This editorial review includes and contains our opinions:
This is now a PUBLIC PAGE
Updates appended at page-bottom
Bob Thoreson, Bad Landlords in Seattle; Laser Views, Laserviews, Laser Design Inc., Bad Seattle Landlord, 8353 13th Ave. NW, Seattle, 98117, HomeRX 2143 N Northlake Way #57 Seattle, WA 98103, Seattle Apartment Living Sucks, Bad tenants, bad neighbors, and too often bad landlords make it miserable.
Lawsuit Against Bob Thoreson
How many Americans are sick to damned death of bad landlords?
We finally had enough [of Bob Thoreson's bad management] and vacated our rental unit on June 1, 2011 for a move across the country. We would have moved in any case, even if it were to stay in Seattle, as the BS in the building and from the landlord, Bob Thoreson, was just too much to bear.
The question of our deposit was cut and dried. We had discussed the carpet with Bob Thoreson in person and by email far in advance (we keep every email for decades). The carpet was over five years old when we moved in. By Washington law a carpet's service life is over at five years. We lived in the unit an additional two years. We asked Bob if he was going to trash the carpet when we left. He replied, in writing, "yes", and told us not to bother cleaning it. After vacating, Bob Thoreson gave us the following written reference:
By 2011 we hated Thoreson with a passion and would not
have rented from him again no matter how much he paid us.
After we had moved across the country, we waited for our deposit refund of $300. In Washington, the landlord must tender the refund within fourteen days, or the entire amount is forfeit. Some 32 days later we had not received anything from Thoreson (surprise). We wrote to him; he sent a check for $40, citing "carpet cleaning" expenses as using up the rest.The fact that he was more than two weeks past his deadline to refund meant that by law he had no claim to ANY of our deposit, but he had no claim to it ANYWAY because the carpet was past its service life and because he had told us not to clean the carpet because he was ripping it out. I believe Bob Thoreson was fully aware of all of this but decided to try to cheat us on the deposit merely because we were across the country and he thought it would be difficult for us to return to collect from him.
When we received Bob Thoreson's check for $40 we immediately wrote to him demanding the remaining $260. We also explained that, by Washington law, we could collect, now, DOUBLE the amount of the deposit if we so desired. To do that required that we file a small claims case and we didn't want to. We only wanted the lousy $300 without any further trouble.
A week and a half later we had heard nothing from Bob Thoreson (surprise), so, now just plain disgusted, we filed in small claims court against him for the amount of $600 and we had him served.
A few days later we received a check for $260, with a hand-scrawled note on it stating that if we cashed the check, we were forfeiting any right to collect any additional monies. What a dirty little shyster of a skunk. Typical Bob Thoreson. Anything to make a simple situation worse. There was no way on earth we'd agree to that and by law we didn't have to.
We had no choice, then, but to go ahead with the small claims suit against Bob.
We were now living across the country, and we thought it would be a completely simple matter to arrange with the court to submit our case by video-link, or at least by speakerphone. This is done every hour in every court in the land and is no big deal. We petitioned the court and the court (Judge Eak, King county district court in Seattle) denied this excruciatingly simple request. Why? --That's a VERY good question.
We then petitioned the court to allow us to appoint a representative on our behalf, our son, who still lives in the Seattle area. This is done every hour of every day in every court across the land. But Judge Kato (King county district court in Seattle) personally denied this request too. Both of these judges were aware that we would not be able to attend in person, and that the case could not be tried unless we were present. Both judges decided to take steps into their own hands to thwart the regular process and to make sure the case couldn't move forward. It sounds to me as though we have some landlord-judges sitting in small claims court in Seattle, Washington.
We then invoked the mediation service that's attached to the King County Small Claims Court. They contacted Bob Thoreson three times by email and he refused to respond. They contacted him then by phone, but Bob Thoreson refused to enter into ANY mediation discussion with them, and utterly refused their free service.
By this time we were disgusted with the whole thing and just wanted to move on. We then decided to take Thoreson's check for $260 to a local branch of his bank and cash it with a note next to his, refusing to agree to not go after him for additional compensation. There was almost no chance we would have gone after Thoreson for more than the $300, but we weren't willing to agree not to -- and anyway, he legally OWED us the $300, and it was NOT within his right to pay us what he legally owed us, subject to ANY conditions at all! The matter would have been settled, except that the bank refused to cash the check.
So here's where we're at:
Bob Thoreson has apparently pulled just about every dirty little trick available to him to keep us from collecting funds that would appear to be due us by Washington renter's law. As it stands we cannot cash his check. Bob Thoreson did NOT have the right to withhold from us funds that were legally due us, in exchange for forcing an agreement upon us which we are under no obligation to accept. Bob Thoreson has therefore not tendered our refund to us in any normal manner which can be utilized by us. That makes it a slam dunk to collect double the amount of the deposit, or $600.
Since neither of us has the time to travel all the way back to Washington to sue Bob Thoreson in small claims, and since two judges have refused to allow the video or telephone procedures that every other court in the land allows for out of state plaintiffs, we now have no choice but to sue Bob Thoreson in regular district court through an attorney. This will cost us, but given his track record to date, we're confident we can recover attorney's fees. Even if we can't, this is something that simply must be done. We don't know how many decent tenants this piece of human garbage has set out to screw-over in this way or other ways, but by God it stops here and now with us.
We are cancelling this small claims court trial and we will re-file a case against Bob Thoreson for double the deposit ($600), plus $500 per month for the three months our building had no roof (this was through October, November and December in Seattle -- think about what that means) and during which we lived virtually underwater in his apartment with significant losses and incalculable inconvenience.
We're sick to death of shysters and con-artists and crooks and fools -- and drunks and pot heads and assholes and every other Goddamned piece of counter-productive vermin the cat traditionally drags in, and we're sick to fucking death of Bob Thoreson. He laments that he's divorced. By God, it's easy to see why.
We'll post updates here as the civil suit gets under weigh. This man has, by his repeated stunts and shenanigans, lead us from actually liking him at first, to mild irritation, to anger, to hatred, and now to an all-out declaration of war. We hate the man. We hate his lack of simple morality. We hate what we perceive to be his blatant dishonesty. We hate his lack of character. We're sick to fucking death of BAD LANDLORDS and in our view, Bob Thoreson is one of the worst.
We expect this case to drag on awhile. This page will reflect all developments in the form of dated updates, below. Bob Thoreson can either fulfill his legal requirement and pay us what he owes, or he can cause this page to become as voluminous as he likes. It's his choice. If he pays us, this page will reflect one more short paragraph and that will be that. If we have to formally sue him in "real" court, literally hundreds of pages and court documents will be added. This guy is not, I promise, the brightest bulb in the string (are you a pot-head, Bob?), so we're guessing it will be the latter. An attorney is being chosen now, unless our regular First Amendment attorney wants the case. We will sue Bob Thoreson for every dime we must spend on attorney's fees. We're so INCREDIBLY sick of shady, greedy landlords trying to get over on their tenants. We really are.
UPDATE 9-8-2011 :
TO:
Bob Thoreson / HomeRX
2143 N. Northlake Way #57
Seattle, WA., 98103-9100Registered receipt: # 420 98103 9405 9930 0215 xxxxxxx
This document is posted publicly at the following URL:
http://www.truth-or-consequences.com/apartment_living/parking.shtml
Enclosed find your check number 1004 in the amount of $260. You had intended this as repayment of a security deposit on our vacated unit in your building in Seattle. Unfortunately, you stipulated a condition on the check which was not within your legal right to make. The amount of $260 is legally owed to us. Period. It’s not a gray area. It’s not “pending a legal decision”. It’s straight-out owed according to Washington renter’s law. You cannot make a payment to someone who is legally due that sum, yet say, “I am paying you this amount, which I legally owe, but only on the condition that you __________.” You cannot say you will pay what you owe on the condition that the recipient not work to collect other monies you owe. It is not legal to do this, Bob, and if you’d get off the booze or the pot or whatever the hell it is that you take that makes you irrational, you’d know that. Ask any attorney. Ask any judge. You cannot make conditions on the payment of any amount you owe to anyone. You must simply pay what you owe. You owe us at least $260. PAY IT. Pay it with no attached conditions. The court will make you do that anyway, and if the court must be bothered to hand down a ruling against you because of this stunt of yours, the court will add a number of other damages to the amount you must pay. It’s just that simple. I’m truly sorry you don’t get it. Visit your attorney, then do exactly what s/he says. He will tell you exactly what I’m telling you here. And if it goes to court, the judge will ask you why you didn’t just do this in the first place. You will simply look stupid.
With regard to any future amounts we may seek to collect from you, that’s OUR BUSINESS TO DECIDE. By pulling this dishonest shenanigan on this deposit refund check, you have made it cut and dried in the court’s eyes, and the court WILL award us double the deposit amount if we pursue it. The court would have almost certainly awarded us double the deposit in the first place, because that is Washington law. But for you to have then also tried to bamboozle your way out of paying what the law allows by inserting your absurd condition on the check – the court will see through it and nail you for that, and you WILL, I promise, be ruled against in the matter of the $600. I VERY much prefer dealing with corporations as landlords because they have at least received a beginner’s course in renter’s law and they understand the procedures. You obviously don’t have a single damned clue and you aren’t apparently smart enough to go find out. So be it. I’m tired of trying to educate you. The court will see that you have tried every sleazy trick here to cause trouble in this matter, and the court will nail you. I absolutely guarantee it. Again, ask your own attorney. Ask ANY attorney. You haven’t dealt with this in good faith. That’s documented. The court will go against you.
I had been allowing XXXXX to mostly take care of this. She hated you far more than I did because of the flooding. But that’s changed. Since I’ve seen how you’re tried to cheat her, I now surpass her in the hatred department. I flat want your ass. I do NOT like shysters, and you have shown me over and over that you are a shyster. Given the opportunity, you will screw people. I’m going to proceed as though you have no intention of paying us. I’m sending this case to my regular First Amendment attorney in Seattle. If she’s too busy, she will hand it off to a junior colleague who needs to rack up a few wins, and this is about the easiest win anyone can imagine. I will instruct them to file the suit against you with little or no preamble. You’ve already refused to work with the small claims mediators. That shows the court what you’re made of. I don’t see any point in giving you any further chances. I want you sued. Period. And if I must go to that much trouble, I won’t just ask for the $600, I’ll ask for much more to compensate for the three months we lived in your roofless building, and for attorney’s fees, and a host of other damages. It will cost me the same amount of time and trouble to sue you for $600, as for $2100, or for ten grand. The amount makes no difference. Since small claims court has proven to be so incredibly unaccommodating to out of state plaintiffs, they have actually worked against you by forcing us to take this to regular court, where an attorney can argue it in our absence. You probably thought small claims was doing you a favor by refusing to allow us to state our case by proxy or by telephone link; in reality, small claims has really cost you.
I am sending everything up to the law firm in Seattle in the next day or two. You should know by now that I do not bluff. The MOMENT they incur even ONE DOLLAR in fees, I will hold you accountable for those amounts. You can send us a REAL check in the amount of $260, NOW, without stupid, illegal conditions or stipulations on it, and we MIGHT consider letting the matter go with that payment. But it is NOT within your right to stipulate that in any way, shape or form. You may PAY YOUR BILL. You may NOT say that you will only pay your legal bill on CONDITION of X. You do not have that right. Again, grow some Goddamned brain cells to replace the ones you’ve lost and ASK YOUR ATTORNEY how this will all play out. I have all the time in the world to nail you, and nail you is exactly what I intend to do. And the more you screw us around with stupid little illegal stunts, the bigger your web page will become.
In disgust and supreme contempt,
[signature]
9-8-2011PS: If you lose the link to your web page, just give it three weeks and Google your name.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Claims Court
Seattle Courthouse
516 3rd Ave. Room E-327
Seattle, WA. 98104
Fax: 206-296-0910Case # 115-XXXX, Re our case against:
Bob Thoreson / HomeRX
2143 N. Northlake Way #57
Seattle, WA., 98103-9100This document is posted publicly at the following URL:
http://www.truth-or-consequences.com/apartment_living/parking.shtml
Be advised that since your court has refused to allow us to submit our out-of-state testimony via video link, which is done in nearly every courthouse around the country nearly every day, and since your court has refused to allow us to submit our testimony from out of state via a telephone speakerphone setup, which is done nearly every day in nearly every courthouse across the country, and since your court has refused to allow us to appoint any proxy to argue our case personally in Seattle, which is done in nearly every courthouse across the country nearly every day, we have no choice but to cancel this court case and re-file it in district, superior or possibly Federal court as a full-on civil lawsuit against the defendant, Robert Thoreson.
We see no reason that two of your judges would steadfastly deny our repeated petitions for these easy solutions to out-of-state plaintiffs, except that, perhaps, one or both are landlords themselves, and they have decided to automatically thwart any actions that come against landlords in their courts. We know of no other reason for this irrational stubbornness, and based on our experiences with judges in King County, this type of disgusting, illegal behavior would be absolutely typical.
The defendant has been notified and is no doubt thrilled that he must now defend himself with an attorney and all the expenses incurred thereof, in regular court. You may have thought you were doing him a service; in point of fact, you have screwed him pretty effectively.
