NRS 116.310313 Collection of past due obligation; charge of reasonable fee to collect.
2. The provisions of this section apply to any costs of collecting a past due obligation charged to a unit’s owner, regardless of whether the past due obligation is collected by the association itself or by any person acting on behalf of the association, including, without limitation, an officer or employee of the association, a community manager or a collection agency.
NRS 116.310313 (2)
NRS 116.310315 Accounting for fines imposed by association.
NRS 116.31083 Meetings of executive board; frequency of meetings; notice of meetings; periodic review of certain financial and legal matters at meetings; requirements concerning minutes of meetings; right of units’ owners to make audio recordings of certain meetings.
NRS 116.31084 Voting by member of executive board; disclosures; abstention from voting on certain matters.
NRS 116.31085 Right of units’ owners to speak at certain meetings; limitations on right; limitations on power of executive board to meet in executive session; procedure governing hearings on alleged violations; requirements concerning minutes of certain meetings.
NRS 116.31087 Right of units’ owners to have certain complaints placed on agenda of meeting of executive board.
HOA managing agents are fiduciaries
NRS 116A.620 Management agreement: Contents; requirements; community manager to provide executive board with evidence of insurance; community manager to provide executive board with copy; changes; termination or assignment
4/27/12 debt collection agreement FirstService Residential dba Red Rock Financial Services and Sun City Anthem includes an unenforced indemnification clause that unjustly enriches Red Rock’s undisclosed principals
NRS 116A.630 Standards of practice for community managers.
In addition to any additional standards of practice for community managers adopted by the Commission by regulation pursuant to NRS 116A.400, a community manager shall:
1. Except as otherwise provided by specific statute, at all times:
(a) Act as a fiduciary in any client relationship; and
(b) Exercise ordinary and reasonable care in the performance of duties.
NRS 116A.640 Community manager prohibited from engaging in certain acts; exceptions.
In addition to the standards of practice for community managers set forth in NRS 116A.630 and any additional standards of practice adopted by the Commission by regulation pursuant to NRS 116A.400, a community manager shall not:
8. Intentionally apply a payment of an assessment from a unit’s owner towards any fine, fee or other charge that is due.
9. Refuse to accept from a unit’s owner payment of any assessment, fine, fee or other charge that is due because there is an outstanding payment due.
10. Collect any fees or other charges from a client not specified in the management agreement.
NRS 116A.640 (8), (9), (10)
9. Taking property from another under circumstances not amounting to robbery;
Sun City Anthem bylaws 3.21 Accounts and reports: delinquency report
(f)(v) a delinquency report listing all Owners who are delinquent in paying any assessments at the time of the report and describing the status of any action to collect such assessments which remain delinquent ( any assessment or installment thereof shall be considered to be delinquent on the 15th day following the due date unless otherwise specified by Board resolution).
A 2017 study conducted by the UNLV Lied School of Real Estate, commissioned by the Nevada Association of Realtors, studied 611 HOA foreclosures between 2011-2015.
SCA’s 2014 Foreclosures WERE NOT IDENTIFIED in the UNLV Study
Somehow the professionals conducting the study missed ALL of SCA’s 13 foreclosures between 2011 and 2015.
Ten HOAs had 1/6 of the 611 foreclosures UNLV studied.
Why didn’t UNLV know about SCA’s 13 sales Red Rock conducted?
SCA had 13 foreclosures in 2014, but SCA is not in the UNLV HOA foreclosure study’s list of HOAs that had more than five foreclosures from 2011-2015.
Notice a pattern?
ALL SCA foreclosure buyers were knowledgeable speculators.
Some would call them “vulture investors”.
This pattern – selling for a dime on a dollar to a few wise guys – would never have happened if bidding had not been suppressed by a few unsavory practices:
Convince the HOA Board that they must keep everything about foreclosure secret,
have no agendas or minutes of HOA Board actions to foreclose
give no notice to the owner whose house is being sold
Allow the manager to be the debt collector and control EVERYTHING about the money that’s collected for the benefit of the HOA members
Allow the debt collector full, unilateral, unsupervised proprietary control all the records and processes, so the HOA has no independent records;
give away signatory control over bank accounts of HOA money collected,
allow the debt collector to use the HOA attorneys against a homeowner who complains
allow the debt collector to lie about notices that were given.
At Sun City Anthem, not a single homeowner knew when or where RRFS was selling these houses.
NOTICE A PATTERN? FOLLOW THE MONEY
In the case of 2763 White Sage, RRFS intentionally WITHHELD notice to ALL parties with a known interest – and then lied about it in order to cover up how this scam works to enrich the chosen few..
Look at who bought the houses. Look at how much they paid, and look at what Sun City Anthem Board and owners were told. It’s quite a lucrative scam for a lucky few.
FSR and FSR dba RRFS told the HOA Board falsely that everything about HOA sales had to be kept secret.
How the vulture investors unjustly profited
TRP Fund IV LLC bought four SCA properties at unnoticed sales @ an average price of $52,125, 80% below fair market value. I, and many other Sun City Anthem homeowners, were prevented from attending these sales and bidding because RRFS explicitly withheld notice.
Two sham LLCs, using the property address as the corporate name, bought houses for $6,500 & $7,600.
All 13 houses COMBINED were sold for $734,900 to a few people “in the know”, and not a single one to an SCA owner.
SCA properties RRFS secretly sold in 2014
1/2/14 RRFS sold 2532 Grandville Avefor $25,500 to TRP Fund IV LLC .
