Posted by John Maloof on August 21, 2010 at 6:24pm
I am a small business woman in Truckee, California engaged in the sale of home furnishings and accessories.Let me tell you about the state of the economy here in Truckee. We suffer from severe unemployment and a housing market that has been devastated. Our main shopping street is littered with vacant and boarded up store fronts symbolic of hard working small business men and women who could no longer hold on.Now let me tell you how the State of California is helping small business in California deal with this ever shrinking economy and the expanding hardships experienced by small business.On Thursday, August 5, an agent from the State of California Department of Consumer Affairs entered my store and proceeded to inspect labels on upholstered furniture on my showroom floor. She then announced she was taking a $1,300.00 club chair with her to Sacramento for testing. The chair she zeroed in on is manufactured by an American owned and operated company in Marshfield, Wisconsin. I told her all the safety labels required for compliance with California regulations were clearly visible on the chair. She agreed. Yes, they were all present. HOWEVER, SHE WAS TAKING THE CHAIR ANYWAY BECAUSE SHE THOUGHT IT OUGHT TO BE RETESTED. Can someone tell me, what is the point of all the required state labels if that is not sufficient to satisfy the state? This agent certainly could not.I telephoned the agency in Sacramento to verify the credentials of this agent. I was told, yes, she was an agent and had every right to take the chair. I then asked the agent in the store when I could expect the chair to be returned. In a flippant and unconcerned manner, I was told THE CHAIR WOULD NEVER BE RETURNED BUT IN FACT WOULD BE BURNED “TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA”. When I asked who was to reimburse me for the chair this bureaucrat told me to file an insurance claim. Now there is a clever idea.I then telephoned the manufacturer and was told the chair was in compliance with California consumer protection laws. The product had been tested and was properly labeled. While on the telephone speaking with the company this state bureaucrat shoves a copy of the state regulations in front of me in which she has highlighted in shocking pink the following: “No person shall interfere with, obstruct or otherwise hinder any inspector of the bureau or the departments division of investigation in the performance of his or her duties”. Can you imagine, my telephone call to the manufacturer suggested to her that I was interfering in her duties and in the middle of my conversation required immediate attention to her highlighted regulations? Well, let’s add some intimidation to the help we can expect from the State of California. IF ANYONE SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT INTERFERENCE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ME. THIS AGENT WAS ABOUT TO CONFISCATE MY PERSONAL PROPERTY AND COULD NOT EVEN SUPPLY ME WITH A REASONABLE ANSWER AS TO WHY.She proceeded to confiscate the chair. By the way, on her way out she thanked me for my cooperation in helping her protect the people of California. Interestingly, she left all the other furniture produced by this manufacturer on the showroom floor. I guess these pieces did not present a hazard to the people of California from which they needed protection!I am a small business struggling to succeed in a continually dwindling customer base and ever shrinking economy. I take pride in finding American manufacturers to showcase in my store. I do not seek or receive any form of government assistance to operate my business. What I do get from the State of California is a bureaucrat with the regulatory power to confiscate and destroy my personal property without due process. If that is not emblematic of an abuse of discretion what is?My lease expires December 31, 2010. This sort of experience hardly motivates me to continue. Should I choose to close my business the consequences are obvious: another boarded up store front, more names added to the unemployed, a reduction in orders to manufacturers for goods and services, and the list goes on.A small store in Truckee may seem insignificant but this incident is indicative of the arrogance and condescension of government bureaucrats who abuse their discretion under the guise of protecting the people of the State of California.There are governments around the world that confiscate private property without due process. I never dreamed I was living in one. Today a chair, tomorrow a gun, and then what?I do not need this kind of destructive protection, interference in my ability to make a living, and the unreasonable confiscation of my personal property. This is one state employee California could do without. I understand more and more every day the attraction of the Tea Party movement to millions of Americans.Deborah Maloof
The manufacturer of the chair is Marshfield Furniture of Marshfield, Wisconsin. Without hesitation, Marshfield offered to reimburse Tippy Canoe for the cost of the chair. Such a shame. It is the State of California that should reimburse for the chair not Marshfield.
There is an update. yesterday I received a telephone call from the Bureau of Consumer Affairs. The agent, M. Olson, has been reassigned and is no longer dealing with the public. (In the private sector she would have been fired. As we know government operates a little differently.) I have been told the Bureau has suspended the practice of confiscating home furnishings from retails pending anticipated changes to the laws of California. The Bureau verbally apologized to me for the conduct of this agent. I have been invited to Sacramento to comment on changes to the current statutes and regulations that govern this agency. State Assemblyman Dan Loque has been quick and direct in dealing with this issue and is to be commended. I would like to see this story as a national media piece. It is so emblematic of government intrusion in our lives without concern or regard for constitutionally protected rights. E mail John and Ken and tell them you appreciated the piece . If possible contact local and national media. Send the letter to whomever you feel appropriate. Thanks for your comments.
The media has been contacted but has not responded. It is a violation of the Federal Constitution. She was alone. Yes, the state government can steel from me and you and the next door neighbor. It is happening every day. I do not intend to let it lay but getting attention to address the issue in the media is proving difficult.
My question to you Deborah; why didn't you contact the media? This is a violation of the Constitutional right to private property. I mean, it cost you a sale of the chair, cutting into your profits, plus the cost of your chair from the manufacturer. I'd be raising holy hell; papers or not.
“No person shall interfere with, obstruct or otherwise hinder any inspector of the bureau or the departments division of investigation in the performance of his or her duties”
Was this woman alone? Did her 'paperwork' state that she could confiscate personal property as part of her duties? The State government cannot steal from you.. .. .Sooooo, next is your home, for some bureaucrat to live in while they are in town?
I don't think I would let this lay; you shouldn't either!
Yes, she provided paperwork. Interestingly, the paper work acknowledges that all the required tags were present on the chair. Our store was not singled out. The agent and agents like her are present throughout California confiscating "samples" for testing.
Just curious did she give you any paperwork in exchange for the chair?
This just does not seem right. I would consult an attorney at least to find out if she could be sued civilly.
They must have a reason and why would she single you out and the chair?
As a resident of California, I agree with your comments. California is going to go bankrupt and very soon. California was doing just fine when Regan was the Governor. They had a surplus.
Comments
“No person shall interfere with, obstruct or otherwise hinder any inspector of the bureau or the departments division of investigation in the performance of his or her duties”
Was this woman alone? Did her 'paperwork' state that she could confiscate personal property as part of her duties? The State government cannot steal from you.. .. .Sooooo, next is your home, for some bureaucrat to live in while they are in town?
I don't think I would let this lay; you shouldn't either!
This just does not seem right. I would consult an attorney at least to find out if she could be sued civilly.
They must have a reason and why would she single you out and the chair?