Just received a notice of violation from the government...

Without going into too much detail, because we all know that the government "code enforcers" just go around the state trying to collect revenue for the Corporation, I wanted to get some opinions on what I should do.

I run a small business in California and it has operated relatively free from State workers trying to extort money from me. But just today I had one particular individual enter my place of business for the second time, disregarding the "NO SOLICITING" Notice on the door, and offering up a contract.

The first time my friend/employee made the mistake of signing the violation, and after attempts of telling this government worker that the particular laws they are citing me for don't apply to me because my business is not operated in the way the state is using its regulations for, it was met with restating the canned "spiel" of how I'm in violation.

Well, just today they came back in and tried to serve us a second notice of violation, however this time my friend did NOT sign the violation and it reflected as such, i.e. "Cashier/agent refused to sign violation" in the signature line.

Am I going about this the wrong way, or is there nothing they can do because they don't have a contract with ME? Also, isn't there some form of notice they have to give me before they can enter my premises?

Sounds like a R4C situation.

Perhaps a miscellaneous case file at the USDC is in order, so you can record your refusal for cause there.

I'm sure there is a lot "they can do", because "they" are probably under the impression that "they" own you via the many carefully crafted hidden adhesion contracts, such as BC, DL, SSN, or the mere fact of your existence in that particular space and time.

Without knowing any more details, such as what agency is trying to contract with you and for what, it's impossible to tell what a prudent course of action might be, except to say:
do a cost-benefit analysis before you get into a fight, know who your allies are, and most importantly, know who's your Daddy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unknown

Without going into too much detail, because we all know that the government "code enforcers" just go around the state trying to collect revenue for the Corporation, I wanted to get some opinions on what I should do.

I run a small business in California and it has operated relatively free from State workers trying to extort money from me. But just today I had one particular individual enter my place of business for the second time, disregarding the "NO SOLICITING" Notice on the door, and offering up a contract.

The first time my friend/employee made the mistake of signing the violation, and after attempts of telling this government worker that the particular laws they are citing me for don't apply to me because my business is not operated in the way the state is using its regulations for, it was met with restating the canned "spiel" of how I'm in violation.

Well, just today they came back in and tried to serve us a second notice of violation, however this time my friend did NOT sign the violation and it reflected as such, i.e. "Cashier/agent refused to sign violation" in the signature line.

Am I going about this the wrong way, or is there nothing they can do because they don't have a contract with ME? Also, isn't there some form of notice they have to give me before they can enter my premises?

---

Your friend/employee signing that violation is likely being viewed as a contract/agreement. Too bad you did not know of R4C at that time for a timely non-response, cancelling that agreement.

Thank's for your replies.

A bit more info would be that it is the department of weights and measures saying that I need a certified scale because I have one in my store. I checked out the statute regarding it and it specifically says that the definition of a "Weighmaster" is someone who provides a statement or memorandum of weight, which I do not. But they don't care.

I'm not exactly sure how to do a R4C correctly. Would I simply write R4C over the front of it and send it back to the agent? Or send everything back to the head of the department? Also, couldn't I R4C both "violations" nunc pro tunc?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unknown

Thank's for your replies.

A bit more info would be that it is the department of weights and measures saying that I need a certified scale because I have one in my store. I checked out the statute regarding it and it specifically says that the definition of a "Weighmaster" is someone who provides a statement or memorandum of weight, which I do not. But they don't care.

I'm not exactly sure how to do a R4C correctly. Would I simply write R4C over the front of it and send it back to the agent? Or send everything back to the head of the department? Also, couldn't I R4C both "violations" nunc pro tunc?

---

Here's a sample page from an IRS letter which was refused for cause:
Attachment 833

The red ink original was sent back to the agency within 72 hours of receiving the letter, via registered mail with return receipt.

Two black ink copies were sent via registered mail with return receipt to a USDC in the region, with clerk instructions.
The clerk was instructed to file one of the copies into a miscellaneous case jacket which had been bought previously with lawful money ($39.00 at the time), and to stamp and return the other copy to the sender (me) in the SASE.

This can get expensive if the agency inundates you with presentments.
If the presentment isn't too important you can save money by using certified mail instead of registered.

If it's a big deal, like a levy or seizure proposal, then a miscellaneous case jacket won't do. You'd have to go on the offensive and file a Libel of Review in a civil case jacket.

The original cognizance of the USDC may or may not impress a presenter, depending on who it is.

I once made a fraudulent debt collector go away with a miscellaneous case jacket R4C, after he had begun to garnish my wages in order to collect a trumped up hospital bill which was allegedly owed by a judgement proof family member with the same last name.
The debt collector was an attorney who had evidently bought the debt and who had fudged paperwork at the county court to make it look like my person owed it, even though neither I nor my numbered trust account FIRST M LAST had any involvement with the bill or the hospital whatsoever.
I suspect he backed off because of the embarrassment that his forged paperwork would cause him among his colleagues.

I had to eventually file a Libel of Review to deal with the IRS however, because they were undeterred by my misc. case file. Best money I ever wasted:)

That is an edifying journey; To go from a simple evidence repository to a Libel of Review complete with a summons - typically on the Secretary of the Treasury as principal.

Thank you for describing that to the readers!