A Quick Question So I Can Draft My Lawsuit Help!

[PROPERROGER]

What is the name of your state? OREGON

I have had a contentious relationship with the garbage people you know the people who pick up the garbage for the last three years always considering them a necessary evil. Around the first of the year they went an unprecedented four weeks without picking up my garbage requiring me to take it to work with me and putting it in the dumpster. Then my service was suspended for failure to pay them for the garbage that they didn't pick up. And on top of that they charged me an additional $50 for suspending my service (you know for the garbage they didn't pick up) so for the next two months I simply took the garbage to the store in the morningand save myself all that brain damage and 30 bucks a month. My landlord and her husband were over this last weekend cleaning up after a big storm around the yard and gathered a bunch of yard debris and miscellaneous wrappers and newspapers and anything else that had blown in and filled both of my garbage cans plus left a pile. My landlady asked me when the garbage came for pickup I told her on Wednesday and sure enough Wednesday afternoon her husband stops byand notices the garbage had not left. So he uses his cell phone apparently and calls the garbage company and for some reason they divulged every single bit of personal information they had on me including claiming that I had been suspended for non-payment (failing of course to mention that I had written a letter disputing the bill entirely and requesting validation has never come)then the garbage people proceeded to bad mouth me to the landlady's husband or 20 minutes. Shortly thereafter I received a phone call from her essentially telling me everything that she had found out about the garbage situation. And telling me to pay the bill. Somewhere here somebody has screwed up and I am the victim of that screw up because now the landlady who used to love me thinks I'm a garbage deadbeat and her husband of course just thinks I'm a deadbeat and can't believe how badly I've been treating garbage company based on his conversation with them. Now I'm 40 years old and the garbage leaves every single week sometimes three times with me in so the garbage is an issue it was the garbage company trying to collect the debt by a turning up the heat on me through my landlord and potentially interfering with my contractual relation ship with my landlord the husband does not own the property and is not on the deed it belongs to his wife and even so I don't think it's appropriate for a utility company sort of to divulge personal information about anybody alone those people who have a legitimate beef with them like me and that of course is only tell one side. It is my question I hate this garbage company and I was prepared to file a lawsuit against them what exactly would my causes of action be. I'm assuming there's another cause of action for slander defamation but what about the strip more strict liability issues like violating the privacy laws which laws are those anyway any help anybody can give me would be much appreciated and angry and I want my pound of flesh and my day in court thank you very much

[Chien]

I think you better get over yourself and clear your unpaid bill. If you feel the need, write a letter about irregular/inadequate pick-ups. Document them if they re-occur. Complain more, if they re-occur, but clean up (no pun intended) the bill.

As for your lawsuits, you don't know what was said (at best, you're getting it second-hand), it was a private conversation (no public dissemination), truth is a defense, it was initiated by the property owner and was between the property owner and the company.

And while that list of problems FOR YOU could continue, separate problems exist in that the property owner may be vulnerable to suit by the city/county/whatever for permitting the "garbage nuisance" to exist and you may be vulnerable to eviction for the same reason.

If husband/wife were over there cleaning up the yard, your carrying the garbage away yourself is not doing the job.

My guess is that the day in court that you get and the pound of flesh that's taken are not going to be what you intend.

[PROPERROGER]

I Did Complain And I Wrote Letters...the Person That This Information Was Disseminated To Was Not The Property Owner But The Brand New Husband Of The Property Owner And Oregon Is Not A Community Property State. She Was Cleaning Up Storm Debris Not Garbage Per Se And My Take The Garbage To Work Program Works Just Great The Garbage People Involved A Non Prop Owner Third Party In An Effort To Collect A Debt Anbd In Doing So Violated Some Personal Privacy Issues ....i Just Need To Know What Ones They Violated Thank You For The Response Though Does That Help Clarify Things ?/ Ra

[debtcollector`]

I am going to try to distill this to the facts of your question and Chein's response to you.

