Maryland Lobbyists self interests

Maryland Lobbyists self interests

Postby ProcessPosseAdmin » Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:56 am

HONORABLE BRIAN E. FROSH
Miller Senate Office Building, 2 East Wing
11 Bladen St., Annapolis, MD 21401
via e-mail: brian.frosh@senate.state.md.us

HONORABLE DERECK E. DAVIS
House Office Building, Room 231
6 Bladen St., Annapolis, MD 21401
via email dereck.davis@house.state.md.us

February 18, 2014
Re: Senate Bill 838 and House Bill 1293

Dear HONORABLE REPRESENTATIVE DERECK E. DAVIS AND HONORABLE STATE SENATOR BRIAN E FROSH:

Please be advised that the process server industry is indeed broken. It is broken not from an absence of laws or rules but from the absence of enforcement of rules and laws.
I understand that the Senate Bill 838 and House Bill 1293 is designed to reign in the practices of errant purveyors of service of process but history has shown more laws and more rules only muddle the steps to bring accountability to the errant practitioners.
It is my proposals that through your office the Attorney General takes interests and begins to prosecute those who have imposed upon the industry a bad name. Not prosecute for perceptions or politics but prosecute for known deviates in the industry.
There are court records involving returns of service that could easily be used to find the deviates and send a message to all parties who have brought on this industry a bad name.
Some may argue before your committee these fraudulent acts are simple mistakes but I contend those who propose such nonsense have been misdirected through self interest and self dealing to avoid accountability and maintain the status quo. It is not a simple mistake when an owner of a company fraudulently signs a notary and signature of a process server under their employ. It is blatant and already against the law and enforcement of those laws should prove additional laws are unneeded.
In fact more laws suggest that the current law is insufficient. This leads to a propagation of laws where ambiguities and privilege rise up to cause them to be ignored too. Ultimately in these new laws is an encroachment of self dealing and protectionism and that furthers the growth of some associations to the detriment of the entire trade. In addition when considering any laws we need to consider the interstate commerce clause and the full faith and credit clause of the US constitution. Legitimate service of process within your state may be governed by other states as their courts determine what is right and wrong based on their states legislative intent. The federal government determines the appropriate service of process under federal rules. Maryland should address the sewer service but it should address it under current criminal codes and put those deviates in jail.
As persons or groups of people present to you their proposals for consideration ask the questions if they are participating in a market manipulations for the benefit of themselves and their aligned groups. I would recommend if this bill is to progress that we eliminate the portions that could be detrimental to the US constitution and the right of commerce among the states.
Finally, with much regret there is a need to look upon those who claim to lead the industry and ask the questions what part in creating these controversies the industry has had since at least 1973 through action or inaction. I have a web site that shares the conflicts and reports at http://www.pstrade.us/protected that is used primarily to keep legislators and regulators informed as a guide to reign in the industry back to proper purposes. In the New York conflict Section you will see the full report by the AG in 1986. 25 years ago they make the same proposals we are revisiting today! http://pstrade.us/protected/lawsuits.html
Although this is popular advertised by the stakeholders as a “Battle of the Bills” it is well known in the industry that the stakeholders of the association leadership wants the power of the law to regulate the commerce of this industry. Some in these associations proposing these laws are known to have improperly notarized documents submitted to the court. Norman Yellon is NAPPS chairmen of the state association committee overseeing these lobbying activities of MAAPPS. In addition what these laws are designed to do is to wipe away their past practices. As bold as my speech may seem the best analogy is the fox watching the hen house. It is the charge of the legislator to consider this information and apply a remedy where needed. (http://www.nytimes.com/1999/04/04/nyreg ... serve.html )
One significant issue this board should consider is the foundation of this legislation and Maryland Ethics laws. What you do not know is the National Association of Professional Process Servers (NAPPS) have given significant cash donations to the MAAPPS organization specifically to get this licensing passed and there is no reference to them in the Maryland lobbyist reports. What also you may not know is NAPPS is pledging over $100,000.00 to Georgia Association of Professional Process Servers (GAPPS) in their lawsuit against 159 state constitutional officers in Georgia. Again they did not report NAPPS contribution to their state ethics commission either. (viewtopic.php?f=3&t=108 )
To ferret out the purposes of whoever testifies before you under oath in support of or unfavorable to either bill ask them these two questions:

1. Instead of licensing, would you support referring to the Attorney General a pulling of court documents to review notary signatures and perjured statements and bring criminal charges for perjury and forgery against the individual and the corporation so involved?
2. Is your testimony or preparation to testify here of your own expenses or have you been paid for or reimbursed by another person or entity?

To be fair my answer to 1. I would support criminal investigations against these parties. 2. I have not accepted reimbursement or payment by anyone to testify before you.
I believe, if you ask those questions, they will hesitate immensely as the goal is not correction but horizontal price gains from a reduction in process servers and, like in Georgia’s Association of Private Process Servers leaders lawsuit on paragraph 29 against the government, who assisted them in creating the law, states they have jurisdiction since the government gave them exclusive education rights they are losing revenue by the resistance of the sheriff’s. (viewtopic.php?f=3&t=121 )
I mention horizontal restraints, as the Federal Trade Commission has been successful in recent actions defeating the immunity of state actors when proposing horizontal restraints in law. What I refer to is the immunity of antitrust activity that states enjoy in many instances. How Maryland will protect this immunity is if in the law they specifically state that the legislator’s intent is to limit competition. (http://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-pr ... system-inc )
Furthermore the FTC is even looking closely at these NAPPS state associations for antitrust practices. Specifically the FTC has this open case FTC v. CALSPRo can be found at http://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-pr ... als-matter
Again I implore you to begin prosecutions and punishments. Let the professional process server be freed from the corporate interest. Many of these types are attempting to get cover under new laws instead of enforcement of existing ones. These self-interests have confused the legislators claiming they now have the answers through new laws, new rules and new regulations. History shows, it is their, very actions and inactions that allowed this to grow up in a trade. Their solutions, as it was in New York, are to eliminate competition because the market has dropped. Those who hurdle their rules soon to become state rules with your help will remain in business and will be the very ones you should seek out for just and proper remedies. http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20 ... o-process#
For instance Mitchell Rubin, Susan Collins Utah Constable, Fred Blum B & R, Larry Yellon these are all directors and upper echelon leaders of NAPPS. NAPPS has pledged over $30,000.00 dollars to get the state of Maryland on board to its plans of licensing. They have given those members before you today who are members of MAAPPS over $8,000.00 already to get this job done of laying the blame on other when by their own emissaries there is proof beyond reasonable doubt their actions with the full support of their emissaries have caused these credibility problems.
Approaching these high holy days it is time we move to set the people free and not set up standards that further embolden the corrupt corporations over the individual.
Thank you

Randy Scott
343 Hazelwood Ave S
Lehigh Acres, Florida
33936

To seamlessly introduce you via the web to the linked references and sources you may visit this document/testimony at viewtopic.php?f=24&t=157&p=195#p195
ProcessPosseAdmin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 3:38 pm

Return to Mid-Atlantic Association of Private Process Servers (MAAPPS)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron