That truly sucks - and is hopefully the exception rather than the rule in our industry. Is the winery local? Have you had face to face communications with them? I know that you are a lawyer - have you or anyone else attempted to sue as of yet?
I agree that it’s probably not best to ‘name names’ but if this is a winery that is still actively in business, and may have a ‘presence’ here on this board, it would suck to think that they would run their business in this manner. Sh*t happens to us all in life, and sometimes we need to forgo making payments in the short term, but it’s always the right thing to make things right in the long term. Period. If they are still active, they should have the means to repay . . .
Hi Larry. I have had several meetings with the owner. I extended the statute of limitations for two years. We worked out a repayment plan which he followed for two months then defaulted. I arranged sales of the wine in kegs which provided some cash. I talked to other wineries who purchased our fruit about buying the wine in barrels. He promised me to send the checks from wine sales at public events I saw and then did not. So after six years we sued and secured the judgment.
Hi Mel. The lien only applies to bankruptcy proceedings and only if the wine has been kept separate and can be identified. If it is blended you lose the priority of the lien- you still have your claim as an unsecured creditor.
You can garnishee a debtor’s paycheck by serving papers on the employer – very common.
You can have the sheriffs stand at the till in a debtor restaurant and collect the money as the patrons pay. That is VERY effective. I know because I did that once for a client in California. A certified check for the full amount – a six-figure sum – arrived at our law firm in a couple of hours.
I have no experience with the process and it may be too late for your situation, but it may help someone in the future. PACA gives fruit growers first in line status in a bankruptcy proceeding. The USDA is available to help with the resolution process.
Hi Mel. Yes the winery is selling wine. They are also generating income by providing custom crush services. They rent their winery space and have a tasting room in another locale. Besides two landlords they are paying employees, utilities and of course themselves. I made a proposal for a two year payment plan with interest tolled. The response was “I don’t have the money.” My wife thought I was being too generous and lenient. There is some irony here because they are selling wine made with our grapes which were not paid for to generate income to pay their landlords, utilities etc.
Just out of curiousity, how do grapes normally get paid for when sent from the grower to the vintner? Does the vintner post a Letter of Credit? or is just billed in 90 days? or is there some other mechanism?
There are some great wineries like Loring and Brewer Clifton who paid us when we dropped off the grapes or within a couple of days. Vineyard folks are like orchards- we have only one pay day all year long.
Wow. I know some like to shit all over banks and the financial system…but this is exactly what irrevocable letters of credit / trade financing banks are for. Buyer posts one to the seller, goods get shipped, buyer pays, and all is good. If there is hiccup, seller exercises the LC, bank pays seller, and bank puts the screws to the buyer to get the money. Generally banks are well equipped and prepared to collect money from those reluctant to pay.
Used to represent banks trying to collect judgement against deadbeat businesses. Post-judgment financial discovery was always fun. This was in MN so not sure if CA is different, but we’d do all sorts of things like get their insurance policies canceled by sending garnishments on unearned premiums right after they renewed. Took 2nd vehicles, coin collections, all sorts of things.
We have frequently sent restraining notices to AMEX here in NY.
The truth of the matter is that we have not had much success recovering any funds from AMEX.
It is a shame there is no legitimate legal recourse for what is technically fraud, theft or grand theft. Years ago I got little taste of this type of “crime” in my opinion.
An individual had provided capital to a winemaker and merchant to produce and sell about 100K worth of wine but the winemaker wouldn’t pay him back timely. After six or seven court cases to try to collect he was totally frustrated by the system. He went to the winemaker’s storage facility and offices, forced his way in and removed wine in an amount equivalent to one quarter what was owed. The winemaker called in a burglary with a known suspect who had called and left a message on his answering machine saying he took the wine and would be returning regularly to collect his money.
I was able to convince the victim he was the only one I could prosecute and worked out a deal for him to return the wine and the winemaker would drop his complaint. Again, I could only prosecute the “victim” in this case. I would rather have helped load a truck with enough wine, equipment and property from the “dishonest” winemaker to make victim whole.
Per the plaintiff, the active winery is actively hiding its money from the sheriff.
That’s the entire point of this thread - the plaintiff can’t get remuneration because the winery owner is moving his money into accounts [or mattresses] which are unknown to the court.
Furthermore, if there is bottled wine physically present in the winery, then there is no reason* whatsoever that the sheriff can’t simply show up at the winery and seize the wine.
The fact that the sheriff hasn’t shown up at the winery and seized any bottled wine led me to conclude that either:
A) The plaintiff’s lawyer is utterly incompetent, or
B) There is no bottled wine in the winery which the sheriff can seize [meaning the winery is either completely broke, or else the winery is hiding its bottled wine from the sheriff in precisely the same manner as it’s hiding its bank accounts from the court].
*I suppose the other possibility would be that because the sheriff does not have a license to distribute [or sell at auction] alcohol, some muckety-muck dressed up in a funny costume has declared that sheriffs are forbidden to seize alcohol as a means of remuneration in the state of California?
I have never heard of something like that around here.
But now let me ask you this: If the winery is accepting VISA/Mastercard payments from “mailing list” customers all over the country, then wouldn’t the plaintiff have to get an order from a federal court to intercept the interstate payments?
Can a state court intercede in interstate payments?
It seems to me that the intercession would have to involve a mechanism [in software or hardware] which was fundamentally an interstate wiretap, and I don’t see how a state court would have the authority to order such a thing.
Unless maybe there’s a federal statue which allows the receiving state to seize wired funds coming from the paying state?
But if the winery’s web server [with its VISA/Mastercard functionality] were in, say, Las Vegas Nevada, then it seems like you’d have to get the Feds involved somehow.
Nathan - wine is a bitch to sell. Trying to sell a massive quantity of someone else’s wine in short order would mean getting some small fraction of the retail value (10%?). There’d be great expense negating higher return schemes. (You also be essentially marketing for the winery, while also contending with potential news stories devaluing the wine you’re trying to sell.) No sense seizing the wine. Garnishing their sales makes sense. Seizing a critical piece of equipment during harvest, like the press or destemmer, makes sense - they’d cut you a check on the spot.
Stephen is a lawyer himself and knows plenty of them - I don’t think it’s point A.
This sucks all around - and the fact that it has gone on as long as it has while this winery still is in business and making new wines is absolutely amazing. I do hope that Stephen gets closure on this sooner rather than later.