Well, it's "official" -- I have been assured by my anonymous tipsters from the Deep State/Dark Web:
that Lloydminster's most renowned and infamous undischarged bankrupt, Patrick "Super Quintuple Threat MMA Cosplay Street Fighting Man etc etc" Ross, has decided to prevent me from seizing any more of the $100K+ that he owes me by ... by ... simply never having any assets to seize for the rest of his natural life.
I am not joking, this is what I've been told.
Apparently, Patrick's too-clever-by-half strategy to deny me any further of his cash is to blow all his money, then remain unemployed in perpetuity such that there is nothing for the Saskatchewan sheriffs to take anymore. Technically, he's correct -- more than one lawyer has confirmed for me that you can't take assets from someone who has none so, in that sense, I guess this is what Patrick sees as his "blar-har-har" moment: "You can't take anything if I choose to remain utterly destitute for the rest of my life. Victory is mine!"
Well, OK, I guess ... but that implies that Patrick had better steer clear of all loans, gifts, income and inheritances, and make himself comfortable in his mom's basement for the next few decades since, as someone coming up on 41 years of age, he should expect to be there for the next 30 to 40 years, watching UFC and eating dill pickle-flavoured Doritos straight out of the bag, waiting for the "ding" that tells him his Tater Tots are ready.
In any event, just to play it safe, the SK sheriffs will be stopping by his credit union on a regular basis to clean out whatever happens to be in his account. Oh, and Canada's Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy is still looking for Patrick, having become increasingly irritated with Patrick's refusal to respond to numerous e-mails, phone calls and letters, so Patrick's celebration might be short-lived when the OSB inevitably gets ahold of him and drags him in to answer questions about his finances, assets and potential inheritances over the last several years.
Under oath.
And what with Peter Skinner about to crush Patrick's idiotic million-dollar defamation action (and possibly have Patrick declared a vexatious litigant), I'm starting to think I'm the least of Patrick's problems.
Oh, and I almost forgot -- while it's a couple days early, Mar 19 will be Patrick's monthly "Happy Interestversary" Day, whereupon Patrick's debt to me will have increased by another $500 or so (which it will be doing every month, again in perpetuity). For the mathies out there, this means that if Patrick resolutely remains in a state of utter penury for the next 10 years, his $105,000 debt to me will increase to just over $170,000 (plus 10 years worth of sheriffs' collection enforcement fees).
You're all caught up now; that is, until the OSB finally gets ahold of Patrick. I'll keep you posted.
9 comments:
I'm not sure it applies here, but have you looked into classifying the benefits that Patrick is getting from his parents as assets that you are entitled to? If he lives at home for free, then his parents are effectively "giving" him benefits corresponding to free room and board, and paying for utilities and food and so on, which I guess he isn't claiming as assets or income or benefits with transferable value or something like that.
For example, let's say his parents buy a really nice SUV with their own money, and register it in their name, and pay for all the registration and insurance and maintenance, but give Patrick free rein to drive it whenever he wants. Then what they've done is effectively given Patrick a vehicle at no cost, and if you try to seize it, they would argue that it's theirs, not Patrick's, so you have no right to it. But with the way it's being used, you could argue that they're using a loophole to transfer a valuable asset to Patrick, without him having to declare it as his.
You could say the same if his parents bought a really nice 80" flat screen, and a super-duper gaming laptop, and an exercise bike, all with their own money, but put it all in Patrick's room and let him use it exclusively. Again, Patrick would claim that none of it "belongs" to him, so he doesn't have to turn it over. And even letting him live there for free can be argued to be a transferable value since they're allowing him to keep the rent he would normally be paying. (It would be even worse if Patrick was paying rent right now, since that's money that should be going to you.)
So even if Patrick has no assets of his own, if he's living at home for free, and having all of his rent and food and utilities and maybe car payments and insurance and gym membership covered by his parents, you should argue that all of those are tangible assets of Patrick's that you can take.
You should check with your lawyer.
Anon: An interesting idea, I will pass it on to the appropriate people, and I've already been looking into another possible way that Patrick might be gaming the system.
During those times when Patrick was unemployed, he quite possibly was getting loans from family members, which he of course neglected to turn over to me. If that happened after he declared bankruptcy in Dec of 2012, that was a bad move on his part since, once you file for bankruptcy, any further assets you acquire are referred to as "after-acquired assets" and you are legally required to turn them over to your trustee for dissemination among all your creditors. So this would have been Patrick's first mistake.
