WBCCI Board Lawsuit

[Goin camping]

Once again, The post that was and now is not. (per forum rules) was very interesting and told a completely opposite story than had been told here.

If you can find it. It's worth your time to read the International President's letter regarding the new committee, lawsuit and other associated issues.

[Dave Park]

A claim in small claims court costs about $35, plus about $60-80 for service, depending on jurisdiction. These costs are paid by the defendant if you win, or they don't show up.

[Goin camping]

Originally Posted by Dave Park

A claim in small claims court costs about $35, plus about $60-80 for service, depending on jurisdiction. These costs are paid by the defendant if you win, or they don't show up.

Small Claims cannot be used to sue someone out of state. To cross state lines with your suit you need to file an actual civil suit in State Court or in Federal court.

[Gene]

Once again, every state does things differently, but some generalities—

Small claims court is a good way to collect small sums. This kind of court sometimes has a reputation for splitting the difference between the parties—i.e., claim $100, you get $50. That reputation is not always the truth and shouldn't stop people from going forward.

You generally have to sue in the jurisdiction where the defendant is, or, maybe, the asset is. If the defendant lives in Suffolk Co., NY, as a random example, you go to the court there. If the money is in a bank in Nassau County, NY, you may be able to sue there. But you may be able to sue where the agreement was made—try to pin that one down. You would have to check with the courts about jurisdiction. It's been 32 years since I lived in NY, so civil procedure there may have changed a lot. Get out your copy of McKinney's CPLR (Civil Procedure Laws and Rules) and start reading. How you establish jurisdiction regarding an agreement made on the internet is much newer than me.

You may have multiple defendants—the original promoters of the lawsuit, a bank with the escrow fund, Metro NY unit. You only have to have jurisdiction over one of them and then you can serve all of them.

In my experience, Small Claims Courts (which may be a division of County Court and not actually a Court, but a Division or Part) mail a summons and complaint to the defendant instead of personal service. This saves money, though I have constitutional questions about it. Fees probably vary a lot from state to state.

Theoretically, you can fill out the forms, mail stuff and pay fees from far away, but you do have to appear on the trial date.* Most likely the judge or magistrate will encourage a settlement to save time. In the '70's, judges in County Court in NY would ask for lawyers waiting for County Court cases to mediate settlements. It was not a good idea to complain about it or refuse. Generally, lawyers are not allowed to represent parties in Small Claims Court.

Trying a class action is this very informal tribunal is likely to result in some muted laughter. You need to have the agreement regarding donations. It could be a series of messages sent back and forth or some letter posted on the internet. Whether this is fraud, breach of contract, promissory estoppel, misrepresentation or some other legal claim is not so important in this type of action—I think the form may not even ask for a legal theory because this is for laymen, not lawyers. The judge or mediator or whoever hears the claims is supposed to know the legal theory.

And the loser may be able to appeal to County Court for a formal trial. I suppose a litigious individual might.

Is that clear? Do you really want to go through this?

Gene

*you could assign or sell your claim ("chose in action") to someone else who lives in or near the county where the claim is filed, but you are your best witness, so it's better to be there. Yeh, I could find a way around that, but just how complicated do you want to go?

[wheel interested]

Got tomatoes? That may not be as classy as the RP's first lady and her tea party with Leo, but hey we are only mere members...

[wheel interested]

Originally Posted by Goin camping

Once again, The post that was and now is not. (per forum rules) was very interesting and told a completely opposite story than had been told here.

If you can find it. It's worth your time to read the International President's letter regarding the new committee, lawsuit and other associated issues.

Oh here yesterday gone today, hmmm. Well perhaps I may try to fill in any blanks from memory if that is not a breech of any sort. And since this letter was addressed to MNY who is also acting upon Defend Wally and the contributors' behalves then it is truely meant to be shared among us and not secreted away or the IP would not have penned it in regard to the current events. And I am surprised that Michele and Howie have not sent the IP's letter directly to correct the misconceptions to all the contributors and supporters of Defend Wally as the latest update along with apologies and provision for speedy refunded contributions. The IBT may certainly benefit from Bob's actions where we have not. Who just played who and who has the last laugh may be open to some debate for time to come. It is enough to say that Bob did not act in an approriate manner for his commission of Defend Wally.

