When Luna Carpet promises to deliver and install, can they keep their promise? This is my story and experience. Future customer's make an informed decision. Do not let the Sales Consultant rush you through your process. Ask your Sales Consultant where are the guarantees for delivery and installation. If you choose Luna as your carpet retailer, be sure to talk to supervisors and not customer service personnel. Take a chance and ask for the President's name, address, and phone number and see what the response is for contacting him. Talk to Joe at 708-547-4120. He's the man. He will take care of you. Do not trust customer care!!!
November 30, 2005
Luna Carpeting
Mr. Steve Dezara, President
10 North Davis Drive
Bellwood, Illinois 60104
Re: Carpet Installation
Mr. Dezara:
I, Fred Nance Jr., and my wife, Darlene Bouyer-Nance, purchased carpet from Luna on November 2, 2005. We changed the order on November 5, 2005. The installation date was set for November 19, 2005. When the installers arrived on November 19, 2005 they did not have carpet for one of the rooms. There was no legitimate reason for not having our complete order.
We called your company and requested a date for when they would have the carpet. We were told the carpet would be in and installed in our home on November 22, 2005. As we prepared for this installation date taking another day off from work, we called to confirm the date. We were told that the information we received regarding the installation on November 22, 2005 was wrong. We were then told the installation would be on November 29, 2005. We changed that date to November 30, 2005. One of your representatives gave us a $75.00 reduction in cost for our troubles.
We decided to have a morning installation. We were told the installation would take place between 9:00 am and 12:00 pm. We were told that someone would call us a few days before installation to confirm the installation. We received a call on November 28th and 29th, 2005 confirming November 30, 2005 between 9:00 am and 12:00 pm for delivery and installation.
On November 30, 2005, we received a call at approximately 7:10 am. The lady who called stated, “We have you down for installation after 5:00 pm. Can I schedule you between 9:00 am and 12:00 pm today?” After everything we have been through I was appalled. I informed the lady I had a scheduled installation appointment between 9:00 am and 12:00 pm already.
I spoke to Kate Zilke, Manager of Customer Care for Luna, about 4 times regarding the scheduling of my appointment for November 30, 2005. I requested the name of the President of Luna. Ms. Zilke informed me many times the person I need to write and discuss this issue with is Mr. Joe Borczyk, Vice President of Operations. I informed Ms. Zilke she could not tell me who to write too. I informed Ms. Zilke I wanted the name of the President of Luna. Ms. Zilke refused to give me the name.
I informed Ms. Zilke that I was putting this letter on my website at: http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/, and that if she continued to refuse to give me the name of the President of Luna, I would include her refusal and attitude about my issues. Ms. Zilke gave me Mr. Steve Dezara as the President of Luna. Ms. Zilke told me I could use the same address she gave me for Joe Borczyk.
I called Mr. Borczyk requesting a return call. Mr. Borczyk did not call me. Mr. Borczyk would have treated this complaint in a similar manner. I left my website on Mr. Borczyk’s voice mail stating I would put this letter on the Internet for others to view.
The installers arrived at 11:00 am. They finished the final room at approximately 2:00 pm. We paid $2,955.00 cash for this carpeting. We did not finance our purchase. Overall, the customer service for the purchase was satisfactory. The best service we received was from another person by the name of Joe. I can only identify him with his phone number, which is 708-547-4120. He was very supportive and proactive in providing comprehensive and optimal service after all the mishaps experienced.
My wife and I are disappointed with Luna’s customer service. It appears Luna’s customer service has many individuals acting without accessing their system for information. This has to be the problem or Luna’s employees are not putting information given to customers into their system’s database. Whether it is a data processing problem or employee neglect, it causes problems for the customer in addressing their issues especially when one has to deal with a person like Ms. Zilke.
Ms. Zilke’s refusing to give me the name of Luna’s President can only be construed as an attempt to keep her and her colleagues negligence hidden. We scheduled painting, carpeting, and the purchase of furniture for the Thanksgiving holiday. Ms. Zilke knew the original installation date did not have all the carpet ordered to complete the order. Ms.Zilke knew the information given by an employee of Luna stating we would receive the carpet and installation needed on November 22, 2005 was not going to be available. Ms. Zilke gave us a $75.00 “discount” apparently for the “miscommunication” for a delivery date of November 22, 2005. I believe she meant this discount to account for my wife having to take off another day, that being November 30, 2005. This “discount” did not alleviate my daughter frustration of coming home from college to sleep in the room where the old carpet still remained.
The most frustrating issue of this mess is the fact there was no priority given to us for the delivery date of November 30, 2005. Kate informed us we were the first stop for installation. As we kept calling back talking to Kate to see when the installers were leaving the warehouse, Kate informed us the installers were just leaving the warehouse at 9:20 am. Kate informed us the late departure was due to a “big” order for another customer. My question is: Didn’t they know a “big” order existed the day before? Where is our relief? Mr. Dezara, please respond.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
cc: http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/
November 30, 2005
November 26, 2005
September 11, 2005 - Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services & Senator James Meeks and Illinois State Representative David Miller
Voters!!! Voters!!!
Well it November 17, 2005 and no child support for Kristina Gaston. Policies are guidelines for implementation. Governor Blagojevich may promise and sign anything he wants, but if his appointees to particular offices do not carry out his agenda, it means nothing to us. Do not think this will happen to me and not to you.
Visit the website of Dr. Eric Wallace, who is attempting to run for Lt. Governor of Illinois. He man of moral ethics and family values. He probably does not share my views or the way in which I approach governmental issues, but he is a man of integrity. Who ever he appoints to an office will carry out their duties in a professional way with integrity and thought to why the policy is instituted.
Vote Governor Blagojevich out and his cronies will follow. They are denying Kristina the right to have child support on time, and in an amount that would be suitable for a child. If it were their friends or relatives believe me they would not have this problem. The problem with this administration is their is no integrity or honesty.
Vote for Dr. Eric Wallace for Lt. Governor of Illinois. Integrity and family values are top priority with him.
The Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Service, formerly known as Public Aid, is seriously flawed regarding child support. What Governor Blagojevich seems to have addressed in his revamping of the system is apparently still operating against a child's right to have child support.
On October 12, 2005 I spoke to Ms. Barbara Radtke about Kristina's child support payment being late. Ms. Radtke informed me there was payment made on October 11, 2005. I asked about the late charges and/or penalties for being late. Ms. Radtke informed me there is no real late charge for being late with payments. She informed me the Court ordered penalties for being late mean something other than a monthly charge to the parent ordered to pay child support.
As I read the Court order, it states if the child support is not paid on the 3rd of every month a $20.00 fee is attached to the payment. As Ms. Radtke interprets the language she reports a $20.00 fee is not a fee attached to the monthly payment. Ms. Radtke also continues to report the agency cannot collect from this parent because the source of his money is from SSI and is non-attachable. In summation, this means the child support can come anytime it wants, if it does not come so what, and the Court ordered penalties are null and void.
What a wonderful system to be part of, I guess. I guess its up to us voters who should represent our interest. If we don't say anything, you can believe nothing will be said.
The Illinois Department of Healthcare & Family Services wrote us stating, basically, there was nothing they could do about Mr. Gaston unpaid child support because it has to reach $500.00 before they can do anything. This is absurd. The Court Order means nothing.
As of October 12, 2005, I have not received any correspondence from Senator James Meeks, Illinois State Representative David Miller or any other entity copied. There is something seriously wrong with our State Representatives when they refuse to respond to their constituents.
September 11, 2005
Illinois Department of Healthcare & Family Services
Mr. Barry S. Maram, Director
201 South Grand Avenue
Springfield, Illinois 62763-0001
Re: 2004 D 650237 Darlene Bouyer-Nance (petitioner) vs. Lawrence Gaston (respondent) with child support for Kristina Gaston
Mr. Maram:
On September 10, 2005 we received a check in the amount of $136.00 from the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois stating case # 2004D0650237. This is not the normal check that comes for child support. The child support court order reports a monthly payment of $100.00 plus $25.00 if the payment is late. This payment is supposed to be made to the child support division on the 3rd of every month.
We have yet to hear from Ms. Radtke regarding the outcome of our complaint. We do not know why the “$36.00” was added to the monthly allotment. We have not heard anything about the 2 monthly payments not received, with late charges. We have not heard anything about the late charges for other monthly payments.
Therefore, we respectfully request a reply to our letters for 2 past child support payments and the late charges due.
Thank you.
Fred L Nance Jr.
cc: Mr. Rod R. Blagojevich, Governor of Illinois; Mr. Barack Obama, United States Senator (c/o Nubia Chaidez); Mr. James Meeks, Illinois Senator; Mr. David Miller, Illinois State Representative; Mr. Durman Jackson, Ms. Colleen Glass, Cook County Assistant State’s Attorneys Supervisors; Ms. Barb Radtke, DCSE Customer Service.
September 8, 2005
Illinois Department of Healthcare & Family Services
Mr. Barry S. Maram, Director
201 South Grand Avenue
Springfield, Illinois 62763-0001
Re: 2004 D 650237 Darlene Bouyer-Nance (petitioner) vs. Lawrence Gaston (respondent) with child support for Kristina Gaston
Mr. Maram:
On August 17, 2005 I, Fred L Nance Jr., wrote regarding the non-receipt of two (2) child support payments for Kristina Gaston. I received a call from Ms. Barb Radtke stating she would respond within 2 weeks. Ms. Radtke requested and received a “Consent To Release Confidential Information” from my wife Darlene to discuss the issues of this matter with me, Fred L Nance Jr. Darlene and I have not heard anything from your office Mr. Maram or from Ms. Barb Radtke since August 17, 2005.
In addition to non-receipt of 2 child support payments, Kristina has not received her child support for the month of September 2005. This is the 3rd child support payment Mr. Lawrence Gaston has not paid. The child support payments should be a direct deposit to my wife’s bank account. My wife submitted a “Direct Deposit Authorization Agreement” to the Illinois State Disbursement Unit on or about January 24, 2005 and August 13, 2005 faxing it to 630-221-2312. Even though my wife faxed this request on January 24, 2005, she continued to receive child support checks through the U.S. Mail. She has not received any child support payments since faxing this document, a second time, by direct deposit to her bank account.
We copied the letter of August 17, 2005 to Mr. Rod R. Blagojevich, Governor of Illinois, Mr. Barack Obama, United States Senator, Mr. James Meeks, Illinois Senator, Mr. David Miller, Illinois State Representative, and supervisors Colleen Glass and Durman Jackson of Illinois Cook County’s Child Support Division. Of the copied letters sent, the only one who responded was Senator Obama suggesting his office does not handle child support; reporting forwarding the documents I sent to Senator Meeks stating his trust Senator Meeks responds in a timely fashion to the issues. As usual, we have heard nothing from Senator’s Meeks office.
We received a telephone response from Illinois’ Cook County State’s Attorney Chris Johnson and Mark (who reported he was the Deputy Supervisor; I did not get his last name) stating they could not prosecute and would have to wait until this office, Illinois Department of Healthcare & Family Services, investigation and request to file a petition in Court regarding this issue. Evidently, there is no investigation, and therefore, there will not be a hearing in Court on this matter of 3 non-payments, with late charges, of child support for Kristina Gaston.
Mr. Maram, we hope to hear from your office soon on this matter of receiving the Court ordered child support, and late fees from past child support payments and non-payments from Mr. Lawrence Gaston. I will fax this letter to the individuals listed below, along with posting it with the letter of August 17, 2005 on my personal Blog
Respectfully submitted,
Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
cc: Mr. Rod R. Blagojevich, Governor of Illinois; Mr. Barack Obama, United States Senator (c/o Nubia Chaidez); Mr. James Meeks, Illinois Senator; Mr. David Miller, Illinois State Representative; Mr. Durman Jackson, Ms. Colleen Glass, Cook County Assistant State’s Attorneys Supervisors; Ms. Barb Radtke, DCSE Customer Service.
August 17, 2005
Illinois Department of Healthcare & Family Services
Mr. Barry S. Maram, Director
201 South Grand Avenue
Springfield, Illinois 62763-0001
Re: 2004 D 650237 Darlene Bouyer-Nance (petitioner) vs. Lawrence Gaston (respondent) with child support for Kristina Gaston
Mr. Maram:
I, Fred Nance Jr., am writing this letter in behalf of my wife, Darlene Bouyer-Nance. On March 14, 2005, my wife filed a “Rule To Show Cause” to be heard on April 29, 2005 in room 209, in front of the Honorable Judge Panici, at the 6th District Courthouse in Markham, Illinois, that is, 16501 South Kedzie Parkway (attached). On April 29, 2005, my wife could not attend because of work-related issues and I attended in her stead seeking a short continuance. On April 29, 2005 in Judge Panici’s courtroom 209, I informed the State’s Attorney of the short continuance. The State’s Attorney informed me my wife’s motion for Rule to Show cause could not be presented before the Judge because the State’s Attorney’s office did not file the motion. The State’s Attorney informed me child support violations are not filed until the respondent is 6 months late with child support payments. This is absurd.
According to Governor Rod R. Blagojevich’s press release, on or about August 2, 2005, stating, “Official Proclamation Recognizing Strengthened Enforcement and Increased Collections for Illinois’ Children”, the report states, “…August is Child Support Month and honored the Division of Child Support Enforcement with an official proclamation recognizing its success in strengthening enforcement and increasing collections for Illinois’ children. The press release also reports Governor Blagojevich recently signed five bills into law that further improve the state’s child support services under the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services (HFS)”. With my wife’s issues, this appears to be a fallacy.
The five pieces of Child Support legislation signed this summer by the Governor are:
Making the child support process more efficient: House Bill 785, makes child support collection more efficient by updating the process to reflect current practices. The law is effective January 1, 2006.
Adding interest to unpaid alimony: Senate Bill 95, an initiative of the Illinois State Bar Association, provides that any new or existing order including any unallocated maintenance obligation (alimony) shall accrue simple interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum, just as child support obligations. This law is effective January 1, 2006.
Improving ability to legally serve notices on non-custodial parents: Senate Bill 955 improves the Department's ability to legally serve notices on non-custodial parents. This law is effective immediately.
Making sure the family receives interest payments first: Senate Bill 452 simplifies the calculation and distribution of interest on unpaid child support and ensures that collections of interest are paid to the family first. This law is effective January 1, 2006.
Making payments easier through currency exchanges: HB 783 allows a non-custodial parent to give certain information to a currency exchange so that their child support payments can be made there, giving the non-custodial parent more access to places where they can make payments.
The Governor also states in his press release, “This dramatic turnaround follows years of poor child support collection.” It appears this poor child support collection is still being produced under the leadership of Mr. Barry S. Maram. It seems no one in the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services has a clue as to how the processes work. My wife and I have received conflicting information from Child Support entities at 32 West Randolph and 28 North Clark (both entities operate in the City of Chicago).
