Saturday, April 08, 2006
Why is extortion only prosecuted when rich people are the victims?
You tell me what’s the difference between the Verizon threats of and most likely actual FALSE credit reporting of a disputed debt and this extortion attempt:
In Page Six Inquiry, Gossip Swirls Around Gossips
... The scandal that is rattling Page Six began about a year ago, when items about Mr. Burkle, a supermarket magnate and Democratic fund-raiser, began appearing in the column more often.
The accounts of Mr. Burkle’s dealings with Mr. Stern and The Post are based on interviews with several associates of Mr. Burkle, as well as two other people who said they knew what is on the tapes. They all refused to be named because of the federal investigation.
Associates of Mr. Burkle said that Page Six items about the billionaire began appearing last year that were wildly inaccurate, without Mr. Burkle’s even being called for comment.
Last summer, one associate said, Mr. Burkle arranged to meet Mr. Stern at the Palace Hotel in Manhattan after a friend suggested Mr. Stern could give him some insight into Page Six. There, Mr. Stern asked Mr. Burkle to become a source, dishing on his famous acquaintances. Mr. Burkle declined but as a favor agreed to buy 60 shirts from Skull and Bones, Mr. Stern’s clothing line.
The associate said Mr. Burkle protested to editors, including Mr. Johnson and even wrote a personal letter of complaint to Mr. Murdoch, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times. “Every time I am mentioned in your newspaper,” the letter read, “the facts are just plain wrong.”
The letter concluded: “I hate to bother you with this; but at the end of the day, it is your newspaper.”
Colin Myler, the paper’s executive editor, wrote back and promised to correct any errors, the associate said. Mr. Burkle also had his lawyer, Martin D. Singer, send several letters threatening litigation, according to several people with knowledge of the correspondence.
On March 14, the associate said, an employee of Mr. Burkle’s received an e-mail message from Mr. Stern, a contributor who worked two days a week for Page Six, suggesting that Mr. Burkle had “the means” to change the column’s treatment of him.
“I understand Ron is upset about the press he’s been getting,” the e-mail message read. “If he’s really concerned, he needs a strategy for dealing with it and regulating it rather than merely reacting. It’s not easy to accomplish, but he certainly has the means to do so.”
At that point, Mr. Burkle suspected he was being extorted, the associate said. Then, “he reached out to his attorney, who then reached out to law enforcement,” the associate said.
According to many people involved in the episode, Mr. Stern agreed to meet Mr. Burkle face to face at least two times at Mr. Burkle’s loft in TriBeCa, the first of which was on March 22. Mr. Burkle’s security team, aided by a New York City-based private investigations firm, recorded the meetings in the loft over the last few weeks, according a person who was briefed on the sessions and was granted anonymity because the investigation is continuing. At the final meeting, on March 31, a federal agent and an assistant United States attorney were with Mr. Burkle’s security detail to monitor the recording. The recordings were turned over to the federal authorities.
In their meetings, Mr. Stern described three levels of “protection” he could offer Mr. Burkle, according to those with knowledge of what is captured on the tapes.
...
I can tell you two differences:
1) Dorothea is dead.
2) If I had given in to Verizon’s threats AFTER they reported the account to the CRAs, chances of getting deletion were next to ZERO. Once you PAID a collection, you admitted that it was a valid debt. Why else would you pay?
And a PAID collection is rated no different than an unpaid collection by FICO credit scores.
I posted the Verizon discovery responses. Check theirs Admission No. 22 about the credit reporting. If they had NOT reported this disputed and fraudulent collection on Dorothea’s credit, they would have said so.
I should have just sent Verizon an extra $1,000 or whatever when that ordeal first started in 1998.
I was extrememly pissed off at Verizon because they caused me so many problems with their fraudulent billing, false advertising and false claims about their service area, I really didn’t want to reward them by paying any more than I owed.
Of course I didn’t know that Dorothea would get breast cancer, that my own credit would be destroyed by entirely false reporting by creditors and collectors, that I wouldn’t be able to invest in real estate, that I’d have to SUE to get the corrections and that my life would turn to shit.
I feel as guilty as anyone who refused the demand of kidnappers and subsequently had their loved one killed.
Who can I contact to demand the criminal prosecution of Verizon?
And for the record, many creditors and collectors refuse to accept disputes and continue to report the disputed accounts to the CRAs to force consumers to pay those debts.
It’s a HUGE problem.
2003 Suit (appealed, Experian filed credit reports on PACER) • Verizon Wireless - billing fraud • Credit - Collection - Economic News • (0) Comments • Permalink
