Re: Arden Van Upp

Dear Mr. Hansen,

It is with deepest regret that I am constrained to inform you of two very serious problems which have arisen with respect to your client, Arden Van Upp.

The first concerns a certain telephone bill in the amount of $467.00, consisting almost entirely of calls which Arden Van Upp made on the telephone of another person without the permission of that person. These included several hundred long distance telephone calls which Arden made to her sister in Akron, Ohio, to her niece in Eureka, Missouri, to her mother and lawyers in Vallejo and even to me in New York City.

The second is an even more serious matter because I have been threatened by Arden several times in the last few days. For example, just within the past few minutes, as I have been typing this letter, Arden came up and told me that she has some "friends" who want to come here and talk to me about this situation.

I do not take kindly to being threatened. My inclination in such situations is to tell everybody about it. For this reason, I am telling you as I have told several others. I am hereby notifying you that should any physical violence come to me in the next several days, the persons to look to will be Arden Van Upp and her friend, Craig Larsen.

Regarding the first item: The Telephone bill: In late 1994, I had a telephone under my name at 2550 Webster Street. The number was (415) 673-7123. It was disconnected with a $300 bill after Arden ran her Party Fax on my telephone line without my knowledge or permission while I was in New York. The reason she gives for doing this is that she thought that I was never coming back, so it was all right to run up my telephone bill, she says. This unpaid telephone bill is on my credit reports and I cannot get a credit card or a telephone in my name because of it. The bill itself clearly shows more than 200 charge calls per month to subscribers to The Party Fax.

Throughout 1995 and 1996 Arden harassed me, insisting that I install another telephone in her house, which I naturally refused to do. Finally, this harassment became so bad that, in July, 1996, a business associate in Japan, Richard Bozulich, whom Arden had also been harassing to put in a telephone, agreed to have a phone installed in her house in his name, with the firm understanding that this phone was to be used for business purposes only and that under no circumstances was she to make any calls at all on that phone. Needless to say, I had already informed him that Arden has a proclivity for making long distance telephone calls on other people's phones.

The telephone was installed on the last week of July, 1996 at 2550 Webster Street. I had the telephone installation man seal the telephone box to prevent any tampering with or switching of the lines. The telephone number was (415) 292-7711. I then went to New York on August 4, 1996.

When I returned on October 29, 1996, I discovered that the phone had just been disconnected the previous day. Arden refused to give me the bill, which had been sent to her address at 2550 Webster Street, claiming that the cat had urinated on it. I was later able to obtain parts of it. It showed that for example on the last day that the telephone had been working, which was October 28, 1996, Arden had made 13 long distance telephone calls on that phone. The total bill was $467.00. Because I had been in New York and Virginia for the previous three months, and Richard Bozulich had been in Japan for the entire time, it was obvious that neither of us had made these calls. Moreover, all of the calls were to people whom Arden knows, including her sister in Akron, Ohio, her niece in Eureka, Missouri and to her Party Fax subscribers around the Bay Area. I do not know anybody in any of those places, nor does Richard Bozulich. In addition, the telephone call box had been pried open and the telephone lines switched and tampered with. This had been done by Craig Larsen, according to Arden.

Arden gives the following reasons for making these long distance telephone calls on the phone of Richard Bozulich:

1. She thought that I was not coming back from New York (the same excuse she gave last time).

2. She thought that since Richard Bozulich lives in Japan, he would not care that he incurred a telephone bill here.

3. She thought that I had not told Richard Bozulich about the telephone in his name, that I was scamming him, and that therefore there was nothing wrong with her scamming me.

4. She knew that the telephone was going to be disconnected anyway, so therefore she saw no harm in running up the bill.

5. She says that she incurred a $50 charge from AOL ("America On-Line") after I signed her up for the account and that therefore she was entitled to offset that by using the telephone in the name of Richard Bozulich. (This AOL account was a service which she requested that I sign her up for. The bills she suddenly now complains about were incurred during the period September, 1994 through February, 1995, more than two years ago. I several times advised her not to use AOL and to switch to a cheaper service. She did not do so and continued with AOL, against my advice.)

Far from being unconcerned about the telephone bill in his name, Richard Bozulich is incensed about this. This unpaid $467.00 bill has gone on his TRW credit report. He is receiving dunning notices from collection agencies. As an importer of products from Japan to America and as a businessman who frequently ships goods on credit, it is of vital importance to Richard Bozulich that he maintain a good credit rating. Mr. Bozulich spent about 10 days in America two weeks ago. During that time, he made complaints to Pacific Bell and to the police against Arden Van Upp.

Arden Van Upp flatly refuses to pay the bill, except she says that if we can provide her with a list of calls which she made she will pay for those calls only. It is difficult to provide such a list, because she still has failed and refused to hand over the actual bill, which came to her address at 2550 Webster Street but she says that the cat urinated on it. We do know that she made more than 200 charge calls on that phone.

This brings us to the second item, which are the threats I have received over the past few days:

In a desperate attempt to rid herself of the problems created by Dr. Badgley, Arden has recently renewed an old friendship with Craig Larsen. Mr. Larsen claims to have a patent on "The Video-Telephone". I do not know much about patent law, but I suspect that this patent of The Video-Telephone, if indeed it exists, is void for obviousness. It does not seem to add much to Dick Tracy's "two-way wrist radio." However, I could be wrong.

