3/10/2023

Dear Legal Professional -

This is an abridged version of Doc 1 below.  This is designed to peak your interest, get you to read Doc 1, and get you involved. 

In March 2021 my partner and I found an $895,000 home to purchase in Monterey County, California.  Our Coldwell Banker Agent presented an RPA (Residential Purchase Agreement) to us for purposes of making an offer.  The clause that specified seller disclosure document presentation timing was "inverted".  

It suggested/specified the delivery of all disclosure documents to transpire AFTER Contract Acceptance.  This included statutory disclosure documents (TDS and SPQ) that are most relevant and useful for gaining property condition understanding that is needed to craft a financially appropriate offer. 

“Hi, I’d like to make you an offer to buy your home 'As Is', but don’t tell me about any problems or issues with it.  Let me craft a binding offer and give it to you. After you accept my offer and transfer equitable title,  then tell me if there are any defects I should have known about prior to crafting my offer that would have prevented me from offering too much for your home”. 

...and the Real Estate Brokers in CA have been running this scam with a state wide, bogus contract, in violation of CA 1102, since 1994. 

We are currently estimating the Total Transactions Processed with this illegal contract since 1994 to be estimated at $1 Trillion dollars. The Brokers would have netted $50-60 BILLION in commissions (5-6% average).

This feels like:

An "antitrust" matter related to the specification, supervision and management of an “illogical”,  “unreasonable”,  “seller biased” AND “highly illegal”  negotiation process that is NOT inline with the fact or intentions of CA Code 1102, the code created in 1994 to regulate the Disclosure process.  

 A consumer protection matter that is NOT inline with CA Code 1102 and/or other Federal and State code that would regulate consumer protection where “good faith dealings” are specified, as is the case for 1102. 

Unfair business practices, intentional tort, unfair competition, deceptive trade practice?

A "lame horse house trading industry" being run by gypsy controlled brokers that is NOT inline with the CA Code that was intended to manage them.

Who are the Brokers that would participate in this in plain view for 30 years?

In 1994, California created CA Code 1102 specifically for the Regulation of Disclosure processes for this type of real estate transaction. At face value it was designed for Buyer Protection, and all required components for a reasonable legal process are specified in 1102.   Underneath, it may have also been intended to manage, reduce, deter and/or expose "money laundering" in real estate transactions, but that is just speculation at this time.  

This is Gypsy Mafia work that seems to have been sitting in plain under the guise of "Real Estate Brokerage" since 1994. . 

Our goal with this outreach program is to quickly determine if there is a large or small legal claim to be had.  Our goal for understanding the potential or problems for any legal claims is 4/30/2023.  

Thanks in advance for your public, personal, or anonymous support.

Bryan

PS - As mentioned this is ABRIDGED intro letter. Please read Doc 1 for a full intro letter with more details. 

3/10/2023 

This is an abbridged verison of Doc 2 below. 

As a Licensed RE Agent in Maryland, who lives in CA, I've seen a lot of strange things in CA, but this takes the cake commercially so far.  

We were in a bind. We needed a home.  We realized the entire system was "inverted",  so we were going to overpay one way or another.  Renting was no longer an option.  That was going to cost us as much as $3500/month. 

Without Statutory Disclosure Documents we did NOT have the information needed to craft an accurate offer. As equitable title holders upon contract acceptance per RPA clause 13B,  we were given patently incomplete statuary disclosure documents with material omissions. Then we uncovered a half dozen cases of "gross disclosure fraud" participated in by BOTH the Seller and Seller's Agent in collusion (documented and provable at face value). 

These "surprise" conditions  that did NOT match the disclosure documents we received AFTER contract acceptance diminished the homes value significantly.  But is there any case to be had for disclosure fraud  when uncovered during escrow if the disclosure documents were not used as part of the consideration to start with?  

As good gypsies do, they had the seller covered every which way they could. 

As equitable title holders we had been  induced into over bidding for the property by procedure AND THEN we were surprised with additional concealment matters.  

In our particular situation, The Seller's' Agent and Seller had worked together for 8 months prior to the sale managing $50,000 of contracting work and faulty pre sale inspections that was clearly intended to conceal and obfuscate about $250,000 in defects. AND then they signed disclosure documents claiming this exact type of relationship did NOT exist. 

Some of the defects were found during escrow and others were not found until after we settled. 

I have a written document from a Coldwell Banker Assistant Broker indicating there is no standard for disclosure document delivery in California.  She indicates some places delivery all prior to making offer, some deliver some and others delivery none prior to contract acceptance. 

She spoke as if if they "just followed somebody elses rules at a county level", with no peripheral vision for "reason", "logic", "consumer protection" or "good faith negations" in mind.   

Who does that? What type of Brokerage Office Manager thinks like that? 

What type of Brokers did NOT do a cursory read of 1102 to ensure they weren't stepping into monstruous piles of doo-doo?  Only those who might think they had the ENTIRE SYSTEM under their control and others who are clueless and just along for the ride.

Please read Doc 2 for this same information with a few more details

Thanks

Bryan

A claim was filed with the CA DRE in December 2022.  The documents for them were posted on a website.

 https://home-purchase-2021.bryancanary.com/  this includes all docs other than unredacted transaction documents. 

 Complaint copies and/or the website URL was sent to the FTC, the Department of Justice, the CA Attorney General, the Monterey County Prosecutors office and more.  

As of March 2023, the CA DRE investigator has been assigned and we had an initial 90 minute dialogue. She has been using the website provided and she's been given the URL to the unredacted transaction documents. 

She's indicated her investigation can take up to one year. It results in internal sanctions that would be private or it's elevated to Sacramento for Administrative Court Processing.  

As far as I can tell, the rest of the legal community that have been notified are  now waiting to see what action, if any action, Civil Attorneys might take to support me/us.  

I see no reason to wait until the CA DRE completes their work to make a decision about litigation. 

90% of the fraudulent activities are known with supporting evidence. 

The amount of information needed to define a few further acts of deviance in the transaction is minor and clearly outlined in Doc 7 on the home purchase website and currently doc 7 on this site too (coincidence). 

I'm setting an initial deadline of April 30, 2023 at 5pm to determine if there is support for a large anit-trust type lawsuit.  Please provide thoughts and feedback prior then. If you do NOT feel it's viable, please share that and you can do it anonymously. I just want to know what might be available and/or acknowledge there is no legal recourse before dropping to a smaller claim attempt.