Blackcat Bail Bonds Theresa Tindal cursed me out & in violation with SC law; SECTION 38-53-50. Surety relieved on bond; surrender of defendant; filing of new undertaking. Florence, South Carolina

My complaint is regarding a bail bond company utilized to
release my son (who was being detained on a $50,000 surety bond) from jail the
beginning of September and would like to file a complaint due to conflict of
interest on Theresa Tindals part which is believed to be the rationale to the
current issues. My son has never been in trouble a day in his life until this
in which he is being accused of burglarizing a home belonging to an associate (
named Hazel Mouzon) of Theresa Tindal; both the women worked for the Housing
Authority of Florence and are acquaintances (which can & will be easily
proven). I known the woman making these accusations prior to her accusations
because her daughter used to harass my daughter that has cerebral palsy and I
have had to get the school involved at that time. However, in regards to how
BlackCat Bail Bond (843-346-6595) of 900 South Irby Street, Box 334 in Florence
South Carolina 29505 services were initiated was my sons father made contact
with them and spoke with Theresa Tindal, they worked out an agreement on the
phone, she would accept $875 upfront and when he finished working he would
bring her an additional $300 dollars. Since he was working and unable to leave
I was to bring the money to the jail, which I did. She asked me information
about myself which I told her where I was residing, that I am not currently
employed, but attend school as a full time student (which she made note of).
She explained to me that my sons father had agreed that he would make payments
of $200 every two weeks until the balance was paid off. I spoke with her a few
times when she called my house the following month stating that my sons father
was late in a payment and she was unable to reach him, the payment was due the
day before she called and I told her I would make contact with him so that he
could handle it. I did reach my sons dad and he said he had been busy working,
but he did pay her that day. His work schedule interrupted the payments being
timely occasionally following that (according to Theresa), but I was unaware of
it because she stopped calling me all together and I did not know until the end
of November he was two payments behind, or so she claimed I myself am uncertain
because if she cannot maintain dates it makes me skeptical about the accuracy
of anything else. However, I found this so- called late payment information out
not because she had called me, but because Steven Tindal (which is the name
signed on the certified letter I latter received) had went to the home of
Bobbie Timmons the grandmother of my son and place of his residence as well
informing her about monies that were overdue. My sons grandmother called me
and let me know and I had called Theresa Tindal and talked with her that night
and she told me that he was two payments behind and she was unable to get in
touch with him. She was asked why she never contacted me about this, but I
never received a response other than she attempted to contact my sons fathers
cell phone on multiple occasions, left messages and has never heard back from
him. I told her that he and I were not on speaking terms right now and I have
not spoke with him in awhile, but assumed everything was fine because I have
not heard from her (Theresa). She stated that I should have been keeping on top
of things with him and I told her that was not my job it was hers and that him
and I have not been together for almost 2 years now and he lives with another
woman they dont want me going over there and I dont want to go, but gave her
the address, which she should have already had seeing as she had just bonded
him out of jail as well. Theresa stated she was under the assumption that my
sons father and I were together, but I told her I never said that and have no
idea where she got that from and she mentioned that night about my sons father
going to jail and they bonded him out, she asked did I not know he went to
jail? I told her I did because I seen it in the Florence Bookings, but was
unaware they were the ones who bonded him out. Theresa said she would call me
back that night, but did not so I had tried to call her and never received an
answer (which happened any time I tried to call her, other than when I received
the certified letter). However, I do not have receipts of anything because I
was not the one making payments, it was my sons father and I find it hard to
believe if he were behind in my sons payments that they would really bond his
father out of jail creating a larger debt. Furthermore, I have not heard from
Black Cat Bonding and just assumed payments were being made, but on December
16, 2011 I received a certified letter from Stephen Tindal that stated that if
I did not pay off the balance of $ 3,450 by December 5, 2011 that paperwork
within the Magistrates office would be filed against me. First of all I was
the one to bring the money there to her and they decided on an agreement, but
my signature was in place of his because he could not go. I have been told
there are laws regarding opening a contract with individuals with no income
since this is what she appears to be implying and will research that further in
addition to contacting Legal Service because I have no money and that was not
what was agreed upon within the deal they had that day were with my sons
father and them I have no documentation showing I have made any payments
because I havent. Second of all they have the documentation dates messed up
because if they were expecting anyone to pay the balance by December 5, 2011
the letter was not received until December 16th which is noted with
the Postal Service because the letter was certified. On Christmas Black Cat
Bonding went off my sons bond and went to his grandmothers house and locked
him back up, but my son had told his girlfriend that one of the men stated that
if his father paid $600 that they would let him back out. Thus, my sons
girlfriend Shante had called Theresa at Black Cat Bonding and she said that
they had sent me a certified letter regarding the amount of money they wanted
and when Shante called me telling me what Theresa said I called her. I told
Theresa that I had no idea the payments were in arrears seeing as I have not
heard from them, that is until I had received the certified letter on December
16, 2011. I also told her about the conflicting dates and she said I dont
keep up with the dates, in which I responded you run a business and dont keep
up with dates? She became hostile, yelling calling me profane names and
threatening me with court and continued yelling and using profanity I informed
her to do what ever and I would be filing complaints as well to the
unprofessional handling of business in addition to her unprofessional behavior
and hung up. I received a call from my sons girlfriend moments later stating
Theresa had called her phone with a message for me (which she could have just
as easily called the house number where I stay) which consisted of more
belligerent threats of taking me too court and for me not to contact her
regarding the issue at hand. This is not how business is conducted and bringing
a third party (Shante) into the equation appears unethical seeing as the young
lady did not even know my son during the time he was bonded nor has she had
anything to do with the bonding process at any time. In addition, Theresa
Tindals hostile and verbal assault was not warranted nor required and I have
witnesses to vouch that this has taken place because she was so loud that the
individuals within the room I was in could hear her and I placed the phone to
one of their ears so they could hear exactly what she was saying. I cannot
actually say that any payments were even due, but have left word for my sons
father to get in touch with me. However, I believe Theresas actions were done
out of spite to illustrate that she has the power to have my son locked up or
released and was done so as retribution for her associate in addition to
maintaining all monies received thus far. Had I knew prior to signing the
document that the two were acquaintances we would have utilized another company
that would not toy with our sons freedom. I have never had to deal with bail
bonds because I am not the type who gets into trouble, but I am full time
student and mother of five nor do I have knowledge of how any of the processes
associated with them, but I do know that it is considered a business and people
within businesses are more structured and organized and do not treat consumers
of their product or services in that manner. In addition, the steps taken by
Theresa Tindal conflict with SC laws, as illustrated below.

