Robin's Ruminations

WSPSA has revised their pricing for the upcoming seminar on process serving.  They are now offering members of WALI (Washington Association of Legal Investigators) the same great price available to WSPSA members.  

So if you're a member of WSPSA or WALI you can get a full day of education on process serving for only $99.

See the registration form on my previous post.

Comments (0)
Robin Mullins March 8th, 2010 01:37:09 PM

The Washington State Process Servers Association is presenting an all day seminar on process serving and related topics.  It is scheduled for April 17, 2010.  The venue is the Shoreline Community Center located at 18560 - 1st Ave. NE, Shoreline, WA 98155.  A series of 1 hour talks beings at 9 a.m., breaks for an hour at noon, and continues on until 4 p.m.

Speakers include Gary Turpen, Pat Mahoney, Jim Cronin, Eric Vennes, and Robin Mullins.  Topics will be wide ranging from report writing to postings and sales to risk management to the business of doing business.

Lunch is included in the registration fee.

If you have questions please call Linda Duralia in Bellingham at 800-321-2455 or local 360-671-2455.

Use this link to open the registration form.   Follow the instructions on the form to reserve your place at the seminar.

WSPSA Spring Seminar Registration Form.pdf

Comments (0)
Robin Mullins March 7th, 2010 09:07:32 PM

I checked my e-mail this morning and received wonderful news from WSPSA lobbyist Steve Lindstrom.  SHB 1913 passed the senate last evening and is now on it's way to the governor's desk.  It makes to major changes for process serving in Washington.  In addition to already existing requirements anyone serving process for a fee must:

1.  Be a resident of the State of Washington.
2.  Be registered with their county auditor - This now includes employees of registered process servers.

It took 3 years and several amendments but we finally made it.  Representative Judy Warnick was the prime sponsor.  She and the WSPSA Board of Directors are to be thanked and congratulated.

This is the way a representative democracy is supposed to work.  

Here's a link to the bill - Click here.

Comments (0)
Robin Mullins March 3rd, 2010 09:38:39 AM

For those of you who may not know him, Jim Cronin is a private investigator located in the Mukilteo area.  He is a VERY active member of WALI (Washington Association of Legal Investigators).  And, of course, he does some service of process now and then.  Though I only know him over e-mail I've found him to be just a tremendous fellow.  Very professional and very sharing with his knowledge.  Here is a Jim Cronin "Tid Bit" I received today.

Here’s a little tidbit that might be of interest to process servers. If they have to serve an attorney, and he/she is being difficult, they can search by the attorney’s WSBA# to check this site to see what court appearances the attorney has scheduled and serve him/her at the courthouse.

http://www.mywsba.org/Default.aspx?tabid=177

http://dw.courts.wa.gov/?fa=home.attyTerms
 

	Jim Cronin, MPA, CFE Seattle Insurance and Legal Investigations
	PO Box 1327, Mukilteo, WA 98275
	( (206) 992-1555       FAX: (425) 514-0615

 

 

Comments (1)
Robin Mullins March 2nd, 2010 11:17:56 PM

One step closer.  I just learned our bill, SHB-1913, has moved out of the Senate Rules Committee and is now eligible for action on the floor of the Senate.  If it passes then it goes to the governor.

Comments (0)
Robin Mullins February 28th, 2010 04:47:48 PM

Being "in the news" is not generally a good place for process servers.  Let me give you a few examples.

#1 - Process servers commit perjury via sewer service in New York and Boston - Click here and here.

#2 - Process server commits murder, assault, and armed robbery in Las Vegas - Click here and here.

#3 - Process server arrested for unlawful use of weapon and criminal trespass in Castle Rock - Click here.

Folks, this is not the kind of PR we need.  It is definitely attracting attention but it is the kind of attention we can do without.  

As mentioned in an earlier post, New York is proposing to require process servers to carry GPS tracking devices whenever they're working.  Can you blame the authorities for doing this?  No, we can only blame ourselves.

We make our living based on the value of our signature and yet too many of us place no value at all on our own signature.  So how can the courts trust us?  

I expect to see changes in the near future and by that I mean the next four to six years.  I don't know exactly what those changes will be but I suspect most of us won't like them.  I think regulation is in the future and many of us in the business today won't be able to make the cut.

Look at yourself.  Look at those for whom you work.  Do you like what you see?

Comments (0)
Robin Mullins February 27th, 2010 06:27:46 PM

After three years of effort it looks like Washington process servers will finally receive a protection afforded process servers in many other states.  HB-1913, which adds a residency requirement to RCW 18.180.010, is advancing nicely under the watchful eye of our ace lobbyist Steve Lindstrom.

Here is the current wording of RCW 18.180.010.

(1)	A person who serves legal process for a fee in the state of Washington shall register as a process server with the auditor of the county in which the process server resides or operates his or her principal place of business.
(2)	The requirement to register under subsection (1) of this section does not apply to any of the following persons:
	(a)	A sheriff, deputy sheriff, marshal, constable, or government employee who is acting in the course of employment;
	(b)	An attorney or the attorney's employees, who are not serving process on a fee basis;
	(c)	A person who is court appointed to serve the court's process;
	(d)	An employee of a person who is registered under this section;
	(e)	A person who does not receive a fee or wage for serving process.

And here is the new wording as proposed in the bill.

(1)	Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, a person who serves legal process for a fee in the state of Washington shall:
	(a)	Be eighteen years of age or older;
	(b)	Be a resident of the state of Washington; and
	(c)	Register as a process server with the auditor of the county in which the process server resides or operates his or her principal place of business.
(2)	The requirements under subsection (1)(b) and (c) of this section do not apply to any of the following persons:
	(a)	A sheriff, deputy sheriff, marshal, constable, or government employee who is acting in the course of employment;
	(b)	An attorney or the attorney's employees, who are not serving process on a fee basis;
	(c)	A person who is court appointed to serve the court's process;
	(d)	A person who does not receive a fee or wage for serving process.

NOTE:  There are two major changes.

First, of course, is the residency requirement.  Once the bill passes a person must be a resident of the State of Washington if he/she wants to serve process for a fee in this state.

The second change is the removal of the employee exemption.  Once the bill passes ALL process servers, who serve for a fee, must register.  Being an employee of a registered server will no longer exempt a server from registering.

We're very close but we're not there yet.  It must still pass the Senate Rules Committee and the full Senate.  Then it needs the Governor's signature.  Stay tuned.

Comments (2)
Robin Mullins February 27th, 2010 02:40:33 PM

Randy Bennett was kind enough to forward the following links along.  Educate yourself or suffer the consequences.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/02/22/1491994/beware-of-independent-contractor.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/business/18workers.html?em

http://www.gsmlaborcouncil.org/node/4597

Comments (0)
Robin Mullins February 27th, 2010 02:28:31 PM

The people at NAPPS headquarters in Portland really keep their ear to the heart of the membership.

After receiving a "few" phone calls and e-mails (OK, and maybe a blog post or two) from members, Gary Crowe, NAPPS Administrator, took the bull by the horns and resolved the Post A Job issue.  Recall that when it was first instituted the Post A Job system would send notification to all NAPPS members, regardless of where the actual job needed to be done.  Well this past week the following was sent out by Gary and his crew.

Dear NAPPS Member:
Fifteen minutes ago we launched the updated version of the NAPPS Job Post which incorporates the following changes:

1)  The member's name and company is placed automatically in the body of the post.

2)  If a zip code is used in the post, only members within a 50-mile radius of the zip code will receive the emailed post.

3)  If only a city and state are used in the post, only members that have a listing under that city will receive the emailed post.

4)  If a city, state AND zip code are used in the post, only members within a 50-mile radius of the zip code will receive the emailed post.

5)  If a member chooses to opt-out of system there is now a simple automated link at the bottom of each post.

6)  Jobs can now be posted in Canada by inputting only the City and State (the state acts like a Canadian territory).  Canadian zip codes will NOT work on this system.

This notice is also being sent to those members that have already opted out of the system in order that they may opt back in.  If you have already opted out and wish to opt back in, please send an email to claire@napps.org with OPT-IN in the subject line.

We strive to make this a useful tool for our members and have appreciated your patience while we have fine-tuned the system.

Gary A. Crowe

Nice!  Thank you Gary, much appreciated.

Comments (0)
Robin Mullins February 27th, 2010 01:54:42 PM

WSPSA member Randy Bennett reports his company, Seattle Legal Messengers, was recently audited by Employment Security and passed it with flying colors.  Randy uses the employee business model and, by all appearances, seems to be doing well with it.

Randy emphasized one important point over and over - Don't let the auditor come into your office.  Apparently there is no requirement that you let them through your door.  Instead, let them know you'll meet with them at a neutral location and you will bring everything they want to see to that meeting.  Randy's office is in Seattle but his CPA is in Mount Vernon so he proposed to use the CPA's office as the meeting place.  The auditor agreed and the meeting went off without a hitch.

Comments (0)
Robin Mullins February 27th, 2010 12:12:50 PM

A WSPSA member was kind enough to forward along the attached pdf document.  The company he works for is currently under audit by L&I.  One of his IC's said he received the questionnaire from L&I.  It was quickly determined all of their IC's had received the same questionnaire.  

We already know the IC business model is under close scrutiny at both the state and national levels.  We've been told (more than once) that government (L&I and Employment Security) doesn't think process servers will qualify as IC's under the six part test.  

