Law Offices of Alan M. Cohen LLC


Home
Firm Overview
Practice Areas
Resource Links
Helpful Information
Contact Attorney Cohen To Collect Your Debt
Credit Applications - Part I
Credit Applications - Part II
Credit Applications - Part III
What You should Know About The Mechanic's Lien law
How to Collect Old Receivables
Mechanic's Lien Newsflash
Avoid the Deadbeat Shuffle
Collect on Bad Checks -- Helpful Hints -- 2007
Credit Applications and Bank Attachments
Reach and Apply Injunctions and Real Estate Attachments
The Value of Persistence
Aggressive Debt Collection in Action
How to Attach Your Debtor's Bank account
How to Attach Your Debtor's Real Estate
What every Credit Application Should Contain
How to Attempt Avoiding Deadbeatitis
What You Should Know About The Homestead Act


Helpful Information


Printer Friendly View
Add To Favorites
Send To A Friend

Law Offices of Alan M. Cohen LLC
550 Worcester Road
Framingham, Massachusetts 01702
Phone: (508) 620-6900
Fax: (508) 620-9696
Firm E-mail: amc.law@verizon.net


Website: http://www.collections-law.com/

Contact Us

 

THE VALUE OF PERSISTENCE

FRAMINGHAM A couple hire an attorney to negotiate a settlement with the Internal Revenue Service. The Attorney convinced the IRS not to seize the couple's wages and to accept a reasonable settlement. The happy couple then rewarded the attorney - by stiffing him.

Crying poverty, the couple purchased a new home for more than double the cost of their existing home.

Shortly after being retained by the attorney, I sued. I obtained an ex parte bank attachment and, after notice, obtained a real estate attachment.

The couple answered disputing the amount of the debt. I then filed for summary judgment (a procedure of winning the case without the need for a trial). I won the case, obtained the execution and had the sheriff levy and suspend the sale of the couple's house.

I then filed a new complaint, seeking to attach the couple's wages.

As a result, the couple paid the entire amount due to the attorney plus interest and court costs.

FRAMINGHAM A supplier is owed $340,000.00 from its once good customer. The customer, knowing that it was about to be sued, sued first - seeking over $400,00.00. The customer claimed that the supplier breached an alleged oral exclusive distribution agreement and made false promises that it relied upon. The supplier's first attorney stalled and crawled.

Based upon a referral from an existing client, the supplier jumped ship and retained me.

I immediately counterclaimed for the $340,000.00 and obtained an ex parte bank attachment. The attachment froze almost $200,000.00 of the customer's money.

Although the customer's counsel huffed and he puffed, he could not convince the Court to release the frozen funds. When the customer attempted to transfer the case to the Superior Court, I defeated the motion.

The next phase involved "discovery". After receiving excuse upon excuse, I sought and received a Court order that the customer be deposed. Faced with discovery motion after discovery motion, the customer finally offered $75,000.00. Offer Rejected!

When the customer tried to take discovery to support its promissory estoppel claims, I filed for a "protective order." The Court agreed and prevented the customer from taking any discovery until I could complete my discovery on the merits of their case.

Faced with an uphill battle that it could not win, the customer started exploring whether we would be willing to mediate the case. After winning almost every discovery and procedural motion, I convinced the customer to offer at least $200,000.00 to induce my client to mediate the case.

A few weeks before trial, the customer's counsel contacted me to see if we would accept $350,000.00. The answer was still no.

Facing very likely liability for alleged unfair and/or deceptive trade acts and after admitting in deposition that it owed the full principal amount, the customer faced the music and danced to the tune of my fiddle!

Because of my aggressive and persistent efforts, my client received $400,000.00 within thirty days of the settlement agreement and paid to the customer nothing on its complaint.

After almost three hours of mediation, the customer offered to pay $300,000.00 over time. The offer was again rejected.

Now this does not always happen. but it could happen to you. Armed with solid paperwork, an aggressive competent collection attorney who knows how to collect debts is a valuable ally in the battle for control of your money.

Shouldn't you use an attorney that other attorneys rely upon to collect their delinquent debts?

Plane

DON'T LET YOUR MONEY GO SOUTH!

FRAMINGHAM .....  Your top salesperson says that a buddy of his wants to make a large purchase from you. If you keep the reigns of credit too tight, your sales suffer. If you let the reigns too slack you risk deadbeatitis.

What should you do? Do you require the new potential customer to complete the equalizer - your credit application - or do you rely on your salesperson's instincts.

Company A chose "sales, sales, sales" and relied on its salesperson without seeking a credit application. I-lad Company A obtained a credit application, it would not have sold anything to the deadbeat. The credit application could have shown that the deadbeat had recently filed bankruptcy and was in the process of "reorganizing."

A few months passed without getting any payment. Company A became very nervous - to the tune of $50,000.00.

Company A called me. Within a few days, I obtained an ex parte bank attachment, keeper attachment and bulky goods attachment.

Relying upon an obscure statute, the deadbeat's bank, which had a prior security interest in the deadbeat's assets, forced Company A to dissolve its attachment. The bank then seized and sold the deadbeat's assets. After the asset sale, the deadbeat again filed for bankruptcy.

Company A became an unsecured creditor whose chances of collecting any of its $50,000.00 ordinarily would have been slim and none. You know the rest of that story.

However; due to my diligence and persistence in the Bankruptcy Court, Company A recovered $12,500.00 in settlement of an adversary proceeding.

Company A's actions show the pitfall of an unchecked sales policy. Company A might have avoided this substantial loss. First, it should have done a diligent examination of its potential customer's credit worthiness and should have required a credit application.

Second, in light of the prior bankruptcy, it should have perfected a security interest in all of its future customer's inventory, accounts receivable, etc. This would have at least made it a secured creditor in any later bankruptcyproceeding.

If Company A had done any homework prior to the sales, it might not have lost $37,500.00. Although there is no guaranteed or foolproof way to make sure that a customer will not beat you, at a minimum following these suggestions may help you avoid repeating Company A's costly mistake.

TM

 



The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. Nor shall contact through said site establish an attorney client relationship, absent a formal fee agreement. You should consult Attorney Alan M. Cohen at 508 620-6900 or email him at amc.law@verizon.net for individual advice regarding your own situation.

Copyright © 2008 by Law Offices of Alan M. Cohen LLC. All rights reserved. You may reproduce materials available at this site for your own personal use and for non-commercial distribution. All copies must include this copyright statement.