Mr. Larsen now states that using his patent on The Video-Telephone he has raised $1.55 million to buy out Dr. Badgley, plus another one million to fix up the house. Mr. Larsen has bounced several checks recently and I believe has had his telephone disconnected for non-payment. Mr. Larsen does not even have a college education.

Now Mr. Larsen wants me and my stuff moved out of the house as a condition for his putting up the $1.55 million he says that he is going to put up to buy out Dr. Badgley.

I believe that Mr. Larsen's proposal is going nowhere, because Dr. Badgley will object and Judge Montali will never accept it. Again, however, I could be wrong.

Nevertheless, I have been threatened by Arden. She apparently now believes that I am standing in the way of her receiving $1.55 million from Craig Larsen. Although I doubt that Mr. Larsen will ever give her this money, I have every reason to be concerned about these threats. Arden Van Upp herself told me that Craig Larsen spent two weeks in jail for assaulting a woman and in fact he moved into her house in around March, 1996 because he just gotten out of jail and had nowhere else to go. Arden says that she did not know this at the time. She thought that Craig was still on good terms with his girlfriend, Joan, who in fact had put him in jail.

Around one month ago, Arden asked me to call the police and have Craig Larsen arrested. Interestingly, this is exactly what Dr. Badgley claims that Arden did. I refused to make the call. Arden has also indicated that she was going have Craig Larsen detained and put into a drug rehabilitation program. She several times asked him to move out of the house but he refused, she says. Now, however, Arden has become good friends with Craig Larsen, because he says that he is going to give her $1.55 million to buy out Dr. Badgley.

I think that you know this already, but in case you don't, I have been living at 2550 Webster Street since early 1992. Although I have spent about half of that time on the East Coast, I have always had my own room plus the keys to the house. I can document and prove this. In addition, Arden Van Upp is functionally illiterate. She is incapable of writing even a simple letter. Almost all of the letters she has written over the last five years were actually written by me. I am the person who tells her what to tell you (although I certainly did not tell her to perjure herself in court recently. That happened during the three months that I was in New York.) I think that you know that already, too.

I consulted a lawyer about this yesterday. He says that Arden cannot throw me out of the house without a court order (which she will never get after I tell the real story to the judge) plus she will face a major lawsuit if she touches any of my personal papers and possessions which she is now threatening to destroy.

This is not just a matter of my tenancy. This lawyer wants to bring a class action against Arden on behalf of all of the tenants which she has similarly screwed over the last 20 years. I suspect and hope that you are not aware of the full extent of the problem. I believe that if the true extent of her activities were to become known, she would not only be liable for a judgment in the millions but she could easily spend several years in state and even in federal prison.

In addition, what I have just related to you is only the tip of the iceberg. For example, in late 1994 and early 1995, Arden had me driving her around in a yellow 1967 Chevrolet which she had led me to believe that she owned. Later, the car was impounded by the police and I found out that it had been reported as a stolen car by the actual legal owner. Had the car been stopped while I was driving it (which fortunately never happened), I could easily have been arrested and spent five years in prison, especially since I was out on parole on a child custody matter. Arden knew this, and that is the reason she wanted me to drive the car rather than driving it herself. If the car had been stopped, she wanted me to be arrested rather than her.

Arden also placed me in the situation of possibly being arrested in the cases of both her mother, Doris Rich, and (less likely) in the case of Dr. Badgley. As you perhaps know, I was the person taking care of her mother while Arden was in jail in January, 1995. Arden actually did not know where her mother was.

I am well aware that you have your own problems with Arden Van Upp. I have seen your bills, your invoices and your letters. However, if what I know about Arden Van Upp becomes known to the courts, which would automatically make it known to Dr. Badgley and to Neel Rich, your chances of collecting the legal fees which are due and owing to your firm could be diminished.

I am aware that you will be meeting with Arden Van Upp within the next few days. I believe that it is in your interest and in the interest of your client that you urge upon her the following courses of action:

1. She should pay the entire bill of $467.00 owed on the number (415) 292-7711. She will claim that she should only pay for the calls which she personally made. Mr. Bozulich however points out that he did not make any calls on that phone at all and was not even in the United States of America during the period when the phone was working and moreover that it was due to her harassment and insistence that the telephone was installed at all. Furthermore, he is tired of playing these endless games with Arden Van Upp and demands that she pay the entire bill in full. He wants the bill paid NOW.

2. She should also pay the bill owed on (415) 673-7123 at 2550 Webster Street under my name of Samuel H. Sloan from 1994 to early 1995. I still have the old bills and I can prove that she ran The Party Fax on that number without my knowledge or permission and that she made more than 200 long distance telephone calls on that number.

3. Arden Van Upp should be admonished and warned not to touch any of my papers or personal effects, not to evict me without the benefit of court order, not to mess with my Pentium computer and not to order any products or services in my name or to call herself "Mrs. Sam Sloan" as she has been known to do.

Again, I wish to state that I regret having to write this letter. I wish that I had not been forced to take this action. Nevertheless, I have no choice. The matter of the $467.00 telephone bill has been the subject of almost daily arguments in the more than three months since I first learned about it. That plus the threats I have received from Arden Van Upp during the past few days require that I inform you of this situation.

Very Truly Yours,

Sam Sloan