Vintage Computer Festival Archvies STOLEN by Tri-Valley Recycling in Stockton - now selling on eBay as seller "tvrsales"
14 Jan
2013
14 Jan
'13
9:47 p.m.
eBay seller id "tvrsales" is currently selling property STOLEN from the
Vintage Computer Festival.
If you are planning on buying anything of a vintage computer nature from
eBay seller "tvrsales" in Stockton, California, please know that you are
most likely BIDDING ON STOLEN PROPERTY.
The VCF Archives were STOLEN by Tri-Valley Recycling (eBay ID "tvrsales")
in cahoots with the landlords of the building where it was sold.
The sordid tale can be read about through lawsuit material already on my
website for download:
http://vintagetech.com/download/lawsuit/
I encourage everyone to read through the letters and especially the
affidavit to see the absolute criminality of these vultures. I am
continuing to upload more material as I have time, but the basic story is
there.
The court system was absolutely useless, as were the police and sheriff.
I am having to sue for conversion, fraud, racketeering, unjust enrichment,
and probably other charges as I continue my research.
I am here to tell you right now: Anyone on the receiving end of my stolen
property is going to be entangled in this mess one way or another.
Therefore, my suggestion to you is that YOU SHOULD NOT BID ON OR BUY
ANYTHING FROM TRI-VALLEY RECYCLING IN STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA. If you do end
up with my stuff, you will become a part of the lawsuit in some way. So
if you don't want to have legal issues to deal with, stay away from
anything they are selling. I think I have made myself redundantly clear
here.
The full story will come out in time. Right now I'm re-grouping for my
next legal attack. Yes, I could use assistance, especially if you have a
law background and can do research for me. Sure, I could use money, so
send some if you got it. I don't need attorneys. Attorneys are useless
in the capacity that I am acting. I'm doing this the proper way: myself.
My entire career as a computer historian has been destroyed by these
hyenas. Now I have to sit here and watch as they auction off 25 years of
my life's work piece by piece. Don't be caught in the frenzy when the
lion shows up.
--
Sellam Ismail VintageTech
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintagetech.com
Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap...The truth is always simple.
14 Jan
14 Jan
10:47 p.m.
On 1/14/2013 6:47 PM, Sellam Ismail wrote:
eBay seller id "tvrsales" is currently
selling property STOLEN from the
Vintage Computer Festival.
If you are planning on buying anything of a vintage computer nature from
eBay seller "tvrsales" in Stockton, California, please know that you are
most likely BIDDING ON STOLEN PROPERTY.
I am sure you already know this but, you face an uphill battle in San
Joaquin county. It's not anywhere I would want to go up against a
landlord or even go to court. Maybe contact the recycler and offer them
something for all your stuff back. If it was the bay area you might find
a friendly judge. No such thing in the central valley.
15 Jan
15 Jan
9:02 a.m.
On Mon, 14 Jan 2013, Sellam Ismail wrote:
I don't need attorneys. Attorneys are useless in
the capacity that I am
acting.
In all due respect, a pit-bull of an attorney is exactly what you DO need.
But, however you do decide to proceed, I wish you the best of luck and a
favorable outcome.
--
11:47 a.m.
how much of the collection were you able to save, seems like the pdf's indicate you
did move quite a bit
--- On Mon, 1/14/13, Sellam Ismail <sellam at vintagetech.com> wrote:
12:29 p.m.
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
1:21 p.m.
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
3:04 p.m.
On 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!
Well, speaking as someone who had a storage area robbed and had to try salvaging my
smashed-up equipment from a dumpster, at least the stuff would still exist somewhere. I
would have at least a chance of getting it back later. It's not GOOD, but it's
better than the alternative.
3:57 p.m.
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?
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
5:22 p.m.
The laws vary by state as pointed out and then also they can vary depending
on the contract you sign. Many storage facilities have contractual
agreements stating that if you fail to pay you'll have x time to retrieve
your property (or forfeit your property) and it will become the property of
the storage facility and they then sell it as they see fit.
In this scenario it wasn't a storage unit though, this was technically an
office space as far as I know. Hence the size (10,000 square feet or so).
That's my previous knowledge though and I'm not a legal person nor up to
date on whether it was the same warehouse I had the honor if standing in
years back. It was amazing to see though. I can't imagine having to move
10,000sf of equipment in a timely or safe manner, nor having the funds to
find a place to store that much equipment.. not like storage units come in
that size ;-)
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Geoffrey Oltmans <oltmansg at gmail.com>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?
5:41 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
>>
>>
>
16 Jan
16 Jan
9:45 a.m.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Guy Sotomayor <ggs at shiresoft.com> wrote:
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).
Ah, this makes sense now. I missed the commercial part. I withdraw my
earlier criticism.
15 Jan
15 Jan
4:12 p.m.
That is not how I took what Mike said, and he has a very valid point.
Also we have seen no evidence that Tri-Valley stole anything, or that they are
'shady'. In reading through the *one* side of the story we have, it would appear
that they were either sold the 'scrap', or else contracted to remove it. I have
also noticed that Sellam references many documents that are missing, so even in his side
of the story there are considerable holes.
Something that worries me is what went into the dumpster that they apparently had on
site.
One also has to wonder how badly Sellam had pissed off the landlords prior to this point.
Reading through the email and documents last night I was reminded of a conversation
I'd had earlier in the night with my seven year old. As regrettable as it is, the
choices he made had consequences.
Zane
On Jan 15, 2013, at 10:21 AM, 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
4185
days inactive
4186
days old
11 comments
11 participants
participants (11)
-
barythrin＠gmail.com -
bryan.pope＠comcast.net -
dseagrav＠lunar-tokyo.net -
ggs＠shiresoft.com -
gkicomputers＠yahoo.com -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
madcrow.maxwell＠gmail.com -
mc68010＠gmail.com -
oltmansg＠gmail.com -
sellam＠vintagetech.com -
snhirsch＠gmail.com