Prologue
Prologue
Embedded Files
In late 2020 and early 2021, we ( Bryan C and Holly B ) needed to find a home to rent or buy.
We were generally good people, all things considered. We kept to ourselves. We enjoyed caring for cats and a small garden. We were "savers" not "spenders".
We had taken decades to save money while others made more to enjoy more. We lived very modest.
We had suffered financial trauma in the 2007/2008 banking crisis, and more in another retail bank cash constriction scheme in 2015 that was implemented quietly by the OCC on behalf of the Department of Treasury and the FED.
To complicate matters, Bryan had suffered chronic health and medical issues starting the mid 1990s which climaxed with an inability to walk more than 50' in 2012.
By 2020, with more than 20 surgical procedures under his belt, he was still trying to find his way back to walking again.
We were good people, but we certainly hadn't won the "life of good fortune" stick by that point in time by any means...
In June 2020, we were given notice of a need to vacate an 8 year rental property while "h" was in New Zealand trapped on a business trip due to COVID lockdowns, with no known return date.
When h got back in August, we took months to try to find a place with no success in a strapped California rental and home sale market place, as our landlord grew impatient.
In February 2021, h's mom passed away. She too was a small business person and saver. She left "h" a small sum of money that we really needed to make a purchase that was more worthy of what we were being forced to invest in, in an upside down world.
On March 1, 2021, our landlord gave us a firm 60 day lease termination notice. She was tired of being patient. That notice and her subsequent actions are something she may regret for the rest of her life, but that is a different story for another website.
With only 60 days left to find a home, we started to feel desperate. There were options in towns 10 and 20 minutes away, but they were with little character and very problematic for our three cats Frankie, Frisco and Kizmet, who were all very special and loved to be outdoors.
On March 16, 2021, we saw a very interesting house come on the market just a mile from our rental. It had a view of water. It was clean but needed some modern upgrades. It had blackberries on in that mimic grapes, and it had other features, all of which our psychic had told us our next home would possess, many months prior.
At $895,000, it as at tippy top of our price range. We were going to have to turn part of it into a rental to afford it long term. We couldn't afford a bidding war so we did nothing for a week to see if it would get snatched up by others.
Around March 23, 2021, it was still on the market so we scheduled a showing. We did another showing on March 26, 2021. We decided we wanted to make an offer.
In order to properly contract on a home, or to create any contract for that matter, there is a very specific set of steps that contracting parties must use to properly consent to forming a contract. It is easily remembered with the acronym "RROA". It's ROAR, but with the trailing R moved to the front too.
RROA ---> Representations - Reliance - Offer - Acceptance
the requirements for consenting to any contract
And this is where this story takes a very unfortunate and dark twist --- one which will eventually lead us to a land of painter, attorney, and legal lobby deceit that shall turn many stomachs -- and that's just the beginning of this story about the land we now call, "Calikhazaria".
Unbeknownst to b and h, the Real Estate Brokers and Attorney across the "great state of California Calikhazaria" had been running a commercial hoax since 1985.
They were leading buyers (and sellers) of real property into believing OAR was the proper acronym for creating a contract not ROAR with the repositioned R (RROA). It was undoubtedly one of the largest consumer scams of the half century for Calikhazaria for sure.
OAR --- > Offer - Acceptance - Representations -> is NOT how a contract is formed.
OAR is how scams are run by rogue real estate agents and attorneys that were supporting them in the great land of Calikhazaria in a time gone by.
We had figured out that the Real Estate Agents were suggesting OAR as the protocol for contract formation, not RROA, before it was forced on us.
We didn't think it could be legal, but we could find no one to tell us it was not.
Before we could make a deeper investigative inquiry directly to Attorneys, this opportunity to make an offer presented itself so we went with the flow.
The home fit the psychics vision, and we were open minded. We were open to land wherever our path led. It was kind of like OZ but not actually like it at all.
This was NOT Kansas, and NOT OZ at all although there's a fascinating coincidence that will mix a lot of things together sometime down the road with this Calikhazaria story and Kansas, the proverbial home of OZ. For example, did you know the zip code for Topeka KS, starts with 666? Hang on to that fact for later, as you may find it a bit coincidental, to say the least.