SCA did not enforce the 4/27/12 contract indemnification clause that would have shifted this expense to RRFS. TRP FUND IV v. HSBC Bank A-16-735894-C There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property.
1/2/14 RRFS sold 2227 Shadow Canyon to TRP Fund IV LLC for $40,000.
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. SCA was not identified AT ALL in the litigation as the HOA under whose statutory authority this sale occurred.
Neither SCA nor RRFS were named parties to the litigation.
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. There is no court record that Red Rock interpleaded the proceeds. Upon information and belief, RRFS did not distribute the proceeds after the sale as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3)(2013).
2/18/14 RRFS sold 2721 Evening Sky for $40,000 to TRP Fund IV LLC
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. There are no SCA records to ascertain what happened to the proceeds of the sale. Upon information and belief, RRFS did not distribute the proceeds after the sale as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3)(2013).
2/18/14 RRFS sold 2115 Sandstone Cliffs for $54,000 to TRP Fund IV LLC
TRP Fund IV LLC v. Bank of Mellon et al, A-15-724233-C SCA did not enforce the 4/27/12 contract indemnification clause that would have shifted this expense to RRFS. There is no court record that RRFS interpleaded the proceeds.
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. There are no SCA records to ascertain what happened to the proceeds of the sale. Upon information and belief, RRFS did not distribute the proceed of the sale as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3)(2013).
2/18/14 RRFS sold 2842 Forest Grove for $89,000 to TRP Fund IV LLC
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. There are no SCA records to ascertain what happened to the proceeds of the sale. Upon information and belief, RRFS did not distribute the proceed of the sale as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3)(2013).
3/7/14 RRFS sold 2260 Island City for $30,000 to SFR Investment Pool
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. There are no SCA records to ascertain what happened to the proceeds of the sale. Upon information and belief, RRFS did not distribute the proceed of the sale as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3)(2013).
3/7/14 RRFS sold 1382 Couperin Dr for $100,100 to LN Management LLC series 1382 Couperin
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. There are no SCA records to ascertain what happened to the proceeds of the sale. Upon information and belief, RRFS did not distribute the proceed of the sale as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3)(2013).
3/14/14 RRFS sold 2167 Maple Heights for $6,500 to 2167 Maple Heights Trust
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. Bank of NY Mellon v. SCA 2:17-cv-02161-APG-PAL, ADR 17-91. SCA did not enforce the 4/27/12 contract indemnification clause that would have shifted this expense to RRFS.
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. There are no SCA records to ascertain what happened to the proceeds of the sale. Upon information and belief, RRFS did not distribute the proceed of the sale as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3)(2013).
3/28/14 RRFS sold 2584 Pine Prairie for $7,600 to LN Mgt Series LLC 2584 Pine Prairie.
LN Mgt LLC series 2584 Pine Prairie v. Deutsche Bank A-14-707237-C. SCA did not enforce the 4/27/12 contract indemnification clause that would have shifted this expense to RRFS.
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. There are no SCA records to ascertain what happened to the proceeds of the sale. Upon information and belief, RRFS did not distribute the proceed of the sale as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3)(2013).
4/29/14 RRFS sold 2175 Clearwater Lake Dr.for $45,100 to Saticoy Bay LLC
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. there are no SCA records to ascertain what happened to the proceeds of the sale.
Upon information and belief, RRFS did not distribute the proceed of the sale as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3)(2013).
6/10/14 RRFS scheduled the sale of 2986 Olivia Heights Ave,
The sale was cancelled by a Citi Mortgage temporary restraining order. Citimortgage Inc v. SCA A-14-702071 NV Supreme court case # 71942. On 12/7/17, the SCA Board authorized paying $55,000 to Citi to settle the case. SCA did not enforce the 4/27/12 RRFS contract indemnification clause that would have shifted this expense to RRFS.
The Board President’s report of the settlement does not match the court records.
8/15/14 RRFS sold 2763 White Sage Dr. for $63,100 to Thomas Lucas took title as Opportunity Home, LLC.
The sale was conducted without notice. The buyer was a realtor in the BHHS listing office that was under contract with Nona Tobin. Jimijack vs BANA & SCA (A-15-720032-C); Nationstar vs Opportunity Homes (A-16-730078-C), Nona Tobin vs Joel Stokes et al A-19-799890-C, Supreme Court appeals #79295, 82094, 832234 and 82294. SCA did not enforce the 4/27/12 contract indemnification clause that would have shifted this expense to RRFS.
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. There are no SCA records to ascertain what happened to the proceeds of the sale. RRFS did not distribute the proceed of the sale as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3)(2013). Instead, more than six years later, after refusing to distribute the proceeds to Nona Tobin, RRFS sued five defendants for interpleader, knowing that no one had a recorded claim except Nona Tobin.
9/11/14 RRFS sold 2921 Hayden Creek Terrace for $100,000 to Jayem Family LP
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. There are no SCA records to ascertain what happened to the proceeds of the sale. Upon information and belief, RRFS did not distribute the proceed of the sale as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3)(2013).
11/12/14 RRFS sold 2416 Idaho Falls for $174,000 to Global Village LLC.
My Global Village LLC v BAC Home Servicing A-15-711883-C . SCA did not enforce the 4/27/12 contract indemnification clause that would have shifted this expense to RRFS.
There is no SCA record that the SCA Board approved the sale of this property. There are no SCA records to ascertain what happened to the proceeds of the sale. Upon information and belief, RRFS did not distribute the proceed of the sale as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3)(2013).