On Monday, August 15, 2005, my wife and I went to the State’s Attorneys office at the Markham Courthouse seeking information on how to pursue additional non-payment of child support and the Rule to Show Cause filed with the Court on March 14, 2005. The State’s Attorney we talked to gave us information to call 1-800-447-4278. We informed the State’s Attorney at the Markham Courthouse that my wife was informed that Mr. Gaston’s child support payments were being paid by company check. We informed the State’s Attorney that Mr. Gaston informed the Court that he was receiving Social Security and had no other income. We asked the State’s Attorney what could we do to have the Court look into Mr. Gaston’s income. The State’s Attorney at the Markham Courthouse stated we should file a motion for “Modification of Child Support Payments and Rule to Show Cause” in this matter. My wife informed the State’s Attorney that the person she talked to at the 1-800-447-4278 number told her she could not get any information on the business location of the check submitted to the Child Support payment center by Mr. Gaston to present to the Court. The person at this 1-800 number told her that the State’s Attorney is only privy to this information. My wife was denied the information regarding the respondent, Lawrence Gaston, employment to present to the Court.
My wife reports the person she talked to this morning, August 17, 2005, informed her that pursuit of child support payments does not take place until the respondent is 90-days late. In addition, my wife was told this morning, August 17, 2005, she had to go to 28 North Clark, Chicago, to file a motion for this back child support payments. This is ludicrous. What are we supposed to do? There are mixed messages given to us to pursue the child support payments.
In addition to the petition for “Rule to Show Cause” submitted on March14, 2005, the respondent, Lawrence Gaston, did not pay child support for July 2005. Also, the August 2005 payment of Child Support was received at our home on August 12, 2005. My wife has recently faxed and mailed a hard copy requesting direct deposit.
Nevertheless, Mr. Gaston is 2 months delinquent with child support and has not paid any late fees for other past payments of child support, which were late. Regarding the March 14, 2005 petition for “Rule to Show Cause” my wife reports Mr. Gaston telling her he did not have to honor her motion because it was not filed or pursued by the State’s Attorneys office.
We are clearly receiving mixed messages about the collection procedures for past and current child support payments. Please have the entity responsible for collection of child support payments, that is, past- present- and future contact us by phone and mail. How can we file anything if no one will honor it? The State’s Attorney suggested to us we should have a private law firm pursue the issue of child support. This is ludicrous. Why should we employ a private attorney to do what the State of Illinois is responsible for?
Therefore, we are aware that the Governor’s legislation does not become “technically” effective until January 1, 2006. Nevertheless, his press release noting August as Child Support Month and honoring the Division of Child Support Enforcement with an official proclamation recognizing its success in strengthening enforcement and increasing collections for Illinois’ children would and should create a proactive stance with the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services.
It would seem to us and to others that the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services would work in concert with the Governor and the women who have “deadbeat” dads assisting those who are disenfranchised and disadvantaged by the “system” of child support. Who will assist us? Shall we wait until January 1, 2006 for assistance?
My wife and I would appreciate an immediate response. My wife has received and returned by fax a document to Ms. Barb Radtke giving the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services authority to discuss any and all information with her husband, Fred L Nance Jr. regarding case number 2004 D 650237, Darlene Bouyer-Nance (petitioner) v. Lawrence Gaston (respondent) regarding minor child Kristina Gaston.
I am faxing a copy of this letter to the individuals below, along with a faxed copy to Mr. Barry S. Maram c/o Barb Radtke. A hard copy of this letter and attached motion for Rule to Show Cause of March 14, 2005 will be sent by U.S. Mail to Mr. Barry S. Maram.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
cc: Mr. Rod R. Blagojevich, Governor of Illinois, Mr. Barack Obama, United States Senator, Mr. James Meeks, Illinois Senator, Mr. David Miller, Illinois State Representative
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION
Darlene Bouyer-Nance, )
on behalf of, )
Kristina Gaston, a minor, ) Court No. 04 D 650237
Plaintiff/Petitioner ) C. No. C 01581611
vs. ) Calendar No. 86
) Room ________
Lawrence Gaston, ) Judge __________________
Defendant/Respondent. )
NOTICE OF FILING MOTION
TO: Lawrence Gaston Ms. Dorothy Reed, Chief Deputy Clerk
6856 So. Crandon State’s Attorney of Cook County
Chicago, Illinois 60649 Child Support Enforcement Division
28 North Clark Street, Suite 200
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Mr. Durman Jackson
State’s Attorney of Cook County
Child Support Enforcement Division
28 North Clark Street, Suite 200
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Please take notice, on March ____, 2005 plaintiff/petitioner shall file her Motion for Rule to Show Cause with the Clerk of the Court at 16501 South Kedzie Parkway, Markham. On ___________________, 2005 in room _____, at approximately ________, or as soon thereafter as plaintiff/petitioner may be heard, plaintiff/petitioner shall appear before the Honorable Judge ____________ or whoever sits in his stead to hear her Motion for Rule to Show Cause.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Darlene Bouyer-Nance plaintiff/petitioner (pro se) on behalf of Kristina Gaston a minor, certify that I caused the above notice and attached motion to be served upon parties above, by depositing the same in the United States Mail on March ____, 2005.
Respectfully submitted,
Darlene Bouyer-Nance, B.S.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION
Darlene Bouyer-Nance, )
on behalf of, )
Kristina Gaston, a minor, ) Court No. 04 D 650237
Plaintiff/Petitioner ) C. No. C 01581611
vs. ) Calendar No. 86
) Room ______
Lawrence Gaston, ) Judge _________________
Defendant/Respondent. )
MOTION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE
Now Comes Plaintiff/Petitioner, Darlene Bouyer-Nance on behalf of Kristina Gaston a minor, respectfully requesting this Honorable Court find the defendant/respondent in contempt of this court for the following:
On August 3, 2004 the Honorable Judge Luciano Panici entered an order instructing the defendant/respondent to pay $100.00 a month toward child support starting on August 3, 2004.
There was no true [prove-up] investigation by the State’s Attorney’s office into the financial position of the defendant/respondent for child support.
Nevertheless, according to the child support order, payments are made between the 1st and 3rd of each month.
Defendant/respondent has not paid $100.00 for August 2004 and March 2005.
Defendant/respondent did not make the October 2004 payment until November 2004.
The Court order states that if the defendant/respondent is delinquent he will pay an additional $20.00 per payment for each month he is delinquent.
In October 2004, the plaintiff/petitioner called the Illinois State Disbursement Unit asking them if a payment had been made to them for August and October 2004 by the defendant/respondent.
The Illinois State Disbursement Unit informed the plaintiff/petitioner that they did not received a payment from the defendant/respondent for August and October 2004.
Plaintiff/petitioner has contacted the Illinois Department of Public Aid and did not get a response leading to recouping delinquent payments mentioned above.
Plaintiff/petitioner has contacted the Assistant State’s Attorney Office for the Child Support Enforcement Division, 28 North Clark Street, Suite 300, Chicago, Illinois 60602.
No one has assisted or gave the plaintiff/petitioner relief toward her child support.
Defendant/respondent paid the October 2004 payment with the November 2004 payment, which the payment was $200.00. The defendant/respondent did not make the $20.00 delinquent fee for the October 2004 payment.
Defendant/respondent did not make the child support payment for March 2005.
On March 13, 2005 Plaintiff/petitioner had her daughter, Kristina Gaston, call her father [defendant/respondent] asking him for her monthly payment of $100.00 for March 2005.
Defendant/respondent told his daughter, Kristina, to have the plaintiff/petitioner [her mother] call him and he will explain the March 2005 payment.
Plaintiff/petitioner called defendant/respondent asking why she had to call him about their daughter’s March 2005 child support payment.
Defendant/respondent states “the money will continue to be late until I am able to visit with my daughter.”
Plaintiff/petitioner has never refused the defendant/respondent visitation, if he wants to pick his daughter up.
Defendant/respondent wants the plaintiff/petitioner to drop-off his daughter [when he decides he wants to see her] and pick-up their daughter.
Plaintiff/petitioner has informed the defendant/respondent to go to court if he wants “court ordered” visitation.
Plaintiff/petitioner has informed defendant/respondent that it is not her responsibility to drop-off and pick-up their daughter when he decides he wants visitation.
Plaintiff/petitioner also informed defendant/respondent that there is a court order for child support, and getting visitation has nothing to do with the court ordered child support.
Defendant/respondent rarely calls his daughter.
Plaintiff/petitioner’s husband graciously allowed defendant/respondent to call our home when he wants to speak to his daughter.
Well it November 17, 2005 and no child support for Kristina Gaston. Policies are guidelines for implementation. Governor Blagojevich may promise and sign anything he wants, but if his appointees to particular offices do not carry out his agenda, it means nothing to us. Do not think this will happen to me and not to you.
Visit the website of Dr. Eric Wallace, who is attempting to run for Lt. Governor of Illinois. He man of moral ethics and family values. He probably does not share my views or the way in which I approach governmental issues, but he is a man of integrity. Who ever he appoints to an office will carry out their duties in a professional way with integrity and thought to why the policy is instituted.
Vote Governor Blagojevich out and his cronies will follow. They are denying Kristina the right to have child support on time, and in an amount that would be suitable for a child. If it were their friends or relatives believe me they would not have this problem. The problem with this administration is their is no integrity or honesty.
Vote for Dr. Eric Wallace for Lt. Governor of Illinois. Integrity and family values are top priority with him.
The Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Service, formerly known as Public Aid, is seriously flawed regarding child support. What Governor Blagojevich seems to have addressed in his revamping of the system is apparently still operating against a child's right to have child support.
On October 12, 2005 I spoke to Ms. Barbara Radtke about Kristina's child support payment being late. Ms. Radtke informed me there was payment made on October 11, 2005. I asked about the late charges and/or penalties for being late. Ms. Radtke informed me there is no real late charge for being late with payments. She informed me the Court ordered penalties for being late mean something other than a monthly charge to the parent ordered to pay child support.
As I read the Court order, it states if the child support is not paid on the 3rd of every month a $20.00 fee is attached to the payment. As Ms. Radtke interprets the language she reports a $20.00 fee is not a fee attached to the monthly payment. Ms. Radtke also continues to report the agency cannot collect from this parent because the source of his money is from SSI and is non-attachable. In summation, this means the child support can come anytime it wants, if it does not come so what, and the Court ordered penalties are null and void.
What a wonderful system to be part of, I guess. I guess its up to us voters who should represent our interest. If we don't say anything, you can believe nothing will be said.
The Illinois Department of Healthcare & Family Services wrote us stating, basically, there was nothing they could do about Mr. Gaston unpaid child support because it has to reach $500.00 before they can do anything. This is absurd. The Court Order means nothing.
As of October 12, 2005, I have not received any correspondence from Senator James Meeks, Illinois State Representative David Miller or any other entity copied. There is something seriously wrong with our State Representatives when they refuse to respond to their constituents.
September 11, 2005
Illinois Department of Healthcare & Family Services
Mr. Barry S. Maram, Director
201 South Grand Avenue
Springfield, Illinois 62763-0001
Re: 2004 D 650237 Darlene Bouyer-Nance (petitioner) vs. Lawrence Gaston (respondent) with child support for Kristina Gaston
Mr. Maram:
On September 10, 2005 we received a check in the amount of $136.00 from the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois stating case # 2004D0650237. This is not the normal check that comes for child support. The child support court order reports a monthly payment of $100.00 plus $25.00 if the payment is late. This payment is supposed to be made to the child support division on the 3rd of every month.
We have yet to hear from Ms. Radtke regarding the outcome of our complaint. We do not know why the “$36.00” was added to the monthly allotment. We have not heard anything about the 2 monthly payments not received, with late charges. We have not heard anything about the late charges for other monthly payments.
Therefore, we respectfully request a reply to our letters for 2 past child support payments and the late charges due.
Thank you.
Fred L Nance Jr.
cc: Mr. Rod R. Blagojevich, Governor of Illinois; Mr. Barack Obama, United States Senator (c/o Nubia Chaidez); Mr. James Meeks, Illinois Senator; Mr. David Miller, Illinois State Representative; Mr. Durman Jackson, Ms. Colleen Glass, Cook County Assistant State’s Attorneys Supervisors; Ms. Barb Radtke, DCSE Customer Service.
September 8, 2005
Illinois Department of Healthcare & Family Services
Mr. Barry S. Maram, Director
201 South Grand Avenue
Springfield, Illinois 62763-0001
Re: 2004 D 650237 Darlene Bouyer-Nance (petitioner) vs. Lawrence Gaston (respondent) with child support for Kristina Gaston
Mr. Maram:
On August 17, 2005 I, Fred L Nance Jr., wrote regarding the non-receipt of two (2) child support payments for Kristina Gaston. I received a call from Ms. Barb Radtke stating she would respond within 2 weeks. Ms. Radtke requested and received a “Consent To Release Confidential Information” from my wife Darlene to discuss the issues of this matter with me, Fred L Nance Jr. Darlene and I have not heard anything from your office Mr. Maram or from Ms. Barb Radtke since August 17, 2005.
In addition to non-receipt of 2 child support payments, Kristina has not received her child support for the month of September 2005. This is the 3rd child support payment Mr. Lawrence Gaston has not paid. The child support payments should be a direct deposit to my wife’s bank account. My wife submitted a “Direct Deposit Authorization Agreement” to the Illinois State Disbursement Unit on or about January 24, 2005 and August 13, 2005 faxing it to 630-221-2312. Even though my wife faxed this request on January 24, 2005, she continued to receive child support checks through the U.S. Mail. She has not received any child support payments since faxing this document, a second time, by direct deposit to her bank account.
We copied the letter of August 17, 2005 to Mr. Rod R. Blagojevich, Governor of Illinois, Mr. Barack Obama, United States Senator, Mr. James Meeks, Illinois Senator, Mr. David Miller, Illinois State Representative, and supervisors Colleen Glass and Durman Jackson of Illinois Cook County’s Child Support Division. Of the copied letters sent, the only one who responded was Senator Obama suggesting his office does not handle child support; reporting forwarding the documents I sent to Senator Meeks stating his trust Senator Meeks responds in a timely fashion to the issues. As usual, we have heard nothing from Senator’s Meeks office.
We received a telephone response from Illinois’ Cook County State’s Attorney Chris Johnson and Mark (who reported he was the Deputy Supervisor; I did not get his last name) stating they could not prosecute and would have to wait until this office, Illinois Department of Healthcare & Family Services, investigation and request to file a petition in Court regarding this issue. Evidently, there is no investigation, and therefore, there will not be a hearing in Court on this matter of 3 non-payments, with late charges, of child support for Kristina Gaston.
Mr. Maram, we hope to hear from your office soon on this matter of receiving the Court ordered child support, and late fees from past child support payments and non-payments from Mr. Lawrence Gaston. I will fax this letter to the individuals listed below, along with posting it with the letter of August 17, 2005 on my personal Blog
Respectfully submitted,
Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
cc: Mr. Rod R. Blagojevich, Governor of Illinois; Mr. Barack Obama, United States Senator (c/o Nubia Chaidez); Mr. James Meeks, Illinois Senator; Mr. David Miller, Illinois State Representative; Mr. Durman Jackson, Ms. Colleen Glass, Cook County Assistant State’s Attorneys Supervisors; Ms. Barb Radtke, DCSE Customer Service.
August 17, 2005
Illinois Department of Healthcare & Family Services
Mr. Barry S. Maram, Director
201 South Grand Avenue
Springfield, Illinois 62763-0001
Re: 2004 D 650237 Darlene Bouyer-Nance (petitioner) vs. Lawrence Gaston (respondent) with child support for Kristina Gaston
Mr. Maram:
I, Fred Nance Jr., am writing this letter in behalf of my wife, Darlene Bouyer-Nance. On March 14, 2005, my wife filed a “Rule To Show Cause” to be heard on April 29, 2005 in room 209, in front of the Honorable Judge Panici, at the 6th District Courthouse in Markham, Illinois, that is, 16501 South Kedzie Parkway (attached). On April 29, 2005, my wife could not attend because of work-related issues and I attended in her stead seeking a short continuance. On April 29, 2005 in Judge Panici’s courtroom 209, I informed the State’s Attorney of the short continuance. The State’s Attorney informed me my wife’s motion for Rule to Show cause could not be presented before the Judge because the State’s Attorney’s office did not file the motion. The State’s Attorney informed me child support violations are not filed until the respondent is 6 months late with child support payments. This is absurd.
According to Governor Rod R. Blagojevich’s press release, on or about August 2, 2005, stating, “Official Proclamation Recognizing Strengthened Enforcement and Increased Collections for Illinois’ Children”, the report states, “…August is Child Support Month and honored the Division of Child Support Enforcement with an official proclamation recognizing its success in strengthening enforcement and increasing collections for Illinois’ children. The press release also reports Governor Blagojevich recently signed five bills into law that further improve the state’s child support services under the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services (HFS)”. With my wife’s issues, this appears to be a fallacy.
The five pieces of Child Support legislation signed this summer by the Governor are:
Making the child support process more efficient: House Bill 785, makes child support collection more efficient by updating the process to reflect current practices. The law is effective January 1, 2006.
Adding interest to unpaid alimony: Senate Bill 95, an initiative of the Illinois State Bar Association, provides that any new or existing order including any unallocated maintenance obligation (alimony) shall accrue simple interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum, just as child support obligations. This law is effective January 1, 2006.
Improving ability to legally serve notices on non-custodial parents: Senate Bill 955 improves the Department's ability to legally serve notices on non-custodial parents. This law is effective immediately.
Making sure the family receives interest payments first: Senate Bill 452 simplifies the calculation and distribution of interest on unpaid child support and ensures that collections of interest are paid to the family first. This law is effective January 1, 2006.
Making payments easier through currency exchanges: HB 783 allows a non-custodial parent to give certain information to a currency exchange so that their child support payments can be made there, giving the non-custodial parent more access to places where they can make payments.
The Governor also states in his press release, “This dramatic turnaround follows years of poor child support collection.” It appears this poor child support collection is still being produced under the leadership of Mr. Barry S. Maram. It seems no one in the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services has a clue as to how the processes work. My wife and I have received conflicting information from Child Support entities at 32 West Randolph and 28 North Clark (both entities operate in the City of Chicago).
On Monday, August 15, 2005, my wife and I went to the State’s Attorneys office at the Markham Courthouse seeking information on how to pursue additional non-payment of child support and the Rule to Show Cause filed with the Court on March 14, 2005. The State’s Attorney we talked to gave us information to call 1-800-447-4278. We informed the State’s Attorney at the Markham Courthouse that my wife was informed that Mr. Gaston’s child support payments were being paid by company check. We informed the State’s Attorney that Mr. Gaston informed the Court that he was receiving Social Security and had no other income. We asked the State’s Attorney what could we do to have the Court look into Mr. Gaston’s income. The State’s Attorney at the Markham Courthouse stated we should file a motion for “Modification of Child Support Payments and Rule to Show Cause” in this matter. My wife informed the State’s Attorney that the person she talked to at the 1-800-447-4278 number told her she could not get any information on the business location of the check submitted to the Child Support payment center by Mr. Gaston to present to the Court. The person at this 1-800 number told her that the State’s Attorney is only privy to this information. My wife was denied the information regarding the respondent, Lawrence Gaston, employment to present to the Court.
My wife reports the person she talked to this morning, August 17, 2005, informed her that pursuit of child support payments does not take place until the respondent is 90-days late. In addition, my wife was told this morning, August 17, 2005, she had to go to 28 North Clark, Chicago, to file a motion for this back child support payments. This is ludicrous. What are we supposed to do? There are mixed messages given to us to pursue the child support payments.
In addition to the petition for “Rule to Show Cause” submitted on March14, 2005, the respondent, Lawrence Gaston, did not pay child support for July 2005. Also, the August 2005 payment of Child Support was received at our home on August 12, 2005. My wife has recently faxed and mailed a hard copy requesting direct deposit.
Nevertheless, Mr. Gaston is 2 months delinquent with child support and has not paid any late fees for other past payments of child support, which were late. Regarding the March 14, 2005 petition for “Rule to Show Cause” my wife reports Mr. Gaston telling her he did not have to honor her motion because it was not filed or pursued by the State’s Attorneys office.
We are clearly receiving mixed messages about the collection procedures for past and current child support payments. Please have the entity responsible for collection of child support payments, that is, past- present- and future contact us by phone and mail. How can we file anything if no one will honor it? The State’s Attorney suggested to us we should have a private law firm pursue the issue of child support. This is ludicrous. Why should we employ a private attorney to do what the State of Illinois is responsible for?
Therefore, we are aware that the Governor’s legislation does not become “technically” effective until January 1, 2006. Nevertheless, his press release noting August as Child Support Month and honoring the Division of Child Support Enforcement with an official proclamation recognizing its success in strengthening enforcement and increasing collections for Illinois’ children would and should create a proactive stance with the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services.
It would seem to us and to others that the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services would work in concert with the Governor and the women who have “deadbeat” dads assisting those who are disenfranchised and disadvantaged by the “system” of child support. Who will assist us? Shall we wait until January 1, 2006 for assistance?
My wife and I would appreciate an immediate response. My wife has received and returned by fax a document to Ms. Barb Radtke giving the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services authority to discuss any and all information with her husband, Fred L Nance Jr. regarding case number 2004 D 650237, Darlene Bouyer-Nance (petitioner) v. Lawrence Gaston (respondent) regarding minor child Kristina Gaston.
I am faxing a copy of this letter to the individuals below, along with a faxed copy to Mr. Barry S. Maram c/o Barb Radtke. A hard copy of this letter and attached motion for Rule to Show Cause of March 14, 2005 will be sent by U.S. Mail to Mr. Barry S. Maram.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
cc: Mr. Rod R. Blagojevich, Governor of Illinois, Mr. Barack Obama, United States Senator, Mr. James Meeks, Illinois Senator, Mr. David Miller, Illinois State Representative
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION
Darlene Bouyer-Nance, )
on behalf of, )
Kristina Gaston, a minor, ) Court No. 04 D 650237
Plaintiff/Petitioner ) C. No. C 01581611
vs. ) Calendar No. 86
) Room ________
Lawrence Gaston, ) Judge __________________
Defendant/Respondent. )
NOTICE OF FILING MOTION
TO: Lawrence Gaston Ms. Dorothy Reed, Chief Deputy Clerk
6856 So. Crandon State’s Attorney of Cook County
Chicago, Illinois 60649 Child Support Enforcement Division
28 North Clark Street, Suite 200
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Mr. Durman Jackson
State’s Attorney of Cook County
Child Support Enforcement Division
28 North Clark Street, Suite 200
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Please take notice, on March ____, 2005 plaintiff/petitioner shall file her Motion for Rule to Show Cause with the Clerk of the Court at 16501 South Kedzie Parkway, Markham. On ___________________, 2005 in room _____, at approximately ________, or as soon thereafter as plaintiff/petitioner may be heard, plaintiff/petitioner shall appear before the Honorable Judge ____________ or whoever sits in his stead to hear her Motion for Rule to Show Cause.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Darlene Bouyer-Nance plaintiff/petitioner (pro se) on behalf of Kristina Gaston a minor, certify that I caused the above notice and attached motion to be served upon parties above, by depositing the same in the United States Mail on March ____, 2005.
Respectfully submitted,
Darlene Bouyer-Nance, B.S.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION
Darlene Bouyer-Nance, )
on behalf of, )
Kristina Gaston, a minor, ) Court No. 04 D 650237
Plaintiff/Petitioner ) C. No. C 01581611
vs. ) Calendar No. 86
) Room ______
Lawrence Gaston, ) Judge _________________
Defendant/Respondent. )
MOTION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE
Now Comes Plaintiff/Petitioner, Darlene Bouyer-Nance on behalf of Kristina Gaston a minor, respectfully requesting this Honorable Court find the defendant/respondent in contempt of this court for the following:
On August 3, 2004 the Honorable Judge Luciano Panici entered an order instructing the defendant/respondent to pay $100.00 a month toward child support starting on August 3, 2004.
There was no true [prove-up] investigation by the State’s Attorney’s office into the financial position of the defendant/respondent for child support.
Nevertheless, according to the child support order, payments are made between the 1st and 3rd of each month.
Defendant/respondent has not paid $100.00 for August 2004 and March 2005.
Defendant/respondent did not make the October 2004 payment until November 2004.
The Court order states that if the defendant/respondent is delinquent he will pay an additional $20.00 per payment for each month he is delinquent.
In October 2004, the plaintiff/petitioner called the Illinois State Disbursement Unit asking them if a payment had been made to them for August and October 2004 by the defendant/respondent.
The Illinois State Disbursement Unit informed the plaintiff/petitioner that they did not received a payment from the defendant/respondent for August and October 2004.
Plaintiff/petitioner has contacted the Illinois Department of Public Aid and did not get a response leading to recouping delinquent payments mentioned above.
Plaintiff/petitioner has contacted the Assistant State’s Attorney Office for the Child Support Enforcement Division, 28 North Clark Street, Suite 300, Chicago, Illinois 60602.
No one has assisted or gave the plaintiff/petitioner relief toward her child support.
Defendant/respondent paid the October 2004 payment with the November 2004 payment, which the payment was $200.00. The defendant/respondent did not make the $20.00 delinquent fee for the October 2004 payment.
Defendant/respondent did not make the child support payment for March 2005.
On March 13, 2005 Plaintiff/petitioner had her daughter, Kristina Gaston, call her father [defendant/respondent] asking him for her monthly payment of $100.00 for March 2005.
Defendant/respondent told his daughter, Kristina, to have the plaintiff/petitioner [her mother] call him and he will explain the March 2005 payment.
Plaintiff/petitioner called defendant/respondent asking why she had to call him about their daughter’s March 2005 child support payment.
Defendant/respondent states “the money will continue to be late until I am able to visit with my daughter.”
Plaintiff/petitioner has never refused the defendant/respondent visitation, if he wants to pick his daughter up.
Defendant/respondent wants the plaintiff/petitioner to drop-off his daughter [when he decides he wants to see her] and pick-up their daughter.
Plaintiff/petitioner has informed the defendant/respondent to go to court if he wants “court ordered” visitation.
Plaintiff/petitioner has informed defendant/respondent that it is not her responsibility to drop-off and pick-up their daughter when he decides he wants visitation.
Plaintiff/petitioner also informed defendant/respondent that there is a court order for child support, and getting visitation has nothing to do with the court ordered child support.
Defendant/respondent rarely calls his daughter.
Plaintiff/petitioner’s husband graciously allowed defendant/respondent to call our home when he wants to speak to his daughter.
Defendant/respondent disrespected plaintiff/petitioner’s home some time ago by calling cursing and threatening her husband with bodily harm.
Plaintiff-petitioner’s husband decided defendant/respondent could not call his home because he disrespected and threatened him with bodily harm.
Through litigation in another court between defendant/respondent and plaintiff/petitioner’s husband, defendant/respondent was informed that he should buy a cell phone to contact and call his daughter.
Defendant/respondent bought a cell phone for his daughter.
Defendant/respondent turned the cell phone off telling plaintiff/petitioner that he turned it off because his daughter does not call him.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff/petitioner prays this Honorable Court find the defendant/respondent in contempt of this court for violating the child support order of August 3, 2004, Order defendant/respondent to pay the child support of August 2004 and March 2005 with the delinquency payments, Order defendant/respondent to provide future child support payments in a timely manner, Order defendant/respondent to provide his daughter, Kristina, with telecommunication equipment for means of calling or contacting him, Inform the defendant/respondent that the order for child support has nothing to do with visitation, and whatever other relief this court deems necessary and appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
Darlene Bouyer-Nance
Plaintiff-petitioner’s husband decided defendant/respondent could not call his home because he disrespected and threatened him with bodily harm.
Through litigation in another court between defendant/respondent and plaintiff/petitioner’s husband, defendant/respondent was informed that he should buy a cell phone to contact and call his daughter.
Defendant/respondent bought a cell phone for his daughter.
Defendant/respondent turned the cell phone off telling plaintiff/petitioner that he turned it off because his daughter does not call him.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff/petitioner prays this Honorable Court find the defendant/respondent in contempt of this court for violating the child support order of August 3, 2004, Order defendant/respondent to pay the child support of August 2004 and March 2005 with the delinquency payments, Order defendant/respondent to provide future child support payments in a timely manner, Order defendant/respondent to provide his daughter, Kristina, with telecommunication equipment for means of calling or contacting him, Inform the defendant/respondent that the order for child support has nothing to do with visitation, and whatever other relief this court deems necessary and appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
Darlene Bouyer-Nance
November 21, 2005
Cook County Illinois States Attorney's Office: Victimizing the Victim
The Riverdale Police Department arrested the right person. I informed Detective Graziano, the arresting officer on the scene, that the person in the passenger seat was driving the car when my car was hit. I never saw the person's face who was arrrested. I never knew his name. The States Attorney's office should have questioned this officer for an identification, not me. The arresting officer knew LaShawn Hobbs because he arrested the man I said was driving the car when my car was hit. The arresting officer arrested the right man. The man I said was driving the car when my car was hit. The man who hit my car was in the passenger seat of the car when the car was stopped by the Riverdale Police Department. I followed this car after it hit me. The car never was out of my site. I was on the phone with 911 all of the time I was following the car. The two males in the car did not stop and pick anyone up. I had the car in site all the time I was following it.
November 4, 2005
Cook County of Illinois
States Attorney Dick Devine
69 West Washington, 32nd Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Re: Case No. YG191601 (this letter is posted on my website)
Mr. Devine:
I, Fred Nance Jr. the Plaintiff/Petitioner in this matter, am writing to complain of how my case was handled by your Markham States Attorneys’ office. On March 20, 2005 at approximately 7:21 am, my car was struck from behind at the stop light at approximately 134th and Halsted. There were two black males in the car. The car that hit me took off from the scene of the accident. This was a hit-and-run. I called 911, and stayed on the phone with 911 as I pursued the car. The Riverdale Police Department caught up with the car I believe at 115th place and Wallace about 4 miles from the scene of the accident.
The Riverdale arresting police officers talked to me about the accident. I informed them the person who was driving the car when they stopped it, was not the person driving when my car was hit. I informed the arresting officers the two people in the car stopped the car during my chase and switched seats. Therefore, when the arresting officers stopped car, the person driving the car at that time, was not the person driving when my car was hit. As I was talking to one of the arresting officers I was walking toward the car that hit my car. The arresting officer stopped me and stated it was no need for me to go near the scene of the arrest. I obeyed and retreated back to my car. I never saw the faces of the two guys in the car that hit my car. I was not told their names at the scene of the arrest.
I went to the Markham courthouse by subpoena on July 29, 2005 and October 5, 2005 to room 205M. I was scheduled for another court appearance on October 19, 2005. On October 17, 2005, I called and left a message for Mr. Bill Galati and Mr. Dennis Dwyer stating I acquired new employment on October 17, 2005 and I needed a continuance because I could not take time off from this new employment to appear in court. I left another message on October 18, 2005. In both messages I requested they call me to acknowledge receipt of my message. I never received a returned call. I received a call on or about October 28, 2005 after I left a 3rd message on or about October 24, 2005.
Sir, before this court date, I was very diligent in attending court because I need to know who was going to pay my medical expenses and time off from work. The car I was driving was a rent-a-car from Enterprise Leasing. As of this date, Enterprise Leasing has not contacted me for payment for damages to their car.
When Mr. Dwyer called me on October 28, 2005, he stated he had not taken the information off of his answering machine before erasing my message; therefore, I would have to call him back with the case number so he could check the status of the case for my continuance. Mr. Dwyer called me on November 3, 2005 reporting he had dismissed my case because he believed he could not win. What kind of nonsense is this?
Mr. Dwyer reports he read the transcript of a prior court date stating I could not pick out the person in the courtroom who was driving the car. I informed him I never saw who was driving the car or knew the name of the person driving the car. What I know is there were two black males in the car when their car hit my car, and they changed seats before the Riverdale Police apprehended them. I informed Mr. Dwyer my subpoena reports “The People of the State of Illinois vs. LaShawn Hobbs.” I don’t know LaShawn Hobbs. I never knew the names of the people driving the car. The police officer knows whom he arrested as the driver of the car. Why didn’t your Assistant States Attorney question the police officer that arrested the driver? The arresting police officer was in court. Is your Assistant States Attorney a friend of defense counsel? There are some relationships here that are inappropriate.
What Assistant States Attorney Dwyer is reporting is an account from the transcript on the day I was asked, “do you see Mr. Hobbs in the courtroom?” When I was asked by defense counsel “Do you see LaShawn Hobbs in this court?” I answered I do not know LaShawn Hobbs. Defense counsel asked again, “Do you see the man who was driving the car that hit you?” There were about 60 people in the courtroom. I told the court the person I saw driving the car is not the person who was driving the car when the police arrested them. I informed the court that I never saw the faces of the two males because the Riverdale arresting Police Officer instructed me to go back to my car when they were making their arrest. The Assistant States Attorney who was prosecuting the case on that day let the defense attorney grill me into an answer to this question that fit the defense counsel’s motives.
Therefore, Mr. Devine I respectfully request a thorough investigation into this matter. How is the States Attorney’s office assisting the People of Illinois when you have Assistant States’ Attorney working to further their own ambitions and careers by working against the victim? I am a victim in this matter. Where is my justice and equal treatment? I asked Mr. Dwyer how was I supposed to pay for the damages and expenses incurred for this hit-and-run accident. Mr. Dwyer informed me I would have to go after the “driver” in a civil complaint. I informed Mr. Dwyer I do not know who the driver is in this matter. I informed Mr. Dwyer I do not know whom the car belongs too. I told Mr. Dwyer I thought I would learn all of this when I went to court. Mr. Devine what I learned when I went to court is that your office victimizes the victim.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
cc: Mr. David Sabatini, Markham Supervisor Riverdale Police Department
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/ faxed copies sent only
November 4, 2005
Cook County of Illinois
States Attorney Dick Devine
69 West Washington, 32nd Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Re: Case No. YG191601 (this letter is posted on my website)
Mr. Devine:
I, Fred Nance Jr. the Plaintiff/Petitioner in this matter, am writing to complain of how my case was handled by your Markham States Attorneys’ office. On March 20, 2005 at approximately 7:21 am, my car was struck from behind at the stop light at approximately 134th and Halsted. There were two black males in the car. The car that hit me took off from the scene of the accident. This was a hit-and-run. I called 911, and stayed on the phone with 911 as I pursued the car. The Riverdale Police Department caught up with the car I believe at 115th place and Wallace about 4 miles from the scene of the accident.
The Riverdale arresting police officers talked to me about the accident. I informed them the person who was driving the car when they stopped it, was not the person driving when my car was hit. I informed the arresting officers the two people in the car stopped the car during my chase and switched seats. Therefore, when the arresting officers stopped car, the person driving the car at that time, was not the person driving when my car was hit. As I was talking to one of the arresting officers I was walking toward the car that hit my car. The arresting officer stopped me and stated it was no need for me to go near the scene of the arrest. I obeyed and retreated back to my car. I never saw the faces of the two guys in the car that hit my car. I was not told their names at the scene of the arrest.
I went to the Markham courthouse by subpoena on July 29, 2005 and October 5, 2005 to room 205M. I was scheduled for another court appearance on October 19, 2005. On October 17, 2005, I called and left a message for Mr. Bill Galati and Mr. Dennis Dwyer stating I acquired new employment on October 17, 2005 and I needed a continuance because I could not take time off from this new employment to appear in court. I left another message on October 18, 2005. In both messages I requested they call me to acknowledge receipt of my message. I never received a returned call. I received a call on or about October 28, 2005 after I left a 3rd message on or about October 24, 2005.
Sir, before this court date, I was very diligent in attending court because I need to know who was going to pay my medical expenses and time off from work. The car I was driving was a rent-a-car from Enterprise Leasing. As of this date, Enterprise Leasing has not contacted me for payment for damages to their car.
When Mr. Dwyer called me on October 28, 2005, he stated he had not taken the information off of his answering machine before erasing my message; therefore, I would have to call him back with the case number so he could check the status of the case for my continuance. Mr. Dwyer called me on November 3, 2005 reporting he had dismissed my case because he believed he could not win. What kind of nonsense is this?
Mr. Dwyer reports he read the transcript of a prior court date stating I could not pick out the person in the courtroom who was driving the car. I informed him I never saw who was driving the car or knew the name of the person driving the car. What I know is there were two black males in the car when their car hit my car, and they changed seats before the Riverdale Police apprehended them. I informed Mr. Dwyer my subpoena reports “The People of the State of Illinois vs. LaShawn Hobbs.” I don’t know LaShawn Hobbs. I never knew the names of the people driving the car. The police officer knows whom he arrested as the driver of the car. Why didn’t your Assistant States Attorney question the police officer that arrested the driver? The arresting police officer was in court. Is your Assistant States Attorney a friend of defense counsel? There are some relationships here that are inappropriate.
What Assistant States Attorney Dwyer is reporting is an account from the transcript on the day I was asked, “do you see Mr. Hobbs in the courtroom?” When I was asked by defense counsel “Do you see LaShawn Hobbs in this court?” I answered I do not know LaShawn Hobbs. Defense counsel asked again, “Do you see the man who was driving the car that hit you?” There were about 60 people in the courtroom. I told the court the person I saw driving the car is not the person who was driving the car when the police arrested them. I informed the court that I never saw the faces of the two males because the Riverdale arresting Police Officer instructed me to go back to my car when they were making their arrest. The Assistant States Attorney who was prosecuting the case on that day let the defense attorney grill me into an answer to this question that fit the defense counsel’s motives.
Therefore, Mr. Devine I respectfully request a thorough investigation into this matter. How is the States Attorney’s office assisting the People of Illinois when you have Assistant States’ Attorney working to further their own ambitions and careers by working against the victim? I am a victim in this matter. Where is my justice and equal treatment? I asked Mr. Dwyer how was I supposed to pay for the damages and expenses incurred for this hit-and-run accident. Mr. Dwyer informed me I would have to go after the “driver” in a civil complaint. I informed Mr. Dwyer I do not know who the driver is in this matter. I informed Mr. Dwyer I do not know whom the car belongs too. I told Mr. Dwyer I thought I would learn all of this when I went to court. Mr. Devine what I learned when I went to court is that your office victimizes the victim.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
cc: Mr. David Sabatini, Markham Supervisor Riverdale Police Department
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/ faxed copies sent only
November 17, 2005
Harlem Furniture and Great American Finance Company: Interest Rates and Dispectful Sales Associates
Guess who sits at the head of the table for Harlem Furniture; World Financial Network Bank, which is a subsidiary of Alliance Data Systems Corporation. Alliance Data Systems Corporation had sales of $1,227.5 Million in 2004. I wonder how they factor in the scheme of my writings. Well, they just may answer that question. World Financial Network Bank demands your credit score be 650+ to acquire furniture at Harlem Furniture???????
If your credit score is not 650+, Harlem Furniture uses Great American Finance Company to finance their customers at a rate of 28.23%. Be careful of what you purchase at their stores. I am paying almost 50% of the purchase price as calculated with this interest rate. The amount I financed is $2721.63. I have a two-year agreement. I will pay $870.69 for financing $2721.63. As a consumer, you should go somewhere else to purchase your furniture. Great American Finance Company operates as "loan sharks" do on the street. I wonder why our laws allow a company to use such high interest rates.
As the letter of November 11, 2005 reports, I was disrespected by one of the sales associates at Harlem Furniture. For the Harlem Furniture Sales Associate's unprofessional character and behavior toward me, Harlem furniture has decided to take the "delivery" charge off of one of my purchases. I bought a bedroom set and a dining set. Evidently, Harlem Furniture was going to charge me two (2) delivery charges for one purchase. A person is disrespected in the store by one of their own and they believe taking the "one" of delivery charges off of my purchase satisfies me. This is how Harlem Furniture does business.
Examine the letters I have written about their service, and decide if this is where you want to make a purchase.
Any store you go to that is using Great American Finance Company as their financing agent, is a bad deal. Go somewhere else. Go anywhere. You might as well find a loan shark on the street or a drug dealer to loan you the money.
November 14, 2005
Alliance Data Systems Corporation World Financial Network Bank
J. Michael Parks, Chairman, President & CEO Ivan M. Szeftel, CEO
17655 Waterview Pkwy 800 TechCenter Drive
Dallas, Texas 75252 Gahanna, Ohio 43230
Re: Harlem Furniture: Glenwood Illinois
Gentlemen:
Please read the letters attached. This is what a customer encounters when purchasing items from stores you invest in and possibly own. I have still more research to do on World Financial Network Bank, subsidiary of Alliance Data Systems Corporation.
What I do know is World Financial Network Bank owns and issues Harlem Furniture accounts. My wife and I were told unless our credit scores were 650+ we would be denied an account with Harlem Furniture. Gentlemen, your corporation is part of the problem I discuss in the letters attached.
A customer is forced to deal with an unscrupulous company like Great American Finance Company because of your credit rating system. I know you will say that everyone operates in the manner you display. That may be true, but it takes a pioneer to adopt a system of fairness and opportunity.
Alliance Data Systems Corporation had sales in 2004 of $1,227.5 Million dollars. This is off the backs of honest working people who have to put up with a system such as Harlem Furniture and unprofessional Sales Associates.
There should not have been a commission on the sale/purchase my wife made because of how we were treated. Elva, an employee of Harlem Furniture, told me today that Harlem Furniture puts a delivery charge on every item they sale. For example, my wife and I purchased a bedroom set and a dining room set that will be delivered on the same day under one contract. We have only one contract for the purchases of a bedroom set and a dining set. We were charged two delivery charges. One delivery charge was taken off as an apology for how I was disrespected by a Sales Associate. Would this satisfy you if you were purchasing any item? When was the last time you gentlemen went to a store and the Sales person disrespected you?
Harlem Furniture would not allow my wife and I to purchase the bedroom set we wanted. Great American Finance Company would not give an okay on the price, even though they would be the last people we would want to finance anything. Nevertheless, what choice do we have when we are denied credit with Harlem Furniture, which is controlled by World Financial Network Bank, because are credit score is not 650+. Our credit scores are what they are. My wife’s credit score is what it is.
My wife and I are victims of corporate deceit and unprofessional staff. I will publish this writing, as I have the others in my journal reports, and post it on my website at: http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/. What is your response? What part do you play in the scheme of things presented here? What is your responsibility? All consumers need to know the type of company you invest in and own. A child’s integrity should and must mirror the integrity of the father. You are the parent company. What will you do? What is justice and equality to you, Gentlemen? Where does fairness fall with you? Inquiring minds would like to know.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
November 12, 2005
Harlem Furniture, The Roomplace
Mr. Aaron Carson, Assistant Manager
18325 South Halsted Street
Glenwood, Illinois 60425
Re: Compensation for Insult
Mr. Carson:
As I looked over our purchase order and thinking about the compensation we received from Harlem Furniture for being disrespected in your store, I find your offer humiliating and embarrassing.
We made one purchase from your store, yet your store was about to charge us two (2) delivery charges. As you well know, we purchased a bedroom set and a dining room set. This is one purchase. There is one contract, therefore, it is one sale.
As compensation or good faith for the unprofessional behavior of a Sales Associate of Harlem Furniture, you presented to us an act, which is debasing and demeaning. To state that you were not charging us for a delivery charge on our dining set is an act of pretense and deceit. Do you usually charge your customer’s a delivery charge for each item bought in your stores? If so, the public needs to be aware of your business practices. You presented the offer of taking the “delivery” charge off of our dining set as an apology for the unprofessionalism of an employee of Harlem Furniture.
We asked to be compensated by eliminating the commission on the sale. You stated the unprofessional employee would not receive any commission, but you put yourself on our sales receipt as the recipient of the commission of this sale.
I am publishing my writings on the business practices of Harlem Furniture in my journal reports, and posting them along with the other writing on my website at: http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/, for public viewing hoping to give information so people can make better informed decisions about buying furniture from Harlem Furniture.
My suggestion to my readers is Harlem Furniture’s business practices need to be investigated.
Fred Nance Jr.
November 11, 2005
Harlem Furniture, The Roomplace
Mr. Aaron Carson, Assistant Manager
18325 South Halsted Street
Glenwood, Illinois 60425
Re: Flyer from Sales Associate James Osby
Mr. Carson:
Please review the attached flyer sent to my wife and I from Mr. James Osby on Harlem Furniture stationery, which states, in part, “Hi Darlene & worse half (smile). Thanks again. Your Salesman, James Osby. How should I feel about the language used in this correspondence? Why would he call me her “worse half”? What is my wife supposed to think of this statement? Maybe you can get the answers to these questions from him.
I engaged you and requested a new salesperson, which you stepped up and assisted us with our purchase, because of the unprofessional practices of sales associate James Osby. For example, James stated to my wife and I, while assisting us with our purchase, that another woman customer “liked” him, and therefore he was treating and talking to her in a certain way and manner (I shall not mention the words in this open letter). If he treated this female customer like this, what do you think he may say or do to my wife if she shopped alone, as she did in the beginning of our search for a purchase of furniture at your store?
I believe training is the solution. I am a mental health professional by degree. I do not believe in throwing the baby out with the bath water. People understand things better when it effects their wallets and pockets.
Therefore, it is my suggestion and request that whatever commission Mr. Osby had coming out of this deal should go toward the purchase of lamps for our end tables to our bedroom set purchased. This would be a good gesture toward apology. This deal is not completed or finalized yet with Harlem Furniture.
I would like you to review my website: http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/. I address issues such as reported above. I will not publish and post this letter at this time. The reason I publish and post to my website is to alert the public/consumer/customer to various social practices of government and private corporations and organizations.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
December 20, 2002
Harlem Furniture
Mr. Bruce Berman, President & CEO
1000-46 Rohlwing Rd.
Lombard, Illinois 60148
Re: 1216214PXCZD
Mr. Berman:
My name is Fred Nance Jr. On December 16, 2002 I entered into a verbal and preliminary contract with Harlem Furniture, Orland Park store. The verbal contract was the confirmation of your store manager reporting to me that the furniture I wanted to buy was in stock. The preliminary contract was the Harlem Furniture printed agreement, signed by me stating my agreement on this specific choice of furniture, which was supposed to be used to verify approval on financing.
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, I received a call from my salesperson stating I was approved to purchase the furniture my wife and I chose. I went to the store to finalize the agreement. Upon finalization, I was told that the Love Seat/Chaise was not available. Not only was it not available, but also it would have to be ordered and I would have to wait 6 to 8 weeks for delivery. Your manager confirmed by looking on his computer, in front of me, that the merchandise, as he stated, was available on December 16, 2002.
I talked to Chris, your assistant manager, on December 18, 2002 about this issue. She told me that while I am waiting for this delivery, I would have to pay for the Love Seat/Chaise in my monthly payment, which starts 30 days after I receive delivery of my other merchandise. I think this is ludicrous. Why would I pay for merchandise I do not have? I discussed this issue with a financial expert who wondered why I was dealing with a company operating in this manner. I told him I honor contracts, and that I thought responsible companies honor contracts also. I hope this would be the discipline of your company, to honor contractual agreements whether they are verbal or written. Most consumers rely on salespeople giving honorable statements and companies honoring the statements of their salespersons since the salesperson represents the company. Delivery is set for December 24, 2002 between 8:00 am and 12:00 pm. Chris and I discussed alternatives.
My wife and I thought to buy some tables to go along with the living room furniture. Chris offered a 5% discount on the tables we chose. This was ludicrous. The tables, three in number, cost around $600.00. 5% would not even cover the tax, let alone any decrease in the interest rate and monthly payment. We chose not to buy the tables.
On December 20, 2002 I received a call from Ms. Eman at telephone number 630-972-3656 who stated I would not receive my nightstand until December 30, 2002. Is it assumed I can just take time off of work to accommodate last minute discretions with my contract agreement, whether it is verbal or written? What is wrong with your system where the consumer cannot rely on the statements of your salespeople? How can business thrive and continue in this manner? It may be because the consumer has not addressed the issues appropriately.
I asked Ms. Eman for your corporate phone number and for the President & CEO’s name. I was tired of this mess. She gave me the phone number to your corporate office, but declined to give me the President & CEO’s name. I stated to her that I wanted to complain about my issues and I needed a corporate manager’s name to put on a written statement. She still declined my request to address my correspondence to you by giving me your name.
I called the corporate office, obtained your name, and was told I would receive a call from customer relations. Ms. Joyce called me from corporate relations and reported my nightstand would be delivered on December 24, 2002.
Mr. Berman, my wife and I spent a couple of hours in your store deciding to buy the furniture we chose. We chose other packages, but decided not to get them when we found they were not in stock and could not be delivered before Christmas. The living room furniture is for my wife. The bedroom furniture is for my child. These are their Christmas presents. We chose Harlem Furniture to fulfill our dreams of buying this furniture after going to Homemakers and Wickes, in Orland Park.
Therefore, it is our hope some agreement can be set, by you, to accommodate this inconvenience. On December 20, 2002 I went back to the store in Orland Park to cancel the mattress we ordered, because we can use the mattress we have and it would lower our monthly payment. My wife thought we could buy the end tables as an exchange. I informed her that the end tables would total $600.00, and that the mattress was at a cost of about $300.00. We could not afford an increase in the monthly payment. Her suggestion was to put the tables in lay-away and pay $20.00 a month to make sure they will still be available. This is her mindset after this fiasco.
Please inform me of the alternatives in this situation. I am PhD candidate in Human Services with focus on Social Policy Analysis and Planning. This appears to be a topic for research. In addition, Great American Finance and your contract, which displays a 28.23% Annual Percentage Rate, appears to illustrate an imbalance in understanding to the consumer when actually a consumer is charged 16% interest (as my contract displays). This appears to be an interesting study.
I hope to hear from you soon. Respectfully submitted,
Fred L. Nance Jr., M.A.
February 3, 2003
Harlem Furniture
Mr. Bruce Berman, President & CEO
1000-46 Rohlwing Rd.
Lombard, Illinois 60148
Re: 1216214PXCZD
Mr. Berman:
On December 20, 2002 I wrote a letter to you about the treatment I received during the purchase of furniture from Harlem Furniture. This is a follow-up letter.
On December 24, 2002 I received my furniture, minus the chair complained of in the first letter. According to my home phone bill I called Harlem Furniture’s distribution center at 630-972-3656 on December 24, 2002, and on January 4, 2003 at 630-739-4700. Regarding the phone number 630-739-4700 ext. 301, I spoke to Mr. Mike McGee who is no longer in Harlem Furniture’s employ.
The conversations I had with Mr. McGee was about the delivery of my Chair, which I complained of having to pay for yet I did not have it; and the Love Seat I purchased, supposedly new, which had a lengthy soiled mark of a black dirt-like substance along the left arm (left arm being the arm of the Love Seat when one is sitting in the Love Seat).
I have lobbied many days on the phone with Mr. McGee regarding these issues, and finally with Ms. Dale Kelton. Ms. Kelton took on the this task after the exit of Mr. McGee from Harlem Furniture. Ms. Kelton scheduled a furniture cleaning service, which Harlem Furniture contracts with, to come out and clean the arm of the Love Seat. I was not pleased with having bought new furniture that had to be cleaned. I adamantly expressed my dislike with this procedure to Ms. Kelton.
The representative of the furniture cleaning company came out to the house on February 1, 2003. He told me that he could not get the stain out, and that the Love Seat should be replaced. He also gave his professional opinion about the condition of the furniture, which was, to say the least, “how could someone sell you some furniture with a stain like this and not know it was there.” He told my wife she would be surprised of how many calls he gets to clean “new” furniture from various companies; and that, where the furniture is stored, in these warehouses, are dirty.
On February 3, 2003 I called and left a message with Ms. Kelton’s voice mail stating I wanted my Love Seat replaced with new furniture. Ms. Kelton called me at approximately 5:45 pm stating Harlem Furniture will replace the arm of the Love Seat. I told her I bought “new” furniture and I should receive “new” furniture. In addition, I told her I did not want to have the arm of the Love Seat replaced, but I wanted “new” furniture as I thought I bought. Ms. Kelton stated that the parts manager Ms. Sue Dittmer suggested Harlem Furniture replace the arm and not give me a “new” Love Seat. Ms. Kelton stated that this was a matter of company policy and replacing the arm of the Love Seat was a courtesy.
From the beginning, I informed Mr. Mike McGee I was a PhD candidate in Human Services with a focus on Social Policy Analysis and Planning. With this study, comes research in the field of policy. From informed sources in the sale of furniture, I believe furniture that is to be cleaned by a furniture cleaning service contracted with a furniture company, such as Harlem Furniture, is solely for furniture that has been in the home for some time. This service is not generally structured for cleaning “new” furniture purchased as “new” furniture.
I informed Ms. Kelton that I would exhaust all remedies to achieve the purchase “new” furniture as I agreed too from Harlem Furniture. I informed Ms. Kelton that if I could not get my purchase of “new” furniture, I wanted Harlem Furniture to come and get their furniture and refund my money. Ms. Kelton stated that Harlem Furniture is never going to take the furniture back, and that she was documenting this statement I made, as I told her I was doing.
In addition, I am attaching this letter and the letter from December 20, 2002 to Harlem Furniture’s website, complaints. com, and BigClassAction.com.
I would hope to hear from you, Sir, regarding my plight in this situation. I thought I was getting some relief dealing with Mr. McGee. He was very professional and sounded sincere in addressing my needs. When he was on the issue of my furniture, he suggested Harlem Furniture may want to attempt to clean the furniture, but if the stain was determined uncleanable, Harlem Furniture would replace the soiled furniture with “new” furniture as I purchased. He never said anything about having the arm of my Love Seat taken off and replaced. By the way, how is that done? It sounds ludicrous.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr., M.A.
cc: http://www.complaints.com/
http://www.bigclassaction.com/
February 3, 2003
Harlem Furniture
Mr. Bruce Berman, President & CEO
1000-46 Rohlwing Rd.
Lombard, Illinois 60148
Re: 1216214PXCZD
Mr. Berman:
On December 20, 2002 I wrote a letter to you about the treatment I received during the purchase of furniture from Harlem Furniture. This is a follow-up letter.
On December 24, 2002 I received my furniture, minus the chair complained of in the first letter. According to my home phone bill I called Harlem Furniture’s distribution center at 630-972-3656 on December 24, 2002, and on January 4, 2003 at 630-739-4700. Regarding the phone number 630-739-4700 ext. 301, I spoke to Mr. Mike McGee who is no longer in Harlem Furniture’s employ.
The conversations I had with Mr. McGee was about the delivery of my Chair, which I complained of having to pay for yet I did not have it; and the Love Seat I purchased, supposedly new, which had a lengthy soiled mark of a black dirt-like substance along the left arm (left arm being the arm of the Love Seat when one is sitting in the Love Seat).
I have lobbied many days on the phone with Mr. McGee regarding these issues, and finally with Ms. Dale Kelton. Ms. Kelton took on the this task after the exit of Mr. McGee from Harlem Furniture. Ms. Kelton scheduled a furniture cleaning service, which Harlem Furniture contracts with, to come out and clean the arm of the Love Seat. I was not pleased with having bought new furniture that had to be cleaned. I adamantly expressed my dislike with this procedure to Ms. Kelton.
The representative of the furniture cleaning company came out to the house on February 1, 2003. He told me that he could not get the stain out, and that the Love Seat should be replaced. He also gave his professional opinion about the condition of the furniture, which was, to say the least, “how could someone sell you some furniture with a stain like this and not know it was there.” He told my wife she would be surprised of how many calls he gets to clean “new” furniture from various companies; and that, where the furniture is stored, in these warehouses, are dirty.
On February 3, 2003 I called and left a message with Ms. Kelton’s voice mail stating I wanted my Love Seat replaced with new furniture. Ms. Kelton called me at approximately 5:45 pm stating Harlem Furniture will replace the arm of the Love Seat. I told her I bought “new” furniture and I should receive “new” furniture. In addition, I told her I did not want to have the arm of the Love Seat replaced, but I wanted “new” furniture as I thought I bought. Ms. Kelton stated that the parts manager Ms. Sue Dittmer suggested Harlem Furniture replace the arm and not give me a “new” Love Seat. Ms. Kelton stated that this was a matter of company policy and replacing the arm of the Love Seat was a courtesy.
From the beginning, I informed Mr. Mike McGee I was a PhD candidate in Human Services with a focus on Social Policy Analysis and Planning. With this study, comes research in the field of policy. From informed sources in the sale of furniture, I believe furniture that is to be cleaned by a furniture cleaning service contracted with a furniture company, such as Harlem Furniture, is solely for furniture that has been in the home for some time. This service is not generally structured for cleaning “new” furniture purchased as “new” furniture.
I informed Ms. Kelton that I would exhaust all remedies to achieve the purchase “new” furniture as I agreed too from Harlem Furniture. I informed Ms. Kelton that if I could not get my purchase of “new” furniture, I wanted Harlem Furniture to come and get their furniture and refund my money. Ms. Kelton stated that Harlem Furniture is never going to take the furniture back, and that she was documenting this statement I made, as I told her I was doing.
In addition, I am attaching this letter and the letter from December 20, 2002 to Harlem Furniture’s website, complaints. com, and BigClassAction.com.
I would hope to hear from you, Sir, regarding my plight in this situation. I thought I was getting some relief dealing with Mr. McGee. He was very professional and sounded sincere in addressing my needs. When he was on the issue of my furniture, he suggested Harlem Furniture may want to attempt to clean the furniture, but if the stain was determined uncleanable, Harlem Furniture would replace the soiled furniture with “new” furniture as I purchased. He never said anything about having the arm of my Love Seat taken off and replaced. By the way, how is that done? It sounds ludicrous.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr., M.A.
cc: http://www.complaints.com/
http://www.bigclassaction.com/
February 7, 2003
Mr. Jesse Jackson Sr.
Rainbow/Push Coalition
LaSalle Street Bureau
208 So. LaSalle St., Suite 1277
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Re: Harlem Furniture
Dear Sir:
My name is Fred L. Nance Jr. My wife, Darlene Nance, and I are members of Rainbow/Push Coalition. My uncle, Otha Nance, is a well-respected member and organizer of Rainbow/Push Coalition. Mr. Otha Nance has been with the Rainbow/Push Coalition for many years.
My family is suffering a tremendous injustice with Harlem Furniture. I am attaching three letters I have written to Harlem Furniture regarding our plight. These letters are to inform you of the plight that may be suffered by many people. The injustices suffered are being minimized and exploited.
It is my hope you contact my uncle, as I will, and express my need to spread this information to the public at-large making sure that injustices like ours is never allowed to happen to others. My uncle lives on the Westside of Chicago.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred L. Nance Jr., M.A.
cc: Mr. Bruce Berman, President & CEO
If your credit score is not 650+, Harlem Furniture uses Great American Finance Company to finance their customers at a rate of 28.23%. Be careful of what you purchase at their stores. I am paying almost 50% of the purchase price as calculated with this interest rate. The amount I financed is $2721.63. I have a two-year agreement. I will pay $870.69 for financing $2721.63. As a consumer, you should go somewhere else to purchase your furniture. Great American Finance Company operates as "loan sharks" do on the street. I wonder why our laws allow a company to use such high interest rates.
As the letter of November 11, 2005 reports, I was disrespected by one of the sales associates at Harlem Furniture. For the Harlem Furniture Sales Associate's unprofessional character and behavior toward me, Harlem furniture has decided to take the "delivery" charge off of one of my purchases. I bought a bedroom set and a dining set. Evidently, Harlem Furniture was going to charge me two (2) delivery charges for one purchase. A person is disrespected in the store by one of their own and they believe taking the "one" of delivery charges off of my purchase satisfies me. This is how Harlem Furniture does business.
