The documentation that has been delivered is lacking and in error of
understandings. I have yet to receive the documentation I requested.

Nor was I paid in full the amount you just represented as owing, albeit
the incorrect amount. Nor was I given a payment schedule. I did, however,
receive a check recently for $200. For this, I'll give you a cookie.

I have received every check you have ever given me. I have records of
each, and we have never had a problem with regards to receiving the checks
themselves -- only the frequency of when I receive them, what they are for
and the actual amounts on the checks.

I do not believe there is a need, yet, for spending money you could be
paying me instead, to register mail just to pay me what is owed.

Please note that everything paid prior to our agreement, and most
certainly before May 1st 2002, was not subject to the agreement itself,
and was payment to keep me alive so that I could work the next day at your
office.

The day that we agreed you owed $14,000.00 was the day your $14,000.00
agreed debt began to me. As it is an agreement, and be it, however, MUCH
less than I would again agree to, if it comes to that, a summary of the
hours I put in at your facility.

Are you requesting that we seek another agreement to settle this matter
in full?

The following checks have been paid directly as part of reconciling our
agreed debt.

Ck# 1049	$1,000
Ck# 1075	$2,000
Ck# 1095	$3,000
Ck# 1111	$1,500
Ck# 1140	$1,500
CK# 1199	  $100
CK#1226		  $200

Your last 4 checks were not paid within the proper timeline nor were they
paid as the proper amounts. If you have forgotten, please reference the
timeline & payment schedule, outlined in our agreement, created by
Colette. Do you need a copy of this?

Any checks previous to 1049 are not in direct fulfilment of the agreed
$14,000.00 debt. For your records, you have paid $9,300 in direct
fulfilment of your $14,000.00 debt.

Check 1049 was May 22nd 2002. Check 1027 was signed as a payment on
4/17/2002. I believe I was still working there at the time, had not
considered leaving at that time, nor did we have an agreement on a
$14,000.00 debt at that time. We did, however, have other agreements that
I will not dive into as they have nothing to do with an agreed $14,000.00
debt.

It is very interesting, and I will say nothing more beyond the thought
that it is *interesting*, that you are attempting to toss in employment
payments as settling part of our agreement. Why didn't you toss in the
$4900 I was paid for being employed in the year 2001 as well? Maybe you
would've saved more money. Employment payments were not a fulfilment of
our agreement.

The most interesting notion that I received as a result of your e-mail is
that I received $250.00 on 4/13 and nothing more until May 22nd. And more
interesting than that, that I actually lived on being paid $1500 after 2
months and 14 days since the beginning of the year, in 2002. You were my
income and that is something I lived with.

Why did I put up with that.

Interesting position you're taking. Thanks.

On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Matt Dittrich wrote:

>
> Hello Matt,
>
> Regarding your request for documentation; the requested information
> accompanied check #1199 which was cashed at Columbia River Bank on
> December 28th, 2002. For your convenience I've attached a current
> accounting. To ensure that you personally receive correspondence and
> payments in the future, we will send them via registered mail.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Matt Dittrich
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Klein [mailto:mklein@nmedia.net]
> Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 5:08 PM
> To: Colette Dittrich
> Cc: Matt Dittrich; mklein@nmedia.net; president@whitehouse.gov;
> eric.j@benddatacenter.com; caryl@lancair.com
> Subject: RE: Matt and Colette
>
>
>
> I have yet to recieve the documentation I requested.
>
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, Matt Klein wrote:
>
> >
> > Matt and Colette:
> >
> > I am nothing less than astounded regarding the significant degree to
> which
> > you have misgauged the seriousness of the current situation.
> >
> > Your current response is so inadequate and inappropriate, I am only
> barely
> > able to justify any response to you whatsoever.
> >
> > First of all, you must get up to speed. I am now convinced that your
> > conduct is unlawful. I am now aware that it will not be very difficult
> to
> > convince those charged with the authority to take the appropriate
> actions
> > against you.
> >
> > Presently, I have equal desires to see you punished for your conduct
> > towards myself and others.  I understand that this has pretty much
> come
> > down to an either/or situation, that once legitimate complaints
> initiate
> > investigations that will most certainly result in expenses you cannot
> > bear, the chances of my recovering amounts you owe me will be not
> > forthcoming anytime soon.
> >
> > Absent the immediate liquidation of your debt to me, there does not
> exist
> > any motivation to further restrain my desire to see the maximum amount
> of
> > justice that can be achieved.
> >
> > It is an error for you to continue to assume you can get away with any
> > further stalling procedures. Now that I know how I can have you
> > legitimately put out of business and in so doing, help prevent your
> > victimizing others, presently, or in the future, the only possible
> action
> > that can prevent starting this ball rolling is your acting
> responsibly.
> >
> > Why did you not send secure funds in the amount of what you admit you
> owe?
> >
> > Where is the proof, i.e. cancelled checks front and back, to support
> your
> > claim of those payments that were supposedly received by me on those
> > dates, and that all of them were in direct fulfillment of the specific
> > agreement of the $14,000.00 debt?
> >
> > Absent.  That is where they are.
> >
> > Nothing.  That is what you have delivered.
> >
> > You could not possibly be more mistaken to think that 'nothing' is
> going
> > to achieve anything more than maximum justice.
> >
> > I am as dangerous to you as anyone could legally possibly be.
> >
> > I am now intelligent on these matters, and more importantly, I am
> > thoroughly enthused to see justice, one way or the other, but
> certainly,
> > one way or the other, now.
> >
> > Not later.  Not next year.  Now.
> >
> > You will either pay what you owe, or you will pay the consequences,
> but
> > not paying is no longer an option you can unilaterally choose.
> >
> > Your response has secured you this and nothing more:  One more
> business
> > day to make sure there is delivered to me the full amount as a
> cashiers
> > check of what you just represented that you understand you owe me, and
> the
> > full documentation to support it as being the full amount paid in
> full. If
> > your documentation is compelling and convincing that I am in error,
> that
> > will be the end of the matter, settled in full.
> >
> > The address you are to deliver the cashiers check and documentation to
> by
> > 5 p.m. Monday, is:
> >
> > Matt Klein
> > 675 NE Bellevue LP
> > Apt #508,
> > Bend, OR 97701
> >
> > You may mail this, but it must be done on Monday, by 5 p.m. Pacific
> Time.
> > That is the extent of which I am able to consider offering you.
> >
> > Further stalling, excuses or failure will serve only to increase my
> > commitment to doing everything in my power that is legal and ethical
> to
> > have you held responsible to the absolute maximum possible allowed by
> our
> > State's Labor Board, the Internal Revenue Service, the Oregon State
> > Department of Revenue and the Attorney General's Office.
> >
> > All indications are to me presently, that with the number of
> individuals
> > that have been treated similar to me, who are willing to drive to
> Portland
> > with me to obtain assistance in getting our affidavits and complaints
> to
> > these agencies professionally prepared, and the underlying facts that
> you
> > have been using a pattern of unfair and deceptive business practices
> to
> > defraud laborers of wages at Christmas will quite legitimately
> stimulate
> > the righteous enthusiasm of these agencies to pursue this matter
> > immediately and vigorously.
> >
> > If the funds are not presented, if the documentation is lacking or
> > insufficient, then you must realize that you are the ones who are
> > requiring that I seek the assistance of government agencies to come
> and
> > get from you what you will not voluntarily deliver.
> >
> > And, I am willing to make copies and myself available to the media.
> >
> > Like the gentleman said, if you're not paying me, then you are not
> paying
> > me, and I really have nothing to lose.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Matt
> >
> > On Fri, 20 Dec 2002, Colette Dittrich wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Matt,
> > >
> > > I have your most recent invoice dated August 12, 2002 reflecting a
> total
> > > owed to you of $14,000:  January 2002 was $3,000; February 2002 was
> > > $3,000; March 2002 was $3,000; April 2002 was $3,000 and a
> miscellaneous
> > > of $2,000.  To date we have issues checks as follows:
> > >
> > > Ck# 2		$1,500
> > > Ck# 1015	$1,000
> > > Ck# 1027	  $250
> > > Ck# 1049	$1,000
> > > Ck# 1075	$2,000
> > > Ck# 1095	$3,000
> > > Ck# 1111	$1,500
> > > Ck# 1140	$1,500
> > > Total				$11,750
> > > Remaining owed		  2,250
> > >
> > > Again, we apologize for our slowness in getting the entire balance
> paid.
> > > Matt & I remain committed to paying the remaining balance and will
> > > continue to make payments as funds are available.
> > >
> > > Colette
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Matt Klein [mailto:mklein@nmedia.net]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 5:35 PM
> > > To: mattd@rvseek.com; colette@rvseek.com
> > > Cc: mklein@nmedia.net
> > > Subject: Matt and Colette
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Dear Matt and Colette,
> > >
> > > As much as I may have previously felt reluctant to do so, the lack
> of
> > > payment of funds that you owe me really is leaving me no choice but
> to
