[quote=CA renter]
And that KPBS link regarding the software that would allow for “fraudulent” transactions? NO FRAUD WAS FOUND. The issue here is that the auditors thought some employees had access to certain modules in the software that they shouldn’t necessarily have access to. It’s like people in sales having access to the accounting modules. The apparent reason for this is that the building/planning department is understaffed, and people are trained to do more than one thing when necessary. It also looks like they are working on fixing this.
“Luna recommends 13 changes to the Development Services Department including restructuring its management to create greater internal controls, separating employees’ responsibilities so they can’t access as much of the computer system and documenting more changes to individual permits. He attributed much of the failures to inefficient staffing, high workloads, limited supervision and deficiencies with the computer system itself.
What’s the old saying “where there smoke there is fire”
In general, people don’t like bad news so they don’t dig for it. Then there is tendency of people not wanting to admit anything thing is wrong (if they missed something the first time around), so if the root cause of a problem is not fully understood, it can’t be fixed!
IMHO TPTB are in denial (much like an individual who has a substance abuse problem), unfortunately for me I inherited an issue that required me to try and figure out the root cause of a bad news problem.
If ya first look at the MLS for the property (which was sold in 2006), it shows no structure (because it was torn down after a homicide investigation back in 1988), therefore the plans submitted to the city for a permit that show a “termite infested detached garage” to be replaced is a fraudulent statement!
Given all the historical documents (like a 1929 documents showing an easement, along with city maps indicating utilities in place), news reports that the the city has software that allows fraud and the statement from an eMail dated 9/23
“In addition, based on preparation of a thorough historical report on our property to apply for a historical designation of the residence, no existence of any sewer line or associated easement was noted on any of the historical documents/maps we researched.”
there as you can see, lots of “interesting” questions one can ask about the “integrity” of the building permit process, along with questions about “historical property” designations.
Being god fearing and honest all their lives, the last thing my parents wanted to do was be an accessory to insurance fraud (because an offer was given to fix the mess from the builders/owner of the construction project)
Because there were lots of questions/concerns my parents parents “informally” worked their way up the chain of command to eventually goldsmith and gloria, asking for an investigation.
So after my parents died, I inherited the whole damn mess which legally put me between a rock and a hard place.
The city IMHO basically swept the whole problem under the carpet, because after the scandal allowing a skyscraper (the sun road building) to be built too tall next to an airport (as per FAA regulations) to fix the software that won’t allow fraud has a pretty high price tag (financially and politically), then there is the tricky question what about all those tax credits based on “historical property” status.
Trying to do the right thing, cost me well into six figures of legal and repair costs (basically had to cave in because it was my only survival option after I was sued for “quiet title” )
I’ve been more financially fortunate than most, having a legacy my parents left me as well as managing to save and invest my own monies, so I can survive a six figure hit. But I’ve learned the game is rigged, and its not only wall street “greed” that is causing the economy to hurt those in the so called 99%…
I am not a lawyer, but was able to piece together case law “logic” that seems to fit the fact pattern…
ARREOLA v. MONTEREY COUNTY
An entity with the power to control a project need not actively participate in it to suffer liability.
BOOKOUT v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA
a five-year statute of limitations applies only where a public entity has physically entered and exercised dominion and control over some portion of the plaintiff’s property.
Main body logic…
HARSHBARGER v. CITY OF COLTON
1) there is a mandatory duty for building inspectors to enforce building codes because of public safety concerns
2) an exception to the rule of sovereign immunity is fraudulent inspection
BLAIR v. MAHON
3) failure to speak is a species of fraud
HORWITZ v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES
4) “Just as the city has no discretion to deny a building permit when an applicant has complied with all applicable ordinances, the city has no discretion to issue a permit in the absence of compliance”
Is section 1983 Applicable???
MAXWELL v. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
5) the court ruled that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity because of the danger creation exception
(9th circuit has addressed the legal standard issue in “danger creation” cases and agrees with the majority view that a heightened level of culpability, i.e., more than mere negligence is required. Specifically, in Grubbs II, the court held a plaintiff must plead and prove “deliberate indifference.”
pleadings and briefs are available upon request see:
