Here is a letter showing some concealed assets in the amount of $2.5 million dollars.
This is a letter from the law firm which represented me during the divorce called the law offices of Alan Shifman to the law firm which represented my ex-husband called Seastrom & Seastrom.
Both of these law firms and my ex-husband who controlled the community estate worth millions and is a CPA and Harvard Business School grad signed the judgment and advised me to sign it too EVEN THOUGH (as only one example) this $2.5 million dollars was omitted from the divorce along with its disposal. Think it just evaporated? Remember, the net worth of the community estate was never established so therefore it is impossible that it was divided 50/50 between my ex-husband and me. You need to establish the value of something before you can divide it 50/50 and you don’t need to be a CPA to know that.
Also, several professionals believe the court-appointed therapist Alan Liberman’s protocol and reunifications methods were very controversial and harmful so I was advised to end the therapy so I did.
Also, this letter and this other information is all part of public records.
Well, here is the letter.
Dear Mr. Kenney:
In accordance with the Court’s order, please be advised that Mrs. Hassman arranged a consolation for the minor son and Mrs. Hassman with Dr. Alan Liberman on Wednesday, July 29, 2009. She will pick up the minor Son at 8:30am at the corner of Alta Vista Way and Juanita.
As a side note, please instruct your client to cease using profanity when speaking to Mrs. Hassman. His conduct yesterday in the hallway was reprehensible along with the oldest son’s refusal to even make eye contact with his mother. Frankly, we don’t understand why he(no longer a minor) is part of your private discussions with Mark like this is some sort of game. Don’t you think he will convey everything to his siblings? None of this is beneficial to their well being and relationship with their mother. As the judge told the parties, Mr. Hassman should cooperate in connection with the child’s relationship with their mother. He can start by telling the children this is not the fault of their mother and asking them to call her. As the judge said, it is not the mother’s fault if the father is the sole wage earner and they can no longer afford to keep the home and send the kids to boarding school and an elite university. Based on my observation, Mr. Hassman’s priority is money and education. Obviously, he is teaching his children the same priority. As someone who no longer has a living mother, I can tell you that the relationship between a child and parent is more important.
With respect to other matters in this case, I notice that on item 2e of Mr. Hassman’s FL-150, the Life and Health Insurance expires 7/31/2009. We expect Mr. Hassman to renew these items. If this is not your understanding, please let me know immediately, otherwise, we will be forced to file an ex-parte and seek sanctions for failure to comply with the automatic restraining orders and the California Family Code.
With respect to Spousal Support, I disagree with your misleading statement to the court wherein you stated that this is a simple W-2 issue. I noticed a few interesting facts which dispute this statement. First, your proposed dissomaster provides for 2 exemptions for each party and that Mrs. Hassman status as head of household. For your information, Mr. Hassman should have 4 exemptions, including Stephen who is still being supported by Mark and was an exemption in 2008. Also, Mr. Hassman’s average monthly earnings for the last 12 months is $22,500. At a minimum, the support should be based on this number. However, he annually earned $335,000 in 2008 and $322,000 in 2007 plus substantial consulting fees from Nick Samios, Anann, Harry Sidou and others. We are requesting that the court take an average of his earnings over the last few years. Is Mark still earning fees for services provided to other parties? I am very confused as to why Mr. Hassman, a Harvard CFO, did not provide information relating to his cash, checking accounts etc. as required in Item 11a of FL-150. What is he hiding? Also, if he isn’t having employment taxes taken from his paycheck, he should pay support based upon his cash flow, which is the gross amount. Anyway, we propose that Mr. Hassman pay spousal support and the child support in the amount of $6,270 and $76 respectively based upon an average monthly earnings for the last 3 years which is approximately $24,916.66. This is very reasonable in light of the facts that (1) Mr. Hassman is the CFO and in control of the amounts paid as set forth in his pay stubs, (2) he controls all community funds, (3) his monthly living expenses as set forth in his FL-150 are $25,541, and (4) Mrs. Hassman’s current monthly expenses exceed $7,000 and are substantially lower than her marital standard of living due to the amount of support Mr. Hassman has been paying her. She would like to buy a home or condominium but can’t based upon your proposed support. Please note that we also are requesting a percentage of his bonus plus other compensation he earns as set forth in the attached dissomaster report.
As you may know, I’ve been a CPA since 1984. I had the opportunity to review the 2008 and 2007 Income Tax returns along with some of the bank statements. I noticed that Mr. Hassman sold the EDPA building in February of 2008 for $2,000,000 resulting in a gain of $916,000. Also, please let me know three(3) alternate dates that you and Mr. Hassman will be available for deposition in September.
With respect to our requests for attorney fees, I am hereby requesting that Mr. Hassman pay $15,000 not $5,000 because of the length of the prior hearing, the hearing set forth on August 3, 2009, discovery necessary in light of the substantial monies which were in control of Mr. Hassman, and preparation for trial.
Law Offices of Alan Shifman
As always, none of this is legal or any other advice, just based on my knowledge and experiences.
-By Sara Hassman, Parental Alienation Solutions, Founder;www.PAlienation.org