Examine the letters I have written about their service, and decide if this is where you want to make a purchase.
Any store you go to that is using Great American Finance Company as their financing agent, is a bad deal. Go somewhere else. Go anywhere. You might as well find a loan shark on the street or a drug dealer to loan you the money.
November 14, 2005
Alliance Data Systems Corporation World Financial Network Bank
J. Michael Parks, Chairman, President & CEO Ivan M. Szeftel, CEO
17655 Waterview Pkwy 800 TechCenter Drive
Dallas, Texas 75252 Gahanna, Ohio 43230
Re: Harlem Furniture: Glenwood Illinois
Gentlemen:
Please read the letters attached. This is what a customer encounters when purchasing items from stores you invest in and possibly own. I have still more research to do on World Financial Network Bank, subsidiary of Alliance Data Systems Corporation.
What I do know is World Financial Network Bank owns and issues Harlem Furniture accounts. My wife and I were told unless our credit scores were 650+ we would be denied an account with Harlem Furniture. Gentlemen, your corporation is part of the problem I discuss in the letters attached.
A customer is forced to deal with an unscrupulous company like Great American Finance Company because of your credit rating system. I know you will say that everyone operates in the manner you display. That may be true, but it takes a pioneer to adopt a system of fairness and opportunity.
Alliance Data Systems Corporation had sales in 2004 of $1,227.5 Million dollars. This is off the backs of honest working people who have to put up with a system such as Harlem Furniture and unprofessional Sales Associates.
There should not have been a commission on the sale/purchase my wife made because of how we were treated. Elva, an employee of Harlem Furniture, told me today that Harlem Furniture puts a delivery charge on every item they sale. For example, my wife and I purchased a bedroom set and a dining room set that will be delivered on the same day under one contract. We have only one contract for the purchases of a bedroom set and a dining set. We were charged two delivery charges. One delivery charge was taken off as an apology for how I was disrespected by a Sales Associate. Would this satisfy you if you were purchasing any item? When was the last time you gentlemen went to a store and the Sales person disrespected you?
Harlem Furniture would not allow my wife and I to purchase the bedroom set we wanted. Great American Finance Company would not give an okay on the price, even though they would be the last people we would want to finance anything. Nevertheless, what choice do we have when we are denied credit with Harlem Furniture, which is controlled by World Financial Network Bank, because are credit score is not 650+. Our credit scores are what they are. My wife’s credit score is what it is.
My wife and I are victims of corporate deceit and unprofessional staff. I will publish this writing, as I have the others in my journal reports, and post it on my website at: http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/. What is your response? What part do you play in the scheme of things presented here? What is your responsibility? All consumers need to know the type of company you invest in and own. A child’s integrity should and must mirror the integrity of the father. You are the parent company. What will you do? What is justice and equality to you, Gentlemen? Where does fairness fall with you? Inquiring minds would like to know.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
November 12, 2005
Harlem Furniture, The Roomplace
Mr. Aaron Carson, Assistant Manager
18325 South Halsted Street
Glenwood, Illinois 60425
Re: Compensation for Insult
Mr. Carson:
As I looked over our purchase order and thinking about the compensation we received from Harlem Furniture for being disrespected in your store, I find your offer humiliating and embarrassing.
We made one purchase from your store, yet your store was about to charge us two (2) delivery charges. As you well know, we purchased a bedroom set and a dining room set. This is one purchase. There is one contract, therefore, it is one sale.
As compensation or good faith for the unprofessional behavior of a Sales Associate of Harlem Furniture, you presented to us an act, which is debasing and demeaning. To state that you were not charging us for a delivery charge on our dining set is an act of pretense and deceit. Do you usually charge your customer’s a delivery charge for each item bought in your stores? If so, the public needs to be aware of your business practices. You presented the offer of taking the “delivery” charge off of our dining set as an apology for the unprofessionalism of an employee of Harlem Furniture.
We asked to be compensated by eliminating the commission on the sale. You stated the unprofessional employee would not receive any commission, but you put yourself on our sales receipt as the recipient of the commission of this sale.
I am publishing my writings on the business practices of Harlem Furniture in my journal reports, and posting them along with the other writing on my website at: http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/, for public viewing hoping to give information so people can make better informed decisions about buying furniture from Harlem Furniture.
My suggestion to my readers is Harlem Furniture’s business practices need to be investigated.
Fred Nance Jr.
November 11, 2005
Harlem Furniture, The Roomplace
Mr. Aaron Carson, Assistant Manager
18325 South Halsted Street
Glenwood, Illinois 60425
Re: Flyer from Sales Associate James Osby
Mr. Carson:
Please review the attached flyer sent to my wife and I from Mr. James Osby on Harlem Furniture stationery, which states, in part, “Hi Darlene & worse half (smile). Thanks again. Your Salesman, James Osby. How should I feel about the language used in this correspondence? Why would he call me her “worse half”? What is my wife supposed to think of this statement? Maybe you can get the answers to these questions from him.
I engaged you and requested a new salesperson, which you stepped up and assisted us with our purchase, because of the unprofessional practices of sales associate James Osby. For example, James stated to my wife and I, while assisting us with our purchase, that another woman customer “liked” him, and therefore he was treating and talking to her in a certain way and manner (I shall not mention the words in this open letter). If he treated this female customer like this, what do you think he may say or do to my wife if she shopped alone, as she did in the beginning of our search for a purchase of furniture at your store?
I believe training is the solution. I am a mental health professional by degree. I do not believe in throwing the baby out with the bath water. People understand things better when it effects their wallets and pockets.
Therefore, it is my suggestion and request that whatever commission Mr. Osby had coming out of this deal should go toward the purchase of lamps for our end tables to our bedroom set purchased. This would be a good gesture toward apology. This deal is not completed or finalized yet with Harlem Furniture.
I would like you to review my website: http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/. I address issues such as reported above. I will not publish and post this letter at this time. The reason I publish and post to my website is to alert the public/consumer/customer to various social practices of government and private corporations and organizations.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred L Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
December 20, 2002
Harlem Furniture
Mr. Bruce Berman, President & CEO
1000-46 Rohlwing Rd.
Lombard, Illinois 60148
Re: 1216214PXCZD
Mr. Berman:
My name is Fred Nance Jr. On December 16, 2002 I entered into a verbal and preliminary contract with Harlem Furniture, Orland Park store. The verbal contract was the confirmation of your store manager reporting to me that the furniture I wanted to buy was in stock. The preliminary contract was the Harlem Furniture printed agreement, signed by me stating my agreement on this specific choice of furniture, which was supposed to be used to verify approval on financing.
On Wednesday, December 18, 2002, I received a call from my salesperson stating I was approved to purchase the furniture my wife and I chose. I went to the store to finalize the agreement. Upon finalization, I was told that the Love Seat/Chaise was not available. Not only was it not available, but also it would have to be ordered and I would have to wait 6 to 8 weeks for delivery. Your manager confirmed by looking on his computer, in front of me, that the merchandise, as he stated, was available on December 16, 2002.
I talked to Chris, your assistant manager, on December 18, 2002 about this issue. She told me that while I am waiting for this delivery, I would have to pay for the Love Seat/Chaise in my monthly payment, which starts 30 days after I receive delivery of my other merchandise. I think this is ludicrous. Why would I pay for merchandise I do not have? I discussed this issue with a financial expert who wondered why I was dealing with a company operating in this manner. I told him I honor contracts, and that I thought responsible companies honor contracts also. I hope this would be the discipline of your company, to honor contractual agreements whether they are verbal or written. Most consumers rely on salespeople giving honorable statements and companies honoring the statements of their salespersons since the salesperson represents the company. Delivery is set for December 24, 2002 between 8:00 am and 12:00 pm. Chris and I discussed alternatives.
My wife and I thought to buy some tables to go along with the living room furniture. Chris offered a 5% discount on the tables we chose. This was ludicrous. The tables, three in number, cost around $600.00. 5% would not even cover the tax, let alone any decrease in the interest rate and monthly payment. We chose not to buy the tables.
On December 20, 2002 I received a call from Ms. Eman at telephone number 630-972-3656 who stated I would not receive my nightstand until December 30, 2002. Is it assumed I can just take time off of work to accommodate last minute discretions with my contract agreement, whether it is verbal or written? What is wrong with your system where the consumer cannot rely on the statements of your salespeople? How can business thrive and continue in this manner? It may be because the consumer has not addressed the issues appropriately.
I asked Ms. Eman for your corporate phone number and for the President & CEO’s name. I was tired of this mess. She gave me the phone number to your corporate office, but declined to give me the President & CEO’s name. I stated to her that I wanted to complain about my issues and I needed a corporate manager’s name to put on a written statement. She still declined my request to address my correspondence to you by giving me your name.
I called the corporate office, obtained your name, and was told I would receive a call from customer relations. Ms. Joyce called me from corporate relations and reported my nightstand would be delivered on December 24, 2002.
Mr. Berman, my wife and I spent a couple of hours in your store deciding to buy the furniture we chose. We chose other packages, but decided not to get them when we found they were not in stock and could not be delivered before Christmas. The living room furniture is for my wife. The bedroom furniture is for my child. These are their Christmas presents. We chose Harlem Furniture to fulfill our dreams of buying this furniture after going to Homemakers and Wickes, in Orland Park.
Therefore, it is our hope some agreement can be set, by you, to accommodate this inconvenience. On December 20, 2002 I went back to the store in Orland Park to cancel the mattress we ordered, because we can use the mattress we have and it would lower our monthly payment. My wife thought we could buy the end tables as an exchange. I informed her that the end tables would total $600.00, and that the mattress was at a cost of about $300.00. We could not afford an increase in the monthly payment. Her suggestion was to put the tables in lay-away and pay $20.00 a month to make sure they will still be available. This is her mindset after this fiasco.
Please inform me of the alternatives in this situation. I am PhD candidate in Human Services with focus on Social Policy Analysis and Planning. This appears to be a topic for research. In addition, Great American Finance and your contract, which displays a 28.23% Annual Percentage Rate, appears to illustrate an imbalance in understanding to the consumer when actually a consumer is charged 16% interest (as my contract displays). This appears to be an interesting study.
I hope to hear from you soon. Respectfully submitted,
Fred L. Nance Jr., M.A.
February 3, 2003
Harlem Furniture
Mr. Bruce Berman, President & CEO
1000-46 Rohlwing Rd.
Lombard, Illinois 60148
Re: 1216214PXCZD
Mr. Berman:
On December 20, 2002 I wrote a letter to you about the treatment I received during the purchase of furniture from Harlem Furniture. This is a follow-up letter.
On December 24, 2002 I received my furniture, minus the chair complained of in the first letter. According to my home phone bill I called Harlem Furniture’s distribution center at 630-972-3656 on December 24, 2002, and on January 4, 2003 at 630-739-4700. Regarding the phone number 630-739-4700 ext. 301, I spoke to Mr. Mike McGee who is no longer in Harlem Furniture’s employ.
The conversations I had with Mr. McGee was about the delivery of my Chair, which I complained of having to pay for yet I did not have it; and the Love Seat I purchased, supposedly new, which had a lengthy soiled mark of a black dirt-like substance along the left arm (left arm being the arm of the Love Seat when one is sitting in the Love Seat).
I have lobbied many days on the phone with Mr. McGee regarding these issues, and finally with Ms. Dale Kelton. Ms. Kelton took on the this task after the exit of Mr. McGee from Harlem Furniture. Ms. Kelton scheduled a furniture cleaning service, which Harlem Furniture contracts with, to come out and clean the arm of the Love Seat. I was not pleased with having bought new furniture that had to be cleaned. I adamantly expressed my dislike with this procedure to Ms. Kelton.
The representative of the furniture cleaning company came out to the house on February 1, 2003. He told me that he could not get the stain out, and that the Love Seat should be replaced. He also gave his professional opinion about the condition of the furniture, which was, to say the least, “how could someone sell you some furniture with a stain like this and not know it was there.” He told my wife she would be surprised of how many calls he gets to clean “new” furniture from various companies; and that, where the furniture is stored, in these warehouses, are dirty.
On February 3, 2003 I called and left a message with Ms. Kelton’s voice mail stating I wanted my Love Seat replaced with new furniture. Ms. Kelton called me at approximately 5:45 pm stating Harlem Furniture will replace the arm of the Love Seat. I told her I bought “new” furniture and I should receive “new” furniture. In addition, I told her I did not want to have the arm of the Love Seat replaced, but I wanted “new” furniture as I thought I bought. Ms. Kelton stated that the parts manager Ms. Sue Dittmer suggested Harlem Furniture replace the arm and not give me a “new” Love Seat. Ms. Kelton stated that this was a matter of company policy and replacing the arm of the Love Seat was a courtesy.
From the beginning, I informed Mr. Mike McGee I was a PhD candidate in Human Services with a focus on Social Policy Analysis and Planning. With this study, comes research in the field of policy. From informed sources in the sale of furniture, I believe furniture that is to be cleaned by a furniture cleaning service contracted with a furniture company, such as Harlem Furniture, is solely for furniture that has been in the home for some time. This service is not generally structured for cleaning “new” furniture purchased as “new” furniture.
I informed Ms. Kelton that I would exhaust all remedies to achieve the purchase “new” furniture as I agreed too from Harlem Furniture. I informed Ms. Kelton that if I could not get my purchase of “new” furniture, I wanted Harlem Furniture to come and get their furniture and refund my money. Ms. Kelton stated that Harlem Furniture is never going to take the furniture back, and that she was documenting this statement I made, as I told her I was doing.
In addition, I am attaching this letter and the letter from December 20, 2002 to Harlem Furniture’s website, complaints. com, and BigClassAction.com.
I would hope to hear from you, Sir, regarding my plight in this situation. I thought I was getting some relief dealing with Mr. McGee. He was very professional and sounded sincere in addressing my needs. When he was on the issue of my furniture, he suggested Harlem Furniture may want to attempt to clean the furniture, but if the stain was determined uncleanable, Harlem Furniture would replace the soiled furniture with “new” furniture as I purchased. He never said anything about having the arm of my Love Seat taken off and replaced. By the way, how is that done? It sounds ludicrous.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr., M.A.
cc: http://www.complaints.com/
http://www.bigclassaction.com/
February 3, 2003
Harlem Furniture
Mr. Bruce Berman, President & CEO
1000-46 Rohlwing Rd.
Lombard, Illinois 60148
Re: 1216214PXCZD
Mr. Berman:
On December 20, 2002 I wrote a letter to you about the treatment I received during the purchase of furniture from Harlem Furniture. This is a follow-up letter.
On December 24, 2002 I received my furniture, minus the chair complained of in the first letter. According to my home phone bill I called Harlem Furniture’s distribution center at 630-972-3656 on December 24, 2002, and on January 4, 2003 at 630-739-4700. Regarding the phone number 630-739-4700 ext. 301, I spoke to Mr. Mike McGee who is no longer in Harlem Furniture’s employ.