On March 18, 2021, two days after the home was listed for sale, the Seller , Micah Forstein, had filled out "disclosure documents" with "representations" on them for a future buyer.
NOTE: The completion of documents with seller representations on them should have happened well BEFORE a final price was established and the home was listed. The Broker needed to know what they were representing before they listed it. That alone tells you something went wrong, but you can't possibly imagine how bad it really was, just yet.
The documents Forstein filled out with seller representations on them, referred to as the TDS and SPQ, were intended to tell future buyers what he was selling with regards to appliances, and what condition the roof, siding, plumbing, electric, hvac and all other systems and features of the home were in. In addition he was to "represent" (aka "disclose") what problems and repairs had been made during his occupancy as well.
These "disclosure" documents with "representations" and/or "disclosures" of the seller on them were supposed to be given to us or any other interested buyer for "reliance" before we made an offer. . (remember, reliance is the second R in RROA -- representations then reliance)
Unfortunately, Forstein's Agent, Kent Weinstein, a Keller Williams Coastal Estates Agent, from Carmel CA, withheld the TDS and SPQ from us in a fully illogical manner that made no sense in any reasonable form of Hell, but was suggested to be legal by agents brokers on both sides of the transaction, and even attorneys later contacted.
Not the Devil himself nor any of his followers would be so dumb as to suggest such an absurd process was proper, so it suggested they were lost in the sauce of another maker unknown.
Below is a bit of Parody to convey the insanity that these followers of "another sauce" wanted us to believe was true...
Us - "Is the hot tub staying with the home?"
Them - " You make a binding offer. If the Forstein accepts it, then we'll tell you!"
If nothing else comes of this, one thing is for sure. They will need to find a new boss for their sauce because "another sauce" has been removed from the menu due to mental health concerns!
On 3/27/2021, we made a full price offer for $895,000 withOUTthe "representation" and "reliance" process. That turned RROA into RRO.
On 3/30/2021 a counter offer was "accepted". That created RROA
On 4/1/2021 the Weinstein, an odd Agent from the land of Carmel, finally forwarded the Forstein's TDS and SPQ with "representations" on them. That created RROAR .
Unfortunately, the Forstein and the Weinstein had lied on those documents about structural work that had already been admitted to by the Weinstein AND they had left key information for important topics like MOLD and PROPERTY FLOODING just "blank", as if not answering questions was an option without consequence in the land of Hell.
At that point in time, we thought dropping them over board with an OAR, and NO boat, in the middle of a crocodile filled moat, was the best thing to do. But before we could do that, things escalated rapidly and then got much worse.
One of our Buyer's Agents, was an old man who had been practicing real estate since 1978, He was the one who was responsible for establishing Agent Training for Coldwell Banker in Beverly Hills CA decades ago, and he didn't react to their OAR , plank, or moat deserving acts as he should have.
To him it and them were all kosher too. In-deed, as It turned out, the man named Peter Whyte, was not very white in the energetic sense either.
And it was at that point we realized we had MAJOR PROBLEMS with somebody elses "sauce" all over all of them that was now affecting us too.
If this was all legal, then we could expect nothing more in another transaction.
If this was NOT legal, then Coldwell Banker, Keller Williams and every Attorney in CA needed a check-up from the neck up.
We proceeded with far greater caution with Eyes AND Ears wide open !!
On 4/3/2021 we inspected the property we had purchased at time of "Acceptance", with a contractor friend. The Weinstein was present at that inspection.
When we opened the hatch to the 2nd floor attic, the odor of urine and poo came rumbling through.
The Weinstein proceeded to immediately spew a story about a rodent invasion during the Forstein's occupancy that led to a humane raccoon trapping at the expense of 1000sf of insulation and attic integrity.
But how and why did the Weinstein know the story abou the rodents as the Seller's Agent?
And given he knew it, why wasn't it on the TDS and SPQ that were delivered via OAR, not RROA?
