a process server, I could use some of my skills and see what happens.

The first thing I did was prepare an Affidavit and several other Request for Hearing documents (of all of the facts I have laid out so far), had Rick sign each one, filed them all with the court and our hearing was set for January 15, 2012.

Now I need to serve Carol with a copy of this and I am reminded of an old saying, “Keep your friends close, and your enemy’s closer."

― Sun Tzu

I decided to just telephone Carol, I have to serve her anyway, she can run but not hide, and it makes sense to do this the simple way first. To my luck, she was receptive, all too eager to meet, be the victim and tell me all about it. Besides serving her, I wanted to find out what her beef really is and what her strategy is going to be at the hearing in January. 

As it turns out, I met with Carol on two occasions. The first time we met, I served her the legal papers so she can attend the hearing. She talked openly and I noted her statements telling her I wanted to type up an Affidavit for her signature, and we would get together again to make sure it was correct before I filed it with the court.

I had no intention of doing jack-crap with any Affidavit; I just wanted her strategy, which is:

She wants alimony from Rick.

She wants the court to subpoena his bank accounts, financial records from his business and other financial institutions so she can show the court the amount of money he is making.

She wants equitable monies for all the property and business assets he has.

When we met again, I pretended to give-a-hoot and let her read a quasi-affidavit I typed up. Not to my surprise at all, she changes her story on certain statements she had said to me previously. She’d say, “I didn’t mean that” or, “I think someone misunderstood” or “I want to think about whether or not I am going to say that in the courtroom”. When I tried to confirm exactly what statements she was going to make or what statements she possibly might make in the courtroom, she stated repeatedly that she wants to “think about it”. Basically, I could not get her to commit on what she was going to say, she was being manipulative, evasive. 

Then Carol decides to verbally tell me if Rick does not cooperate she might have to tell the court and Judge the following: Rick told her after the divorce, he would still take care of her, and they had sexual relations while she continued to work for him in his business. She'll go on to tell the court Rick owes her for the time he beat her up, which she had bruises and pictures of this abuse, and that Rick hid $200,000 cash during the original divorce proceedings. All of these accusations are false.

It was really apparent now that Carol felt scorned and wanted revenge, and if she keeps lying which she has done and continues to do, then these hearings will never end. She'll make up lies why she can't show proof of abuse, "I lost the pictures"  or "my internet provider is going to send me the emails"  or "I need more time" or in actuality, it's "I'm going to keep on lying and disrupt Rick's life."  It will be hearing after hearing.

The one thing I had going for me was she was very naive, she had no clue what the repercussions were for lying to a Judge in a courtroom. Since I met her, I found her to have no inkling of a conscious. Trying to pin her down about these untrue statements, she just ignored them in a contempt manner.

These hearings had to stop, this craziness had to stop. I have no pity when I find that someone does not have a conscious. So I am going to call her bluff, show her how the legal system really can work to bite her in the ass and teach her a lesson. 

I prepared some subpoenas which forced Carol to come to the court hearing with documents and pictures showing physical abuse.

I gave a trial subpoena to all the process servers she hired so they can testify in court that Carol purposely gave them Rick's old addresses so he could NOT be found. I also gave a trial subpoena to a bookkeeper who knew Carol had worked in Rick's business prior to the divorce, to testify that Carol knew where to find Rick this whole time. I also subpoenaed Carol's mother, who knew where Rick worked along with giving subpoena's to two other friends of Carol's, who knew where Rick was working.

I served Carol with all of these subpoenas, and she was pissed beyond belief. She went into a screaming tirade, throwing the subpoenas everywhere and stalked off, threatening to hire a lawyer.

I told Rick that I have done what I can do within my process serving ability and that he may need a lawyer if she continues to lie and cause trouble. We won't know until the court hearing in January.

 In the meantime, I filed another Affidavit with the court outlining Carol's accusations and how they are false. There never was any physical abuse, much less sexual relations after the divorce and neither was there $200,000 hidden anywhere.

I checked the court case file periodically up until the hearing date to see if Carol had filed any more paperwork with the court, but there was nothing, so if anything I got her to stop filing lies and distortions with the court. Rick prepared for the worst, which she would attend the hearing, carry-on like a victim and we'll be in court hearings forever, and he'll need to hire a very expensive lawyer.

Unbeknownst to Carol, court Judges really don't have time to read every document that is filed. Since Carol brought this action, she gets to go first at the hearing. She'll start rambling and the judge won't have any idea what she is talking about. I told Rick, do not say or do anything at the hearing unless the Judge asks him a question, let Carol dig herself into a bigger hole. 

JUDGMENT DAY: January 20, 2012 - Sacramento Superior Court - 1:30 PM

Rick and I show up along with the witnesses we subpoenaed. Carol shows up by herself and does not look in our direction at all. After listening to three other cases before us, it was Rick's turn; both he and Carol went up to their prospective seats. The Judge looked over the file, took off his glasses, looked up at Carol and said, "You go first Ms. Smith, what is going on here?"

To our amazement, Carol made this statement. "In light of new discussions with my family and counselor, I wish to withdraw my intentions to set-aside my divorce judgment and actually re-instate my divorce". The Judge asked her if she was absolutely sure she wanted to do this and if she is doing this under her own determinism. She replied that she was. The Judge then stated to both Rick and Carol that the original divorce judgment of July 13, 2008, was reinstated. This hearing took less than five minutes!

I still believe up to this day that the Judge had no time to read all the Affidavits, not really knowing all the lies Carol told. If she had pursued this action, then all her lies and perjury would have come to light resulting in some kind of punishment. I also believe that the basis of the subpoenas and asking people to testify threatened to expose Carol's lies. She was scared that she would get caught for lying and obstructing justice.

Rick and I left the courtroom, waited in the lobby for the bailiff to bring us some paperwork, and while we were waiting, Carol left the courtroom and came into the lobby, saw us and flipped us off as she went by. That's okay, we made our point.

SMALL CLAIMS IS NOT YOUR FRIEND

      I mean this in the most sincere way, Small Claims court is not your friend if you do not understand how it really works. I still run into people who are frustrated and upset with small claims court because they did not feel justice was served, for one reason or another including small technicalities and frankly, because the proper legal procedure was not followed.

     Instead of writing an entire small claims legal course, I am going to list a few of the most common misunderstandings people make (not your fault as there are things the court just doesn't have time to tell you). No, I am not an attorney. My job as a process server, when serving small claims papers entitles me to take the initiative to make sure the legal papers you just filed are correct. 

    This is an article giving you advice and opinion based on my experience, some of it may be harsh but it is reality. Always consult an attorney for an actual course of action if you have concerns. Court clerks do not check if your paperwork is 100% correct, it's not their job and they do not give legal advice - it is up to us to figure it out.

Common Misunderstandings:
WRONG NAME FOR DEFENDANT: This kind of mistake mostly happens when you are suing a business. If you are suing Joe Smith Automotive because that was the name on your receipt, it is not necessarily his legal name that he has to be sued under. All the defendant has to do is show up for the court hearing, tell the Judge this legal paper does not have the correct legal name for the business, and the case can be dismissed, and some have been dismissed. This is because if you win your case and get a Judgment, then you want to file a lien or attach wages, your Judgment has to match the defendant's name exactly with any bank accounts, government agencies or employers. HINT: To find the legal name of any business or company, look at the bottom of their webpage. The web address might say www.joesmithautomotive.com but at the bottom of the web page it will say Joe Smith Automotive LLC., and this is the name you put on your legal papers. You can contact the Secretary of State to find out who is the Agent for Service. If there is no web search information, check with the County Recorder for a Fictitious Business Name Statement such as Joe Smith Automotive, or check with the CA Bureau of Automotive Repair or the State Contractors Board, (if the defendant is a contractor). If Joe Smith Automotive is not listed with the CA Bureau of Automotive Repair or any other governing agency, then you are probably safe suing Joe with the only name you have. If you are suing any contractor or automotive repair company and they have no license with the CA State Agencies they are supposed to, get a letter stating this from the Agency, take it to the hearing and you will probably win your case just because of that. So bottom line, before you sue a business make sure you have the actual legal name for the business or company. Here's as the trick: Before a client of mine wanted to sue a business, I needed to know the legal name of a business and his banking information so I could levy his bank account. I could not find this information anywhere. I went to the business, bought something from him and wrote a check, then from my bank I got a copy of the check after it cleared. The legal name and account number were on the back of the check where the business endorsed it.

LEVERAGE: I have seen people sue another because of emotion, not practicality. Take a moment and ask yourself if you are going to be effective in recovering your money. In other words, what in gods name makes you think, after serving a defendant, he/she is just going to show up in court and get his/her hand slapped with an order from the Judge to pay you? Ask any collection agency, they have hundreds of Judgments they cannot collect on. Do you know why? NO LEVERAGE. With collections agencies, it's a crapshoot. They figured if they keep harassing someone, they will pay. Not so much. A low life has ripped you off - they did not have car insurance when they hit you, or bounced a check on you or they failed to pay back rent - we get it, it's a bummer. But make sure before you go through all the court bureaucracy to get a hearing and then a Judgment, that the person you are suing has something to lose. If a loser has nothing to lose then the result is, you lose. For example, does the person you are suing own any property, or been at their job for a long time? Does this person have a successful business with employees and an actual commercial property address? Does this person have something that if you sue him, will affect some part of his life? Then you have leverage, because the person you are suing doesn't want a lien on his house, they don't want their wages attached, and he wouldn't want his business levied on. After reading this, if you still want to sue because you want "justice" and are still angry - and the loser you are suing has no job or any leverage - here's what you do. After you get your Judgment, get a certified copy of it from the small claims court clerk, take it to the County Recorder and for a few bucks you can put a lien on the Defendant. You are actually putting the lien on his/her name, because if this loser ever wins the lottery, he has to pay all his lien obligations first, and that's you. (Did you know the State of California checks you out before they fork over the lottery money to you?). If you owe the government any money or have liens on you, the lottery takes this money out of your winnings. So you might recover the money someday, but for now the lien will stay on file and if the loser ever tries to buy a house with an inheritance or something, the loser will have to pay you before escrow closes. I wrote an interesting legal case about LEVERAGE on my blog: www.legworkpi.com and this gives you insight on how important leverage is.

APPLICATION AND ORDER TO APPEAR FOR EXAMINATION: I have never seen this work. That doesn't mean it hasn't worked for some people if so, let me know as I've never seen it work. Any Plaintiff suing another, and has a Judgment for monies they want to collect but can't find anything the Defendant owns to levy, or you can't figure out where they work or pretty much anything else, you can serve this Application and Order on the Defendant, (more court and process serving fees). This makes the Defendant show up and under oath, has to answer all your questions about his property, finances and other assets. Please remember this is an informal hearing, don't expect the Judge to fight for you so you can "finally get justice." A Judge can't make the Defendant tell the truth. If the Defendant says he doesn't have a bank account, he doesn't have to prove he doesn't. If the Defendant says he doesn't have a job, he doesn't have to prove he doesn't. He doesn't have to prove anything. If he had the money to pay you in the first place, you wouldn't need to do this. You are better off doing your own research into the Defendant's property and assets so you can attach wages or a lien etc. www.courts.ca.gov/documents/ej125.

SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT - SERVING PAPERS FOR YOU: Most Sheriff's Civil Divisions in CA will serve your legal papers for you, for a small fee. What you need to know is, it is not an actual Sheriff in a uniform using a Sheriff's vehicle serving your papers. They are process servers in plain clothes, just like any other process server. They only work from 8 AM to 5 PM and are employees of the Sheriff's Department. They do not work nights or weekends and do not guarantee your papers will be served. If the Sheriff's Civil Division does not serve your papers in time for your hearing, you have to start all over again. It is better to hire a private process server who can work nights and weekends, and get the legal papers served on time for you. The Sheriff's Department should be used if you need to do a bank levy, earnings withholding order, vehicle levy or business seizures. Check out the Civil Division, Service of Process at www.sacsheriff.com.

So these are the most important things to know especially regarding LEVERAGE. Remember, we must also keep emotion out of any small claims case. Judges only follow laws governing small claims, they cannot help you get punitive damages to handle any emotional distress. That is another courts jurisdiction.

"MY JAIL TIME"

"I'd always believed that old saying that the first 15 minutes in jail were the toughest until I experienced the 5 minutes after."

~Bob Odenkirk~

Comedian

                           
    I'm a process server, and I'm in jail....it's a long story. 

    For many years, it was the policy of the Sacramento County Sheriff's Department, (who supervise, guard and run the County Jail) that when you serve an inmate who is incarcerated, the Sheriff's Deputy at the reception station/window takes the legal papers and serves the inmate for us. You still go through the front door to the initial security station, then wait your turn in line to speak to one of the deputies. Then the deputy takes the papers from you while you are writing down his name and badge number, then you are done - "free as a bird". That's the way it's always been done.

    So about three years ago, I had to serve some divorce papers on an inmate who was in the county jail. No problem, I go bebopping downtown, park near the jail, throw a couple of quarters in the meter and enter the jail to the security area. Two quarters for parking was plenty of money, I'm only going to be in there for about fifteen minutes. 

    I went up to the security window, telling the Sheriff's Deputy the usual standard protocol and started to hand him the divorce papers. The deputy told me they no longer accept legal papers for inmates, that from now on the process server actually goes up to the prisoner/visitor center and serves them personally.

    "HUH?"

    I asked the deputy "what does this mean"? He laughs and makes the same statement. He knows me from previous visits so I asked him if he was playing with me and he said no. In the background, a couple of other deputies were laughing - not at me, just my humoristic attitude.

    "HUH?"

    The Sheriff's Deputy laughs again and then gives me the whole security procedure checklist in order to go through the ominous doors behind him. This is after he makes a copy of my license. Here is what I had to do:  I had to put more money in the meter along with putting my cell phone, license and spare change in my car. I then had to take all the staples out of the legal papers I was carrying. When I arrived back at the security window, I had to be patted down, (can't remember if this was an electronic-stick-thing pat down or a physical one).