Comes now, Defendant NONA TOBIN, AN INDIVIDUAL by and through her attorney of record, Thomson Law PC, through attorney John W. Thomson, Esq., and hereby files her CROSSCLAIM VS, NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC AND WELLS FARGO, N.A. AND MOTION FOR SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO NRCP 11 (b)(1)(2)(3)(4), NRS 207.407(1), NRS 42.005[1].
JURISDICTION, VENUE
The real property which is the subject of this civil action is a residence commonly known as the 2763 White Sage Drive, Henderson, NV 89052, APN 191-13-811-052, (hereinafter “Property”).
This action is within the jurisdictional limits of this Court and this venue is appropriate because the real property is located within the jurisdiction of this Court.
The Court has the authority under NRS 30.030[2] to declare rights, status and other legal relations of the respective parties in this NRS 40.010[3] quiet title dispute.
NRS 30.130[4] limits the Court’s authority to ensure that the rights of parties who are not present from being prejudiced by court actions in their absence.
The Court’s jurisdiction in cases involving the interpretation, application or enforcement of any covenants, conditions or restrictions (CC&Rs) applicable to residential property or any bylaws, rules or regulations adopted by an association (HOA) to parties who have submitted their claims to mediation in the manner proscribed in NRS Chapter 38.
NRS 38.310(2)[5] limits the Court’s jurisdiction to adjudicate claims that have been
The Court’s jurisdiction in this case requires an interpretation of NRS 116.31164(3)[6] (2013) which mandated the ministerial duties Red Rock Financial Services (Herein “RRFS”) was required to perform promptly after it conducted the disputed 2014 HOA foreclosure sale.
This Court’s jurisdiction includes the authority to impose sanctions on Red Rock Financial Services for its failure to comply, and to ensure that the HOA Board complied, with with ALL the statutory mandates for conducting a valid HOA foreclosure sale, included in NRS 116.3116-NRS 116.31168 (2013)[7], NRS 116A.640 (8), (9), (10)[8], NRS 116.31083[9], NRS 116.31085[10], NRS 116.31031[11], NRS 116.1113[12], NRS 116.31065[13], NRS 116.3102[14], NRS 116.31087[15], NRS 116.31175[16], NRS 116.31183[17], NRS 116.31184[18], NRS 116.4117[19]
This Court’s jurisdiction includes the authority to impose sanctions on Red Rock Financial Services for its failure to provide, and its failure to ensure that the Sun City Anthem (Herein “SCA”) Board provided ALL the owner protections, notice and due process mandated by the HOA governing documents[20], SCA Board 2013 Delinquent Assessment Policy (SCA 168-175)[21], SCA Board Resolution 1/17/11 Policy and Procedure for enforcement of the governing documents (due process before imposing sanctions for alleged violations), SCA bylaws 3.21(f)(v) (owner access to quarterly delinquency reports) , SCA bylaws 3.15 (open Board meetings), SCA bylaws 3.15A (closed Board meetings permissible topics), SCA bylaws 3.18/3.20 (delegation by SCA board prohibited), SCA bylaws 3.26, SCA bylaws 6.4 (owner access to records), CC&Rs 7.4 (enforcement (due process before imposing sanctions),
This Court’s jurisdiction includes the authority to determine the standing of the defendants named by Red Rock to assert a claim for the excess proceeds from the HOA sale.
The court has jurisdiction to impose sanctions against parties who have recorded false claims to title as defined by NRS 205.395[22] and to consider the severity of the sanctions in terms of other statutes applicable to, and commensurate with, the frequency and seriousness Nationstar’s corrupt business practices, under the auspices of NRS 205.377[23], NRS 207.360 (9)(10)(30)(35)[24], NRS 207.400[25], NRS 207.470 (1)and (4)[26], and NRS 207.480[27]
PARTIES
Cross-claimant NONA TOBIN, an Individual, (Herein “Cross-claimant” or “Tobin”) was the sole successor trustee, beneficiary and surviving member of the Gordon B. Hansen Trust, dated 8/22/08, (Herein “Hansen Trust”) that held recorded title to the subject property from 8/27/08 until a foreclosure deed was recorded on August 22, 2014 transferred title to the alleged purchaser at the disputed HOA sale.
Tobin claims an individual interest in this property as all the GBH Trust’s claims to title were transferred to Tobin as an individual via a quit claim deed, recorded on 3/28/17.
Also on 3/28/17 the Hansen Trust was closed as it was insolvent when its sole asset was transferred out of the trust. NONA TOBIN claims the proceeds of the sale unlawfully retained by Koch & Scow, with interest, penalties and sanctions.
Tobin files this cross-claim against Nationstar Mortgage LLC for treble damages for the loss of the property at 2763 White Sage, along with interest, penalties and sanctions, for Nationstar’s fraud on the court, abuse of process, mortgage servicing fraud, recording false claims to title, and misrepresenting material facts and the law in order to steal Nona Tobin’s property.
Defendant NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC (Herein “NSM” or “Nationstar”) is an entity of unknown origin whose false claims to own the beneficial interest of the disputed Hansen deed of trust have been without merit filed into district court cases A-16-730078-C, A-15-720032-C, and A-19-799890-C and into Supreme Court appeals 79295 and 82294.
