Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Scientology policy on paying bills
From: cultxpt@primenet.com
Date: 13 Jun 1998 20:54:01 -0700

SCIENTOLOGY AND PAYMENT OF BILLS

INTRODUCTION

My inquiry is about Scientology's record and policy on paying its bills. This is a very preliminary look, and I hope by posting this to get further evidence from church policies and from records of lawsuits against Scientology from other states and countries.

POLICY

"In the case of a tradesman demanding for a bill only slightly overdue you will usually find they have done poor work or slow work if you're at all solvent and paying your bills. Don't say 'We're too poor and we can only send you a little but we will try.' ... Say properly 'I don't see that your bill is much overdue. It takes a bit of time to pay a bill you know. I will check over your account and see if it is all right. And by the way, people who dun us either have insufficient finance to handle our business or something is wrong with their bill. I am setting your bill aside for audit and if you call again about it, we will sever the account." (HCOPL of 28 March 1965, "Emergencies and Accounts Personnel")

This finance policy letter says that the church should never say it is poor, but simply to delay any "tradesman" who comes demanding payment. Accuse the tradesman of shoddy business and threaten to break off the relationship if they complain too loudly.

"Disbursement NEVER pays from a received bill alone. All bills received are first filed in the Disbursement files. Then the file is reviewed as a whole when the time comes to pay bills. It is forbidden to short circuit this line and pay bills just as they drop into the In basket. They are filed. Then all files are reviewed once a month, summated and the result entered in a statement sheet in the file folder and on a Bills Summary Sheet.... when thereafter requested to do so, the Disbursement Section makes out the cheques as indicated or readies the cash." (HCOPL of 6 May 1964, "Accounts Policies")

It appears that bills must go through a lengthy bureaucratic paper shuffle before payment is finally made.

Keep in mind that Hubbard could have written something like "pay your bills on time and if any company complains about nonpayment work out a payment plan if you have to." There are ways to act decently in dealing with tradesmen.

Also, the Church of Scientology is highly compartmentalized. Any bills are generally paid from the particular local department or section and not from some general fund for the entire church. Therefore, the church as a whole may be wealthy, but the local department may not have the funds to pay its bills. I am not sure of the system in such a situation, but my general opinion from reading church policy letters is that the local section must not ask for funds from above, they must instead go out and make the money needed.

Below are cases I've found that appear to indicate Scientology actually following the above rules. These are companies that felt they needed the assistance of our legal system to help get Scientology to pay its bills. This route is expensive and time-consuming in itself, so I'm sure these companies sued only as a last resort.

The court filing systems in Los Angeles and Riverside Counties frankly suck, so this is partial information gleaned from 2 quick trips.

SAMPLE LAWSUITS AGAINST SCIENTOLOGY BY "TRADESMEN" FOR PAYMENT

LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
[note: all the below come up from a search of a Scientology related corporation name, but sometimes the computer does not show such a corporation in the printout or on screen, indicating to me multiple defendants]

Case # Date Plaintiff

• BC 063069 8/28/92 Academy Mechanical Inc. vs. Joseph Inc Guy, CSI
• BC 066256 10/13/92 Royal Plywood vs. Building Management Services
• 92K00529 1/6/92 Todd Pipe & Supply Inc., Sepulveda vs. Van Pelt, Tim (1/30/92 dismissed)(a Tim Van Pelt is listed in Impact issue 33, 1990 as a Scientologist and plumbing contractor)
• 92K29239 6/23/92 Metro Concrete Pumping Inc. v. Kerr, Charles (dismissed 1/27/93)
• 92K29241 6/23/92 Advantage Concrete Pumping vs. Kerr, Charles
• 92K35330 7/31/92 Acme Rent Inc. vs. Ackerman, Dale (dismissed 8/18/92)
• 92K40056 8/27/92 Atwood Sales, Inc. vs. Sheely, Everett (dismissed 1/27/93)
• 92K42130 9/15/92 Tobi Transport Inc. vs. Porrazzo, William Michael (dismissed 10-13-92)
• 92K45331 9/30/92 Tobi Transport Inc. vs. Sipro (dismissed 12/10/92)
• 92K48126 10/21/92 California Portland Cement Co. vs. BMS (dismissed 12/3/92)
• 92K55127 12/10/92 Southdown Inc. vs. Aero-crete Lightweight Concrete (dismissed 9/22/93)
• 93K24481 8/27/93 Armstrong Garden Centers Inc. vs. BMS (dismissed 12/16/93)
• 98K04207 3/4/98 Tokai Financial Services Inc. vs. CSI (breach of lease agreement on a copier. Contract signed by Catherine Gwynne for CSI)

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

Case # Date Plaintiff

• R00208646 12/29/90 Western Sales & Rentals vs. CoS Scott Machinery Co. KRG Inc. Inland Tractor Scott Rentals Inc. Pacific Machinery
• R00209359 10/9/91 Doris Taylor Jett Co. vs. CoS
• R00205649 6/14/90 RJ Noble Co.
• R00208708 12/3/90 Pro-Cast Products Inc. vs. CoS
• R00209963 2/14/91 Kirby Gardens vs. CoS (Kirby Gardens is an apartment complex in Hemet used by Sea Org)
• R00239891 ? Payne Air Conditioning vs. CoS (dismissed 3/25/94)
• R00287270 ? BHP Steel Building Products vs. CoS (dismissed 1/6/98)
• 217237 ? Western Landscape Construction vs. CoS (dismissed 10/14/92)
• 288551 ? Brown-Strauss Steel vs. CoS (dismissed 5/27/97)
• 285126 ? Rental Equipment Inc. vs. CoS (dismissed 2/6/98)
• 285942 9/9/96 Verco Manufacturing Co. vs. CoS (dismissed 12/29/97)
• 208646 ? KRG Equipment Rentals vs. Golden Era Productions, BMS (judgment abstract 5/8/91)
• 961602 ? Brodhead Steel Products vs. BMS (dismissed 6/27/97)
• 971316 ? Nelson Equipment vs. BMS (dismissed 1/12/98)

My conclusions from this brief review of Scientology related lawsuits in one state are:

1) Scientology follows Hubbard's policy on payments of its bills 2) Scientology when sued for payment settles out of court so the case is dismissed

I would like to conclude that 3) Scientology is sued more than most corporations for nonpayment of bills, but I can't. I don't know how most corporations handle bill-paying. But from the evidence above, I think it can be said that companies that contract to Scientology should be aware of their past record of bill paying, and maybe even look up the church's policies on the subject.

If anyone can help by looking up lawsuits in your area if you have a Scientology presence, or if anyone can find policy letters about paying bills, please let me know.

Jeff Jacobsen
cultxpt@primenet.com
PO Box 3541
Scottsdale AZ 85271