CIV-1102-Fraud-1985

In 1985, California Attorneys, Legislators, and those in the Judiciary Committees for the California Senate and Assembly passed CIV 1102.

Unfortunately, the Attorneys and Legislators who put the system in place also put "confusion" in delivery instructions that destroyed the entire contract formation process and inverted all licensed professionals who sought money to engage as authority figures

When this Attorney driven fraud is put next to the the 1974 Political Reform Act Fraud a pattern emerges.

When facts about legislative changes to Judge Qualification requirements and court consolidations are then mixed in, it's easier to understand what happened to California with far greater ease. It was a Legal Coup that now needs to be undone.

The Conflict of Interest Loophole for Real Estate Brokers and Brokerage Fraud

Undue Influence and Fraud Vectors related to CIV 1102

Exploiting CIV 1102 instructions

The "Naive Initiates" and how they became part of "the BIG Club"

Real Estate Licensees

Attorneys

The CA Bar and Counsel on Judicial Performance - Overseers of Faux

Who was involved?

Summary

The Conflict of Interest Loophole for Real Estate Brokers and Brokerage Fraud

In 1985, California Attorneys, Legislators, and those in the Judiciary Committees for the California Senate and Assembly passed CIV 1102.

That included the creation of the TDS (Transfer Disclosure Statement) and the SPQ (Seller Property Questionnaire).

Those forms ask very detailed questions about property and they require sellers and Real Estate Brokers to disclose everything about facts that might affect a buyers perception of value. They also have umbrella questions that ask for disclosure of anything material not specifically asked, so they are very inclusive.

Unfortunately, the Attorneys and Legislators who put the system in place added a loophole in the delivery instructions by stating (paraphrasing),

"The TDS is due to a buyer prior to Transfer of Title" instead of "The TDS is due to a buyer prior to forming a contract / contract acceptance / contract ratification"

The TDS is where the Seller tells a prospective buyer the roof leaked in winter, there were prior mold issues and asbestos and the cat peed in the dining room.

Given these are all things a buyer would want to know BEFORE deciding on an offer amount and signing a purchase contract, the documents must be due prior to forming a contract, right?

Of course, and thus "Transfer of Title" must be equate to the "time of contract formation" correct? Yes, but maybe not...

Transfer of Title is a "legal theory" -- and while many people agree that it happens at time of Contract Acceptance / Ratification and the current contracts in use by California Brokers even state that, other people believe the theory includes "equitable title" and "legal title" -- whereby equitable title transfers at time of Contract Acceptance, but legal title occurs at time of deed recording, so which Transfer of Title was it referring to?

Problem: their loophole wasn't a loophole at all, it was irrelvant confusion for confusion sake

In California and all other jurisdication with proper contract law statutes, a contract is a contract is a contract. A Real Estate contract is no different from a consturion contract and tht's no different from a contract to buy a business -- and prior to Agreeing to the Contract, all material facts that may affect the other parties opinion of value must be disclosed to avoid claims for fraud. This is a Universal Truth that establishes a "contract law system". Without that, there is no civil legal system.

In this case, CIV 1102.8 provides that exact over-arching guidance by statating (paraphrasing), "Nothing about CIV 1102 shoudl be construed to encourage misrepresentation and concealment of fact" -- but conveniently -- California Brokers, Attorneys, and Judges pretend CIV 1102.8 does not exist -- and worse yet -- none will tell a harmed buyer that the fraud was actually committed when the Seller signed his disclosures under penalty of purjery and prsented them to the selling broker -- days, weeks or months before a buyer was even in the picture.

With this system, California Attorneys, their brethren and friends in legislature who passed CIV 1102, and the Real Estate Brokers paid to oversee brokered real estate transactions had everyone looking in one direction while massive conflicts of interest and disclosure fraud were and are transpiring right under everyone's noses -- and the Real Estate Brokers and Civil Attorneys will say it's all okay because the law their crooked brethren passed decades ago says it's so.