If you're using the IC business model you should examine the questionnaire closely.  Ask yourself how your IC's will answer the questions.  And note that some of the questions are leading in nature.  

You're going to need to look at how you operate very closely.  Take a very close look at your IC contract (you are using a contract aren't you???).  You may need to change the language in order to account for some of the items brought out in the questionnaire.  

Even though I don't use it at 4th Corner, I am still of the opinion the IC business model makes a lot of sense for our industry.  But it will only work for you if you follow the rules to the letter.  Don't attempt to short cut things.  If you do you're setting yourself up for a big fine from L&I or Employment Security.

If your IC's begin receiving this type of questionnaire I recommend you do not attempt to influence their answers in any way.  Also, don't suggest they don't fill it out.  Think about it for a moment.  How do you think the auditors will classify a worker who doesn't complete and return it?  Pretty obvious those workers will be classified as employees by default.

Here's a link to the document.

L&I Independent Contractor Questionaire.pdf

Comments (0)
Robin Mullins February 27th, 2010 11:46:21 AM

NAPPS has a new feature on their website called Post a Job.  I'm trying to decide whether or not it is a good idea.  Or, let me put that another way, I actually think it is a good idea but I'm having trouble with their implementation.

Currently, if you post a job using this new tool, when you hit the submit button it will be sent to all NAPPS members.  So if I post a job for service in Portland, Maine, members in Los Angeles (along with the rest of the country) will receive the notification.  The only option members have at this point is to opt out of the entire program.  But that hardly seems reasonable because if I've opted out and a job is posted in Bellingham, Washington, (where I'm at) then I'll miss out on the opportunity.  So, as I see it, "opt out" is not an option at all.

Now I give NAPPS credit for efficient use of the subject line in the Post a Job e-mails.  It tells me it is a NAPPS Post a Job and the city and state where the job is intended for service.  So I don't have to open them in order to know it isn't for my area.  Fine and good but as the Post a Job system becomes more popular the number of these e-mails is going to increase from a trickle to a flood.  

NAPPS needs to limit distribution to those members in the area where the job needs to be done.  They could limit it by state or city or ZIP Code or in some other way.  

Like I said above, I think this is a good idea but I think it needs a tweak or two.

Comments (1)
Robin Mullins February 20th, 2010 08:56:36 PM

Given the current real estate economic situation, it is not surprising that we're seeing an increase in the number of suits being brought against banks and other mortgage holders.  The linked announcement from Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc., aka MERS, is interesting for two reasons.

First it tells us exactly how to go about obtaining service on MERS.

Second it tells us there may be a number of other entities around the country which go by the same name but are not in any way related to MERS.

I've printed and distributed the attachment to many of my attorney clients.

Click below to see the MERS Announcement.

Comments (0)
Robin Mullins February 20th, 2010 08:38:21 PM

Rumor has it the City of New York is placing some stringent new requirements on process servers doing business there.  Given recent history I can understand why but the word "overkill" might be appropriate.

NYC is proposing to require all process servers to carry GPS devices that will log their location on a regular basis.  The logs will then be made available, though I haven't heard to whom.  A city department?  Most likely.  The general public?  It wouldn't surprise me.

The truly sad thing is that we've done this to ourselves.  I heard someone describe the situation recently by saying "Service of process has become a commodity" and "The big companies have investors who are expecting a return and demand efficiencies in the systems."

A commodity - Is that all it is we do?  Harvest a commodity?  Have we lost sight of the 5th and 14th amendments?  Have we forgotten how basic our job is to the very bedrock of our society?  

It appears we have.  And the results are beginning to make themselves evident.  As some of us attempt to fill those demands for efficiency corners will be cut.  Some, who can't reach the level of business they want by honest means, will do as was done in New York, they'll commit crimes such as perjury and forgery.  

But beware the backlash.  GPS trackers are only the start.  We're making our own bed - at some point we'll have to sleep in it.

Comments (1)
Robin Mullins February 20th, 2010 12:22:40 PM

Late Thursday afternoon, the 18th, one of my servers had a rather unnerving experience while serving out in a rural area between Bellingham and the Canadian border.  Here's the link to a newspaper article - http://www.bellinghamherald.com/onpatrol/story/1299672.html

Many of us have ad similar experiences.  I've had a few myself, some involving guns or other weapons.  It looks like my server, Mark, did an excellent job of extricating himself from the situation.  Overall serving is a low risk job but, when something does occur, it can be frightening.  

I gave Mark the day off yesterday, with pay.  He needed to settle his nerves.  I plan on having a meeting with my servers within the next week to debrief Mark and attempt to analyze what happened and how it happened.

Be safe out there.

Comments (0)
Robin Mullins February 20th, 2010 08:42:01 AM