How is it that nobody has objected to the receivership on this basis?
Ross’ longtime attorney identifies Hamstreet and they get the court to
rubber-stamp it, and represent that the court “appointed” Hamstreet.
Quite apart from the fact that this is 3x as expensive as it needs to be, it’s
very fishy that there is a longtime association between Ross and Miller Nash
et. al. (at least back to 2010).
* Corporation listing for the Mexico 600 LLC, (established in 2010):
https://opengovwa.com/corporation/603032123
Registered Agent Name MN SERVICE CORPORATION (WA)
Every other Mexico XXX LLC also has this same registered agent.
* Corporation listing for Miller Nash Graham and Dunn, the law firm for the
receiver Clyde Hamstreet *and *the assignor Ross Miles:
https://opengovwa.com/corporation/601700402
Registered Agent Name MN SERVICE CORPORATION (WA)
The MN Service corporation has the same physical address as Miller Nash et. al.
The registered agent for an LLC receives and sends important documents such as
tax info and legal documents.
In response to my concerns about objectivity that I expressed to my attorney,
John Knapp told my attorney that he and the firm had not been associated with
Ross prior to advising him to go into receivership. But the Mexico 600 LLC was
established in 2010, so they, at the very least, had the association of sharing
a registered agent at the law firm’s mailing address.
I want something done about this. The receiver is not a disinterested third
party—he was identified and brought in by Ross’ longtime attorney and there is
evidence of a longtime association with the LLCs.
This is WRONG.
--
Julia Pond
juliapond@xxxxxxxxxxx