This is a good example of a "commercial hoax".

If you've read the PRA-Fraud-1974 information you should be sensing a fraud pattern now.

In the 1974 PRA Fraud, Attorneys and the legislature passed a law mandating detailed disclosure documents, but they told the filers they did NOT have to answer questions about real estate that was and is very material to making the system useful. Without those the filers can (try to) get away with fraud.

In this 1985 CIV 1102 Fraud, Attorneys and the legislature passed a law mandating detailed disclosure documents, but they told filers they did NOT have to give their disclosures to buyers until close of escrow, if they chose to interpret "transfer of title" at that time. Without those the filers can (try to) get away with fraud.

This is now a "pattern" of corrupt law making related to disclosure documents that is visible 11 years apart.

And there is more to add related to the legislation of modified Judicial requirements and court consolidations that add to all this.

However, for now, let's stay narrowly focused on this CIV 1102 fraud for the remainder of this article to see what else can be learned.

Undue Influence and Fraud Vectors related to CIV 1102

If a Seller and Buyer engaged in negotiations without a Real Estate Broker or a Real Estate Attorney, and both were aware the seller needed to be honest about prior and current property conditions ( TDS and SPQ content) prior to forming a contrat, no Seller would withhold information without expectation of consquence, and no buyer would stand for that. That would be illogical and it would suggest no system for managing "contract law" existed.

To believe the crazy idea that a Seller's Disclosures are NOT due to a buyer until after Contract Acceptance, both seller and buyer would need coaching and to be convincing, that could only come from Real Estate Brokers and/or a Real Estate Attorneya, both of whom we can envision as an "oversight authority" for the State given both are regulated professions for consumer protection.

The parallel between the 1974 PRA Fraud and this CIV 1102 Fraud is continuing. Document Filers would believe something proper without defective written instructions AND coaching from authority figures.

This is just like Naive Judge Ian Rivamonte who looked at the SEI 700 form, filled it out properly and filed it -- but then, when seemingly coached by someone with greater experience or nuanced legal insight -- he chose to disclose less/nothing when something was likely due.

With a system where Real Estate Brokers for Sellers and Buyers as well as Attorneys are Coaching a Seller on a procedural fraud , while convincing buyers they had no rights to material facts prior to forming a contract, what could possibly go wrong?

Exploiting CIV 1102 instructions

In a recent Monterey Bay Transaction a Keller Williams Sales Representative engaged in 1) pre-listing fraud 2) listing process fraud and 3) contract formation process fraud that can be broken down into more detail as follows:

He recommended and then directly supervised two Contractors to fix up the sellers home prior to sale in the sellers absence --without disclosing any of that. During that process contractors concealed about $120,000 in defects that were not otherwise disclosed (mold, structural damage, cat urine, etc -- " a fix up scheme")
He recommended and oversaw the production of two pre sale home inspection documents that concealed facts,, some of which he was personally aware of given his participation fixing the home ( like the need to raise the gas water heater to avoid combustion hazards, the raccoon infestation problems in the attic, etc -- "a disclosure fraud scheme" ) .
He hired a transaction coordinator from a business other than his own brokerage to do his Job obtaining the sellers disclosure documents, which he knew had false statements and omissions due to his participation fixing the home, facilitating the inspectors nad overseeing the disclosure document completion process. ( " disclosure fraud scheme").
He coordinated the Contract Offer and Acceptance process while withholding the sellers patently incomplete and fraudulent disclosure documents with the very unlawful and active support from the Buyers Transaction Coordinator, Sales Person and Broker.

So, in this example aboe, the CIV 1102 fraud is only directly related to item 4 with a moderate blurr into item 3. So what explains the fearlessness for 1 and 2?