    The deputy informs me that they will bring the prisoner to me at the visitor center upstairs.

    Then to my surprise, as soon as the deputy opens the ominous door, telling me to go through, he shuts the door on me, and all I hear is a loud clang. He isn't there with me, no one is. This is such a new experience, I don't know what to make of it. The elevators were right there so I push the button and waited. I finally get in the elevator, no one else is on it, and I hit the third-floor button. I get off the elevator, there is no one around. The only thing I see is a locked door at the end of the hall with a small window. I peeked in the window then jumped back about 5 feet scared out of my freaking wits!

    The deputy had come over the loudspeaker for that hallway and told me to stand back, the door will unlock.

    Then I hear a loud click, I touch the door handle and it opens. I went in trying to hide my shaking body from jumping out of my skin.

    In this room, it was just like on television, there is a long bulletproof glass window running across the entire room, dividing the inmate from his visitor or lawyer, and then 3/4 partition walls for a little privacy. There are about 6-8 chairs on each side and they each have a telephone, just like on TV. 

    I really calmed down at this point, this looked simple enough now, there were a couple of inmates talking to their lawyers. I sat in one of the chairs on the visitor's side and waited.

    Then a Sheriff's Deputy started eyeing me, there goes the blood pressure up again. The deputy comes to the glass window picks up the phone so I pick up my phone and he asks if I am here for "Inmate Smith". I told him yes and he tells me I have to go into a "special locked room" down the hall.

    Oh my God! I asked the deputy "WHY?"
    (oh WHY? WHY? WHY?)

    He stated that whenever an inmate is going to get bad news of any kind, they are spoken to in a locked private room.

    Crap!

    This is no exaggeration, you have no idea the humongous amount of intimidation this place has. I've been "on the inside" for fifteen minutes and according to the comedian, Bob Odenkirk, the next five minutes isn't lookin' good either. 

    This private room is the same size as the regular visitor's partitions and window divider except the dividing privacy walls go all the way to the ceiling. There is a phone on each side. The inmate side has a large window (so the deputy can watch him), and the door will lock after the deputy lets the inmate in. My door has already locked me in with no access to get out unless you figure out the wall of instructions to release the door lock. Too late to read anything, I am locked in there, "CLANG".

    So I am now claustrophobic but have it under "control". I can see down below to the next level via the window and it's just like we see on television. I see inmates in their orange jumpsuits, eating, doing chores, playing cards or chatting away.

    While I am waiting for Inmate Smith, I am reading the signs on the wall. I kid you not - here is the main sign posted. This isn't going to be verbatim and I forgot most of it but this is the gist: 

    "If you are here visiting an inmate and giving him bad news, and after you have informed him of said news, then please inform us if the prisoner experiences any manifestations of threatening suicide, threatening someone else or is acting in a strange manner".

    Sure I will, no problem....ON WHAT FREAKING COMMUNICATION SYSTEM AM I GONNA use to contact you if he starts choking himself?

    All of these stupid but warranted thoughts were running through my mind because it was taking so long for the deputy to bring the inmate. It is starting to get really hot in this little room and thirty minutes have gone by, no one has checked on me.

    I pick up the phone but there is no one on the other end, it's just for the inmate and me to talk to one another. I kind of knew this but I was getting worried that they forgot about me. I figured someone has to be on the line, don't they listen to these conversations??? I then decided to follow the instructions to release the door lock - it wouldn't work! I re-read the instructions, tried the door again - it wouldn't open.

    Crap!

    I must have waited another ten minutes. Then I saw the deputy with Inmate Smith through the window, the door was unlocked, the guard quickly put the prisoner in his seat, doesn't even look at me, then CLANG! and the door is locked, just me and the inmate. I immediately started looking for the deputy through the window to make sure he was close by, but he was gone.

    In an instant, I went into survival mode telling myself this is all good, no problem, everything will be fine, just talk to the guy, explain the legal papers. I wasn't really concern about his behavior, I was just wanted to get out of there and breathe some fresh air.

    The inmate ended up being fine, we talked on the phone, he said he would get an attorney to handle this family law matter, then he knocks on his door and a deputy opens it, lets him out, then CLANG! It happened so fast I did not get the deputy's attention to let him know that I tried to get out of the room earlier but the door would not open.

    Now it's pure hell...the door will not release. I am stuck in there. I have no idea how long this goes on for. I try the phone again, stupid me, no one there and no one can see me through the window. I'm in the last room at the end of a hallway...no one is even going to walk by.

    Crap!

    I decide to just sit there, I really had no choice. I have no idea how long it was as I really lost track of time. I then hear a CLANK behind and jump out my skin again. I turned, tried the door and realized it was unlocked electronically by one of the deputies.  