And for that matter, why the f--k weren't these attic defects on the pre-sale home inspection and pre-sale termite inspection reports we had been properly provided for seller representations before making an offer?
Then we entered the crawl space. It was comparably as bad and bizarre.
There had been years long flooding over 12" deep that had dry rotted the main support posts.
It was obvious something was wrong from the first floor, because they sloped.
It was odd nothing was noted on the pre-sale termite inspection report nor the pre-sale home inspector report.
It turned out both of them had not only skipped out on proper reporting on the 2nd floor attic, they both had done the same on the crawl space defects too?
How do TWO separate professional inspection companies and a total of three "professional" inspectors whiff completely on $20k+ in defects in the spaces we could not see when we walked through the home for showings? This seemed to be an organized crime, somehow.
Then we inspected the Fascia.
It looked pristine from a distance. As if if was a synthetic board, not wood. No grains showing at all.
Then we looked up close. Someone had used drywall mud and fabric tape to make rotten wood look pristine.
We only figured that out because they missed a spot behind the gutter and there were a few odd, perfectly round, 1/2" holes we couldn't understand.
Then we found the big glob of drywall mud falling out of the fascia on the Northeast corner, with what looked to be tissue paper (and bubble gum) behind it as filler.
On 4/3/2021 after we discovered over $20k+ in defects that had not been disclosed by 1) the Seller's pre-sale home inspector 2) the seller's pre-sale termite inspector 3) the Weinstein (the Seller's Agent) and 4) the Forstein (the Seller), we had some decisions to make.
They were not easy.
Our own Agent with 40+ years experience was telling us this was just how Brokerage , no, House Trading , no, Horse Trading was done run in California Calikhazaria -- while using his very powerful gaslights running against all our faculties of thought --- and nobody else operating properly either.
We needed a home. We were desperate. Our psychic described this one to a T months prior.
We decided we'd document the experience, we'd let the rest ride, and we'd catch up with everyone once the dust settled. Before we took the plunge, I told h, "Either this is all legal, in which case we can't expect anything better anywhere else and someone needs to change some things, or it's all highly illegal, in which case I'll work hard to expose it and destroy their entire brokerage system before I'm done".
That was almost 4 yrs ago.
And now, we are catching up with a pack we'd been separated from for far longer than this short story can convey. And boy, do we all have some stories that need to be told.
But first we must finish the story about "the Painter", David Woodbury, the man responsible for the fascia and other deceitful deeds, as well as "his Attorney", the one and only, b Jim Fitzpatrick himself.
Canary v Woodbury - the story about The Painter and his Attorney
Canary v Woodbury - the story about The Painter and his Attorney
We are going to change prose gears here a little to just convey some facts about the situation that played out 6 months before we first saw the home, and that which played out over a 4 year period after the home was purchased.
Hang on to your boots because this will move quicker now, as we discuss the Canary v Woodbury lawsuit.
David Woodbury was a Licensed Painting Contractor in California Calikhazaria .
Woodbury was hired by Micah Forstein, a property seller, for three painting jobs after Forstein had already vacated the home and moved to Topeka KS, the land of 666. Forstein got his name from a General Contractor recommended to him by Weinstein.
All communication between Woodbury and Forstein transpired via email, text and possibly phone. They never physically met. The home was empty when Woodbury walked the property to assess the jobs for quote generation. The real estate agent for the seller (Weinstein) was providing home access , work coordination, and work supervision.
NOTE: b Jim Fitzpatrick is a Board Member of the Monterey County Bar Association.
In total Woodbury prepared 4 quotes with representations on them about the conditions he found and the work he was going to do. Woodbury submitted his four quotes ( he submitted 4 offers to contract) to Forstein. Forstein reviewed the offers to contract, he was supposed to rely on them for contracting purpose, and three were accepted. Do you see now how RROA process is universal in any contract situation?
The Woodbury quotes presented to Forstein were as follows:
1) Interior painting - $7200 (started/completed in September 2020)
2) Exterior Painting - $7500 (started/completed October 2020)
3) Garage painting - $1250 (started/completed October 2020)
4) Pool House exterior - $2800 (submitted in November 2020 but not accepted. The quote is relevant for other things though)
The three quotes that were accepted and acted upon were were delivered in September2020. The work was completed in September and October 2020. As a reminder, that was SIX MONTHS before the home went up for sale.
Woodbury's quotes, if done properly and honestly, should have given us a true understanding of the conditions he found when he quoted the work and full details about the work he performed.
Woodbury's quotes, if provided to us at time of bid consideration, as was appropriate, could have been relied upon by us, with inspections after contract acceptance to review his work.
This requirement for the Forstein to disclose Woodbury's work and provide the quotes was stated in SPQ question 6D. This is a big deal because painting is one of the most powerful ways to conceal defects and the authors of the SPQ knew that, so they explicitly asked sellers to disclose ALL painting work done withing 12 months of sale, for exactly this reason.
The Forstein, being of a mind unlike many, ignored answering SPQ 6D in detail. He merely stated, "painted inside and out", and he opted not to provide Woodbury's quotes, as instructed by Weinstein (And Weinstein failed to deliver the SPQ prior to Acceptance anyway, so all around it was just a really bad sh-t show, but it gets worse. )
During Escrow, after we had figured out that some very squirrely contracting and inspection work had been done to conceal material facts and defects, we made document demands to the Forstein.
The Forstein only produced the quote for interior work and the quote for the pool house, without stating he had NOT accepted the pool house quote.
The Forstein, as it turned out, LOVED to misdirect and confuse people in a way that was not very gay.
Also, as it turned out, Woodbury had engaged in work that concealed material facts and defects for Forstein while carefully omitting words and phrases in his quotes that would have let anyone know about the true work he had done to assist the Forstein - Weinstein dynamic duo with Selling the home for more than it was worth.
IMPORTANT EDUCATIONAL NOTE:
The concealment of material facts and defects by a Painter or other contractor for a property seller can be completed if the work itself is properly and completely identified on quotes, as representations from the contractor to the home owner, at the time the work was quoted. If the work is NOT fully and completely detailed on the quotes, it could result on liabilities to the Contractor for the concealment of facts and the physical concealment facts and defects in a manner that is illegal, as is the case here.
The Painter's Quotes and Work Completed
The Painter's Quotes and Work Completed
From early September to early October 2021, the Woodbury quoted four different jobs and completed three different jobs for the Forstein.
1) Interior painting - $7200 (started/completed in September 2021) view
2) Exterior Painting - $7500 (started/completed October 2021) view
3) Garage painting - $1250 (started/completed October 2021) view
4) Pool House - $2800 (not executed) view
The Painter's Deceit - "David Woodbury in Action!!"
The Painter's Deceit - "David Woodbury in Action!!"
While there is much to share, we shall get on to the punch lines and then work backwards as needed to fill in the blanks.
Interior Painting - $7200
Concealment of 2nd floor ceiling defects - The interior 2nd floor ceiling had hundreds of moisture stains in it that transpired during the sellers occupancy. The Painter used stain blocker to make those disappear and he did NOT note the pre-existing stains or his use of stain blocker on his quote. Thus, the defendant physically concealed material defects and he left no paper trail to enable anyone who needed to rely on his documents with facts about what he found when he assessed the home for work nor the work he did to assist the seller in concealing defects. He admitted to using it in a bond company investigation.
Exterior Painting - $7,500
Concealment of Fascia Defects - The Defendant used what was likely drywall compound to skim coat about 150 linear feet of damaged fascia to improperly cover up minor and major defects in order make the fascia look pristine, but not in a manner that would last. . The Defendant also used drywall compound to fill very large holes and defects that needed to be filled with different compounds for proper repair ( or the fascia needed to be replaced) On the Defendants quote, he totally omitted the fact he had done any work at all on the fascia. Thus, the defendant physically concealed material defects with improper material, and he left no paper trail to enable anyone who needed to rely on his documents with facts about what he found when he assessed the home for work nor the work he did to assist the seller in concealing defects.