Now, if Patrick borrowed money from anyone, and then after working for several months saved up some cash, he might try to protect those assets by repaying the people he owed money to, then claim that I can't touch that money because it's now in someone else's hands, and it was people he owed that money to so he was simply repaying actual debts.
Um, no. Not only would Patrick have screwed up by keeping those after-acquired assets but, in repaying any loans without giving any to me, he would have made those people preferred creditors as compared to me, which you are most emphatically not allowed to do. When Patrick filed for bankruptcy, I was far and away the primary creditor, which means the priority was that any assets would go to me. It's completely against the rules for Patrick to have taken on any more debt while he was bankrupt, then give *those* debtors priority in terms of repayment while I was still waiting. And if this happened, it is entirely possible that I have legal recourse to file to seize any of that repayment from those people. Put another way, if Patrick's brother lent him $10,000, and Patrick -- after working and saving that much -- paid him back, I quite possibly have legal standing to go after Patrick's brother for the $10,000 he was never entitled to.
I am looking into this.
There are many, many ways to mock Twatrick and this situation, but let's ponder what would happen if Reprobate Ross ever tries to seek companionship with a woman.
WOMAN: So, what do you do for a living?
TWATSY: Ummm...I have a podcast! Almost 100 people clicked on my latest video where I drop some knowledge about Jon Jones!
WOMAN: That's nice, I guess. Where do you live in Lloydminster?
TWATSY: On the Saskatchewan side. In fact, my dad is getting up there in age and falls asleep after the evening news. So, every night around 7pm, you could sneak into my basement and... *raises eyebrows with the trademark Twatsy creepy grin*
WOMAN: (starting to get horrified) Wait, what does your dad have to do with anything?
TWATSY: Well, it's a long story. You see, there was this libtard blogger named Mr. Day that persecuted me for my traditional, family-first Conservative values. I have a unique financial philosophy to protect my assets from creditors.
WOMAN: So you live at home, and you have no money?
TWATSY: I actually have *less* than no money. I have some, ummm, debts. But I write fantasy novels and erotic fiction! And I'm going to be a Netflix star. I'm expecting some huge residuals off of that!
WOMAN: *gasps* Erotic fic...Why would you tell me that on a first date? And how the hell are you going to be on Netflix???
TWATSY: Come back to my place, I'll show you the uncut videos.
WOMAN: *sprays Twatrick in the eyes with mace*
TWATSY: *crying* Ugghhhh...I guess you'll take a raincheck? Hey, you're going to pick up the tab for my Triple Bacon Garlic Onion Fried BBQ Chicken Burger, right? Ken hasn't given me my allowance yet this week.
Sooner or later they are going to find Patsy living under a bridge wrapped in a mangy Calgary Flames fleece blanket half frozen to death muttering about how his brilliant strategy of having no assets or income for CC to seize was a masterstroke and boy oh boy he sure showed those libtards!
@Rev. Paperboy:
When he reaches that state, he'll be muttering to himself about as coherently as Pratchett's character "Foul Ole Ron": "Buggrit! Millennium Hand and Shrimp!"
... of course Patrick will be cursing about the Oilers not winning the MMA belt for the umpteenth year in a row
Is it possible that he could inherit assets that are put into a trust via a will that is not open to attack by creditors?
UU
Anon @ 6:44pm re: Ross Family Trust
While this could work, all it means is that Patrick might see gains that he can never withdraw into liquid cash. As long as CC or Sask. Sheriff's/debt collectors have access to Patrick's bank statements, they will know when Patrick tries to get liquidity from his trust find. Legally, those Sheriff's and debt collectors will be obligated to inform CC's lawyer of such. (I think I understand all of this?)
Anon @ 6:44 pm: It's possible, but if it can be shown that the trust was established for the sole purpose of protecting his assets from me, I doubt it would stand up. As I would have access to the will, it would be easy to show if that's what was happening. And, trust me, I have top men -- TOP MEN! -- on standby, morbidly waiting for the passing of Patrick's remaining parent. And if that sounds tacky or classless, well, whatever. Patrick could have avoided all of this by just paying what he owes me, or maybe never having maliciously defamed me in the first place.
Ah, the road not taken.
Thinking about the road not taken can be a blessing, or a painful reminder of ineptitude. Either way, Patrick is finally getting what he deserves.
Post a Comment