The International President in communicating to the MNY unit has shown that the previous information given to supporters of the lawsuit has been eroneous and unfactual. If I remember correctly about the gist of what was said, it was something along the order of these sentiments as closely as I can recall and of course paraphrasing.

It has been represented that a letter on September 1st indicated that there was no negotiation between the IBT and Defend Wally or MNY for a committee seat in exchange for withdrawing the lawsuit as was told to us by Bob and the MNY unit president's letter that was sent out to all contributors by Howie.

The recent posting on Airforums have been brought to the IP's attention and he was compelled to provide clarification on several points.

First, however, he wanted to be allowed to state that a group called Save/Defend Wally holds little interest for him, for it is not a chartered Unit of the WBCCI. He did not know who they are or what they represent. He did say he knew that not all members of the Metro New York Unit support Save/Defend Wally. He stated that his interest is in growing the Club and providing quality recreational opportunities to WBCCI members in our Units and Regions.

The IP went on to say that it was stated that the Metro New York Unit was contacted by WBCCI and that he had no doubt that could be true - it is a big Club. He went on to say that following that statement was an allegation that subsequent discussions "centered on withholding the lawsuit in exchange for appointing a representative" to the Constitution, Bylaws and Policy Revision Committee and for accuracy, he then assures that no member of the WBCCI Executive Committee initiated discussions with anyone in the Metro New York Unit for the reason stated before. He further contends, the Metro New York Unit did not place its representative on the Bylaws Revision Committee. It didn't happen. He rejects any linkage between Committee membership and a threatened lawsuit by the Metro New York Unit against the WBCCI.

Then he summarized what did happen as he saw it. Upon learning of the Revision Committee from Howie L., Bob N. became interested in becoming a Committee member. Bob sent him an email which asked that he call him, and he did on July 28. They had a cordial exchange of ideas and discussion of issues, which included the threatened lawsuit. The IP advised him that he could not influence what others may or may not do in the future. There was no linkage between the threatened lawsuit and the Committee. Then when Bob expressed interest in Committee membership to the IP, he was advised that a nomination from his Unit President, would be considered the same as other nominations for the two remaining positions. This is the only time the IP had spoken with Bob. The undated nomination makes no mention of a seat at the table for him or anyone else in exchange for suspension or withdrawal of the lawsuit.

Following review of the nomination and positive recommendation by Committee members already appointed, the IP appointed Bob on August 18. There was no deal made to avoid a lawsuit expressed or implied in his nomination from his unit or in the IP's appointment of him. The IP goes on to say not to make this suggestion now and that last week there were additional references in Airforums postings to a lawsuit. He says that all this does is poison the water. It does make it necessary for him as IP to restate part of the PP's email to the MNY on May 18, 2010 that they need to be aware that if anyone files a lawsuit against the WBCCI or the IBT, the club will vigorously defend itself in court.

The WBCCI now has five motivated members who represent different geographical areas of the Club, with perhaps different points of view, and who offer a variety of personal qualifications and WBCCI experiences. The Executive Committee looks forward to the recommendations to be made by this Committee and that their first report is expected at the Mid-Winter IBT Meeting in January, 2011. The IP then asks that MNY allows them to do their work without additional distractions and misrepresentations.

And that was about it except that I would reiterate as several others have mentioned that Bob was playing both sides of the field and no one was getting the real deal in his quest for his own advantage and acting shamefully towards all.

[Dave Park]

Originally Posted by Goin camping

Small Claims cannot be used to sue someone out of state. To cross state lines with your suit you need to file an actual civil suit in State Court or in Federal court.

Metro NY does business in other states - you can sue a party in a different state if they have conducted other business in your state. Metro NY has conducted business in any state where they have a member. Therefore, arguably, any state that will allow you to sue out of state will allow this type of claim. If you're unsure, join Metro NY

Or you could just file in NY using their website - they take online submissions ...but you would be liable for travel costs to go there - only legal fees are reimbursed if they lose.