Concealment of Exterior Siding Defects on South Wall - The exterior redwood siding on the south facing wall was weathered and contorted to a far greater degree than the rest of the home due to southern exposure. The Defendant did an excessive amount of nailing, scraping, puttying, caulking and painting to make the south wall appear like the rest of the home. This concealment work was very “well done” in that it was only initially noticed by the buyer's experienced home inspector who was also a contractor. Then it was documented with photos that made it easier to see due to shadows. That south facing wall work started falling within a year while the work the defendant did on the rest of the home did not. Thus, the defendant physically concealed material defects with excessive work, and he left no paper trail to enable anyone who needed to rely on his documents with facts about what he found when he assessed the home for work nor the work he did to assist the seller in concealing defects.
Use of Interior Paint for Exterior work - the defendant used a high quality, expensive INTERIOR paint for the exterior siding. A five gallon paint bucket with his company label, order date, and color was left behind. This fact was discovered by plaintiffs months after the close of escrow when they pulled the paint can out to do touch up work. Either the Defendant ordered the wrong product or he ordered the right product and the wrong product was picked up at Kelly Moore, his vendor. . Given the size of the job, and the extent to which he and others had to work with the bucket, and the SIZE of the word INTERIOR on the outside of the bucket, it’s impossible to imagine the product error was not realized at some point in the pickup or painting process. The Defendant’s quote did not say he’d use interior paint for exterior work and that type of defect is not discernable when looking at the paint job.
Overspray - On his Quote the Defendant represented to the seller he would use coverings to protect items not intended to get paint. The Defendant and/or his two man crew failed to use coverings on the roof when spraying the fascia and 2nd floor siding.They over sprayed onto a newly shingled roof. Those defects were not visible until discovered during escrow inspections.
Garage Painting - $1250
Concealment of Facts and Defect s about garage water intrusion from south facing wall - On his quote for the garage, the defendant DID state there were water stains and that he was going to use stain blocker. In that regard there was a partial paper trail to starting conditions that the plaintiffs could have questioned had the quote been presented prior to ratifying a contract. However, the nondescribed stains were on the walls and ceiling adjacent to the south wall and the result of water intrusion from failing siding and that should have been fully noted on his quote for transparency. Thus, the Defendant concealed the siding defects on the exterior of the south side wall with no notice of that in any documents, and he then concealed the water stains in the interior related to the siding defects, with no clear way for anyone who obtained his documents to understand the defects he found when he quoted the work and those that he made disappear.
The Attorney's Deceit - "b Jim Fitzpatrick for the Defense!!"
The Attorney's Deceit - "b Jim Fitzpatrick for the Defense!!"
The Defendant's Attorney, b Jim Fitzpatrick is challenged with making honest statements.
It's as if he doesn't know how and nobody has ever been able to force him to.
In that regard he seems to be much like Woodbury, and given they look alike, one might wonder if they were related. The Defenses to the right were responded to in a document sent to the court and duplicated below. It's if b Jim Fitzpatrick operates solely in a world of his own.
Attorney b Jim Fitzpatrick wrote, "There is no evidence to support this claim”
1) 80% of the physical concealment work and defects is still inspectable and identifiable at the property today. The Defendant and his attorney have refused to do an inspection themselves or hire an expert witness. We can not bring the home to court, but they are welcome to inspect it.
2) The interior 2nd floor drywall ceiling stains are still discernable to some degree from below because the defendant did not use enough stain blocker. An inspection in the attic reveals the size and quantity of the stains concealed.
3) The fascia concealment of defects is still available for inspection. It looks today as it did in photos dated years ago with some looking worse as the drywall mud failed further.
4) The exterior siding on the bottom half of the south facing wall is in poor condition and inspectable. The difference between it and the rest of the home is significant. The siding on the Upper half of the south facing wall had to be replaced due to leaks.
5) The paint bucket with exterior paint by color in an INTERIOR paint bucket is available for inspection (we’ll bring that to court)
6) The roof overspray is still visible and inspect able.
