As posted periodically on Craigslist.org Las Vegas Local News and Views (until I feel it has served it's purpose in warning people about 702-Traffic.)
5-13-09
Basically, I had my first DUI about a month ago, not being aware that there might be better services available (I'm now with %, $500 for a first time DUI) I went to the place with the most advertising, 702-Traffic... Bummer.instead of it being $1400 like all the signs say, it was $1500, I made two payments up to almost a thousand dollars as a retainer for services yet rendered and had a 5 minute consultation (which most decent lawyers will provide for free).in any case, I discovered a recently published coupon for 702-Traffic, in a check sized packet of coupons we receive regularly in the mail, bluntly stating 20 PERCENT OFF ANY TICKET, with a little star saying 'DUI $1400' 3 inches to the left. I brought the coupon in thinking they would honor that and take $300 (20 Percent) off the total of $1500 (I was detained by the police and 18 hours later, after holding, I was handed a ticket with an amount and a court date.
What 702-Traffic's coupon doesn't mention is that 'they reserve the right' to decide what does and doesn't constitute a 'ticket').'No'. The 20 year old boy who carries a gun, whom clients are forced to contend with, wanted to 'bargain' (??!!) the amount 702-Traffic would take off of my case. At first he said $100, then it became $50, the next day it became $110 when I said I wanted our deposit back (that the amount to be discounted is 'at their discretion' is clearly not a stipulation of the coupon)... Somehow my card was declined and being really put off by their inability to honor their own coupon (which amounts to fraud), I went to consult another lawyer (%, who was a lot more knowledgeable about DUI's FYI and understood technical aspects of the situation that 702-Traffic never mentioned might be of use in my case...) and returned to 702-Traffic the next day to 'have my deposit / retainer' returned to me for 'services not yet rendered'. % did a computer search and noticed 702-Traffic had not yet lifted a finger to begin processing any paperwork on my case.
The 2 armed, young boys (who are the sons of Mr. Odgers / The owner apparently) were incredibly daft in responding to this and rudely pointed out the part of the paperwork that mentions 'No Refunds' and that I had 'spoke with a lawyer, lawyer's get paid for their time, you understand? You spoke with a lawyer..'. I understand it's one thing to keep money for services rendered but this is simply not the case, nor had I provided the full amount they wanted that they could provide a service for me yet. The court date has yet to occur.'Can I speak with an adult please?'
This morning I gave a call to 702-TRAFFIC, that exact number, to attempt to speak to Mr. Odgers himself and carefully explain that we can not afford to pay the full amount of $1500 could we please get our $% back, the court date is weeks away, the coupon was not honored, so on and so forth, and 'like father, like son' I was most rudely responded with a 'No Refunds!'just before Mr. Odgers hung up the phone. I left a few messages and even had my Dad leave one as well (as I had my mother come in with me the first time to speak with the young, shrewd minded staff) and they have decided to ignore any attempts to simply communicate and grant reason to the circumstances. Overall, very immature. Is that who you want to represent you in court? I am currently attempting to have the charges reversed through the Bank's side, have already paid another lawyer to handle the upcoming case (which still saved me about $40 even if I can not get my money back from 702-Traffic) and overall, am pretty upset I was naive enough to not shop around first before dealing with 702-Traffic. Now if I only had the money to take 702-Traffic to court for false advertising.'
Follow up 6-9-09.
Another lawyer went to court for me yesterday, After speaking with 702-Traffic, Charles Odgers specifically over the phone previously, he implied that he understood the situation and I felt that most likely, would allow the charges Well's Fargo reversed to be stay back on my account, after about 30 days of having the funds reversed, I get a letter informing me that wells was not able to find evidence of a malfunction for the transaction' and that within 5 days the funds would be reversed, meaning that these people are going to try to keep the money that they did not earn or deserve to have due to whatever fine print in the contract. I am truly depressed.
I complained to the BBB, and they responded that Mr. Odgers and co. Did not respond to the complaint (of course) and that I would now have to deal with small claims court. After basically forwarding the above part of the letter to the State Bar of Nevada and complaining formally through them, I received a letter back saying that had merely sent a copy of that Charles Odgers, a move I felt was more harmful than helpful if anything (I recently tried to talk to Mr. Odgers over the phone 702-205-7483 and he curtly responded, you complained to the State Bar, I can not talk to you over the phone'). The best the bank can do is give me until 6-16-09 to put $940 back in the account that I not suffer insufficient funds. After almost a month of the provisional credit, I spent it on things needed around the home. I just made a desperate call to our neighbor who is a lawyer and hopefully he can give me some advice. But all in all, a deceitful person' behind that establishment indeed. I really hope I can come to some conclusion on this situation, financially, with out a complete set of tooth and claw marks and a darkened demeanor to show for the experience.