Given that Nationstar was never required to produce evidence to support its claim to be the beneficial owner of the Hansen deed of trust, in this case, the court must determine Nationstar’s standing based on an examination of the Clark county official record for the subject property, APN 191-13-811-052 which is included in Exhibit 1
Factual Allegations
All Wells Fargo’s recorded liens have been released.
Wells Fargo’s only lien was an open-ended deed of trust recorded on 5/10/07 as instrument number 200705100001127, which has no BATES number as it was intentionally omitted in Plaintiff RRFS’s response (RRFS 001-425) to Nona Tobin’s 2/4/19 subpoena.
Wells Fargo’s release of its 5/10/07 lien by its Substitution of Trustee and reconveyance, recorded on 3/12/15 as instrument number 201503120002285, which has no BATES number as it was omitted in Steven Scow’s response to the 2/4/19 subpoena.
Wells Fargo never claimed an interest in the Hansen deed of trust and has never been a party in any of the quiet title cases related to this property.
Wells Fargo’s only claim was a $15,000 outstanding balance on the open-ended deed of trust, recorded on 5/10/07. Wells Fargo issued an IRS 1099-C cancelation of debt in 2012. On Gordon Hansen’s final 2012 tax return, Nona
Nationstar does not have standing to assert a claim for the proceeds of the sale.
Nationstar filed false and conflicting claims to own the Hansen deed of trust on at least these dates: 1/11/16 COMP, 4/12/16 DECL, 4/12/16 MSUB/MINV, 5/10/16 Reply, 6/2/16 AACC, 6/3/16, 6/10/16, 3/27/17 DECL , 3/27/17, 11/9/17, 2/9/18.
Nationstar recorded false claims to title into the Clark County official property record for APN 191-13-811-052 recorded claims on these dates 12/1/14, 1/22/15, 8/17/15, 1/13/16, 6/7/16, 3/8/19 rescind and 3/8/19 assign, and 6/3/19. See Exhibit 1.
None of Nationstar’s recorded claims wherein Nationstar claimed to be authorized as some other entity’s “attorney in fact” were accompanied by recorded powers of attorney, sworn affidavits, and/or proper acknowledgements compliant with NRS 107 as amended by AB 284 (2011)[28]. See Exhibit 20.
Nationstar Wright, Finley, & Zak LLP (Herein “WFZ”) attorneys[29] were well aware of the requirements of the 2011 anti-foreclosure fraud amendments to NRS Chapter 107 and NRS Chapter 205, particularly in terms of the requirement of sworn affidavits to prove the standing to exercise the power of sale.[30]
Nationstar replaced its WFZ attorneys on 4/10/18[31] with Melanie Morgan (NV Bar # 8215) and Karen Whelan (NV Bar # 10466) of Akerman LLP.
Akerman LLP replaced Karen Whelan (NV Bar # 10466) with Donna Wittig NV Bar # 11015) on 12/10/18[32] after Karen Whelan ignored Nona Tobin’s attorney’s attempt to get Nationstar to join with Tobin on a motion for summary judgment by providing Whelan with declarations under penalty of perjury[33] that established the sale had been conducted without notice to the owner or the listing agent who had sold the property on auction.com three months before the surprise sale.
Nona Tobin filed a verified complaint against Nationstar for recording false claims to title and abusing the quiet title HOA foreclosure process in A-15-720032-C and A-16-730078-C with the Office of the Attorney General of Nevada on 3/14/19.[34]
Nona Tobin filed a verified complaint against Nationstar for recording false claims to title and abusing the quiet title HOA foreclosure process in A-15-720032-C and A-16-730078-C with the Office of the Attorney General of Nevada on 11/10/20.[35]
Nona Tobin filed a verified complaint against Nationstar and its Akerman and Wright Finley Zak LLP attorneys with the Nevada Mortgage Lending Division on 12/16/20[36] for recording false claims to title into the Clark County official property record for APN 191-13-811-052 and for abusing the quiet title HOA foreclosure process in A-15-720032-C, A-16-730078-C, A-19-799890-C, and appeals 79295, 82234, 82094, and 82294.[37]
Nationstar recorded into the Clark County property record false, unauthorized, unverified, and conflicting assignments, substitution of trustee, reconveyances of the Hansen deed of trust on at least these dates:
The Clark County property record for the subject property, APN 191-13-811-052, are included in Exhibit 1.
Nationstar evaded detection of its fraud by voluntarily dismissing its claims without any evidence being subjected to judicial scrutiny and without putting on a case and without meeting its Plaintiff’s burden of proof.
Nationstar and Jimijack made an ex parte out of court agreement to steal the house from Tobin.
Nationstar and Jimijack conspired, concealed and misrepresented material facts and law, met ex parte with Judge Kishner, with the corrupt intent of stealing Tobin’s property.
Multiple declarations under penalty of perjury have been entered into the court records show that Nationstar’s claims to own the beneficial interest of the Hansen deed of trust are demonstrably false.
Nona Tobin has filed multiple motions into A-15-720032-C in a futile attempt to prevent Nationstar’s succeeding in its fraud upon the court that have been stricken from the record unheard[38] based on the misrepresentations[39] made by Nationstar at an ex parte meeting with Judge Kishner
Prayer
RECOVERY OF ATTORNEY FEES AS SPECIAL DAMAGES
Counter-claimant Nona Tobin repeats, realleges, and incorporates herein by this reference the allegations hereinabove inclusively as though set forth at length and in full herein.
This counterclaim has been necessitated by the Defendants’ bad faith conduct.
