Amanda Kirkish dba Accurate National Signings files BK | Notary Discussion History | | | Amanda Kirkish dba Accurate National Signings files BK Go Back to November, 2013 Index | | |
Posted by 101livescan on 11/15/13 8:52am Msg #492876
Amanda Kirkish dba Accurate National Signings files BK
What about this wonder girl? What a fast tumble, hustle Amanda gave notaries in less than a year in business.
What do you think Amanda submitted to the courts today ???? bankruptcy papers ???? She tries to get out of everything !!!!
Case TES1301645 - SMITH VS KIRKISH
Case TES1301645 - Complaints/Parties
Complaint Number: 0001 — PCS Plaintiff's Claim - Southwest of SANDRA SMITH Original Filing Date: 07/29/2013 Complaint Status: Judgment 09/27/2013 Party Number Party Type Party Name Attorney Party Status 1 Plaintiff SANDRA SMITH Pro Per Judgment 09/27/2013 2 Defendant AMANDA MARIE KIRKISH Unrepresented Judgment Against 09/27/2013
Case TES1301645 - Actions/Minutes
Viewed Date Action Text Disposition 11/14/2013 RETURNED DOCUMENT: NOTICE OF STAY SUBMITTED BY AMANDA MARIE KIRKISH.
To those unpaid notaries who worked for ANS, your complaint to the DA still stands, it is being looked into very seriously, and of course no one should ever have expected to be paid by ANS once their doors/phones/website shut down when Valuamerica aka Value Escrow cut Amanda off from future orders due to nonpayment claims by notaries to their PA accounting department. Then the Kirkishes relocated to their posh hot pad on Big Sycamore Court in Wildomar, stiffing notaries to the tune of more than $30K. C'mon, isn't it a little ostentatious to rent a $2500 5/3.5 Bed/Bath home, get a $15K boob job and vacation with your partners in Vegas and Cancun, and then expect it all to go away in a BK strategy? Really?
Wonder how that Wildomar HVAC biz is going for Jason Kirkish, is he declaring BK too? He got his contractors license back after recently catching up on his delinquent child support payments to his first family, so there must be some revenue somewhere.
Take heart, notaries. You won't see any money here, but this naughty little girl needs to learn a lesson about it's not nice to lie, lie, lie, steal, steal, steal. And the DA is on it like a flies on a cowpie. Some people just can't phart without the noise and smell traveling on internet speed all around the global atmosphere.
Never, never attempt to rate the notaries when you yourself can't become one because of a criminal background conviction involving moral terpitude. Heck, I thought it was pretty bold of Amanda to get into this business when she was still on probation for her unlawful forgery/ID fraud conviction, using Valuamerica revenue to pay her restitution. What an amazing young woman Amanda is! Right under the very noses of members of our new SPW organization.
| Reply by PegiT_MN on 11/15/13 9:30am Msg #492885
I am standing up right now giving you a standing ovation for this post Cheryl! These people need to rot in jail and I hope the DA throws the book at them......and I hope she is here lurking and reading every nasty word people are posting about her. Shame on you Amanda for hiring notaries knowing full well you weren't going to pay them!
| Reply by 101livescan on 11/15/13 9:44am Msg #492889
Don't forget, Miss Peggy, that Amanda did not act alone. She had co-conspirators. She wasn't even signed on ANS' checking account because of her own dark past. The other USBANK account holders signers will be held accountable as well.
Ahhh, yes, and USBank is also listed on the SPW member list. The plot thickens!
| Reply by Marian_in_CA on 11/15/13 11:43am Msg #492915
Yes, there is a filing as of yesterday.
If anyone wants to show up... their 342 hearing will be:
12/19/2013 at 09:00 AM at RM 103 3801 University Ave., Riverside, CA 92501
Their list of creditors is HUGE... over 2800 names.
