Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Landmark Legislation Assaulting...

Expand Messages
  • suesarkis@aol.com
    Rick - You obviously totally misunderstood my point. This bill does NOT allow our employees access to these gated communities whether you HIRE new ones or
    Message 1 of 4 , Jun 6, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Rick -

      You obviously totally misunderstood my point. This bill does NOT allow
      our employees access to these gated communities whether you HIRE new ones or
      UTILIZE the ones already on payroll.

      We are NOT process servers, we are investigators. The purpose of our
      having an exception for the SIMPLE service of process, meaning subpoenae, is to
      allow us to save the taxpayers and our clients lots of money whether court
      appointed or privately retained. If the client's attorney has you
      interview witnesses and trusts you enough to make a decision about serving them,
      or, in the alternative, gives you a flat across the board "after the
      interview, serve them" it saves the additional expenses of having to have a PS
      locate and then serve the already interviewed witness. In other words, we get
      to kill two birds with one stone.

      If we want to go into the PS business, then we should register like
      everyone else. Plain and simple.

      Look, the bill gives us a little more power than we have today and that
      cannot be looked upon as a negative by anyone with an IQ over 50 no matter how
      many other things you would like the bill to include. Let's get this on
      the books and perhaps later address other issues.

      We are PI's, not PS's.

      Sincerely,
      Sue


      In a message dated 6/6/2012 8:06:11 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
      rick-vg@... writes:


      Ms. Sarkis,
      You have misstated my words for the premise of your reply. I said “utilize
      ” employees and you return fire with “hire employees.” I stand by my
      words as both truthful and accurate.
      To answer your question, I figured “that” out after reading the bill and
      related laws, by speaking with the author’s office who confirmed it twice
      through their legal staff and also with CALI. So Ms. Sarkis, how do you
      figure it would allow us to “utilize” employees or do you just not care?
      Further, if you wouldn’t want NON-licensed investigators having the same
      power you have, why would you, CALI or anyone be so anxious to acquiesce a
      present right to utilize employees by giving power to NON-licensed process
      servers and their trade association, CalsPro?
      Thank you for joining the conversation.
      Sincerely,
      Rick von Geldern




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • donna stein
      Hi all, Would appreciate any responses. 1.  Any guesses why there be a vast amount of cell calls of which are less than 1 minute (same sender, same receiver &
      Message 2 of 4 , Jun 30, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi all, Would appreciate any responses.

        1.  Any
        guesses why there be a vast amount of cell calls of which are less than 1 minute (same sender, same receiver & then immediately reversed for
        the call back).

        2. How can I find out about an
        individual's small-time criminal history (like DWI, petty theft, etc.)
        in Nassau County, NY (2nd district, Hempstead, Long Island, NY)? Is this public info? I was told they wouldn't respond to a FOIA request.
        Thanks for your time.


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • webmail007@aol.com
        ... There are countless possible reasons for this. The funniest / most ridiculous was one I saw approx 2 years ago...some young knuckleheads in Florida saw an
        Message 3 of 4 , Jul 1 2:35 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 6/30/12 8:29:35 PM, dstein5611@... writes:


          > 1.  Any
          > guesses why there be a vast amount of cell calls of which are less than 1
          > minute (same sender, same receiver & then immediately reversed for
          > the call back).
          >

          There are countless possible reasons for this. The funniest / most
          ridiculous was one I saw approx 2 years ago...some young knuckleheads in Florida saw
          an old movie where police were talking about needing 3 minutes to trace a
          call, and the knuckleheads thought that still LEGALLY applied, and they kept
          all of their harassing cell phone calls down to 2 minutes.

          There are of course many other possible reasons, ranging from short calls
          to give directions, to the length of time necessary to send a photo, to a bad
          cell phone plan to a cell phone being used as a tracking or alarm device
          and one minues it the trigger/transmit time. IMO pointless to try to guess w-o
          more info.



          >
          > 2. How can I find out about an
          > individual's small-time criminal history (like DWI, petty theft, etc.)
          > in Nassau County, NY (2nd district, Hempstead, Long Island, NY)? Is this
          > public info? I was told they wouldn't respond to a FOIA request.
          > Thanks for your time.
          >

          We can assist with this, not a problem. Contact info below.

          Steven.

          (Steven Rambam, Director, CFE, CPP, PSP, PCI, CSAR)
          (for: Pallorium, Inc.)
          www.pallorium.com

          USA Tel: 001-212-969-0286
          direct e-mail: rambam@...

          ---sent from a mobile device; please excuse typos and brevity

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • donna stein
          Thanks everybody. Thanks Steven, I actually thought of you, we met at the HOPE Conference. Just might give you a call. ________________________________ From:
          Message 4 of 4 , Jul 1 5:37 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            Thanks everybody. Thanks Steven, I actually thought of you, we met at the HOPE Conference. Just might give you a call.



            ________________________________
            From: "webmail007@..." <webmail007@...>
            To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Sunday, July 1, 2012 5:35 AM
            Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] Re: need help with 2 questions Thanks


            In a message dated 6/30/12 8:29:35 PM, dstein5611@... writes:


            > 1.  Any
            > guesses why there be a vast amount of cell calls of which are less than 1
            > minute (same sender, same receiver & then immediately reversed for
            > the call back).
            >

            There are countless possible reasons for this. The funniest / most
            ridiculous was one I saw approx 2 years ago...some young knuckleheads in Florida saw
            an old movie where police were talking about needing 3 minutes to trace a
            call, and the knuckleheads thought that still LEGALLY applied, and they kept
            all of their harassing cell phone calls down to 2 minutes.

            There are of course many other possible reasons, ranging from short calls
            to give directions, to the length of time necessary to send a photo, to a bad
            cell phone plan to a cell phone being used as a tracking or alarm device
            and one minues it the trigger/transmit time. IMO pointless to try to guess w-o
            more info.



            >
            > 2. How can I find out about an
            > individual's small-time criminal history (like DWI, petty theft, etc.)
            > in Nassau County, NY (2nd district, Hempstead, Long Island, NY)? Is this
            > public info? I was told they wouldn't respond to a FOIA request.
            > Thanks for your time.
            >

            We can assist with this, not a problem. Contact info below.

            Steven.

            (Steven Rambam, Director, CFE, CPP, PSP, PCI, CSAR)
            (for: Pallorium, Inc.)
            www.pallorium.com

            USA Tel: 001-212-969-0286
            direct e-mail: rambam@...

            ---sent from a mobile device; please excuse typos and brevity

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



            ------------------------------------

            <p><hr></p>
            To subscribe, send an empty message to <a href="mailto:infoguys-list-subscribe@yahoogroups.com">infoguys-list-subscribe@yahoogroups.com</a><br/>
            To unsubscribe, send a message to <a href="mailto:infoguys-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com">infoguys-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com</a><br/>
            <p><hr></p>Yahoo! Groups Links



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.