    I slowly walked down the hallway and out the security door. Outside the security door were two lawyers waiting for entry to see their clients (inmates). Both lawyers were grinning at me, and I figured they were just being nice. While I am waiting for the elevator I hear a deputy talking through the intercom. I paid no attention, I just wanted out of this place, I was distraught and oblivious. One of the attorneys to got my attention, pointed to the speaker by the locked door and told them the Sheriff is talking to me. I walk up to the speaker, talked into it and said:

    "HEELLLLOOOO...."

    The deputy responded with:

    "ON BEHALF OF THE SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT WE WANT TO PUBLICLY APOLOGIZE FOR LEAVING YOU LOCKED IN THAT ROOM. WE WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF A SHIFT CHANGE AND THE PREVIOUS SHIFT DID NOT TELL US YOU WERE IN THERE. OUR APOLOGIES."

    I was so flabbergasted, I just stood there for a few seconds. I had no idea what to say so I spat out, "NO PROBLEM." Really Christi, that's all you got????

    Looking back, there was a funny part, actually a hysterical part to this experience: 

    Remember the two lawyers? Earlier when I was finally getting on the elevator to get "out of jail", the two lawyers handed me their business cards. They heard what the deputy said over the intercom, and wanted me to call if I had any PTSD symptoms from being falsely imprisoned. They were still smiling, partly because they were funny and trying to make light of the situation.

    I just couldn't stop laughing the whole time I was in the elevator and walking out onto the street. I needed that, it processed the whole experience for me. I was over it.  

    Guess they thought I had a case - I never called them. They were just like the same funny lawyers from Franklin and Bash.

HOW TO FIND SOMEONE'S EMPLOYER

The good ole' days - the 90's - when finding someone's employer was easy. When we ran credit header reports, the employer was listed. Not any more. So over the years, PI's and Process Servers had to improvise, coming up with new ways to find an employer. It's not at all easy any more but can be done. 

These are my successful actions in finding an employer of a target, defendant or a respondent. I have found the employer every time implementing these actions.

Every case is different, there is no set way to go about getting employer information. The basic and most important attribute you need is street smarts. A street smart person has a lot of common sense, knows every type of person, understands people and how to act around them. This person knows how to deal with different situations and has his own independent state of mind - able to switch pretext stories in a second. 

I recommend two books that discuss a wide range of cases with bright ideas and websites to use in your profession. These books are:

Chuck Chambers, PI - The Private Investigators Handbook
Link: Chuck Chambers, PI

Valeri McGilvrey - The Most Useful Websites
Link: Valeri McGilvrey

Not to be mundane or talk "down" to you but we need to cover the simple and easy ways to locate an employer. Always do the simplest thing first. Check out all the social media websites, Facebook, Linked In, and the city/county/state business licensing bureaus, etc. The key here is, if a person does not list an employer on his Facebook page, he might list a profession. Then you can check the state licensing boards for that profession and see if he is licensed and who he is working for. That is one idea and has been very successful for me. 

Do not underestimate Facebook. One time, I swear to you, I checked a person on Facebook, he did not list any profession BUT in checking his friends list, (he didn't have any privacy settings on his Facebook page), he and I had a friend in common. I contacted our mutual friend, made up a story and found out where the guy worked. My story to our mutual friend was that I was looking for a good insurance agent and thought "Joe" was in the insurance field. The mutual friend stated not insurance, he worked for the State of California. I checked the employee's roster for the State of CA, (this is public information), and there he was listed, he had recently gotten hired. Always check the friends list if you can, you never know.

Keeping it simple - here is another way to find the employer of someone, and I am sure you are aware of this: Follow them. If your client has the budget, use two investigators, two cars and two-way radios. This is a hit and miss as it could take just 2 hours or it could take some time waiting for the guy to leave his house. Most people work at 7 AM, 3 PM and 11 PM. Beat the odds by watching the house prior to these times and see if they leave. I do not sit all day but if by the second day there is no movement, no cars visible or no lights on at night, something is wrong, maybe the person is on vacation. I would then do a drive by at night and not resume a stakeout until you see lights. In the meantime I would also go to the post office and verify the person you want to follow is still living at the house and still receiving mail there. I learn this the hard way one time, I watched the house all day for two days then found out from the post office that the place was vacant and my guy moved.

When following targets to their work place, with two cars, has been successful for me.  

You would think, with all the news about identity theft and protecting ones privacy, that people would be more secure with their documents but some still don't shred their personal data. I have found payroll stubs and employment info in people's garbage - to this day. Chuck Chambers, in his book, covers the art of Dumpster diving. What I can add is this: in certain California counties and maybe in other states, taking ones garbage, even if it is on the street for pick-up, is illegal. California has a lot of problems with the homeless people and recycling guys going through people's trash, so local laws were passed. Here are some different ways that I circumvent this kind of situation:

1. I actually call the city or county garbage agency that has jurisdiction over the address I want to get the garbage from. They will tell you what day of the week the garbage is picked up from that address. The agency doesn't ask you any questions, they think you just moved in or something. I tell them: "Where I used to live" we had trouble with homeless going through our garbage, and ask the agency if at this address, is it illegal to dumpster dive. If they say no, you don't need to do anything else, say goodbye and go get the garbage.