6:13-bk-28607-MW Jason Lee Kirkish and Amanda Marie Kirkish Case type: bk Chapter: 7 Asset: No Vol: v Judge: Mark S Wallace Date filed: 11/14/2013 Date of last filing: 11/15/2013
Case Summary
Office: Riverside Filed: 11/14/2013 County: RIVERSIDE-CA Original chapter: 7 Current chapter: 7 Nature of debt: consumer Pending status: Awaiting 341 Meeting Trustee: United States Trustee (RS) City: Riverside Phone: (951) 276-6990 Fax: (951) 276-6973 Email: [e-mail address]
Trustee: Karl T Anderson (TR) City: Palm Springs Phone: (760) 778-4889 Email: [e-mail address] Party 1: Kirkish, Jason Lee (Debtor) SSN / ITIN: xxx-xx-xxxx
Party 2: Kirkish, Amanda Marie (Joint Debtor) SSN / ITIN: xxx-xx-xxxx
Atty: Karen E Lockhart Represents party 1: Debtor Phone: 951-698-5191 Fax: 951-698-5192 Email: [e-mail address] Atty: Karen E Lockhart R epresents party 2: Joint Debtor Phone: 951-698-5191 Fax: 951-698-5192 Email: [e-mail address] Location of case files:
Let's not forget that this is not the first time they've done this.. in fact, they are filing almost exactly on time to beat the 7 year window of the last Chapter 7 they filed.
I'm not opposed to people having to file. All kinds of reasons and things happen in life that necessitate it. BUT... There comes a time when it looks abusive and a reason to act irresponsibly.
Per the docket:
Notice of Debtor's Prior Filings for joint debtors Jason Lee Kirkish and Amanda Marie Kirkish Case Number 05-61040, Chapter 7 filed in California Eastern Bankruptcy Court on 10/13/2005 , Standard Discharge on 01/24/2006; Case Number 05-61040, Chapter 7 filed in California Eastern Bankruptcy Court on 10/13/2005.(Admin) (Entered: 11/15/2013)
| Reply by Marian_in_CA on 11/15/13 12:14pm Msg #492919
BTW... in lookin gat the petition, it looks like
Amanda is claiming she was the sole owner of ANS, and that there were no partners in the business, nor did any partners depart the business. This was, BTW, signed under penatly of perjury.
That seem awfully interesting given that right here they claimed to be a partnership of at least 4 people.
| Reply by 101livescan on 11/15/13 3:11pm Msg #492939
What about Sara Kirkish, one of the owners?
Bet the DA is having a hard time locating Sara, as this is really Amanda impersonating another person, something she is very skilled at doing.
| Reply by Marian_in_CA on 11/15/13 3:46pm Msg #492947
Re: What about Sara Kirkish, one of the owners?
I'm not entirely sure about what the DA is doing down there. I just can go off the full BK petition (nearly 100 pages!) ON there, it says that the business was not operated as a corp or a partnership and that Jason is still operating his other business. My eyebrow went up on a lot of stuff I saw there... now consider that this is just the first filing, it will likely be amended soon, They probably got the filing done asap in order to stop collection activity, including activity on the recent court judgement.
Interesting, they claim to have over $22,000 in a business checking account. I don't know if that is the ANS account or the husband's business account... but it's the only checking account they list. Who only has a business checking account and not a personal one? Especially a married couple that owns two different businesses? That confuses me. Though they did have a US Bank account that they claim was closes in September. They also claim to have no office equipment... odd, given that they both ran businesses.
They also state the the majority of their debts are PERSONAL and CONSUMER debts, not business debts... which is odd, given that there are hundreds and hundreds of independent contractors listed on the petition, just about all of them list with "unknown" as to how much the Kirkishes owe them.
I see a lot of odd stuff in here... perhaps a lot of it just easily fixed because they were trying to get the paperwork filed. But I take issue with the, claiming Amanda's business had no partners, which right here on this very site they claim that they did.
(For those wondering how I know this, I have access to PACER, the federal filings database. I use it often as support for other clients.)
For those notaries who think they might get a buck or two our of this... they claim to have no assets (or all exempt assets... and have told the court, "Debtor estimates that, after any exempt property is excluded and administrative expenses paid, there will be no funds available for distribution to unsecured creditors."
| Reply by jaxnotary031 on 11/17/13 6:55pm Msg #493114
Wow!! What cojones!!
|
|