Renewed Motion for
New Examination
and Substitute Examiner
 

Court Filings are in Reverse Chronological Order

• 8th Supplemental Submission - in this Submission an email from Mark Schlachet is introduced, in  which he discusses the conduct of Benesch, Freidlander, Coplan &  Aranoff, as an gofer of the Bank Group before the Bankruptcy was filed. This conduct parallels the conduct of the management of Level  Propane after the Bankruptcy was filed, the result of which was to conceal 35,000 customers and 43,000 tanks, driving down the value  of the business so that Amerigas could purchase assets (customers,  leased customer tanks and satellite distribution system) worth $1.2  Billion.

•   Reply  Brief:in this Brief, the Court is shown an example of a Level billing statement, with the tank serial number on it (which comprises the customer account reconciliation library), an  example of a tank discrepancy report, and an email from Steven Sues in which he establishes that at minimum Level had 70,200 customer  tank locations.

•   Post-Hearing Brief: in this Brief, the whole story is drawn together.

• 7^th Supplemental Submission:in this Submission,  the Court learns that when purportedly lost customers were contacted in August, 2003 with an invitation to return, they uniformly stated  that they had always been customer.

•  6^th Supplemental Submission: in this Submission, the Court  is introduced to an eyewitness to both the disabling of the database, so than 35,000 customers and tank locations were hidden, and the disappearance of the written record of the tank locations.

• 5^th Supplemental Submission: in this Submission,  the Court learns that the Debtor is indifferent to the proposed  destruction by the U. S. Trustee of what was likely the last accurate customer list in existence.

• 4^th Supplemental Submission:in this Submission,  the continuing manipulation of the customer count was ongoing.

•3d Supplemental Submission:in this Submission,  the disabling of the database is described and the evidence in support  is submitted.

• 2d Supplemental Submission: in this Submission the Court is reminded that Examiner’s Request  for Production was utter thwarted by the  Debtor’s failure to co-operate.

•   Supplemental Submission: in this Submission, the Court learns that no effort is spared to  control even the conduct of the Examiner’s investigation, a  statement by the Movant

• Renewed  and Restated Motion to Reopen Examiner’s Investigation and for Substitute Examiner: in this Motion, the Court learns, through email exchanges with Debtor’s management in January, 2003, that the management and the Bank Group are working together to keep the locations of the tanks from the Equipment Lessors, while  the written record of the tank locations (the customer account reconciliation library) is taken out of the Level Headquarters. [July 12]

Since the Court declined to Reopen the Examiner’s Investigation  on June 27, 2006, see Court  Decision, we have Renewed the Motion.  This Renewed Motion provided the Court with specific evidence of  the time, date and subject matter of the Bank Group’s efforts to utterly dominate and control the affairs of Level Propane. In  the course of their efforts to control to the exclusion of all others,  the Bank Group also put a wrecking ball to the going concern. As  of this writing, there is no certainty that the destruction of Level Propane was a deliberate decision, but the conduct so far discovered certainly speaks for itself.  

© 2008 All Rights Reserved ------------------------ | Contact  The Webmaster |
 

 All documents on this website are available in the public domain.

Legal Disclaimer: This website is informational only. Information  on this website should not replace legal counsel.
Legal Disclaimer: The spoken content of the specking character avatar is not under the control of the site Webmaster.