2. If the agency says it is illegal, you have to now switch gears, tell them a story. You already have the day of the pickup, so call the agency back the night before the pickup day. You want to get this conversation on the record as they tape all phone conversations. I tell them this: "I need permission to go through the garbage along this street as I think a wallet was lost in this area and I need to go through the garbage in case someone threw the wallet (or purse) out." The agency will say sure, go ahead and now you have permission. Get the name of the person you spoke to and give him/her your first name. If a neighbor happens to see you and inquires about what you are doing going though garbage cans, tell them the same story about the lost wallet and that you got permission from the city/county They will feel sorry for you and leave you alone. Everyone knows a woman who has left her purse or wallet on top of her car and driven off right? No? Well, that's my story....

At no time did I say "my wallet" or give any specifics, keep your statements general when speaking to these agencies. They have never asked for my name or phone number, so there you go. 

3. Just knock on the door of the targets neighbor. 
This is the worst option, (you have to be able to pull off an excellent pretext), but if you do not have access to one's garbage and you have exhausted all other resources and bright ideas, this is what you do - knock on the door of the targets neighbor. Just be upfront, even give them your business card.

FIRST, make sure your target is not home before you knock on the neighbors door. I usually do this at night time, then I can see if any lights are on at the targets house or a car in the driveway. If there are lights and a car, come back again during the day time to speak to the neighbor - as long as there is no car at the targets house, or speak to the neighbor at night when there are no lights on or car present. 

Here is my pretext:

The next door neighbor answers the door -- have a little notebook/pen and your ID visible.

"Hi, sorry to bother you but my name is Christi Losh with LEGWORK (hand them your card) and we are looking for a missing witness for our trial. We understood she/he lived around this neighborhood." I let this statement hang in the air for a moment so I can size the person up. 

They usually say "um....ok."

Then I say:

"Two years ago there was an accident down the street, on the corner of Elm & Oak (find a couple of real streets around this address). Use street names that have a busy intersection.This accident involved 2 minor children who were hurt by a hit & run driver and our witness saw the accident, saying the vehicle ran a red light. Our witness was behind the hit & run driver. We thought the case was going to settle a couple of years ago but it didn't so now we are looking for this witness, Joe Smith, we think is his name." Make up a name, not the targets name.  

Talk at a medium pace and look relaxed.

Then I say:

"We thought Joe Smith, like I said, we could have the name wrong, lived next door and worked for Federal Express...is that true, does your neighbor or any neighbor work for Federal Express? The person says, No, the guy next door works for JB Manufacturing but his name is Steve Roberts. (the name of the guy you are actually looking for).

BOOM, there's your employer.

If you didn't get the employers name from that neighbor, try another neighbor. 

Be prepared for anything as there can be variations to this - one time after a neighbor told me my target worked at COSTCO, she insisted on helping me further, so she called my target for me on his cell phone to find out if he knew a Joe Smith that used to live at his place. My target told her no, he didn't know Joe Smith. Kinda funny...get it? 

I am interested to know the successful actions of others, where they have found employer information. Let's share some of those. 

THE ATM HEIST

This story is about the first legal case I ever worked on. It was the very beginning of my career, and while I planned on going to law school at night, little did I know that this experience was going to change my life.   

San Diego – 1982

Our law firm was the attorney of record for a large pizza franchise corporation being sued by a former corporate employee who supervised all the franchises. This pizza chain encompassed over hundreds of pizza parlors all over southern California.

The pizza corporation was susceptible to some attack over the years, and they scrambled to resolve this susceptibility. Previously, they didn't have their hiring policies fully intact like companies definitely do these days. They didn't regularly perform background checks, or verify social security numbers, or verify previous employment, and there were errors in how they paid overtime.

To rectify these errors, management went through every present employee file and cleaned it up, making sure all pay and benefits were in order. If any past overtime was owed to an employee, they paid it. Background checks were done as well as making sure current employees had no ill-will feelings or problems with management.

There were at least 450 former employees who needed to be located, contacted and their time sheets gone over to correct any errors. Management was advised to try and track down as many of these former employees as possible, and resolve any issues that might expose them to future lawsuits – smart decision.

Before this project of locating past employees started, a nasty lawsuit landed on their door.

MY VEHICLE WAS HERE A MINUTE AGO...