Pursuant to Nevada law, Plaintiff may recover her attorney fees as special damages because she was required to file this suit as a result of Defendants’ intentional conduct.[40]
Prayer
CROSS CLAIMANT NONA TOBIN repeats, realleges, and incorporates herein by this reference the allegations hereinabove inclusively as though set forth at length and in full herein.
This cross-claim has been necessitated by the CROSS-DEFENDANT NATIONSTAR’s bad faith conduct.
Pursuant to Nevada law, CROSS CLAIMANT NONA TOBIN’s may recover her attorney fees as special damages because she was required to file this suit as a result of CROSS-DEFENDANT NATIONSTAR’s intentional conduct.[41] CROSS CLAIMANT NONA TOBIN petitions the Court for the following declaratory relief: to declare
to declare that the disputed HOA sale is void due to fraud in the execution by Red Rock Financial Services;
to declare that the disputed HOA sale did not extinguish the GBH Trust’s, nor its successor in interest’s rights to title;
to declare that Nona Tobin is entitled to the $57,282.32 RRFS claims are the undistributed proceeds and that CROSS-DEFENDANT NATIONSTAR is entitled to none of it
to declare that sanctions are appropriate vs. CROSS-DEFENDANT NATIONSTAR for its abuse of the HOA quiet title process in order to gain standing it does not have in fact or in law to confiscate CROSS CLAIMANT NONA TOBIN’s property without complying with NRS 107 foreclosure requirements;
to declare that sanctions pursuant to NRS 205.395, NRS 205.377, NRS 207.470(1) are appropriate vs. CROSS-DEFENDANT NATIONSTAR for its false claims recorded against the APN 191-13-811-052 title;
that sanctions are appropriate vs. RRFS for its retention of proprietary control of the proceeds of the foreclosure of the subject property, and of approximately a dozen other Sun City Anthem 2014 foreclosures, when RRFS knew, or should have known that the HOA Board was prohibited by Sun City Anthems bylaws from delegating proprietary control over funds collected for the sole and exclusive benefit of the association;
that sanctions are appropriate vs. RRFS for its failure distribute foreclosure proceeds timely after the sales, as mandated by NRS 116.31164(3):
that sanctions are appropriate vs. RRFS for Koch & Scow’s unsupervised, unaudited retention of the funds of many, many HOA foreclosures allowed attorney trust fund violations to go undetected;
Koch & Scow’s filed its unwarranted 6/23/20 motion to dismiss, its 8/3/20 reply in support, and its 12/3/20 motion to dismiss, knowing that all these filings contained many misrepresentations of material facts for which there was no factual support or evidence, defied NRCP 11 (b)(3), Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct 3.3 (candor to the tribunal), 3.4 (fairness to opposing counsel), 3.5A (relations with opposing counsel), 4.1 (truthfulness in statements to others), 4.4 (respect for the rights of third persons) and ABA (1992) Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions 6.1 (False statements, fraud, and misrepresentation).
that sanctions are appropriate vs. RRFS for its misappropriation of funds, covert rejection of assessments, falsification of records that allowed the unjust enrichment of undisclosed partners and co-conspirators;
that Nona Tobin is entitled to treble damages for the fraudulent confiscation of the subject property, valued on 12/27/19 at $505,000 property pursuant to NRS 207.470(1) as RRFS’s actions on the dozen 2014 unnoticed foreclosures constitute racketeering;
that sanctions are appropriate pursuant to NRS 18.010(2) vs. RRFS for its filing the improper interpleader action with penalties as all other named defendants’ liens have been released and Nationstar mortgage is judicially estopped from claiming it ever was the beneficial owner of the Hansen deed of trust;
that Nona Tobin, an individual’s, 3/28/17 deed is the sole valid title claim;
that Jimijack’s defective, 6/9/15 deed was inadmissible as evidence to support its title claim pursuant to NRS 111.345;
that the Joel Stokes-Civic Financial Services “agreement”, recorded on 5/23/19, and misrepresented to Judge Kishner on 5/21/19 as the Nationstar-Jimijack settlement was fraud on the court and sanctionable conduct pursuant to ;
that sanctions are appropriate vs. Nationstar and its Akerman attorneys pursuant to NRCP 11 (b)(1)(2)(3)(4) (misrepresentations in court filings), Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct 3.3 (candor to the tribunal), 3.4 (fairness to opposing counsel), 3.5A (relations with opposing counsel), 4.1 (truthfulness in statements to others), 4.4 (respect for the rights of third persons) and ABA (1992) Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions 6.1 (False statements, fraud, and misrepresentation).
To declare that Joel Stokes’ deed, recorded on 5/1/19, was void as Jimijack had no interest to convey and that this transfer prior to the 6/5/19 trial was for the corrupt purpose of deceiving the court into allowing Joel Stokes and Nationstar to perpetrate a fraud on the court;
That Nona Tobin is entitled to recoup treble damages pursuant to NRS 207-470 and
That Nona Tobin is entitled to is entitled to recoup damages, five years of rental income from Jimijack;
that Nationstar Mortgage LLC’s (Herein “NSM” or “Nationstar”) claims to own the beneficial interest of the disputed Western Thrift Deed of Trust (Herein “DOT”) are false and sanctionable under NRS 205.395, NRS 205.377, NRS 207, 400 and that Nona Tobin is entitled to treble damages by their misconduct pursuant to NRS 207.470 and 480;
that all instruments, encumbrances and assignments, and expungements of lis pendens that were improperly and/or unlawfully notarized, executed or recorded to create false claims, or were done for the improper purpose of abrogating Tobin’s rights during the pendency of litigation, and/or prior to the adjudication of Plaintiff’s claims in this instant action, are cancelled and declared without legal force and effect; and
that attorneys pay Tobin’s attorney fees and costs as a sanction pursuant to NRCP 11(b)(1)(3) and/or NRS 18.010(2)
All assignments of the Hansen deed of trust are void as they did not comply with the statutory requirements of AB 284 (2011) amendments to NRS 107 in order to provide standing and the power of sale.
Nationstar LLC and/or Nationstar LLC dba Mr. Cooper
11/16/20 verified complaint vs. Nationstar to the Nevada Mortgage Lending Division provides 692 pages of evidence supporting Nona Tobin’s claim of mortgage servicing fraud and fraud on the court vs. Nationstar and its Akerman and Wright Finley Zak attorneys.
[1]NRS 42.005Exemplary and punitive damages: In general; limitations on amount of award; determination in subsequent proceeding.
[2]NRS 30.030 Scope. Courts of record within their respective jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed. No action or proceeding shall be open to objection on the ground that a declaratory judgment or decree is prayed for. The declaration may be either affirmative or negative in form and effect; and such declarations shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree.
[3] NRS 40.010 Actions may be brought against adverse claimants. An action may be brought by any person against another who claims an estate or interest in real property, adverse to the person bringing the action, for the purpose of determining such adverse claim.
[4]NRS 30.130 Parties. When declaratory relief is sought, all persons shall be made parties who have or claim any interest which would be affected by the declaration, and no declaration shall prejudice the rights of persons not parties to the proceeding.
[5] NRS 38.310Limitations on commencement of certain civil actions.
1. No civil action based upon a claim relating to:
(a) The interpretation, application or enforcement of any covenants, conditions or restrictions applicable to residential property or any bylaws, rules or regulations adopted by an association; or
(b) The procedures used for increasing, decreasing or imposing additional assessments upon residential property,
Ê may be commenced in any court in this State unless the action has been submitted to mediation or, if the parties agree, has been referred to a program pursuant to the provisions of NRS 38.300 to 38.360, inclusive, and, if the civil action concerns real estate within a planned community subject to the provisions of chapter 116 of NRS or real estate within a condominium hotel subject to the provisions of chapter 116B of NRS, all administrative procedures specified in any covenants, conditions or restrictions applicable to the property or in any bylaws, rules and regulations of an association have been exhausted.
2. A court shall dismiss any civil action which is commenced in violation of the provisions of subsection 1.
[26]NRS 207.470 (1)and (4) Civil actions for damages resulting from racketeering.
[27]NRS 207.480Order of court upon determination of civil liability.
[28]AB 284 (2011) Nevada’s 2011 anti-foreclosure fraud amendments to NRS 107 and NRS 205 summary and legislative digest
[29] WFZ attorneys represented Nationstar Mortgage from its first filing into A-16-730078-C, a complaint vs. Opportunity Homes, LLC (that held no recorded interest) for quiet title and moved into A-15-720032-C by filing a motion to substitute itself as the real party in interest, set aside the default judgment against Bank f America and intervene on the closed case by filing an AACC counter-claim vs. Jimijack who had the recorded claim when WFZ sued the disinterested Opportunity Homes. WFZ filed into these quiet title civil actions statements known to be false and disclosing false evidence on 1/11/16, 4/12/16 DECL, 4/12/16, 5/10/16, 6/2/16, 6/3/16, 6/10/16, 3/27/17 DECL , 3/27/17, 11/9/17, 2/9/18, (Dana Johnson Nitz NV Bar #0050, Edgar Smith (NV bar #5506) Michael Kelly NV Bar #10101)
[31]4/10/18 SUBT switched out WFZ, Akerman LLP Morgan and Whelan came in
[32]12/10/18 NOTA notice the entry of Wittig, but was silent on the exit of Whelan who was never seen again
[33]5/11/18 Craig Leidy DECL and 5/11/18 Nona Tobin DECL. Note that Nona Tobin filed a sworn affidavit into A-16-730078-C, Nationstar Mortgage LLC vs Opportunity Homes, LLC stating that she wanted to JOIN Nationstar to void the defective sale so that each would be returned to whatever rights they could prove they had the day before the sale and prayed that the Court would not allow Nationstar to abuse the quiet title litigation process to gain standing that it did not have in fact or in law. 9/23/16 Nona Tobin AFFD
[39] Nationstar attorneys deceived the court regarding Nona Tobin’s standing to assert an NRS 40.010 claim as an individual holder of a 3/28/17 deed. NSM disclosed the 3/28/17 deed as NSM 208-211. NSM named Tobin individually as a party in all the captions. NSM did not remove Nona Tobin as an individual party when reforming the caption on 3/7/19 NTSO and 3/12/19 ANEO.
Nationstar attorneys knew that Nona Tobin was a party with recorded and filed adverse interests.
Nationstar attorneys knew that to make a side deal with Jimjack in order to prevent Nationstar’s and Tobin’s adverse claims from being adjudicated was fraud.
[40] Sandy Valley Assocs. v. Sky Ranch Estates Owners Ass’n, 117 Nev. 948, 958, 35 P.3d 964, 970 (2001), citing American Fed. Musicians v. Reno’s Riverside, 86 Nev. 695, 475 P.2d 220 (1970).