6-14-09 (Financial assessment of the situation thus far. Conclusion of my grievance towards 702-Traffic and Charles Odgers).
All in all, since I got that awful dui on the night of March 7th (while riding a 49.5cc scooter, an unusual set of circumstances to begin with) the expenses have been as such. I had to pay approx. $400 to post bail, but that $400 went towards something, it allowed me to get out of jail and possibly salvage my employment by attempting to make it to work the following Monday (it didn't unfortunately, and partly due to the dui, I lost my job, at Silver Ridge Nursing Home, as well). The day after that, I had to pay about $380 to have my scooter released from the tow yard, another horrible experience wherein the shrewd and tactless staff of the tow yard, Ewing Bros. Towing, wanted to pretend that I wasn't the actual owner of the scooter. I had presented the title, and because I had never bothered to sign it, they thought they would try to swindle me, keep the scooter, and sell it for themselves. Either that or, send me on a wild goose chase for documents that don't exist at the DMV (I never had to register the scooter at the DMV, it's less than 50cc's and is technically considered a motorized bicycle'), while the price to have it released steadily rose every day they wanted to pretend I wasn't the owner. I am the owner and even provided the bill of sale to boot, but beyond that, they also wanted to pretend that the I had the wrong vin number on the bike because when the cop wrote it down hastily in his scribbled form of handwriting while reading it with a flash light at 1am, you could barely make out what it said.in any case, after much protest on my behalf, them saying it's the wrong serial number, and this and that, they finally conceded saying they found a place on the bike that matched what I had on my title. When I got to the bike, I pointed out to the attendant that there are only 2 places on the thing where the serial number is officially engraved, on the little aluminum plate by the foot rest, and on the back of the fork / steering column, and the both had the same serial number that came with the bill of sale and title that I proffered as proof of my ownership. Besides that, I could tell them how many miles it had and every single random sticker that I put on there over the years but they didn't want to hear that. Sheesh'. I am really lucky to even have gotten my scooter back as far as all that goes, but at the end of that day, the money I spent actually did get my scooter back, it went towards something beneficial / needful to my situation.
The $940 702-Traffic and Chareles Odgers claim they have some entitlement to, in the name of representing me somehow' in this situation, goes towards absolutely nothing, and as far as I'm concerned, needs to be placed towards actual court fees concerning my case.
I sought 702-Traffic out in a time of need, due to the overwhelming number of billboards they pay for in this city, thinking they could possibly help my situation, but when I realized I could not afford the full $1500 while the court date was still weeks away, and that a less expensive lawyer would be my only option, 702-Traffic took advantage of that situation and decided they would not honor the idea of even a partial refund of that retainer (for work, supposedly in my favor, that had yet to even be considered by 702-Traffic). As I've said before, if they insist that I was awarded some lawyerly advice and what not, which I don't feel I was, then about $50 should be their due, not $940.
In addition, I had read some reviews online wherein people in my situation paid 702-Traffic allot of money to represent them, but 702-Traffic failed to even show up in court resulting in warrants for the arrest for these people. Absolute worse case scenario. Taking that into consideration as well as the fact that they refused to honor their own coupon, proclaiming 20% off for their services, which amounts to fraud, I decided that I really was going to be unhappy should I decide to follow through with 702-Traffic as my legal council. With the court date, Monday June 8th, still a ways off, I paid Joseph Scalia $520 to represent me in this situation, and that was $520 that actually went towards Mr. Scalia doing just that. Mr. Scalia showed up on time in the court room and handled that aspect of my situation. I don't think I would be saying the same thing for 702-Traffic. I think that had I been able to meet the full amount of 702's fee, I would have received terrible representation if any at all.
On June 15th I filed a claim in small claims court against 702-Traffic, if any of you have had any similar grief concerning 702-Traffic, feel free to contact with your situation, I might be able to use some of that in court.
7-2-09 Caveat Emptor: The
Constable Robert Bobby G' Gronauer
In one of the most frustrating and disappointing episodes I've had concerning a fraudulent business, in this case, corrupt lawyer Charles Odgers and his 702-Traffic. It seems there is a bit of conspiracy here in that the little guy' can not get a fair chance at justice in terms of getting some, if not all, of his money back from 702-Traffic (bulk of that text below).
As part of a last resort, after contacting the better business bureau, Channel 13 News (who would not hear my case for I think 702-Traffic advertises on their channel), and the State Bar (to whom even them, Charles Odgers will not respond), I made a claim in small claims court in order to discuss my situation with 702-Traffic in front of a judge.