    It was a brutally cold winter in Forest Hill, CA @ 5 AM, sitting parked down a hill out of sight from other vehicles and trying to stay warm. What was I thinking? Freezing temperatures, my hands were numb. Forest Hill isn't exactly close to a warm Starbucks. While I am  sitting waiting for a certain vehicle to come down the hill, I will catch you up on the story.

    A few years back there used to be vehicle broker companies (a bright idea turned out not so bright) that would broker your extra vehicle. Let's say you have a vehicle you no longer need, you can't sell it for what you owe on it and you no longer want to make the payments. Well, call up Joe's Vehicle Broker Company and he'll hook you up with someone who needs a vehicle, then this person takes your vehicle and gets their own insurance on it. This person then sends you the payment every month. Contracts were signed and the brokers were suppose to get back the vehicle if the person did not make their payments. .

    In my client's case, she was receiving the payments every month for almost a year, then all of a sudden in the spring of 2007, the payments started being late and eventually no payments. My client, Catherine, did speak to Debbie stating she would be late for October but would make a double payment in November.

    Debbie also stated she'd lost her job so she and her twins had to move in with her parents.   Debbie was warned that Catherine would have to take the vehicle back if some money was not received soon. 

    No payments came in November, December or January and Debbie's cell phone was now disconnected. We had no physical address for her. 

    So now it's time to just take the vehicle back but where is it?
 
    Catherine thought she'd go see the vehicle brokers in Citrus Heights, CA, and get their help. She pulls up to the office and finds the brokers business closed up, office empty, no one around, just gone. The businesses around this area the had no information on where they went. Now she has no broker or protection.  

    Law Enforcement does not get involved in matters like this, the pink slip is still in Catherine's name so my client can take back the vehicle at any time. The vehicle isn't technically stolen by Debbie as the 911 supervisor says, so they aren't going to assist us. 

    Well, the coppers didn't get the message from the 911 operator, as you will later read. 

    The trick first of all was finding out where Debbie lived or actually where her father lived. Catherine had kept track of all the phone numbers Debbie had previously called her from.  With this information, I located the father's home, and prior to me freezing my butt off, I had driven by the property and saw the vehicle I wanted in the driveway.

    There were problems with this scenario even though I had a key to the vehicle. The property was off the main road about 1/4 mile, no neighbors and dogs, lots of dogs, and let's not forget the sign that says, "Trespassers will be shot". I 'd say my chances of survival by walking up the driveway to steal the vehicle was 100 to 0 in favor of dying so I liked plan B better.

    Also, on this particular job I had to have the client with me as she is the registered owner so if I get stopped by the cops after taking the vehicle, she'll be there to verify ownership.

    I decided I would wait until Debbie left early for work and follow her. Then when she arrives at work and goes inside, I will use my key and take the vehicle. I had no idea where she worked but I would soon find out. She wouldn't know her vehicle was missing until at least lunchtime.

    To my surprise, @ 7:30 AM, when I saw Debbie come down the road and stop at a stop sign, she had two children in car seats. This is going complicate the situation a bit, but would deal with that as this played out.

    Debbie makes a left at the stop sign and starts going down Folsom-Auburn Boulevard. This winding 2-lane road goes all the way to the town of Folsom. She could of gotten on the freeway, gone west, then east on Hwy 50 to Folsom but she decided to take the back way. We followed her for a few miles down the back road and all of a sudden she pulls over. Maybe she was dropping off the kids at the babysitter but as it turned out, she had to do something with the kids in the backseat. I was shocked that she had not realized I pulled over too. She never even noticed, which I guess is plausible since she had all her attention on something or someone in the back seat. 

    Debbie then keeps driving for several miles towards Folsom. There were several towns she could of worked in but she passed them all up and entered the town of Folsom. I followed her through neighborhoods and then to a business district, thinking maybe she has a day care center where she works - not the case, in the middle of the business district there is a day care center, a name that belongs to a huge chain of day care centers, and she pulls into it.

    Now it's 8:45 AM, not only does she pull into a parking spot right near the front door, she gets out, collects the kids and their stuff, then walks into the center. She leaves the vehicle running with all of her keys in the ignition, leaves her purse, the car seats and everything else!

    Since she left the vehicle running, she wasn't going to be very long so I had to jump out of my vehicle and start walking kind of fast towards the vehicle door keeping my eyes peeled on the day care front door in case she came out. I did not want a confrontation, no reason to
get into it with her, didn't want anyone calling the coppers, I just wanted the vehicle.  

    I made it to the driver side door, hopped in using the keys that were in the ignition, put it in reverse, backed out and drove off quickly. I had to hide the vehicle because like I said earlier, sometimes the cops shoot first and ask questions later, and even though I warned them over and over that I was taking the vehicle, I could not trust them not be trigger happy. From other stories I have written, you can see how cops can be jumpy.

