I know, I know: it is “only” a Boston City Council race. But Jeff Ross survived the primary, and the Boston newspapers don’t seem to know how to check public records any more, so here’s something new, about the time Jeff Ross said he “took the judicial process very seriously” and had “the utmost respect for the law” but then refused to pay up when the court ordered him to and managed to avoid a civil arrest warrant for more than a year.
The file is available in Cambridge District Court: Ilir Gjata v Jeff Ross, Esq., docket 200652SC000318.
Gjata is an electrician who worked on Ross’ Ringgold Street home. He said Ross didn’t pay all of what he owed for the work and got a judgment against Ross despite Ross’ counter-claims and demands that the electrician be investigated for perjury.
The case file does not include a transcript, but it appears that Ross claimed Gjata should be charged with perjury because some of services Gjata performed and charges due changed as the case progressed. “I take the judicial process very seriously and have a very high regard for the law,” Ross wrote to the judge on April 13, 2006. “Mr. Gjata has shown incredible disrespect for the Court by lying and has abused the process of justice.”
Ross’ “very high regard for the law” does not seem to have lasted very long: The judge didn’t buy any of Ross’ claims. He ruled against Ross the next day — April 14 — and ordered Ross to pay Gjata $954.50 by May 15. When Ross still had not complied by June 8, the judge issued a civil arrest warrant.
Although Ross claimed to “take the judicial process a very seriously” it took another year for him to pay up: he settled with Gjata for $1478. That would have been about the time Ross was running for state Senate and claiming to be a Cambridge resident, so maybe he worried that Middlesex sheriff’s deputies would arrest him aas he campaigned. I don’t know why he waited.
And while the case file doesn’t give us the context in which Gjata changed some details of the claims he had, it isn’t clear how those changes are any different from what Ross did when he was suing people.
12.00
In both the Souza and Agudelo cases that I’ve cited previously, the amounts that Ross claimed his own clients owed him also seem to have been false: he had not credited them for payments they had already made. So how is it perjury if Gjata cites an incorrect amount due but it isn’t perjury when Ross does? Maybe there’s an explanation. Too bad Ross has yet to answer questions.
Case: Iler Gjata v. Jeff Ross, Esq., Cambridge District Court, Small Claims Division, docket number 200652SC000318, retrieved at the courthouse.
I’ll bet in 2007 he regretted that, now you are the nightmare he has every time he runs for office. Between this post and your 2007 tour de force, you have presented a convincing case that Jeff Ross is not only unfit for public office, but a complete a-hole. (Wait, did I just contradict myself?)
Hopefully Attorney Ross does not expect the 5th amendment to shield him from political scrutiny, because he has some explaining to do or he should be convicted by the court of public opinion.
He didn’t, but it wasn’t the money per se that bothered me. It was the way that he did it and the realization that if he did things like that to one person he might be doing them to others as well. Even then, I was surprised by how much I found when I looked. He makes for a great demo on how to do oppo research (and there are still some areas to explore.)
I’m always willing to discount bills if folks have financial difficulties, and when there’s a genuine difference of opinion, I’ll generally find a mutually agreeable charity and donate my fee. I’ll even match it sometimes. But I don’t like bullies, and Ross came across that way to me.
Why didn’t you say that when I asked you what your beef was last time you posted? I knew there had to be something personal here given how aggressively you have tried to take him down.
Maybe because I had already said it in my original post in 2007 and had referred to the 2007 posy in my follow-ups. as well as on the website jeffrossbostonlawyer.com/
Here’s what I said in 2007: “A few years ago, Ross hired me to provide some professional services in a non-political matter. After the job was done, he ignored my invoices, which totaled a little under $2,500, for more than five months. Finally — after I called and wrote to tell him I was thinking of suing — he sent me a brief note saying he’d only pay $200.”
You didn’t ask me what my beef was: you asked for source citations and whether I was connected to other candidates. I answered those questions and referred you to the 2007 post for my reasons in having voted against him. Pogo found it; I’m sorry that you apparently did not.
My personal experience with him led me to think he was worth investigating, but if I hadn’t found things in virtually every court I checked –Boston Municipal, Boston Housing, Suffolk Probate, Suffolk Superior Cambridge District, Massachusetts Land Court, US District, US Bankruptcy and Broward County Florida, I wouldn’t have written this up. And if the Boston media did their jobs, I wouldn’t have had to.
It sounds like he was right not to pay. Your other post about Ross said there were some safety issues with the electrical work in his house. So if this is the electrician who botched the job, he didn’t deserve to be paid the agreed amount. Business disputes happen. My family has dealt with our share of unscrupulous contractors, as have many, many other homeowners. As long as he promises not to tell the city which electricians to hire, this is a non-issue.
Sorry your family has been unhappy with some of its contractors, but you are wrong on the facts.
1) The city building inspectors cited Ross on Jan. 7, 2004, following what his tenant claimed was him ignoring repeated complaints over three months of spotty electricity and and hot water.
2) Ross hired Gjata in April 2005 because of a separate issue. According to his court filings, his homeowner’s insurance company conducted an inspection on October 19, 2004 and wrote to Ross on December 16, 2004 that it was refusing to continue its coverage because “the property fails to meet reasonable underwriting standards.”
3) The only review of Gjata I saw in a quick internet search was filled with praise. And the state’s licensing website show he’s been licensed since 2000, first as a journeyman and then as master electrician, with no record of any public discipline.
4) Ross and his lawyer certainly raised a lot of claims and counterclaims about the quality of Gjata’s work. But the judge, who heard the evidence and judged the credibility of Ross and Gjata found for Gjata and specifically found against Ross’ counter-claims.
5) Ross had the right to appeal the decision if he thought the judge was wrong. He didn’t. He had the right to seek relief from the decision for a year. He didn’t. Instead, he chose to ignore the court’s order and stiff the contractor for another year. This behavior was consistent with the way the contractor claims that Ross treated him before the lawsuit. It is also consistent with Ross’ behavior in other instances described in my earlier postings.
6) Last but not least, even if we were to assume, topsy-turvy, that the Gjata didn’t deserve the amount, a lawyer is an officer of the court and is one of the the last persons who should ignore a court order. For that matter, neither should a city councilor.
I thought I had described my background with Ross in sufficient detail back in 2007 and referred to it since, but perhaps I didn’t do it enough to suit you and others. If so, I apologize.
And, as you point out, it isn’t like any of that changes the facts. It isn’t like I’m citing anonymous sources or making stuff up. The documents that I have cited are out there in the public domain for anyone who wants to check them, and if Ross — or anyone else — thinks I have misunderstood them they should say so and show how.
Anyone is free to say that I’m wrong about some public record I’ve cited, assuming they can back it up. They can say that it doesn’t matter if a city council candidate has the kind of record that Ross complied over many years. They can even say that Ross’ political positions are so good that they should outweigh his personal record.
n/t
Your interpretation of gross income is clearly contrary to how the instructions say to interpret it. So that pretty much debunks your long rant based on that interpretation, and all the accusations and insinuations it contained. I think it also casts some doubt on a lot of your other accusations, but I don’t have the time to look around at what other misinterpretations you’ve made. For a former reporter, you’re either not very good at reading, or have allowed your personal vendetta to take you down the rabbit hole.