As part of that process, the affidavit' must be delivered to 702-Traffic by a 3rd Person or Party', meaning I can't deliver the court summons but must get someone else to deliver the paperwork or hire the constable' to deliver the documents.in hiring the constable, the idea is that even if the defendant does not sign the document, he will at least have been notified and left with a copy of the document, thus a person pays a fee to have this service performed in a way that assures the court that this person at least knew about the court date even if he / she does not show up'. That fee is $17 plus $2 a mile each way.
I was assured by the constables office secretary that this would be the case, and besides the pink building at the corner of Rainbow and Flamingo' is pretty notorious, they only have billboards covering the entire city. Monday through Friday they perform business, 9am to 5pm. Any of the office staff would have sufficed in order for the constable to simply notify them and drop off a copy.
After waiting longer than I thought I would, to have the summons delivered, I finally receive the promised post card in the mail today July 2nd 2009 (the court date is still a ways off, August 27th), simply letting me know they had delivered the paperwork whether someone signed for it or not. It read as such, misspelled words included, my comments in parentheses):
The paperwork for your SMALL CLAIMS case was NOT SERVED for the following reason: CALLED HOME# SPOKE W/DEF (OK' when I last tried to call him, he would just hang up the phone on me) WILL P/U AT OFFICE BUSINESS NO LONGER AT GIVEN ADDRESS (??!!), NEVATIVE RESULTS, DEF DIDN'T SHOW UP OR CALLED.
Thank you for the opportunity to assist you with your case.'
Robert Bobby G Gronauer
The Las Vegas Constable
This is simply NOT ACCEPTABLE. No Longer at the given address, THE PINK BUILDING AT RAINBOW AND FLAMINGO!!! And it didn't have to be Charles Odgers per say, it could have been any of their staff who work there, Kirk Helmick, you name it. Please, correct me if I am wrong, but I have the address as 9275 W. Flamingo Suite 110, Las Vegas, NV 89147. Shouldn't I have been notified if their was some confusion concerning the address? It seems to me that I have not been given a fair chance to take 702-Traffic to court and that a certain Constable Robert Bobby G Gronauer must owe a favor to his good ole' boy' friend Mr. Charles Odgers, either that or they must have went to prom together in high school or something, idunno'. What's more unfair, is that I don't have a choice in trying to find a constable that is impartial and would simply just do their job'. I have yet to call the constables office (they were closed today for a meeting) and determine if they will realize the absurdity of the above statement and try again, but I get the feeling they will also want to be paid again, and to do that, so that they can pretend to be incompetent again is unacceptable. Who else can I turn to if even the town constable wants to pretend that my paperwork for small claims court can not be delivered? I'm reluctant to solicit their services twice.
Monday morning, July 6th
Yup, it's official, after not being able to contact the constable since Thursday due to the holiday weekend, I finally get a hold of them and they insist on putting the blame in my corner and expect us to pay twice so that they can fail to have the thing properly delivered a 2nd time. Even though I provided my phone number in case there were any questions, a legitimate phone number for their business, located on the NW corner of Flamingo and Rainbow (though the specific address is actually 4086 Spring Leaf Dr, Las Vegas, NV 89147), the constable would have my small claims summons go unheeded because he wouldn't lift his little finger to attempt calling the other phone number I provided them with or me in the instance that their was any confusion. Rather than nit pick with these people or waste our money twice, we're going to try to deliver the summons ourselves and have it notarized. Specifically, the defendant isn't even Charles Odgers, it's 702-Traffic, and the pink building on the NW corner of Flamingo and Rainbow is notorious, that the constable or his deputy couldn't put that together and insisted on going to (the false) address listed on 702-Traffic's receipt, and that I unfortunately thought to be the correct address, they both are located on W. Flamingo, is impossibly frustrating, and whether or not the judge will consider our delivering of it to be as official I do not know, etc.
Do not get involved with 702-traffic! And if you do and find yourself trying to bring them to small claims court, do not trust that the constable will deliver it!
When they play dumb and pretend they can't deliver it, they'll pretend it's your own fault even if you provided them with all the information in the world.
7-7-09 Additional Notes
When I first managed to get Charles Odgers on the phone, sometime towards the end of May, he mentioned that he couldn't even find a file on me'. Meaning for him to imply that he and his staff were performing any sort of preemptory research on my behalf in regards to this case is absolutely ridiculous. ALSO, he mentions in his rebuttal to the Sate Bar that I had not paid his full fee of $1500, thus how could he have done anything', with a person like Mr. Odgers, he / she would not even lift up his / her little finger if they had not received the full amount for which they were asking. To imply that he was performing work to represent my situation in court though I had not paid the full amount is simply atrocious. What's more, that he has now lied to the state bar and implies that I have received my $940 back! (after at least 26 days since I attempted to fight the fee through my bank, Mr. Odgers denied the request through his bank and I am currently about $900 overdrawn since I made the mistake of spending the provisional credit thinking that he had been a good man and was allowing me to keep it).