You have an issue with your garbage company because they provided poor service. As a result of the poor service, you decided to not pay your bill. They in turn suspended your account. To reinstate your suspended account they charge a $50 service fee. You refuse and take the garbage to work. Fine.

Then your landlords are cleaning up after a storm and ask you when the garbage is picked up. You lie to them and say Wednesday. Of course, you knew the garbage isn't picked up because you didn't pay your bill.

The landlord notices the garbage isn't picked up and calls to ask why. There are garbage companies that refuse to pick up yard debris without a special pickup and added fee.

You are upset because the garbage company tells the landlord that service was suspended for non-payment.

1. As Chein said you have no grounds for a lawsuit. Truth is an absolute defense to a slander suit. The question is simple -- is your service suspended for an unpaid bill? Yes. No slander there.

2. You lied to your landllord and said the trash would be picked up on Wednesday. The damage to your relationship was done by you.

3. Your lease may require you to pay for those services.

4. If you do take this to court, the pound of flesh is most likely to be yours and it will be handed to the garbage company.

My advice is to pay the bill. Restore your trash service. Or hire a different company.

DC

[chaz]

Always do everything in writing, have a paper trail... keep documentation of everything. Research Complaints.com and other resources to educate yourself on how scandalous this company is... chances are they have done this to others. Not that this will help you with your case, but it is good for you to know so you can trap them into breaking the law to gain evidence/leverage.

I'm in Michigan, the Privacy Law is taken very seriously here. My ex-girl friend (with my help) recorded a phone conversation with a debt collector who broke the privacy act. Mr. Mike Cox had a field day with that recording.

What is the amount of the bill? What do you feel that you owe? Write a check to them in the amount that you feel that you owe and write in the memo area of the check. "Payment of $XX.XX to pay account number XXXX-XXXX-XXXX up to this date." Make a copy of this check and get it back from the bank after the garbage company cashes it. If they cash it, they accepted that payment, it's like accepting a contract.

This company probably has minimum wage workers who don't care or know that they just accepted a binding contract and which dismisses any past due amounts.

If they are smart enough to catch it, then they will just return the check back to you, normally they'll return the check requiring a signature confirmation... hence, costing that company more money. =)

This is a tactic that I have used.

[Chien]

OP - It apears that chaz is now extending his "trick the creditors" philosophy to other forums and other states. He's going to teach you a "tactic" to get around this "scandalous company" (a garbage company that stopped picking up garbage when it didn't get paid). And he's right. I understand that immoral garbage companies have become a scourge on consumers nationwide. This time, the trick will be to lull their dumb, minimum wage works into accepting an accord and satisfaction. The following is from his own state's Court of Appeals. Sound like his tactic will work? (Note that it didn't here.)

Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co v Quality Builders, Inc
COA# 127443
Released: January 22, 1992
Panel: Danhof, Wahls, Griffin (PC)

192 Mich App 643; 482 NW2d 474 (1992)


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

Contracts - Accord and Satisfaction - Definition

Accord and satisfaction is an affirmative defense, and the defendant has the burden of establishing it. Accord and satisfaction is based on contract principles and is generally contractual in nature. An "accord" is an agreement between the parties to give and accept, in settlement of a claim, something other than that which is claimed to be due. "Satisfaction" is the performance of the new agreement.


Contracts - Accord and Satisfaction - Tender of Payment - Conditional

When one party tenders an item in full satisfaction of a claim and the other party accepts the thing tendered, an accord and satisfaction can arise without an agreement between the parties. An accord and satisfaction can be effected by payment of less than the amount which is claimed to be due if the payment is tendered by the debtor in full settlement of the claim. To effect an accord and satisfaction under such circumstances, the tender must be accompanied by an explicit and clear condition indicating that, if the money is accepted, it is accepted in discharge of the whole claim. The relevant inquiry is whether the creditor accepted the condition which accompanied the tender. Once the tender is accepted, the creditor is bound to the condition. There can be no severance of the condition and it avails the creditor nothing to protest and notify the debtor that the amount tendered is credited on the claim and not accepted in full satisfaction.