When trying to untangle this prior to understanding the 1974 PRA Fraud, this 1985 CIV 1102 Fraud, and a 1980s CCP 1032/1033.5 Fraud you've yet to learn about, it was unclear why the Brokres didn't fear the CA DRE ( the California Department of Real Estate) , the Contractors didn't fear the CSLB (Contractors State Licensing Board), and the inspectors didn't fear the District Attorneys and Judges. Nobody had any fear for anything.

Then, as the buyers questioned Civil Attorney's for represenation it became apparent none of them could explain CIV 1102 in conctext of CIV 1102.8 -- and that was a very bad sign becuse the only reason all of them existed was because of "civil contract law" --- yet they could not explain a 40 year old statute and when and how a contract was formed?

Via 6 lawsuits presented in front of Judges and a few others filed in civil court and small claims to test other concerns, the problems with CIV 1102 and CCP 1032/1033.5 became apparent as did the total corruption of a few Judges, which was a bit out of context until 1) the 1974 RPA fraud was understood, 2) the modification of Judicial requirements was uncovered and 3) the affect that court consolidations had on the civil system was included.

Indeed, the evolution from an improper but digestable brokerage system in the 1960s to the fully lawless system with nothing but actors earning huge incomes is easy to explain, it just requires people to expand their receiptivity for systemic legal lobby driven, legislative fraud a bit more.

The "Naive Initiates" and how they became part of "the BIG Club"

Real Estate Licensees

California has 428,000 real estate licensees. this is over 1% of the population and over 2% of the working population. There is 1 agent or broker for every 50 working people in California and not one fo them knows how a contract is formed? For this to Transpire...

The CA DRE (California Department of Real Estae ) Licensing and Continuing eduation program has to be omitted the simple facts about the four basic requirements to form a contract.
Brokers have to convince new Agents the Contracts they use -- which indicate disclosure documents can be delivered AFTER contract acceptancde and that "as is sales" nullify claims for discloure fraud.

For the "brainwashing" part required in step 2, experienced Brokers, Transation Coordinators and Agents are used to guide new Agents into following written step by step instructions that no new Agent would ever imagine was fraudulent because they put it in writing. (NOTE: the parties violated in the transction detailed above did obtain formalized Mentor to Mentee instrutions directing the bad faith behavior as part of their discovery documents. They were likely an oversight by the Coldwell Banker Attorney who didn't realize they had been buried in 4000 pages of emails illogically).

Thus, Naive people are either 1) "brainwashed" by those more experienced who may or may not know or suspect there is something wrong -- and eveyrone is motiviated my money to keep the improper game going or 2) they know people who are part of the club who told them the truth -- and they just went along with it for the money.

At this time there is NOT 1 in 428,000 real estate licensees who should retain a license, given none know what is required to form a contract.

Attorneys

California has 266,000 Attorneys. That is about 0.5% of the population and over 1% of the working population. There is 1 Attorney for every 100 working people in California and not one of them knows how a contract is formed? For this to Transpire...

Law Schools have to be omitting the simple facts about the four basic requirements to form a contract (this was somewhat verified by a new law school grad who opted not to take the Bar)
The CA Bar exam has to be omitting the simple facts about the four basic requirements to form a contract. (this was verified by a 30 year attorney who asked 30+ discovery questions that prove he doesn't know when/how a contract is formed and what the requirements are)
Older CA Defense Attorneys have to convince younger Defense Attorneys 1) that their twisted view of contract law is proper and/or 2) that the Judges as a collective are all controlled by the Real Estate Brokerage industry and they will prevail no matter what they do in court.

At this time there is NOT 1 in 266,000 attorneys who should retain a license, given none know what is required to form a contract AND/OR those that did, chose not to correct this.

The CA Bar and Counsel on Judicial Performance - Overseers of Faux

The California Bar Association was recently sued for Rackteering. They get approximately 15,000 complaints a year and seem to be acting on less than 50 with blanket denial of concern to the rest. The entire system is a sham of improperly trained and initiated Attorneys trying to oversee the same.

The Counsel on Judicial Performace oversees about 1800 Judges. If you read the cases they sanctioned you might believe the there are only minor behavioral problems and/or problems that are so complex, they take a decade to remedy.