Also, I made it very clear to Mr. Odgers in that one conversation, that I had made an effort to reverse the $940 through my bank and their fee dispute' division, stating that I had not received anything for this amount from 702-Traffic and nor would I want to, could you please attempt to reverse the charges while I make every possible effort to convince Mr. Odgers, 702-Traffic's owner, that a refund in this instance, before any services had been performed, would seriously be the decent thing to do.', and that PLEASE would he try to understand the situation and allow HIS bank to have the fees reversed! Mr. Odgers gave me the impression that he might actually do so! He said that he understood the situation and that he hadn't heard anything regarding the matter and so on and so forth. Permeating the conversation was this aire of well I'm a lawyer and you're not, thus you have to understand that I'm even earning this $940 through my simply talking with you'. The air of pretense is thick, and hearkens back to that initial retort of well hey! You spoke with a lawyer! Don't you know that lawyers get paid for their time!' from the 20 year old boy who works in the office at the NW corner of Flamingo and Rainbow. I would award about $40 to $50 maximum for that 5 minute consultation I received from one of their lawyers, and definitely not Mr. Odgers or his immediate staff.
7-7-09 Continued
So yesterday I got a response from the sate bar with a copy of his response to them. I can't believe it, in so many words, after much lawyerly double speak, insisting things like the two times I unfortunately went in to make a payment, I was actually receiving counseling regarding my case and so on and so forth, Mr. Odgers states that I had provided false information to the state bar and that I had already received my money back! A complete lie, my bank account is still about negative $900 and seems to get worse by about $5 every day though I keep arguing with my bank to undue the overdraft fees. Mr. Odgers / 702-Traffic attached a couple of copies from his bank showing how I had tried to have the fees reversed through my bank, but what he's left out is that he had the ability to refute that reversal and that he had done so! Beyond insisting that I had already received my refund through some means of cunning on my end, he also goes on to boldly state that I owe him more money because I never paid the full $1500! Sadly, I showed the response to our neighbor, David Liebrader, who is on the State Bar Advisory board and even he said that this thing would probably just get thrown out. If I am unable to retrieve my $940 from 702-Traffic for services they only performed in theory, but never actually did, than my best recompense is to simply keep posting this all over the internet, every chance I get wherever it might make a difference so that in the long run, their business will lose more than the $940 had they decided to be decent about things and grant me refund proper.
Here is my response to the State Bar after reading 702-Traffic/Charles Odger's response (which I will not bother to retype here, you get the idea). Also, I completed the packet for the fee dispute' sector of the State Bar and I got a letter back saying they could not proceed for I had already filed a claim to pursue the matter in small claims courtsigh, I really hope I have a fair shake with them as well.
7-7-09
Grievance File # 09-179-2616/ Charles Odgers, Esq.
Response to Charles Odger's
I just spoke with David Liebrader, our neighbor, who is also on the Disciplinary Board, and his advice was that I file my complaint through the fee dispute channels of the State Bar, and I will attempt to do that as well.
To say that I can barely contain my frustration regarding Mr. Odgers page or so of double speak, insisting that he provided $940 worth of services which he did not, and specifically, HIS false claim that I have I already gotten my $940 back through my bank is an understatement.
Although it is true, I attempted to dispute the fee through my bank's, Wells Fargo, fee dispute department, while making an effort to contact Mr. Odgers, what he is leaving out here, and that he is well aware of, is that he DENIED the bank's reversal of the amount after being aware of it for about 3 weeks (he had 45 days to decide whether I would be allowed to keep the provisional credit of $940 and at the last minute rescinded his apparent offer to allow me to have a refund). On June 12th, after Mr. Odgers notified his bank, the $940 provisional credit', for which I am still fighting to receive, was reversed leaving my bank account in a negative balance of about that much for almost a month now.
Enclosed are printouts from my bank showing the reversal of the provisional credit for $940 (at Mr. Odgers behest) and the ensuing negative balance I've had to contend with after the fact. The audacity to insist that I have received my $940 and still owe Mr. Odgers because his services (which I never received) were $1500 is a bit much. Also enclosed are photos of small claims court paperwork being handed to 702-Traffic on July 6th as I attempt to have some or all of my $940 returned to me in small claims court August 27th at 12:55 pm.
To conclude, despite Mr. Odgers false claims that I was somehow provided with a service for any amount whatsoever and thus should be denied a refund due to the fine print in his all inclusive contract', I insist that 702-Traffic / Charles Odgers would not have been a suitable representation for me in court, especially after reading reviews of theirs online, and that in the name of all common decency, if not the golden rule, Mr. Odgers should back up that claim that I actually received my $940, by rewarding me a full refund and actually doing so.
Sincerely,
John *
Carpenns
Las Vegas, Nevada
U.S.A.
0 comments