Contracts - Accord and Satisfaction - Tender of Payment - Conditional - Unequivocal

To prevail on the defense of accord and satisfaction by tender of a conditional payment, a debtor must show that the creditor was fully informed of the condition. The law will deem a creditor fully informed when the tender of money in full payment of a disputed claim is made in unequivocal terms. In this case, the defendant disputed the amount of insurance premiums charged by the plaintiff, and sent to the plaintiff a check marked "paid in full." The defendant also sent the plaintiff an accompanying letter which stated the check constituted payment in full. The defendant's bank received and negotiated the check, but did not forward the letter to the defendant for several months. The notation on the check alone is insufficient as a matter of law to effect an accord and satisfaction. Further, the accompanying letter was not clear enough to fully inform the plaintiff that its claim would be satisfied upon negotiating the check. The defendant has failed to establish an accord and satisfaction and summary disposition on its behalf was improper.

The added emphasis is mine. My hope is that chaz confines himself to counseling Michigan residents so that at least the damage is geographically contained.

As for your situation, my hope is that you'll not have been evicted before your case is heard.

[chaz]

Originally Posted by Chien

OP - It apears that chaz is now extending his "trick the creditors" philosophy to other forums and other states. He's going to teach you a "tactic" to get around this "scandalous company" (a garbage company that stopped picking up garbage when it didn't get paid). And he's right. I understand that immoral garbage companies have become a scourge on consumers nationwide. This time, the trick will be to lull their dumb, minimum wage works into accepting an accord and satisfaction. The following is from his own state's Court of Appeals. Sound like his tactic will work? (Note that it didn't here.)

Did you bother to read that the OP did, in fact, pay the garbage company but didn't receive any services? In his mind he felt he shouldn't pay if they were not going to pick up his garbage.... and I agree with his actions completely.

Perhaps he could get on good terms with the husband and have him as a witness about the slander and privacy act. Not sure how that would work if he doesn't have the information on the actual person who made these allegations.

I'd still send a check with the "payment to update account" noted in the memo area. I think it is a crock that case was dismissed. The debtor must not had much of a paper trail and evidence.

Make sure you have a paper trail... it's best to have conflicting evidence. You probably won't be dealing with one person within the company and it is easy for them to get their facts messed up. Keep track of all that and highlight it on the documents they send you. It'll make their company look bad with no credibility when you can prove that they are unorganized and conflicting.

[Chien]

Did you bother to read that the OP did, in fact, pay the garbage company but didn't receive any services?

Well, I thought I read it. In his mind, he thinks he paid. I propose that the garbage company write a letter saying, in our mind, we think we're picking up garbage.
But if you agree with him that he paid, why suggest that he slip an accord and satisfaction past them?

Perhaps he could get on good terms with the husband and have him as a witness about the slander and privacy act.

Witness the slander and privacy act [violation]?
As explained, it's not slander if it's true. As far as privacy laws, the OP is assuming they exist and asking what they are. After you answer him, the two of you can discuss them further. It doesn't surprise me that you're uncertain how that would work; I don't know what he's talking about.

I'd still send a check with the "payment to update account" noted in the memo area. I think it is a crock that case was dismissed. The debtor must not had much of a paper trail and evidence.

You know, you're probably right chaz. Same thing was probably true of these other Michigan appellate cases. Why do you think Michigan companies keep spending money not just to litigate but to appeal cases when they could just talk to you and learn that they didn't have an adequate paper trail?

Faith Reformed Church of Traverse City v Thompson 248 Mich App 487; 639 NW2d 831 (2001)
(payment must be unequivocal in making offer conditional on satisfaction of the dispute.)

In re MCI Telecommunications Complaint 255 Mich App 361; 661 NW2d 611 (2003)
(the tender must be accompanied by an explicit and clear condition indicating that, if the payment is accepted, it is accepted in discharge of the whole claim.)

