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

Re: [infoguys-list] Re: Investigators Needed Nationwide This Saturday

Expand Messages
  • suesarkis@aol.com
    Paul - If anyone holds themselves out as being able to provide CA investigations for any consideration whatsoever, they must be duly licensed in accordance
    Message 1 of 10 , Jun 8, 2006
      Paul -

      If anyone holds themselves out as being able to provide CA investigations
      for any consideration whatsoever, they must be duly licensed in accordance with
      §§ 7521 and 7523. He does not qualify for an exemption.

      However, for all I know he might be duly licensed in CA. I haven't checked.
      I just asked the question. Also, I will reiterate, if he is not making ANY
      money at all on these subbings, he's not in any violation either.

      It doesn't matter what the laws say in Canada but rather it is the courts
      here in CA that he would have to face.

      Sincerely yours,
      Sue
      ____________________________________________________
      Sue Sarkis
      Sarkis Detective Agency
      (est. 1976)


      PI 6564
      1346 Ethel Street
      Glendale, CA 91207-1826
      818-242-2505
      818-242-9824 FAX

      If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English,
      thank a military veteran.

      God Bless America and her allies forever !!


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Paul Curtis
      Sue, Thanks. I guess I was thinking that he probably would not come under the jurisdiction of the California courts if he was operating out of Canada. On the
      Message 2 of 10 , Jun 8, 2006
        Sue,



        Thanks. I guess I was thinking that he probably would not come under the
        jurisdiction of the California courts if he was operating out of Canada. On
        the other hand, if the information gathered is used in a case before the
        courts here he is sort of between a rock and a really hard place, isn’t he?



        All my best,



        Paul Curtis

        Costa Mesa, CA

        pncurtis@...



        PS I doubt this is a freebie :-)





        _____

        From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
        On Behalf Of suesarkis@...
        Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 10:27 PM
        To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] Re: Investigators Needed Nationwide This
        Saturday



        Paul -

        If anyone holds themselves out as being able to provide CA investigations
        for any consideration whatsoever, they must be duly licensed in accordance
        with
        §§ 7521 and 7523. He does not qualify for an exemption.

        However, for all I know he might be duly licensed in CA. I haven't checked.
        I just asked the question. Also, I will reiterate, if he is not making ANY
        money at all on these subbings, he's not in any violation either.

        It doesn't matter what the laws say in Canada but rather it is the courts
        here in CA that he would have to face.

        Sincerely yours,
        Sue
        ____________________________________________________
        Sue Sarkis
        Sarkis Detective Agency
        (est. 1976)

        PI 6564
        1346 Ethel Street
        Glendale, CA 91207-1826
        818-242-2505
        818-242-9824 FAX

        If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English,
        thank a military veteran.

        God Bless America and her allies forever !!

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





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Ricky Gurley
        ... courts here in CA that he would have to face. In this case, I am not sure that he would have to face the courts in California at all, EVEN if these actions
        Message 3 of 10 , Jun 8, 2006
          --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, suesarkis@... wrote:

          > It doesn't matter what the laws say in Canada but rather it is the
          courts here in CA that he would have to face.


          In this case, I am not sure that he would have to face the courts in
          California at all, EVEN if these actions we refer to here in this
          post were found to be criminal......

          I strongly suspect that this is something that the state of
          California would not waste it's time or money on.... Of course
          though it is California, and I could certainly be wrong....

          Personally; I believe this is all a bunch of non-sense.

          I long for people that would make someone prove their statement, by
          saying: "Ok, let's test your legal theory. When I am finished, I
          will send you the names of all of the P.I.s that did this work for
          me in California, and what they did, and I challenge you to have me
          or cause me to be prosecuted over it".

          It is always good to deal with people that are that confident about
          what they are doing......




          Rick.


          RMRI, Inc.
          Columbia, Missouri
          (888) 571-0958
        • suesarkis@aol.com
          Rick - You do not seem to understand as I have told you this previously so I will say it again. It does not matter what the State of CA is willing to do about
          Message 4 of 10 , Jun 9, 2006
            Rick -

            You do not seem to understand as I have told you this previously so I will
            say it again.

            It does not matter what the State of CA is willing to do about it or not.
            ANY person can file an action in the court for an injunction against unlawful
            conduct. I've done it many, many times. Previously we would use the former
            17200 B&P but that was recently changed whereby only those personally harmed and
            out of pocket can file that way and when they prevail, they do get awarded
            attorney fees. Although there are no attorney fees for "injunctions" there are
            costs and I have an attorney friend who does them for GP.

            Before 17200 changed, there was a nonprofit, CAUP, who went after unlicensed
            people, not only PI's but all unlicensed parties. They never lost one. Since
            the change, I've only gone after 2 but 1 was from out of state and I won
            both.

            Rick, someday when we both have time remind me to tell you about the case I
            filed against the guy who put a bail Kiosk in the lobby of the San Luis Obispo
            County jail. He didn't have a bail license. If Kevin Ripa successfully
            saves my hard drive (which he just telephoned and said he believes he can), I
            believe a copy of the complaint might be on that drive. If so, I'll share it with
            you.

            Sue Sarkis
            Sarkis Detective Agency
            PI 6564
            1346 Ethel Street
            Glendale, CA 91207
            818-242-2505
            818-246-3001 FAX


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Ricky Gurley
            ... or not. ... against unlawful ... the former ... personally harmed and ... awarded ... for injunctions there are ... I believe you Sue.. I have no doubt
            Message 5 of 10 , Jun 9, 2006
              --- In infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com, suesarkis@... wrote:

              > It does not matter what the State of CA is willing to do about it
              or not.
              > ANY person can file an action in the court for an injunction
              against unlawful
              > conduct. I've done it many, many times. Previously we would use
              the former
              > 17200 B&P but that was recently changed whereby only those
              personally harmed and
              > out of pocket can file that way and when they prevail, they do get
              awarded
              > attorney fees. Although there are no attorney fees
              for "injunctions" there are
              > costs and I have an attorney friend who does them for GP.


              I believe you Sue.. I have no doubt that you could file a civil
              action in this case (in any case for that matter)..

              My point was not that a private person could not file on this case,
              but that I did not believe the state of California would see this
              case as something to spend the taxpayers money on. And because I am
              talking about California, I also stated that I could be wrong.. I do
              know that anytime the state of California will not extradite a
              violent offender from the state of Florida, on a felony sexual
              assault warrant, that there is a good possibility that the state of
              California will not get too involved in a misdemeanor licensing
              violation...

              I am off to court, talk to ya later Sue. Have a good day and take
              care..




              Rick.


              RMRI, Inc.
              Columbia, Missouri
              (888) 571-0958
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.