All Superior Court Judges are elected officials. They and all the appointed Judges should be filers of SEI 700 statements - yet some of them may be living in Castles owned by the Rulers of Great lands outside this country and nobody even knows enough to care?

The movie "Idiocracy" is sane compared to California at this time.

Who was involved?

In 1949 a man named John R. McDonough Jr was a young attorney back from service in WW2 where he served in intelligence. Historically it seems he was the son of Irish Immigrants with no major financial or familial ties. At that time he worked with a few others to get the state of California to eliminate reliance on British Common Law as a backstop for civil law. The California Civil Legal system fell into chaos for 2 years. The CA Bar eventually petitioned Congress to reimplement the British Common Law backstop. During that time the major Real Estate Title Companies were among the commercial winners of the Chaos and those all track back to United Kingdom underwriters.

From 1950 to 1969 McDonough was engaged in the Legal Faculty at Stanford along with groups that were seeking to "reform" civil legislation. Under the hood, it seems he was actually making some parts of civil law so complex with exceptions and loopholes he was turning himself into the resource needed to understand nuance. During this period he also served as the a US Assitant Attorney General to Lyndon B. Johnson, who purported engaged in similar schemes with Texas law.

When McDonough entered private practice in 1969ish, he setup shop in the Las Angeles area. His billable rate then was $500/hour when all others pushing the envelop were in the $125 to 200/hour price range.

We have facts that show he was involved with the California Association of REaltors in the late 1970's. He helped them prototype the inverted disclosure document delivery process. In the early 1980s there was push back by Judges and Attorneys. Then CIV 1102 was birthed. This gave the Corporate Brokerages the "confusion" and "interpretation" loophole they needed to continue the practice. Simultaneously, old Judges and local courts were being phased out.

HOWEVER, he did not act alone.

Attorney Willi Brown - Head of the Assembly

Attorney Bill Lockyer - Head of the Senate and later California Attorney General

Others - we have a full ist of the bill sponsors and those in the Assembly and Senate Judiciary Committees to share along with the names of the Attorney General, the Governor and others at that time who all should have known better.

On the Brokerage side of things, the current Broker of Record for Compass in California was in an office in the 1970s and 1980s with the person running the Coldwell Banker Training program fraud in Monterey County in the 2020s. That officde they were both in , which was in the vicinity of McDonough's office, seems to have been a petri dish for testing and mastering this approach to brainwashing and fraud.

We will be adding additional names in the next revision of this report.

Summary

The 1985 CIV 1102 fraud established a disclosure document that was proper, but with vague and improper instructions for delivery, it established a playing field ripe for fraud that has been exploited by Attorneys, Brokers and Sellers for self interest for 40 years.

Initially, only Attorneys, those in the Legislature paying close attention to the Judicial Committee proceedings, and key politicians might have realized what had been passed.

However over 40, years, it's become obvious a LOT more commercial players have been coached or figured it out.

What has transpired as a result of this legislative fraud has been a slow percolating destruction of the moral, ethical and legal framework for political oversight. What's left now is barely being held together by any threads -- and hopefully, this helps explain one key way in which this destruction came about.

As a stand alone act this is horrible and the failure of Judges to prevent is NOT intuitive, until you learn more about the changes in Judge qualification requirements that started in the 1970s, the court consolidation that transpired from the 1970's to 2000 and the 1974 Political Reform Act Fraud -- which is where Judges might voluntarily or accidentally incriminate themselves to become a trusted member of their club.

If this article resonates with you, read the 1974 Political Reform Act Fraud documentation if you haven't already and then advance to the CCP 1032/1033.5 fraud which exposes an entirely different layer of legal lobby driven fraud which helped conceal all this by pushing those harmed into confidential mediations and arbitrations. This isn't the bottom of the legal lobby frauds. It goes much deeper still.

Page updated

Report abuse