Chaz, I'm sure you're well-intentioned, albeit misinformed. But you do have a propensity for dragging your posts into pages of diatribe, and this is enough for me.

Go to law school for 3-4 years. Come back as a consumer advocate and sue those scoundrels and regale folks with your exploits. In the meantime, anyone is free to accept or reject any advice given here, and the OP may follow yours.

[chaz]

[quote=Chien]Witness the slander and privacy act [violation]?
As explained, it's not slander if it's true. As far as privacy laws, the OP is assuming they exist and asking what they are. After you answer him, the two of you can discuss them further. It doesn't surprise me that you're uncertain how that would work; I don't know what he's talking about.[quote]

So you are suggesting that a company can disclose private information with a person whos name is not on the said account?

So I could just call up random companies to seek account / billing information on any person and there are no laws protecting the individual? While these companies divulge horrific stories about how the said person is a rat?

Interesting, indeed!

[ecmst12]

Question - are you REQUIRED to maintain garbage collection service? Is it in your lease or in your local ordinences that you have to? And is this company the only choice for collection?

If you're not required to have this service, I suggest you pay what you owe, less the $50, and say that you do not wish to have your service reinstated, that you want to cancel it. Tell your landlord that you don't need it and you'll make sure the garbage doesn't pile up and become a health hazard. If there's a lot of yard/storm debris and a special pickup is needed, arrange for and pay for just the one pickup. And don't lie to your landlords anymore. You may not think you should have to pay for the times they didn't pick up the trash, and I don't disagree, I just don't think it's worth arguing over.

If you ARE required to have the service, then you're going to have to pick the fight back up with the company. Re-send your dispute of bill letter, certified mail. Call them and tell them you are doing it. Make sure you get a response. Talk to supervisors. Etc.

It may not have been right for them to disclose your information to your LL's husband, but since your actual financial damages from that are minimal to none, what do you expect to get out of a lawsuit, other then getting more people annoyed with you?

Oh and BTW, if you're going to draft the suit yourself, I suggest you learn some proper grammar and capitalization. Your first post was basically one huge run-on sentence and it was rather hard to read.

[Chien]

I had no intention of returning to this thread; it became laughable. But, for the benefit of any future readers, folks please note that, aside from imagined conversations emanating in the minds of paranoids and rabble-rousers, there is no direct evidence in this thread of what was said in a private telephone conversation between a property-owner and what has been labeled a "public utility". There is an enormous amount of speculation, and conjecture and use of phrases like "divulge horrific stories" and references to people being called "rat" and being sigmatized as "deadbeat", but not a soul in this thread knows. In legal parlance, it is referred to as just that - speculation and hearsay - and it can't be used as evidence.

What you can place some reliance on, because it originates from one who has direct knowledge, is that a party to this thread did not pay a bill. Presumably, that party would admit the same thing under oath.

Be aware of such distinctions, if you ever find yourselves in a situation even remotely similar. They are distinctions that tend to take on some significance in a court of law. Laymen may just see it as a tempest in a teapot - one that can drag on and on and on.

[chaz]

Chein, I applaud you for the post about speculating, there are two sides to every story, but assuming the OP was being honest... I can relate to the event that has taken place.

I also find it laughable that you know nothing about a Privacy Act. One cannot call a company and be given any information on the account... unless their name is on that account and is said person's trustee. I am "assuming" that the LL husband's name is not on that account. I know that may seem odd, but that is just a hunch.

I agree with you, without evidence that would be dismissed. Again, that's why I educate anyone and everyone to document, record, and keep a paper trail. 99.9% of the time a company will make the dyer mistake. (Just like being paid and not giving the service to the OP) I'm sure it was a miscommunication within the company.

Not really sure why everything has to be a joke with you when people come here to seek quality advice? Seems you are quick to judge that people are always lying and misleading.

OP, is there any possibility that you could get someone to call this company to trap them breaking the privacy act on record? It would be very helpful if you could get them on tape giving your account information. Check your State laws... some require that the parties know the conversation is being recorded. Just be creative.

