Free Amended Complaint - District Court of California - California

Case 5:07-cv-04808-JF

Document 7-18

Filed 10/18/2007

Page 1 of 3

EXHIBIT Q TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Case 5:07-cv-04808-JF

Document 7-18

Filed 10/18/2007

Page 2 of 3

. WESTON BENSHOOF
ROCHEFORT RUBALCAVA MACCUISH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
(213) 576-1084 djonesiQwbcounsel.com

September 13,2007

VIA FACSIMILE
John G. Michael, Esq.

Baker Manok & Jensen, Attorneys At Law 5260 North Palm Avenue Fourth Floor Fresno, CA 93704

Re: STTN Enterprises, Inc. and ARCO-branded Station and am/pm Mini Market located at 631 San Felipe Road, Hollister, Califomia 95035 ("Station")
Dear Mr. Michael:

Please be advised that we represent BP West Coast Products LLC
("BPWCP") concerning the Station. We respond to your correspondence dated

September 12,2007, as follows:

Although BPWCP maintains that its termination of the franchise
relationship with STTN Enterprise, Inc. ("STTN") is proper and supported by applicable
legal and statutory authority, in order to avoid extra legal and other costs, BPWCP will
agree to reschedule the debranding of

the Station to Monday, September 17, 2007 at 8:00

a.m. In the meantime, your clients must immediately remove and/or adequately cover all

ARCO and am/pm signage on and inside the building, canopy and dispensers which include, but are not limited to, the ARCO mark on the dispensers, the "am/pm" and "eyebrow" signage on the building, the striping on the building, the striping on the canopy, the ARCO mark on the canopy, and the "Arctic Avenue" and "Thirst Oasis"
signage inside the store. As of September 1 i, 2007, the Station was still improperly displaying these trademark-protected signs while, at the same time, offering non-ARCO branded gasoline for sale.
Furthermore, by agreeing to reschedule the debranding, BPWCP by no

means agrees with any of the contentions set forth in your letter. Indeed, each of your
333 SOUTH HOPE STREET. SIXTEENTH FLOOR. Los ANGELES, CA 90071. TEL 213 576 1000 . FAX 213 576 1100
2801 TOWNSGATE ROAD, SUITE 215 . WES.
1()49n3.1

EL 805 497 9474 . FAX 805 497 8804

256

Case 5:07-cv-04808-JF

Document 7-18

Filed 10/18/2007

Page 3 of 3

John G. Michael, Esq.

September 13, 2007
Page 2

claims is patently false. For example, you assert that BPWCP encouraged "STTN to start
construction before BP funded any loans." This statement is incOlTect and never

happened. You also place the blame of the delays in the loan processing on BPWCP.

Your clients, however, repeatedly failed to provide requested documentation to support the payout of loan funds as was a condition precedent to the release of any funds pursuant to the loan terms. Furthermore, BPWCP never represented that your clients had
provided "all the necessary documentation." Rather it was quite the contrary; BPWCP

made numerous requests for documentation to suppOli the work performed at the Station and proof that STTN funded the work. To this day, your clients have yet to provide the required documentation. It is absurd that your clients expect to receive loan funds from BPWCP when they have failed to comply with the applicable loan tenns.

Finally, BPWCP rejects your clients' demand for $1,751,000, \vhich is unsuppOlied and improper. Moreover, please be advised that BPWCP fully intends on
pursuing its legal remedies against your clients including, but not limited to, an action to recover the $ 126,394.77 (plus interest) for outstanding gasoline product deliveries and
the $ 1 50,000 outstanding loan balance.

Please contact me should you have any questions.
Sincerely,

tJ t¡ÇA
Deborah Y. Jones WESTON, BENSHOOF, ROCHEFORT, RUBALCAVA & MacCUISH LLP
dyj/DJ
cc:

Kurt Osenbaugh, Esq. (via email)

II WESTON BENSHOOF

257
lIJ49773. i

ROCHEFORT RUBALCAVA MACCUISH LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW