Here is some fun reading on a slow, lazy day from a discussion in April 2018 between Rob and his buddy mickeycrimm, although not his buddy at the time. ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rob.Singer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mickeycrimm
A judgement against Rob in 2011 for $958. The plaintiff was an apartment complex in Arizona. When it was brought up on this site a few years ago Rob gave some explanation about stiffing the landlord. In 2005 Rob was charged with forceable entry at an apartment complex in Arizona. Don't know the disposition.
mickey was told why the apt. was abandoned only it doesn't fit his scenario. We sold our house and moved into an apt. while we waited for our new RV to arrive for a 5-year living and travel life. It arrived early so I simply left before the lease expired.
Now what is interesting is the timing. The judgement in question occurred in 2011, but the eviction stemming from Rob's admitted breaking of the lease occurred in 2005. It took 6 years to work through court.
So 2005. At the time of this above discussion, Rob ad not yet revealed his double-up bug claim, so at that time Rob's story was 2005 fell right smack in the middle of is 10 year million dollar Singer progression system claim. But just a few months later Rob came up with the stolen double up bug claim, which changes the timeline. So now this 2005 eviction and court action filed for $958 falls in year 2 of Rob's 5 year, 2.9 million dollar double up bug claim (2004-2009).
So the question anyone with even half a brain has to ask themselves is would a guy in the second year of a 2.9 million dollar run (600k a year) allow a court action for $958 to go forward for 6 years that he
KNEW he would lose, because he admits to breaking the lease? Or would someone not wanting to draw attention to their financial situation as Rob later stated, pay off that few hundred dollar issue? BoSox you have half a brain.....what do you think?
(by the way there are dozens of these pieces that don't fit.) LOL.