NOTE: The only defects that were concealed that can not be evaluated are the water stains in the garage. The defendant used enough stain blocker to conceal those , and the point there is that he was hiding the water damage done by the defective siding that he hid another way.
Attorney b Jim Fitzpatrick wrote, “[the work] was inspected by the realtor that listed the property for sale before handing defendant a check.”
1) The realtor knew about the property defects. It was the realtors desire, and that of the seller, to pay the painter to conceal them. The Realtor was working with the seller to supervise various vendors to conceal defects.
2) The realtor did not hand the defendant a check for work. The work was paid for by the seller via electronic bank transfers. It’s unclear why they are misrepresenting the payment process.
Attorney b Jim Fitzpatrick wrote, “plaintiffs purchased the property with the benefit of multiple inspection repots”
1) the misrepresentations of work on the quotes transpired 6 months before plaintiffs contracted to purchase the property
2) the fraudulent work to conceal defects without representing the work on quotes transpired 6 months before plaintiffs contracted to purchase the property
3) the work looked physically proper when plaintiffs contracted on the property.
4) the faulty work and concealment of facts and defects was discovered by plaintiffs via their “due diligence inspections” during escrow, which is why they are done. “Trust but Verify”.
5) the fact that defects were discovered via inspections during escrow does not relieve the defendant of misrepresentation and/or concealment of fact on his quotes, and the physical acts of concealment of defects not properly documented, and done many months prior.
Attorney b Jim Fitzpatrick wrote, “the reports did not suggest anything wrong with defendants work”
1) The defendant's attorney has not acquired any of the plaintiffs escrow reports yet
2) the defendant's attorney has not acquired any of the plaintiffs “composite documents” yet.
3) The defendant's attorney blew off discovery.
4) The escrow reports and composite documents identify all facts described in this document
5) its unclear why the defense attorney is misrepresenting his current report and document understanding. This is a false representation to the court of the Attorneys knowledge and facts.
Attorney b Jim Fitzpatrick wrote, "had anyone ever voiced any concern with the work, the defendant would have returned to the job and addressed the concerns”.
1) The concealment of stains and material defects was intentional and done with the desire and approval of the Relator and Seller. They weren’t going to call him back to undo what they wanted him to do.
2) When the defendant was notified via email from the plaintiffs of the concerns, he failed to respond. Then the Defendant lied about not getting those emails to this court while admitting he got them to the bond company.
Argument for Damages
Argument for Damages
The Defendant engaged in fully fraudulent work with full knowledge and interest of the seller and Realtor AND the Defendant omitted the details of his work from his written documents.
The defendant engaged in excessively careless work with regards to overspray and exterior paint in a manner that no professional painter should have engaged in.
The defendant knew his work was intended to fool and harm a future buyer. .
The value for damages put on the defects concealed and/or the defects created were quoted by 2 Licensed Contractors in California and the total for the defects came to approximately $55,000.
The defendant sought to make money doing work to help a seller make money while damaging a future buyer.
The plaintiffs have had to repair some of the defects and they will still have to repair some of the others.
The painter was a licensed professional and this was grossly predatory and deceit filled.
While plaintiffs only have this experience to expose, the chances of this being his first rodeo with this type of concealment work for property sellers with realtor involvement are slim to nil.
The plaintiffs will have to disclose all these facts and defects when they sell the home. No monetary awards dismiss that fact.
Settlement Discussions
Settlement Discussions
Plaintiffs demand for $50,000 in compensatory damages and $25,000 for punitive damages seems extremely reasonable when true facts are shared with the court.
$50,000 plus a 3x multiplier of $150,000 is $200,000
$50,000 plus a 5x multiplier of $250,000. Is $300,000
$50,000 in theft is a felony and a 2-3 year prison sentence.
Why has this been treated with so little regard for the financial interest of the future buyers he knew he would damage ?
Why should plaintiffs recover compensatory damages only, or less, as if the work was all simply “by accident” ?
Summary
Summary
This is an ongoing complaint. There is a hearing on 2/11/2025 in Monterey County Courts. See other pages on this website for legal documents and details.
Page updated
Report abuse