NRS 116.31164(3) (2013) defines ministerial duties mandated on a debt collector after conducting an HOA foreclosure sale. Red Rock did not comply with 3(b) or 3(c ) after Red Rock sold 2763 White Sage without statutorily required notice to Nona Tobin on 8/15/14.
Rule 22. Interpleader
(a) Grounds.
(1) By a Plaintiff. Persons with claims that may expose a plaintiff to double or multiple liability may be joined as defendants and required to interplead. Joinder for interpleader is proper even though:
(A) the claims of the several claimants, or the titles on which their claims depend, lack a common origin or are adverse and independent rather than identical; or
(B) the plaintiff denies liability in whole or in part to any or all of the claimants.
(2) By a Defendant. A defendant exposed to similar liability may seek interpleader through a crossclaim or counterclaim.
(b) Relation to Other Rules and Statutes. This rule supplements — and does not limit — the joinder of parties allowed by Rule 20. The remedy this rule provides is in addition to — and does not supersede or limit — the remedy provided by any Nevada statute authorizing interpleader. These rules apply to any action brought under statutory interpleader provisions, except as otherwise provided by Rule 81.
NRCP 22
Why interpleader was an abuse of process
NRCP 22 was corruptly utilized by Plaintiff Red Rock after unlawfully holding the sale proceeds for more than six years. Red Rock had no legitimate grounds for filing the interpleader action. Red Rock was not exposed to any liability as there were no recorded claims for those proceeds other than Nona Tobin’s 3/28/17 deed. Red Rock filed the interpleader complaint for improper purposes, including, but not limited to, the obstruction of the fair, evidence-based adjudication of Nona Tobin’s claims for quiet title and equitable relief.
What do HOA bylaws have to do with it?
NRS Chapter 116 is the chapter of the Nevada Revised Statutes that governs homeowners associations AKA “common-interest communities”.
NRS 116.3106 defines mandatory provisions that must be included in an HOA’s bylaws.
NRS 116.3106(1)(d) requires that an HOA’s bylaws define what an HOA Board of Directors can delegate
NRS 116.3106Bylaws.
1. The bylaws of the association must:
(d) Specify the powers the executive board or the officers of the association may delegate to other persons or to a community manager;
NRS 116.3106(1)(d)
Sun City Anthem bylaws 3.20/3.18 prohibit delegation of these duties:
Relevance to Red Rock’s misappropriation of the proceeds of the sale
Bylaws 3.18(b) levying and collecting assessments
SCA bylaws 3.18 (b) prohibited the Sun City Anthem Board from delegating policy control over “levying and collecting assessments”, but handled control of the debt collection and foreclosure function over to Red Rock based on the advice of its managing agent, FirstService Residential (FSR) who unjustly profited by misinforming the volunteer members of the HOA Board about their fiduciary duty to the HOA and to the common good of the membership at large.
Over-delegation caused by undisclosed conflict of interest
FirstService Residential (FSR) was both on contract with Sun City Anthem to be the managing agent and held the NRS 649 debt collection license doing business as Red Rock Financial Services, a partnership (EIN 88-0358132)
Link to RMI-SCA 1/1/10 management agreement is relevant only insofar as the HOA signed the contract with FSR after its agent RMI management, LLC was purchased by, or merged with, or somehow or another, morphed into FSR.
Secondly, this financial conflict of interest is relevant in that it allowed the agents to control all the records in a manner that allowed them to cover up the misappropriation of funds as well as the wrongful foreclosure of a dozen Sun City Anthem homes in 2014 when the transfer of managing agents occurred.
Bylaws 3.18(e) depositing funds in an approved bank and using funds to operate the HOA
Red Rock did not deposit the funds collected anywhere that they were used for the operation of the HOA.
The funds should have been placed in a Sun City Anthem Trust Account and certainly not in a Red Rock Financial Services Trust Account.
Bylaws 3.18(g) opening bank accounts and designating signatories required
Red Rock did not comply with these SCA bylaws restrictions on the proper depositing of these funds into an account where the Sun City Anthem Board controls the signatories.
The Sun City Anthem Board is ultimately accountable for the funds collected on behalf of the HOA under the HOA’s statutory authority. The bylaws provision was obviously required in order to prevent the very type of conversion that FSR dba Red Rock perpetrated here.
By not complying with the bylaws, the proceeds of this sale and at least a dozen other Sun City Anthem foreclosures were retained in an unaudited, unsupervised account, misnamed as an “attorney trust account”. None of these funds were under the proper control of the HOA Board. These funds, belonging to Sun City Anthem, were wrongly under the proprietary control of a partnership with undisclosed partners, Red Rock Financial Services EIN 88-0358132 and/or Steven Scow, an individual, and/or Koch & Scow LLC.
Red Rock agent/employee Christie Marling instructed Steven Scow to deposit the “excess” proceeds of the sale with the court for interpleader on 8/28/14. Steven Scow did not do it.
Bylaws 3.18(i) enforcing the governing documents, bringing legal proceedings, providing due process guaranteed by CC&Rs 7.4
Neither the Sun City Anthem Board nor the SCA managing agent FSR nor the SCA debt collector FSR dba Red Rock complied with CC&Rs 7.4 when they imposed the sanction of foreclosure on the alleged violation of delinquent assessments.
None of the notice and due process required by the HOA’s CC&Rs were provided prior to selling 2763 White Sage as the sanction for an alleged violation of $2,200 delinquent assessments.