SECTION 38-53-50. Surety relieved on bond; surrender
of defendant; filing of new undertaking.



(A) A surety desiring to be relieved on a bond for good cause shall file with
the clerk of court a motion to be relieved on the bond. A copy of the motion
must be served upon the defendant, his attorney, and the solicitor's office.
The court then shall schedule a hearing to determine if the surety should be
relieved on the bond and notify all parties of the hearing date. At the time of
the filing of the motion, a fee of twenty dollars must be paid to the clerk of
court to be retained by the clerk for use in the operation of the clerk's
office. The fee will cover the cost of copies of the motion required by the
surety.



(B) If the circumstances warrant immediate incarceration of the defendant to
prevent imminent violation of one of the specific terms of the bail bond, or if
the defendant has violated one of the specific terms of the bond, the surety
may take the defendant to the appropriate detention facility for holding until
the court orders that the surety be relieved. The surety, within three business
days following recommitment, must file with the detention facility and the
court an affidavit clocked in with the clerk of court on a form provided by the
Division of Court Administration stating the facts to support the surrender of
the defendant for good cause. Nonpayment of fees alone is not sufficient cause
to warrant immediate incarceration of the defendant. When the defendant and the
affidavit are presented at the appropriate detention facility, the facility
shall take custody of the defendant. When the affidavit is filed with the
court, the surety also shall file a motion to be relieved on the bond pursuant
to subsection (A). A surety who surrenders a defendant and files an affidavit
which does not show good cause is subject to penalties imposed for perjury as
provided for in Article 1, Chapter 9, Title 16.





(14) "Good cause" means the violation of a specific term of the bail
bond not to include the nonpayment of fees.

Referenced from:  http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t38c053.php