15 Jan
2013
15 Jan
'13
2:41 p.m.
On Jan 15, 2013, at 12:57 PM, Geoffrey Oltmans wrote:
I'm confused by this case. I was under the
assumption that anyone that
doesn't pay their bills to a storage locker place faces forfeiture of the
property that is stored there. At least that's how I remember the rental
contract agreement I signed on the storage locker we rented when we
relocated houses.
It seems to also track with what seems to happen on "Storage Wars." I read
the stuff, but I'm confused about how the rental company acted improperly,
but it seems painfully clear that OP was several months behind on rent.
Cliffs?
I think what's missing here is that Sellam's "storage" was a warehouse
and not
a storage locker(s) (ie Public Storage and their ilk). It was "commercial"
property
and as such there was a lease. If not in fact, then implied (if implied then CA
statutes still apply to a "default" lease arrangement). That connotes a set of
legal
conditions on the landlord (as well as the tenant).
I feel for Sellam as I went through several years of legal shenanigans at the
hands of unscrupulous attorneys and their clients many years ago. It's not a
pleasant experience by any stretch of imagination (which I guess it why they do
it, most folks tire of the pain and settle rightly or wrongly just to be able to get on
with their lives).
All I can say, especially to all the folks who are down on Sellam, is that until/unless
you've gone through this (and/or have a good basis in the law) I suggest you keep
quiet.
TTFN - Guy
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Bryan Pope <bryan.pope at comcast.net> wrote:
> Wow. So if a burglar came into your house and stole all of your stuff,
> then it would be better for him the sell it instead melting it down for
> scrap. As least somebody can use it and the thief makes a small profit!
>
> Obviously I should not worry about the infinitely tiny detail that the
> stuff was stolen. I feel sooo much better now!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bryan
>
>
> On 1/15/2013 12:29 PM, Michael Kerpan wrote:
>
>> The way that shady "recycling" outfits like this work is that they try
>> to move stuff as quickly as possible and if they can't sell it almost
>> immediately they WILL melt it down. While the fact that they're making
>> even a token attempt to sell stuff whole means that they know the
>> stuff is valuable, you can be pretty sure that if they can't sell the
>> working systems on their first attempt, they WILL get scrapped. Thus,
>> by encouraging people not to but this stuff, you are, in effect,
>> condemning it to a firey death...
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>