The conversations I had with Mr. McGee was about the delivery of my Chair, which I complained of having to pay for yet I did not have it; and the Love Seat I purchased, supposedly new, which had a lengthy soiled mark of a black dirt-like substance along the left arm (left arm being the arm of the Love Seat when one is sitting in the Love Seat).
I have lobbied many days on the phone with Mr. McGee regarding these issues, and finally with Ms. Dale Kelton. Ms. Kelton took on the this task after the exit of Mr. McGee from Harlem Furniture. Ms. Kelton scheduled a furniture cleaning service, which Harlem Furniture contracts with, to come out and clean the arm of the Love Seat. I was not pleased with having bought new furniture that had to be cleaned. I adamantly expressed my dislike with this procedure to Ms. Kelton.
The representative of the furniture cleaning company came out to the house on February 1, 2003. He told me that he could not get the stain out, and that the Love Seat should be replaced. He also gave his professional opinion about the condition of the furniture, which was, to say the least, “how could someone sell you some furniture with a stain like this and not know it was there.” He told my wife she would be surprised of how many calls he gets to clean “new” furniture from various companies; and that, where the furniture is stored, in these warehouses, are dirty.
On February 3, 2003 I called and left a message with Ms. Kelton’s voice mail stating I wanted my Love Seat replaced with new furniture. Ms. Kelton called me at approximately 5:45 pm stating Harlem Furniture will replace the arm of the Love Seat. I told her I bought “new” furniture and I should receive “new” furniture. In addition, I told her I did not want to have the arm of the Love Seat replaced, but I wanted “new” furniture as I thought I bought. Ms. Kelton stated that the parts manager Ms. Sue Dittmer suggested Harlem Furniture replace the arm and not give me a “new” Love Seat. Ms. Kelton stated that this was a matter of company policy and replacing the arm of the Love Seat was a courtesy.
From the beginning, I informed Mr. Mike McGee I was a PhD candidate in Human Services with a focus on Social Policy Analysis and Planning. With this study, comes research in the field of policy. From informed sources in the sale of furniture, I believe furniture that is to be cleaned by a furniture cleaning service contracted with a furniture company, such as Harlem Furniture, is solely for furniture that has been in the home for some time. This service is not generally structured for cleaning “new” furniture purchased as “new” furniture.
I informed Ms. Kelton that I would exhaust all remedies to achieve the purchase “new” furniture as I agreed too from Harlem Furniture. I informed Ms. Kelton that if I could not get my purchase of “new” furniture, I wanted Harlem Furniture to come and get their furniture and refund my money. Ms. Kelton stated that Harlem Furniture is never going to take the furniture back, and that she was documenting this statement I made, as I told her I was doing.
In addition, I am attaching this letter and the letter from December 20, 2002 to Harlem Furniture’s website, complaints. com, and BigClassAction.com.
I would hope to hear from you, Sir, regarding my plight in this situation. I thought I was getting some relief dealing with Mr. McGee. He was very professional and sounded sincere in addressing my needs. When he was on the issue of my furniture, he suggested Harlem Furniture may want to attempt to clean the furniture, but if the stain was determined uncleanable, Harlem Furniture would replace the soiled furniture with “new” furniture as I purchased. He never said anything about having the arm of my Love Seat taken off and replaced. By the way, how is that done? It sounds ludicrous.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr., M.A.
cc: http://www.complaints.com/
http://www.bigclassaction.com/
February 7, 2003
Mr. Jesse Jackson Sr.
Rainbow/Push Coalition
LaSalle Street Bureau
208 So. LaSalle St., Suite 1277
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Re: Harlem Furniture
Dear Sir:
My name is Fred L. Nance Jr. My wife, Darlene Nance, and I are members of Rainbow/Push Coalition. My uncle, Otha Nance, is a well-respected member and organizer of Rainbow/Push Coalition. Mr. Otha Nance has been with the Rainbow/Push Coalition for many years.
My family is suffering a tremendous injustice with Harlem Furniture. I am attaching three letters I have written to Harlem Furniture regarding our plight. These letters are to inform you of the plight that may be suffered by many people. The injustices suffered are being minimized and exploited.
It is my hope you contact my uncle, as I will, and express my need to spread this information to the public at-large making sure that injustices like ours is never allowed to happen to others. My uncle lives on the Westside of Chicago.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred L. Nance Jr., M.A.
cc: Mr. Bruce Berman, President & CEO
November 02, 2005
Chicago's Daley Center Judicial Processes and Prejudices: President Bush's selection processes is the solution for the Daley Center
This writing is not a political stance. A voter should not vote from a political stance, but from a moral, ethical, cultural stance. I am neither Democrate or Republican. I am not liberal or conservative. You must know the agenda of the person being elected. This writing is about agendas.
Voters beware. This is Barack Obama and Chief Judge Timothy Evans "judicial mainstream thinking at work." Vote these Judges out of office.
We, as voters, must elect Judges who do not legislate from the bench. Legislators, who we have voted into office, should legislate. Judges should interpret. The role of a Judge is to interpret the law, as written. If a Judge does not like what has been legislated, they should vote for the person who legislates as they would like to interpret.
President Bush's selection processes and his thoughts that all decisions must flow directly from our Constitution, without personal biases or prejudices, is the only way our system can be free from tyrants and despots. These individuals create their own Constitution.
You can make a difference in who sits in determining your issues in courtroom litigation at the Daley Center. Tell your friends about the issues I raise in this writing. There are many other voters who may not use the Internet to view writings. Reproduce this writing as you see fit and please to distribute.
The Probate Division at the Daley Center under the supervision of the Honorable Timothy Evans is outrageous and egregious toward any pro se petitioner or respondent. The practices complained of here are common among most of the Judges, who are white, in the Probate Division.
The Judges and Attorneys complained of in my writings are "white". Most of the Judges in the Probate Division are "white". Most of the Guardian ad litem's (attorneys for the children or Estates) are "white". Most of the attorneys working for Chicago Volunteer Legal Services Foundation are "white". Many of the people using this system are "black". Many of the "blacks" using this Cook County Court Probate Division system are abused, misused, and oppressed by "whites".
You can believe my issues are about racial prejudice. I am being prejudiced and retaliated against because of my race and my status, that being, Pro se (advocating for myself). This is not "rocket science." Anyone who has an understanding of research methods can do their own legal work. Most of the Judges in the Probate Division are "white".
Cook County has a Chief Judge who is "black" and appears to have no power. Chief Judge Timothy Evans seems to have "no" power because the "whites" are undermining his administration.
The Cook County Sheriff's Department are also involved in this judicial oppression and prejudice. I have filed a written formal complaint on Sheriff's deputies who have abused, misused, and oppressed me in this judicial process, which Senator Barack Obama considers in "judicial mainstream thinking." I have not received a response the Sheriff's Office, where I filed a written formal complaint, against "white" Sheriff's deputies. The Cook County Sheriff's Office has ignored my complaint. No one is holding them accountable to their constitutents.
In this most recent writing and posting, Judge Riley (white) did not even read my motion for sanctions, which was filed with the clerk of the court on June 29, 2005. If he had read it, he would have known the answers given to him by Ms. Ceko and Ms. Benson did not even address the allegations of the motion for sanctions. Ms. Theresa Ceko and Ms. Margaret Benson (white) chose not to respond in writing to my motion, which made it difficult to defend because there is nothing in writing to hold a person too. There is a transcript, and transcript will show that neither Ms. Ceko or Ms. Benson addressed the issues/allegations of my motion for sanctions. Judge Riley decided in open court long ago that Ms. Ceko and Ms. Benson did not have to respond in writing. In doing this, Judge Riley made easier for his "white colleagues" to avoid the issues I raised.
On November 2, 2005, I went to Judge Budzinski (white), Judge Riley's supervisor, to complain about Judge Riley's antics in court procedure. While standing in line waiting to talk to his clerk, Ms. Ceko came in the courtroom with Ms. Benson. Ms. Ceko came to where I was standing and stood in front of me. When the clerk became available to approach and as I approached the clerk, Ms. Ceko "physically" pushed me out of the way and began talking to the clerk (black) calling the clerk by her name. Because Ms. Ceko knew the clerk by name, this was supposed to give Ms. Ceko priority over and to put me down as she was "physically" pushing me aside. I talked over Ms. Ceko to the clerk, regained my position in the line, and informed the clerk I wanted to speak to Judge Budzinski.
The clerk whispered something in Judge Budzinski's ear and Ms. Ceko and I approached the bench. As I began to talk to the Judge about why I was there, Ms. Ceko started overtalking me informing the Judge that what I was speaking about did not have any merit. I continued to talk over Ms. Ceko to Judge Budzinski, when Judge Budzinski angrily stated to me, "you are always starting trouble." This is what the "white" man said about Martin Luther King Jr. I looked at Judge Budzinski and stated, "what did you say to me." Judge Budzinski looked around the courtroom and immediately changed his posture and verbal position. Judge Budzinski looked at me and stated, "what kind of trouble is going on now."
I informed Judge Budzinski that I was scheduled to attend court at 10:00 am and Judge Riley is holding a trial of some sort and I want a continuance because I have to go to work. I informed him another Judge was taking on Judge Riley's court call because of this trial, and she refused to give me a continuance because Ms. Ceko did not want me to have a continuance. Ms. Ceko started telling Judge Budzinski that Judge Riley told us he would be done around 10:30 am. Judge Budzinski listened to Ms. Ceko and decided I had to wait on Judge Riley. I informed Judge Budzinski if Judge Riley was not finished with his trial at 10:30 am, I was going work if he was not going to hear me reasons for a continuance. When I walked out of Judge Budzinski's courtroom, Judge Riley's courtroom was clearing out. The court proceeding with Judge Riley is below.
November 2, 2005
State of Illinois, Circuit Court of Cook County, Daley Center
Honorable Timothy C. Evans, Chief Judge
2600 Richard J. Daley Center
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Re: In re: Romeo Ashford #00 P 1267
Chief Judge Evans:
From past statements from your office, I, Fred Nance Jr., am aware you report you cannot get involved in present litigating matters. I am pursuing this matter further in the Illinois Appellate Court, and if possible, in the Supreme Court. This correspondence is simply written so I can publish and post it on my website for public viewing. Even though you have expressed there is nothing you can do about this matter, I am sure you can take some preventive measures so it cannot happen to others under your watch. The actions of your staff in the Probate Department/Division are egregious and outrageous.
Today, November 2, 2005, Judge James Riley denied my motion for sanctions without examining my motion. Judge Riley asked me for an argument to my motion, and I stated, “I am standing on my motion as written.” My motion for sanctions, filed June 29, 2005, was against Attorney Theresa Ceko and Michael Bergmann. Attorney Bergmann was not in the courtroom, and has not attended court at any time regarding this issue of sanctions.
When I informed Judge Riley of Mr. Bergmann’s absence, and objected to Attorney Margaret Benson’s “verbal” statements of fact as to the validity of my motion for sanctions, Judge Riley stated to me “this attorney is the Executive Director of Chicago Volunteer Legal Services Foundation.” I informed Judge Riley I know who she is, but she knows nothing of the allegations in my motion for sanctions. I informed Judge Riley that Margaret Benson was not present in the courtroom for the allegations I present for sanctions against Mr. Bergmann, and therefore, could not comment on the validity of my allegations for sanctions. Judge Riley ignored my statement, and denied my motion for sanctions against Mr. Bergmann and Ms. Ceko. He also denied entering my exhibits to support my motion.
Judge Riley’s character and behavior in the courtroom is egregious and outrageous. This character and behavior could not exist without Supervising Judge Budzinski and you agreeing to it. Both Judge Budzinski and you have working knowledge of this character and behavior because I have written both of you about it, and therefore, stand equally guilty of perpetrating the wrongs. Judge Budzinski and your non-actions display a system that is corrupt and deceitful to the public and the basic principles of law.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr.
cc: Judge Henry Budzinski, Judge James Riley (faxed to all parties)
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/
The supervisors mentioned here are not going to do anything about this judicial behavior. If you want to continue being treated indifferently with prejudice and malice, keep voting them in office or to the bench. This statement is not meant to address race, it is meant to address the socially disenfranchised and disadvantaged. This not only happens to black people, it happens to all people. Send them to private practice.
The judges and attorneys I write about usually act in a nefarious and retaliatory fashion anyway, despite any instructions from their supervisors. Ms. Benson is a supervisor. These people just appear to have unbridled power. These Judges should not get appointments to the Appellate or Supreme Court of Illinois. The Attorneys should never be voted to the bench. Their appointments or election would be prejudicial and would be deliberately indifferent to the socially disenfranchised and disadvantaged.
October 14, 2005
State of Illinois
Circuit Court of Cook County, Daley Center
Honorable Timothy C. Evans, Chief Judge
2600 Richard J. Daley Center
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Re: In re: Romeo Ashford #00 P 1267
Chief Judge Evans:
On September 30, 2005, I, Fred Nance Jr., filed a Motion Requesting a Hearing for Sanctions against Loyola University Community Law Center, Attorney Theresa Ceko and Chicago Volunteer Legal Services Foundation, Attorney Michael Bergmann in this matter set for October 14, 2005. On October 14, 2005, I appeared before Judge Mary Ellen Coghlan (Coghlan) in courtroom 1811 at the Daley Center. This matter is before Judge James G. Riley (Riley) in courtroom 1809 at the Daley Center. Riley was not available for the hearing.
When the case was called, I approached the bench. I introduced myself as Fred L Nance Jr. the petitioner. Ms. Margaret Benson (Benson) introduced herself as the “former” legal counsel for respondent Julia Johnson. I began to speak about “my motion”, which was before the court.
Coghlan interrupted me and asked Benson to state why we were there. I objected informing Coghlan this was my motion I can articulate the reason why I am here. Coghlan told me to be quiet stating Benson is talking I will let you speak after she is done. Benson started talking about something completely irrelevant to “my motion.” I objected and began to speak. Coghlan told me to be quiet Benson is speaking now. Benson said something irrelevant to “my motion”, and I objected again and began to speak. Coghlan told me this was the final time she was going to tell me to be quiet. I started to walk out of the courtroom since Coghlan was treating me as if I was not in the room.
Benson informed Coghlan Riley entered an order dismissing this action. This was my first objection. Benson informed Coghlan Riley’s order stated 1) the Estate is closed and 2) that all pending orders are moot. This is correct but this was my second objection. I made these two objections because 1) the order entered by Riley does not negate “my motion” for sanctions, and 2) mooting the past orders in this matter does not negate “my motion.” There was no court order regarding “my motion.” After Benson was finished speaking, I asked Coghlan could I speak now. Coghlan told me no stating I have heard enough.
Riley’s court order reads as follows: 1) That the guardianship of Julia Johnson over Romeo Ashford is discharged, instanter the Estate be closed, 2) That Romeo Ashford is returned to his mother’s custody, instanter, and 3) That all pending orders are moot.