[Chien]

Oh Chaz. I take a couple of days off and return to find that, while one thread has been locked, you still haven't been relegated to the "back pages".

Alright, my last post was for the benefit of future readers. I'll do that one more time and then, until you go to school and learn something about what you pontificate on so regularly, I've no further time or interest in you. Lead the true believers to the kool-aid.

"know nothing about a Privacy Act"? In terms of federal regulation, there are the Privacy Acts of 1974, 1986, 1988 and 2003. Which one did you have in mind?

Then there are federal regulations that include privacy provisions. I can think of about 300 easily and I would guess that the true number is at least double that. They cover everything from a kid's education to your gall bladder operation to how you're using your computer. I'll throw you a bone. Take your choice of ARIPA, CFPA, FERPA, FCRA (as amended by FACTA), FDCPA, FERPA, FIA, FIPA, FRA, GOPA, GLB, HIPAA, IPA, MSSA and TILA. My guess is that you were laughing about one of those, but I don't rely on your "hunch" or "assumption". Maybe your sense of humor is more esoteric - CFAA, DMCA, ECPA, FPA, SRPA? One of those tickle your funny bone? Explain to the good folks - with statutory references.

Or maybe you were referring to the 9 state privacy acts. But that seems odd, since the states don't include yours or the OP's. Maybe that's why your appellate courts keeps making the decisions that you don't like. I'm sure that you know the 9, don't you? Tell the folks, if it was one of those. Or a state statute with a privacy provision? Think 4-500 is a good conservative guess?

Now there's no constitutional right to privacy, but the Supreme Court has "found" one in making several rulings (but still nothing that I would expect you to be calling "a Privacy Act", because you're astute and meticulous).

And, while a common law right to privacy was recognized before all of these, it's also not referred to "a Privacy Act", and you wouldn't make a mistake like that.

Well, I guess you got me after all. Gotta hand it to you. That doesn't happen often. I was teaching Consumer Law when you were learning to tie your shoelaces. Wouldn't have imagined getting caught on the Privacy Act thing.

"Everything is a joke"? All of my posts are available to read and as serious as a heart attack. Some people who come here virtually have the necessities of life on the line, and they aren't joking when they ask for advice.

"Quick to judge people as lying and misleading"? Never. People come here and lie about their problem, they get useless information back. You work out the logic. Ahh, but for those who come here with no true knowledge and then presume to encourge others to trick, dupe, trap and resort to subterfuge that at best is useless and at worst is illegal, causing additional expense and possibily leading to civil and/or criminal liability? Yeah, I guess you could say I'm not very indulgent. But that's a personal failing. Others are more magnanimous. You haven't been kicked off the forum, have you?

Now this will kick-start a thread that's been inactive for two days. Know what? That's the purpose. Next time you persist in encouraging misfeasance or malfeasance, someone else is going to call you on it. You want a soapbox, start a blog.

[chaz]

Oh Chien,

Originally Posted by Chien

"Quick to judge people as lying and misleading"? Never. People come here and lie about their problem, they get useless information back.

VS

Originally Posted by Chien

(a garbage company that stopped picking up garbage when it didn't get paid) .

The OP- said, “Around the first of the year they went an unprecedented four weeks without picking up my garbage requiring me to take it to work with me and putting it in the dumpster.”

Either you don’t read or are quick to judge people are lying and misleading… which is it?

Originally Posted by Chien

Now this will kick-start a thread that's been inactive for two days. Know what? That's the purpose.

You wish to label me “misfeasance” while you have just proven in this above statement that you are, in fact, the one obviously practicing infectious motives to revive an exhausted thread with absolutely no purpose to benefit the OP. Interesting!

Originally Posted by Chien

one thread has been locked,

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that people who have a diminutive attention span cannot keep a thread on topic, per the forum rules, which results in thread locks…

Originally Posted by Chien

You want a soapbox, start a blog.

Sorry, I hardly have any interest to amusing myself to your level.

Good day!