    I drove the vehicle to a location nearby where it couldn't be found for quite a while. My client followed me driving my vehicle. When we parked, we then cleaned out the entire vehicle (van). It was really a mess, children's stuff such as clothes, blankets, diapers, food wrappers, all in disarray. We packed all the valuable things in a bag throwing out all the garbage. We put Debbie's purse, car keys and her personal items in a separate bag. When I was packing her personal stuff in her purse, her work ID fell out, so I now knew where she worked. I put that back in her purse loading up everything else including the children's car  seats and put it all in my vehicle. This took us about an hour or so.

    We left the van parked in it's safe place and around 10:30 AM, headed back to the day care center to return all of Debbie's belongings. When we got close, I could hear sirens, not one police siren but several. With so many police vehicles and sirens I knew right away that Debbie not only called 911 to report "her vehicle" stolen but acted like a victim and mentioned her children, and that her car seats and purse had been stolen. All you have to do is mentioned the word children and a lot of law enforcement get involved. 

    When I got around the corner of the day care center, I saw all the police cars, two parked in front of the day care center and others driving around. I thought it best to sit at the Starbucks next door and call the 911 operators. There were even people who came out of Starbucks to see what the heck was going on. But I remained quiet and didn't engage in any conversations. One person asked me what was going on and I replied "I have no idea". After we were alone outside, we called 911.

    My client explained to the operator that we had called in yesterday to the Sheriff's Department of two counties and police stations for two different towns in the Sacramento area. It was re-iterated what time we called them yesterday, also giving them the vehicle license plate number, who the registered owner is, and that we were taking the vehicle back today. After some minutes on hold, waiting, then suddenly we heard all the sirens go off and ta few minutes later he police left the day care center. I guess the 911 dispatch supervisor found our notes from yesterday and called off the posse. When the operator came back on the line she stated they have closed this matter and will do nothing further.

    We waited a while to calm our nerves, actually got something to eat, then around 12 PM drove my vehicle next door to the day care center. We unloaded the car seats and Debbie's box of personal items, went inside, telling the day care staff we were dropping off her stuff. 

    I thought we were going to walk in and the staff would immediately call the police - again. 

    What happened next was hilarious! 

    One of the day care staff sees that we have the car seats and a box, then says, "OH, you must be her mother!"

    I said, "No".

She said, "Oh, you are the friend she called. Debbie left with her father but thank you so much for bringing an extra set of car seats and stuff for the children!". (She didn't see the purse in the box).

    I said, "Sure!" and left.

    I guess they didn't figure whoever stole "her vehicle" would be brave enough to return the car seats - so to them, I must have been Debbie's mother. Too funny.

    After driving back to the place where we hid my clients vehicle (van), she then drove it home back to Sacramento.

    The next thing is even more hilarious!!!

    When Catherine arrived home she found out that Debbie and her father had been there at the house - looking for her! Unbelievable, they want the van back!. That was the message left at the door and on the message machine there were several calls from Debbie.

    I am sure the police told Debbie that Catherine legally took her vehicle back and they could not help her, so she was really pissed off.

    Catherine spoke to Debbie on the phone trying to drive some sense into her, it's my car-you didn't pay-I took my car back etc. But before Debbie slammed the phone down, she said, "I'm going to sue you!"

    At this point Catherine ignored her and her threat, forgetting about this chick. A few weeks go by and a process server shows up at Catherine's door.

    Debbie is suing Catherine in small claims court! She wants "her vehicle" back!

    Of all my years of doing this work, this has got to be the stupidest chick I have ever encountered.  I bet she thinks a Judge is going to feel sorry for her. To her it's worth a try. She's desperate but at the same time - really???

    Now, Debbie got herself in a worse situation because I am going to submit my bill to the court for $800 and get the Judge to make her pay it.

    The court hearing was attended by my client, Catherine and myself. She had all her paperwork, registration, contract with Debbie and even my bill for repossessing the car. We scripted our version so that Catherine would explain the situation in a few words. She did and then it was Debbie's turn to speak to the Judge. Just as I thought, she went on and on about how she was a victim, how we took back "her vehicle" and all Catherine should of done was "call her". She stated she needed this vehicle to drive to work and daycare, that she can't get a vehicle loan due to her financial issues and still says she wants Catherine to give the vehicle back!

    The Judge asked Catherine for information on her actual phone bills listing all the phone calls made to Debbie, with dates and times during the 6 or so months she was trying to get Debbie to return the vehicle. When the Judge queried Debbie on this, it was obvious to him that Debbie had plenty of time to take care of this matter and didn't.

    Catherine won this case and weeks later I was shocked when I received a check for $800 from Debbie's parents. We never heard from Debbie again.

    Moral of the story: When faced with any legal situation or one such as Debbie, look at the law or hire a lawyer or do your own research. Do not succumb to your emotions and let them run your actions - you will lose. Face it head-on and resolved it fast.