“My motion” for Sanctions was filed on June 29, 2005 with the Clerk of this Court. Riley chose not to hear my motion in a timely manner or any other manner. I brought this issue to his attention on September 29, 2005. Riley chose to ignore the Motion for Sanctions entered on June 29, 2005. Riley was careful to keep this out of his order dated September 29, 2005. Benson’s argument this morning had no validity. I reported case law to support “my motion” for Sanctions whether Riley has dismissed other issues or not. The motion for sanctions stands alone at this juncture.
Sir, Judge Mary Ellen Coghlan displayed extreme prejudice to me with malice and her nefarious acts of indifference. Coghlan refused to let me speak in open court on “my motion.” Coghlan allowed Benson to explain “my motion” to the court. Coghlan told me to be quiet because she was going to let me speak after Benson. Coghlan decided I was not “worthy” to speak in court, and so she denied me access to the court. I witnessed Coghlan treating the “white” individuals with dignity and respect. I am black. She treated me different than the “white” individuals. Coghlan took my dignity and respect in the court. Coghlan’s acts were oppressive and meant to separate the socially disadvantaged and disenfranchised from seeking any relief in the judicial processes as similarly situated individuals.
The voters need to be aware of how the judicial process really works at Chicago’s Daley Center under this regime. This judicial process in no way mirrors or operates within mainstream judicial thought or practice. The voters need to vote the judges mentioned in my complaints out. As Martin Luther King and Jesse Jackson stated in the past, if you do not vote people like this out of office, you deserve whatever treatment you receive from the acts they perform.
I will post this letter on my website: http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/, as I have posted other correspondence and legal documents on my site about this matter before the court. The 1st Amendment and the Freedom of Information Act protect these documents.
Those who are receiving this information from outside the State of Illinois should contact whomever you know in the Chicago area. Benson’s bio as posted on the website of Chicago Volunteer Legal Services Foundation, www.cvls.org/, suggest she acts with fairness and justice for those disenfranchised and disadvantaged. I beg to differ. Read her bio for yourself. Then read my other letters and motions on this matter posted on my site. If you cannot find Benson’s bio, I have it in a word document. If it is not posted request it from me through email. Any emails I receive on this matter will be kept confidential. Many individuals email me about the issues I post, so others will not see their posting.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
cc: Judge Henry Budzinski (supervising Judge), Judge Mary Ellen Coghlan, and Ms. Margaret Benson (sent by fax); Letter to Judge Evans sent by fax.
Voters beware. This is Barack Obama and Chief Judge Timothy Evans "judicial mainstream thinking at work." Vote these Judges out of office.
We, as voters, must elect Judges who do not legislate from the bench. Legislators, who we have voted into office, should legislate. Judges should interpret. The role of a Judge is to interpret the law, as written. If a Judge does not like what has been legislated, they should vote for the person who legislates as they would like to interpret.
President Bush's selection processes and his thoughts that all decisions must flow directly from our Constitution, without personal biases or prejudices, is the only way our system can be free from tyrants and despots. These individuals create their own Constitution.
You can make a difference in who sits in determining your issues in courtroom litigation at the Daley Center. Tell your friends about the issues I raise in this writing. There are many other voters who may not use the Internet to view writings. Reproduce this writing as you see fit and please to distribute.
The Probate Division at the Daley Center under the supervision of the Honorable Timothy Evans is outrageous and egregious toward any pro se petitioner or respondent. The practices complained of here are common among most of the Judges, who are white, in the Probate Division.
The Judges and Attorneys complained of in my writings are "white". Most of the Judges in the Probate Division are "white". Most of the Guardian ad litem's (attorneys for the children or Estates) are "white". Most of the attorneys working for Chicago Volunteer Legal Services Foundation are "white". Many of the people using this system are "black". Many of the "blacks" using this Cook County Court Probate Division system are abused, misused, and oppressed by "whites".
You can believe my issues are about racial prejudice. I am being prejudiced and retaliated against because of my race and my status, that being, Pro se (advocating for myself). This is not "rocket science." Anyone who has an understanding of research methods can do their own legal work. Most of the Judges in the Probate Division are "white".
Cook County has a Chief Judge who is "black" and appears to have no power. Chief Judge Timothy Evans seems to have "no" power because the "whites" are undermining his administration.
The Cook County Sheriff's Department are also involved in this judicial oppression and prejudice. I have filed a written formal complaint on Sheriff's deputies who have abused, misused, and oppressed me in this judicial process, which Senator Barack Obama considers in "judicial mainstream thinking." I have not received a response the Sheriff's Office, where I filed a written formal complaint, against "white" Sheriff's deputies. The Cook County Sheriff's Office has ignored my complaint. No one is holding them accountable to their constitutents.
In this most recent writing and posting, Judge Riley (white) did not even read my motion for sanctions, which was filed with the clerk of the court on June 29, 2005. If he had read it, he would have known the answers given to him by Ms. Ceko and Ms. Benson did not even address the allegations of the motion for sanctions. Ms. Theresa Ceko and Ms. Margaret Benson (white) chose not to respond in writing to my motion, which made it difficult to defend because there is nothing in writing to hold a person too. There is a transcript, and transcript will show that neither Ms. Ceko or Ms. Benson addressed the issues/allegations of my motion for sanctions. Judge Riley decided in open court long ago that Ms. Ceko and Ms. Benson did not have to respond in writing. In doing this, Judge Riley made easier for his "white colleagues" to avoid the issues I raised.
On November 2, 2005, I went to Judge Budzinski (white), Judge Riley's supervisor, to complain about Judge Riley's antics in court procedure. While standing in line waiting to talk to his clerk, Ms. Ceko came in the courtroom with Ms. Benson. Ms. Ceko came to where I was standing and stood in front of me. When the clerk became available to approach and as I approached the clerk, Ms. Ceko "physically" pushed me out of the way and began talking to the clerk (black) calling the clerk by her name. Because Ms. Ceko knew the clerk by name, this was supposed to give Ms. Ceko priority over and to put me down as she was "physically" pushing me aside. I talked over Ms. Ceko to the clerk, regained my position in the line, and informed the clerk I wanted to speak to Judge Budzinski.
The clerk whispered something in Judge Budzinski's ear and Ms. Ceko and I approached the bench. As I began to talk to the Judge about why I was there, Ms. Ceko started overtalking me informing the Judge that what I was speaking about did not have any merit. I continued to talk over Ms. Ceko to Judge Budzinski, when Judge Budzinski angrily stated to me, "you are always starting trouble." This is what the "white" man said about Martin Luther King Jr. I looked at Judge Budzinski and stated, "what did you say to me." Judge Budzinski looked around the courtroom and immediately changed his posture and verbal position. Judge Budzinski looked at me and stated, "what kind of trouble is going on now."
I informed Judge Budzinski that I was scheduled to attend court at 10:00 am and Judge Riley is holding a trial of some sort and I want a continuance because I have to go to work. I informed him another Judge was taking on Judge Riley's court call because of this trial, and she refused to give me a continuance because Ms. Ceko did not want me to have a continuance. Ms. Ceko started telling Judge Budzinski that Judge Riley told us he would be done around 10:30 am. Judge Budzinski listened to Ms. Ceko and decided I had to wait on Judge Riley. I informed Judge Budzinski if Judge Riley was not finished with his trial at 10:30 am, I was going work if he was not going to hear me reasons for a continuance. When I walked out of Judge Budzinski's courtroom, Judge Riley's courtroom was clearing out. The court proceeding with Judge Riley is below.
November 2, 2005
State of Illinois, Circuit Court of Cook County, Daley Center
Honorable Timothy C. Evans, Chief Judge
2600 Richard J. Daley Center
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Re: In re: Romeo Ashford #00 P 1267
Chief Judge Evans:
From past statements from your office, I, Fred Nance Jr., am aware you report you cannot get involved in present litigating matters. I am pursuing this matter further in the Illinois Appellate Court, and if possible, in the Supreme Court. This correspondence is simply written so I can publish and post it on my website for public viewing. Even though you have expressed there is nothing you can do about this matter, I am sure you can take some preventive measures so it cannot happen to others under your watch. The actions of your staff in the Probate Department/Division are egregious and outrageous.
Today, November 2, 2005, Judge James Riley denied my motion for sanctions without examining my motion. Judge Riley asked me for an argument to my motion, and I stated, “I am standing on my motion as written.” My motion for sanctions, filed June 29, 2005, was against Attorney Theresa Ceko and Michael Bergmann. Attorney Bergmann was not in the courtroom, and has not attended court at any time regarding this issue of sanctions.
When I informed Judge Riley of Mr. Bergmann’s absence, and objected to Attorney Margaret Benson’s “verbal” statements of fact as to the validity of my motion for sanctions, Judge Riley stated to me “this attorney is the Executive Director of Chicago Volunteer Legal Services Foundation.” I informed Judge Riley I know who she is, but she knows nothing of the allegations in my motion for sanctions. I informed Judge Riley that Margaret Benson was not present in the courtroom for the allegations I present for sanctions against Mr. Bergmann, and therefore, could not comment on the validity of my allegations for sanctions. Judge Riley ignored my statement, and denied my motion for sanctions against Mr. Bergmann and Ms. Ceko. He also denied entering my exhibits to support my motion.
Judge Riley’s character and behavior in the courtroom is egregious and outrageous. This character and behavior could not exist without Supervising Judge Budzinski and you agreeing to it. Both Judge Budzinski and you have working knowledge of this character and behavior because I have written both of you about it, and therefore, stand equally guilty of perpetrating the wrongs. Judge Budzinski and your non-actions display a system that is corrupt and deceitful to the public and the basic principles of law.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr.
cc: Judge Henry Budzinski, Judge James Riley (faxed to all parties)
http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/
The supervisors mentioned here are not going to do anything about this judicial behavior. If you want to continue being treated indifferently with prejudice and malice, keep voting them in office or to the bench. This statement is not meant to address race, it is meant to address the socially disenfranchised and disadvantaged. This not only happens to black people, it happens to all people. Send them to private practice.
The judges and attorneys I write about usually act in a nefarious and retaliatory fashion anyway, despite any instructions from their supervisors. Ms. Benson is a supervisor. These people just appear to have unbridled power. These Judges should not get appointments to the Appellate or Supreme Court of Illinois. The Attorneys should never be voted to the bench. Their appointments or election would be prejudicial and would be deliberately indifferent to the socially disenfranchised and disadvantaged.
October 14, 2005
State of Illinois
Circuit Court of Cook County, Daley Center
Honorable Timothy C. Evans, Chief Judge
2600 Richard J. Daley Center
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Re: In re: Romeo Ashford #00 P 1267
Chief Judge Evans:
On September 30, 2005, I, Fred Nance Jr., filed a Motion Requesting a Hearing for Sanctions against Loyola University Community Law Center, Attorney Theresa Ceko and Chicago Volunteer Legal Services Foundation, Attorney Michael Bergmann in this matter set for October 14, 2005. On October 14, 2005, I appeared before Judge Mary Ellen Coghlan (Coghlan) in courtroom 1811 at the Daley Center. This matter is before Judge James G. Riley (Riley) in courtroom 1809 at the Daley Center. Riley was not available for the hearing.
When the case was called, I approached the bench. I introduced myself as Fred L Nance Jr. the petitioner. Ms. Margaret Benson (Benson) introduced herself as the “former” legal counsel for respondent Julia Johnson. I began to speak about “my motion”, which was before the court.
Coghlan interrupted me and asked Benson to state why we were there. I objected informing Coghlan this was my motion I can articulate the reason why I am here. Coghlan told me to be quiet stating Benson is talking I will let you speak after she is done. Benson started talking about something completely irrelevant to “my motion.” I objected and began to speak. Coghlan told me to be quiet Benson is speaking now. Benson said something irrelevant to “my motion”, and I objected again and began to speak. Coghlan told me this was the final time she was going to tell me to be quiet. I started to walk out of the courtroom since Coghlan was treating me as if I was not in the room.
Benson informed Coghlan Riley entered an order dismissing this action. This was my first objection. Benson informed Coghlan Riley’s order stated 1) the Estate is closed and 2) that all pending orders are moot. This is correct but this was my second objection. I made these two objections because 1) the order entered by Riley does not negate “my motion” for sanctions, and 2) mooting the past orders in this matter does not negate “my motion.” There was no court order regarding “my motion.” After Benson was finished speaking, I asked Coghlan could I speak now. Coghlan told me no stating I have heard enough.
Riley’s court order reads as follows: 1) That the guardianship of Julia Johnson over Romeo Ashford is discharged, instanter the Estate be closed, 2) That Romeo Ashford is returned to his mother’s custody, instanter, and 3) That all pending orders are moot.
“My motion” for Sanctions was filed on June 29, 2005 with the Clerk of this Court. Riley chose not to hear my motion in a timely manner or any other manner. I brought this issue to his attention on September 29, 2005. Riley chose to ignore the Motion for Sanctions entered on June 29, 2005. Riley was careful to keep this out of his order dated September 29, 2005. Benson’s argument this morning had no validity. I reported case law to support “my motion” for Sanctions whether Riley has dismissed other issues or not. The motion for sanctions stands alone at this juncture.
Sir, Judge Mary Ellen Coghlan displayed extreme prejudice to me with malice and her nefarious acts of indifference. Coghlan refused to let me speak in open court on “my motion.” Coghlan allowed Benson to explain “my motion” to the court. Coghlan told me to be quiet because she was going to let me speak after Benson. Coghlan decided I was not “worthy” to speak in court, and so she denied me access to the court. I witnessed Coghlan treating the “white” individuals with dignity and respect. I am black. She treated me different than the “white” individuals. Coghlan took my dignity and respect in the court. Coghlan’s acts were oppressive and meant to separate the socially disadvantaged and disenfranchised from seeking any relief in the judicial processes as similarly situated individuals.
The voters need to be aware of how the judicial process really works at Chicago’s Daley Center under this regime. This judicial process in no way mirrors or operates within mainstream judicial thought or practice. The voters need to vote the judges mentioned in my complaints out. As Martin Luther King and Jesse Jackson stated in the past, if you do not vote people like this out of office, you deserve whatever treatment you receive from the acts they perform.
I will post this letter on my website: http://clickforjusticeandequality.blogspot.com/, as I have posted other correspondence and legal documents on my site about this matter before the court. The 1st Amendment and the Freedom of Information Act protect these documents.
Those who are receiving this information from outside the State of Illinois should contact whomever you know in the Chicago area. Benson’s bio as posted on the website of Chicago Volunteer Legal Services Foundation, www.cvls.org/, suggest she acts with fairness and justice for those disenfranchised and disadvantaged. I beg to differ. Read her bio for yourself. Then read my other letters and motions on this matter posted on my site. If you cannot find Benson’s bio, I have it in a word document. If it is not posted request it from me through email. Any emails I receive on this matter will be kept confidential. Many individuals email me about the issues I post, so others will not see their posting.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr., ABD, MA, CADC, NCRS
cc: Judge Henry Budzinski (supervising Judge), Judge Mary Ellen Coghlan, and Ms. Margaret Benson (sent by fax); Letter to Judge Evans sent by fax.