You may read what we, and others think of you and these decisions, at the URL shown above.
[signature]
9-8-2011CC: snail mail, Internet post, attorney
UPDATE 9-22-2011 :
Predictably, Robert Thoreson has refused to respond in any way. We now consider Bob Thoreson to be nothing more than a petty thief. We are filing a formal, full-fledged civil suit against this piece of human garbage. We'll document it meticulously on this page. Our advice: If this man will screw us in a situation where he is so completely and documentably on the wrong side of the law, what else is he capable of in his other dealings through HomeRx and/or Laserviews? We're not finding any moral fiber at all in this individual.
UPDATE 9-24-2011:
The following is our summary of the case to our Seattle attorney, asking to formally file suit against Robert Thoreson in King County District Court, Seattle, Washington:
Moved into unit 2009 (came from a different unit owned by same landlord)
Carpet was 5-7 years old or more at that time.
Landlord offered to put in new carpet because it was crappy; we refused, saying to just rip it out when we left.
Landlord readily agreed.
We lived in unit for two years.
We got ready to move out in June of 2011.
We advised landlord we would not be cleaning carpet as he had agreed to rip it out.
Landlord acknowledged and agreed.
We vacated and did not clean carpet.
Landlord gave us a first class referral in writing.
32 days later we had not received any deposit refund ($300 deposit).
We contacted landlord and he sent a check for $40, saying the rest was eaten up in carpet cleaning fees (typical Bob Thoreson, in our view).
We reminded landlord that he had agreed to replace the carpet, but at this point that was moot as Wa, law states ALL deposit must be refunded if not tendered within 14 days.
Landlord was advised we would sue him in small claims court if not paid immediately.
A week later we filed against landlord in small claims for $600 (deposit times two).
Washington law allows that if tenant must take steps to collect deposit, then amount of deposit refund must be doubled. I've collected on this in past.
Landlord then sent check for $300, with notation on check stating that if we cashed it, we were agreeing not to try to collect more than $300.
We had advised landlord we were thinking of suing for an additional $1500 for living in extreme flooding for three months, and landlord was trying to prevent us from going after him for that amount. We countered that, person legally owing money cannot put conditions on its payment (you can't send a payment to the light company, for instance, saying they may only cash the check if they never try to collect the rest of the money owed them).
Small claims case date looms; no word from landlord.
We invoked the court's free mediation service.
Landlord steadfastly refused to interact with them in any way (reportedly hung up on them).
We petitioned court to allow us to tender testimony via video link since we now live across the country (it's done every single day).
Court refused.
We petitioned court to allow us to tender testimony via tele link (it's done every single day).
Court refused.
We petitioned court to allow us to assign the case to our son and let him argue it in Seattle for us (it's done every single day and the court has allowed me to do this in the past).
Court refused.
We had no choice but to cancel the small claims trial.
We have returned both checks ($40 and $260) via registered mail to landlord stating that we will not accept payment with his "conditions" attached.
We have demanded a new check for $300 with no conditions attached, saying that we may or may not settle for that.
Landlord refuses to reply and that offer is now off the table (this is one stupid, stupid son of a bitch).
We now want to sue him for $300, plus $300 (slam dunk) plus $1500 for living underwater for three months. We WILL travel back to Seattle for a suit in this amount.
Landlord has been advised that we will hold him responsible for attorney's fees. Still no response. This is indicative of Seattle landlords in my experience and particularly this one. Stupidity on this level just plain boggles the mind. What does this idiot think is going to happen? There's no point in wasting time trying to interact with this fool. Just file the suit, please. I think Thoreson's plan is to try to get us to rack up as much as possible in attorney's fees, then, just before the trial, pay off $300 or $600, hoping that will cause us to settle. In this case, however, I've found this man to be simply too evil and dishonest to allow him to get away with this crap. I won't settle out of court for less than the entire amount, $2100 plus attorney's fees. And God help whoever else has to do business with this imbecile.
UPDATE 12-12-2011:
We've contacted our Seattle attorney to inquire whether the suit had been filed, or what the status of the case was. She asked for all docs and we sent them, including all of Bob's emails during the flood period in which he told us to knock holes in the ceilings to drain them so they didn't cave in on us. Apparently not much has been done since then. We have asked her to FILE THE SUIT in district court in Seattle without further delay. We want the trial over with so we can get the stink of this imbecile off our shoes. We knew this guy was bad news -- we just didn't know how bad. In our experience this is a despicable, utterly dishonest human being.
