1. October 16, 2012 @ 9:28 am

    @kevinokeefe This is worth spreading about as well, from @MarkWBenntt http://t.co/1YeIfWWJ


  2. shg
    October 16, 2012 @ 12:27 pm

    So if I understand Kate Merolo’s email properly, she considers tantamount to defamation to state, albeit accurately, that she was for some period of time in the employ of Gurstel Chargo.

    Talk about get the hell out. Apparently, Kate doesn’t want there to be any evidence of her association to Gurstel on the internet, and who can blame her?


    • Mark Bennett
      October 16, 2012 @ 12:46 pm

      Could falsely claiming that someone worked for Gurstel Chargo be a new form of defamation per se?

      Ms. Merolo worked for Gurstel and quit—whether in disgust or otherwise—or was fired. I am happy to provide her with the correction she requested.

      An apology? Not so much. The undated Gurstel press release is still the first thing that pops up when you google her name.


  3. Anonymous
    October 16, 2012 @ 11:06 pm

    For the sake of discussion:

    Why would you go “googling” for Gurstel Chargo dirt? You disagree with their business. Fair enough. This is your “niche”. Just like this is theirs. Apparently you are just as ruthless as they are.

    But why would you go after their employees? Are you thinking anyone employed by Gurstel Chargo is a bad person? I understand and respect that you disagree with the practice of the industry and/or its leadership but what about the people who need these jobs? Who knows why they take them. All I know is that isn’t your place to judge, let alone post a blog with the intention of making them look ignorant and embarrassed.

    Comments like that would make someone look foolish.

    Secondly, while I’m sure we all appreciate your position, as a (journalist?) or blogger, who writes for the purpose of informing others, you should probably check your facts first before publishing. I get it, you saw it on google. I guess you’re above confirming anything factual.

    Good day.


    • Mark Bennett
      October 17, 2012 @ 9:32 am

      I’m not “going after” Merolo and Kulper. You must be new to this blog, or you’d know what me “going after” someone looks like.

      Merolo and Kulper are just characters in the story. They lay down with dogs (Kulper twice); I am not to blame me for their fleas.

      Neither the fact that the (undated) Gurstel press release was from 2011 nor the fact that Ms. Merolo has moved on made a word of the post incorrect. It didn’t even merit a correction. I’m happy to provide my readers additional information as it comes in, but it doesn’t change the story.


  4. andrews
    November 3, 2012 @ 1:11 pm

    It is good that people leave these firms, but be assured that there are plenty more where they came from. Where I went to grad school a few years ago, the FC mills recruit today. Not sure they are getting the cream of the crop of students, but there are soon-to-be lawyers looking for jobs like this.

    I presume they rationalize it with the idea that the money is legitimately owed (often partly true) and it would be unfair to let people get away without paying. So what if a few laws are broken?

    The surprising thing to me is that so few attys bring debt collection claims. Besides the federal law, [state] has a statute which provides additional damages for those who want them.


  5. Anonymous
    August 1, 2015 @ 1:57 am

    I am interested in this statement you made: “Illegal garnishments are regularly sought and granted”. I believe that may be happening to me very soon. Please contact me at my email address so that I may ask you questions as to what is illegal; I am in hopes of drafting a defense. Thank you.


Leave a Reply