> > > proceed as this gentleman is suggesting.  He is an acquaintance, who
> is
> > > a good friend of a good friend of mine.  He has spent many years in
> the
> > > Attorney General's Office, Consumer Protection Division.
> > >
> > > Last summer, he predicted your current behavior, and at that time
> made
> > > some suggestions.  Since they would have very likely resulted in the
> > > closing of your business and forfeiture of many of your key assets
> and
> > > this would have likely made my getting paid anything from you even
> less
> > > likely, I decided to hold off on implementing his suggestions.
> > >
> > > But, as he says, now, if you are not paying me anyway, what do I
> have to
> > > lose by seeking justice for myself and others who have been treated
> > > similarly?
> > >
> > > That's hard to argue with.  I am very upset to be without the funds
> you
> > > owe me at this time.  If it isn't forthcoming immediately, more
> > > specifically, in full in cash or cashiers check within 48 hours,
> then I
> > > really don't see how I have anything to lose by helping to have you
> be
> > > held responsible for your conduct by 'those charged with the
> authority
> > > and duty to do so', as he says:
> > >
> > > Matt,
> > >
> > > I think that it is becoming clear that the measures I suggested to
> you
> > > this last summer were not at all inappropriate.  It is our tax
> dollars
> > > that pay for the appropriate government agencies that are charged
> not
> > > just with the authority, but the duty, to investigate and determine
> the
> > > most appropriate course of action against any violators of State
> and/or
> > > Federal laws.
> > >
> > > That statement is not meant to understate local authority, but as
> you
> > > are aware, my background is State Law Enforcement, more specifically
> the
> > > Attorney General's Office.
> > >
> > > I maintain that the facts, as you have presented them, are a strong
> > > indication of Unfair and Deceptive Business Practices, and merit of
> a
> > > full investigation.  There are actually, three agencies that I
> assure
> > > you, would be interested in conducting an investigation into the
> > > Practices of these individuals and the business entities they
> operate:
> > > The Oregon State Attorney General's Office, The Department of Labor
> and
> > > the Internal Revenue Service.
> > >
> > > What I recommend at point, since what has happened to you, has also
> > > happened to other individuals, and all of you have the supporting
> > > documentation that I asked about, is for as many of you as possible
> to
> > > pool a little money together and bring that evidence to an Attorney
> and
> > > allow him/her to assist you all in your affidavits and preparation
> of
> > > your complaints before filing them with these government agencies.
> > >
> > > How the complaints are prepared, as well as the supporting
> > > documentation, can effect what level of priority is assigned to the
> case
> > > and any resulting investigation. This is why it worth a little time,
> > > money and effort to make sure these first steps are most properly
> taken,
> > > and an experienced Attorney can be of invaluable assistance in this
> > > regard.
> > >
> > > I can tell you from experience, that when complaints come in, even
> when
> > > further investigation later revealed the same type of facts, a
> clearer,
> > > more compelling and professionally prepared complaint, with
> supporting
> > > affidavits, documentation and evidence, all but made a resulting
> > > investigation not just a given, but also a priority.
> > >
> > > A pattern of fraud, as is indicated in this case, can with your
> > > testimony and the testimony of the others, be more than sufficient
> to
> > > obtain a search warrant and secure their records and any other
> relevant
> > > evidence. I suspect much of the evidence will be electronic,
> > > consequently, most if not all of their computers will need to be
> removed
> > > and forensically inspected.
> > >
> > > This may make it very difficult for them to maintain their
> enterprises,
> > > but if it is the criminal enterprise that you are representing them
> to
> > > be, that can by willful conduct dangle words like 'partner' and
> > > 'profit-sharing' to unlawfully evade both the laws of this State and
> the
> > > Federal Government as well as the proper payment of wages to you and
> > > others, again and gain, then I suggest to you, they should not
> remain
> > > 'in business'.
> > >
> > > If you don't currently have an Attorney or know of one, then get the
> > > funds together quickly and I can get you in the door of Stoel Rives
> as I
> > > have numerous contacts there.
> > >
> > > They are in Portland, but they are the best firm in this State, and
> it
> > > is worth the drive there, and from there to Salem to prepare and
> present
> > > your affidavits and complaints.
> > >
> > > I know what you are thinking, if you do this you will never see any
> more
> > > money from these people because they will quite likely very soon be
> out
> > > of business and incarceration is a distinct possibility.  So, think
> > > about this and think about it real hard.  If they are not paying you
> > > they are not paying you!  And they are not paying you, right?
> > >
> > > So, all you are accomplishing by not allowing the authorities to do
> > > their jobs, is providing them cover to continue in the same manner
> and
> > > hurt someone else the same way as they have done to you.  My God
> Matt,
> > > they owe $5,000.00 and all you are getting are lame excuses and more
> > > statements to lead you on.  If you feel compelled to do so, give
> them a
> > > final demand to pay you in full within 48 hours.
> > >
> > > They can go sell something, borrow if necessary, but I'll tell you
> what,
> > > whatever it takes, it would be a lot smarter for them to do that
> than
> > > try these wholly unacceptable 'theories' out on Labor and IRS and AG
> > > investigators.  Cheaper too, their legal expenses alone would run a
> > > minimum of ten times what they owe you, and that will be hard to get
> if
> > > they are found to have been practicing a pattern of fraud that leads
> to
> > > the forfeiture of all the assets used to perpetrate the fraud and
> funds
> > > gained from those same activities.
> > >
> > > But don't count on them paying, and when they don't, Friday, go to
> > > Portland.  I may even be able to meet you there and introduce you.
> > >
> > > Trust me, this needs to be put to an end.  IF you don't get the full
> > > amount of what you are owed within 2 days, you never will, and you
> > > ethically and morally have no choice but to step forward and make
> the
> > > facts known to those who are charged with both the authority and
> duty to
> > > handle matters such as these as prescribed by the statutes.
> > >
> > > This is absolutely the best advice I can give you.  I am hopeful
> that
> > > the resolution I hear in your voice this time around will keep you
> full
> > > of the courage necessary to see this matter through to it's full and
> > > proper end.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>