I have a legal service on retainer, and they confirmed this for me before I posted.

[Goin camping]

Originally Posted by Dave Park

Metro NY does business in other states - you can sue a party in a different state if they have conducted other business in your state. Metro NY has conducted business in any state where they have a member. Therefore, arguably, any state that will allow you to sue out of state will allow this type of claim. If you're unsure, join Metro NY

Or you could just file in NY using their website - they take online submissions ...but you would be liable for travel costs to go there - only legal fees are reimbursed if they lose.

I have a legal service on retainer, and they confirmed this for me before I posted.

The problem most run into with small claims and out of state defendants is that in most states small claims matters have to be served within the state.

So you could sue any company that does business in your state even if they are based in another state if you have an agent for process of service in your state.

Hopefully are "legal" discussion remains academic and the issues are settled to everyone's satisfaction.

[Dave Park]

I'm not advocating that people sue, so much as saying "if you feel they are holding on to your money and you've made reasonable efforts to recover it, there is an affordable system in place to handle this through the courts. How to use that system is an exercise for the reader."

[Lily&Me]

Originally Posted by wheel interested

Got tomatoes? That may not be as classy as the RP's first lady and her tea party with Leo, but hey we are only mere members...

Or tar and feathers?

Maggie

[wheel interested]

Yes Maggie I am wanting to step closer to this issue also and try a hands on approach. And then run him out on a rail. And who said women were the meeker sex? It's just not so, we just happen to be highly disciplined.

[alumfever]

It was enlightening when I Googled "LIPets" and the person's name and read about the history this person has with lawsuits and forums. Interesting and very telling -to his behavior in the Defend Wally "lawsuit".

[pmclemore]

Originally Posted by Foiled Again

Who has violated my trust worse? The IBT or "defend wally"?

Paula

The way this "settlement" was described, I felt that since the IP was behind the offer, then a good will effort was sufficient for hope and I was willing to invest in that hope by supporting the "settlement".

Now it seems that the basis for the "settlement" was made up out of whole cloth.

If that is true (and the rumored letter from the IP indicates that it is), then Paula's question hits the issue right on the head.

Pat

[Boondocker]

Listens to the the conspicuous silence from some quarters........

[Gene]

Hollywood taught me as a child there were good guys and bad guys. It was easy to tell the difference.

It's not true anymore. Sometimes all the principals are bad guys, or perhaps of questionable intent. It's all so confusing.

Over at some of the TAC threads there been a discussion of whether a new organization needs to be without any rules or some. Insurance is a question. National or regional groups. This is a far more productive discussion. If you like the WBCCI wars, this is the place to stay. If you want to camp, somewhere else is the place of the future.

The discussion there is quite active and sometimes irrational (what would you expect?):

http://www.airforums.com/forums/f505...ion-68927.html

http://www.airforums.com/forums/f505...tes-68930.html

Gene

[hampstead38]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzZxBUxg0Sg

[rideair]

I was able to find out what really happen.

Norm called up someone and in his “Darth Vader” voice said the following:

“I am your father. Come to the dark side with me and we can rule the WBCCI forever”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwExDG7n7Zg

[Andy R]

Who's going to Photoshop Darth Vader with a beret?

[wheel interested]

Is that like pin the tail on the Jack A**? I like party games. OK here's a rudimentary stab at it.



But the berets in this thread are much better! Good times those were and we thought we could actually see the light.

http://www.airforums.com/forums/f286...eret-4115.html

[Buttercup]

Just to squelch any rumors I just want to let everybody know what happened with SaveWally and why.

I did indeed shut down the SaveWally web site and forums. I am the domain name owner and have hosted the site since its inception. Sever people have collaborated on the site over the years but it has been principally an effort of just 2 people. SaveWally was started by the simultaneous efforts of myself, Leo Garvey. We have had the support of a few other like-minded people who were opposed to the name change issue back in 2006. Back in the day we settled disagreements with Rock – Paper – Scissors contests back. Those days are certainly over! SaveWally has always been an open place for communication – anything goes there as long as it generally was in the direction of forwarding a progressive view of the club. I am proud to say that only one act of moderation was ever exercised on the SaveWally forums.

Over the years there have been several attempts to shut down the forums, namely by representatives of the WBCCI who sought to block our message with threats of trademark & copyright violations (which could not be proved or enforced) to outright lies (stating that we were hosting child pornography on the site). We persevered despite these efforts because we had a unified message that could not be denied. Sure, a few folks are dancing in the streets right now with this news. But they will be celebrating prematurely in my humble opinion.

I did this because SaveWally has diverged so far from its original purpose that the group has no validity anymore. The back and forth arguing between people who were (and likely still are) friends has only served to weaken the SaveWally movement to the point that it became a group to be laughed at rather than the group who was mumbled about under cursed breaths in front of an open microphone at a delegates meeting.

SaveWally has gone a long way towards its goal of educating the WBCCI membership to the issues at hand within the club. It was a clearinghouse for an opposing point of view to the myopic expressions of the IBT who would seemingly scuttle the clubs 50+ year history for the sake of a few friends who don’t respect the great Wally Byam name or the grand history of the largest Airstream only club in the world.

I would like everybody to know that I did not do this under threat of litigious action of any sort, nor for reasons of protecting my position as the 3rd VP of the Vintage Airstream Club. I did this because I was sick and tired if seeing friends pull me one way and another to pull posts and remove people from the site. I will not do that. And rather than allow myself to be stretched like spaghetti, I elected to just close it all down. Some people were not happy about this decision while others understood and accepted it.

There is one final message I would like to deliver and that is about Leo Garvey and my years of working with him on WBCCI issues. Leo has an amazing ability to search out facts and build an argument against a position like the name change issue, the MOHO issue and budgetary concerns that would normally escape the average member.

Where Leo’s greatest fault lies is perhaps in his presentation – a bold, in your face, no holds bared expression of the facts. Many have disagreed with him but I have always seen his message as spot on. I do not see where anybody could argue that the club is spending money like it is going out of style for example. The message was so potent that the club immediately started taking action to shore things up. Leo’s messages may be spot on, but his presentation sucks! In fact it is bad enough that on many occasions, several of us would have to edit his message down to make it seem less angry and more on target. The message is always there, but sometimes it had to be coaxed out.

I think that Leo's message was so on target that the WBCCI sought to remove him at all costs. The WBCCI’s efforts to remove Leo from the club were what I believe to be a very calculated move on the club’s part. I do fully believe that there was a concerted effort by the last administration in the WBCCI to get Leo out no matter what. What with the documented promises of back-up grievances if he was reinstated speaks volumes to just how much the club wanted him out. Nobody has gone as far as Leo has to expose the inner workings and fallacies the club leadership has pushed on the membership of the club.

In my humble opinion, the club has only weakened itself and accelerated its demise by kicking Leo out. They did it to preserve their way of doing business and in doing that have only guaranteed the club will not last as long as Wally had intended his trailers to last. The club is going down day by day. And with honoring the opposing points of view about where we are and where we are going, we are guaranteeing the myopic tour straight to hell for the club.

I hope Leo does eventually get reinstated to the club without exception and threat of immediate backup grievances. I hope the club can take a look at the message, rather than the presentation for a change, and make a decision that will truly ensure the history of the club will not be denied for the sake of a few who no longer fit the demographic of this Airstream Only club.

For the future, I will be opposing any action by the club leadership that seeks to bring any SOB motorhome into the club. I will be pushing back against any efforts that seek to deny the Wally Byam history that this club was founded on. Without Wally and his sister, Helen, this club would not exist. Anybody who seeks to deny that history by changing the clubs name or diluting it with a box SOB will be in my sights. I may not be as dynamic as others like Leo in my presentation but I will still fight with all my heart any effort that goes against the singular brand nature of this club. And, I will not be alone in this fight. Give me Airstream or give me death!