Further, the assessments were only delinquent due to the malicious misconduct of the HOA’s agents, FSR and FSR dba Red Rock, who THREE TIMES misapplied or rejected payments of assessments prior to the sale, and then lied and falsified documents to cover up their crime.
Red Rock and HOA attorneys conspired to defraud the HOA homeowners regarding multiple secret Sun City Anthem foreclosures
I, Nona Tobin, under penalty of perjury, state as follows:
I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein, except for those facts stated to be based upon information and belief. If called to do so, I would truthfully and competently testify to the facts stated herein.
I am submitting the documentary evidence based on my personal knowledge, research, analysis, and/or experience.
I was forced into this litigation because Sun City Anthem attorney David Ochoa unilaterally obstructed my access to SCA CC&Rs XVI: Limits on Litigation alternative dispute resolution
See my 3/22/17 offer to settle at no cost to me or to the HOA that David Ochoa rejected, upon information and belief, based on his own imaginary authority or through consultation with HOA community managers, Sandy Seddon and/or Lori Martin.
My involvement with the courts in Nevada has 100% been a thus-far futile attempt to regain title to a house that was wrongly foreclosed and secretly sold by Red Rock Financial Services on 8/15/14, three months after I had approved a sale to the high bidder on auction.com.
Upon information and belief, the extreme abuse to which I have been subjected is only understandable if the opposing counsels are aiding and abetting their clients’ criminal actions, covering up their clients’ misdeed, and/or for their own unjust enrichment.
I have made the following videos and posted them on You-tube in an effort to simplify and publish the massive amount of evidence I have to support my claims that heretofore these attorneys have successfully suppressed and blocked from judicial scrutiny.
The consequences of this successful fraud perpetrated primarily by attorneys:
The title to a $500,000 house was taken from me by a fraudulently conducted-unnoticed foreclosure sale,
Nationstar stole from me the $389,000 outstanding Western Thrift & Loan debt of deceased borrower Gordon Hansen that I did not owe to anyone and was not owed to Nationstar by anyone,
Joel and Sandra Stokes kept $100,000+ in over five years of rental profits that belong to me,
Red Rock attorneys Koch & Scow retained $60,000 that they refused to distribute to me in 2014 and has now accrued plus six years of interest and costs to pursue my claim against massive obstruction
I have been forced to expend tens of thousands of dollars on litigation costs and thousands of hours of personal time to attempt to recover what was stolen from me.
I just know I’ve been in litigation for five years because they aren’t working for the client that pays them.
Yesterday I filed racketeering and fraud claims against Red Rock Financial Services
NONA TOBIN’S ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND COUNTER-CLAIM VS. RED ROCK FINANCIAL SERVICES, AND CROSS-CLAIMS VS. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC AND WELLS FARGO, N.A., AND MOTION FOR SANCTIONS VS. RED ROCK FINANCIAL SERVICES AND NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, AND/OR NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE DBA MR. COOPER PURSUANT TO NRCP 11(b)(1)(2)(3) and/or(4), NRS 18.010(2), NRS 207.407(1), NRS 42.005
PDF of my 131-page response when Red Rock sued me vs. voluntarily surrendering the $60,000 they stole from me in 2014.
I have been greatly damaged by our attorneys defending SCA’s agents and screwing over homeowners
So, it has come to this.
Mortal combat.
To the death.
The Table of Contents of my 131-page response below gives you all you need to know to see why I am livid at their gall.
AACC title
AACC-TOC-PG-2
AACC TOC PG 3
AACC TOC PG 4
AACC TOC PG 5
AACC TOC PG 6
AACC TOC PG 7
None of this litigation had to happen.
It was caused by an abuse of power and the attorneys’ total lack of professional ethics.
Who told the HOA attorneys to refuse my 2017 offer to settle at no cost?
Clarkson Law Group became Sun City Anthem’s Legal Counsel & debt collector on 5/1/17, the same day I was elected to the SCA Board of Directors. John Ayler, on the far right, of the Clarkson Law Group, inappropriately represented Sandy Seddon’s interests, on SCA owners’ dime, at this 8/30/17 hearing before the Discovery Commissioner related to motion to compel production of Sandy’s personnel records and toxicology report re alcohol abuse.
At this hearing the SCA attorney said the petition against her was nothing under the law:
“and further explained the petition of no confidence is not something that exists under the law or under the Association’s governing documents. It is of no consequence. There’s nothing with associations hasn’t recognize these homeowners have no authority over removing her from her position of employment
John Ayler, attempting to rationalize why it would be contrary to the association’s interest to let the divorce court know the truth
This hearing was six days after:
Adam Clarkson & Sandy Seddon took over the recall election
Adam Clarkson unlawfully removed me from my elected Board seat
Adam Clarkson advised the Board to conceal my complaints against his law firm and Sandy Seddon
Our HOA attorney’s attempts to conceal Sandy Seddon’s records from discovery in her divorce occurred 18 days after:
SCA management received petitions against four directors calling for NRS 116.31136 elections to remove them from the Board
SCA management received a petition calling for a vote of no confidence against Sandy Seddon
SCA management withheld notice of the receipt of the petitions from the Board – or at least from me
General manager Sandy Seddon did not answer – only one of the Board members who was facing a recall petition answered
General Manager Sandy Seddon did not answer again knowing that she would be protected by the attorney and the four directors who also had petitions against them
John Ayler wrote a 2nd cease & desist letter ordering me not to criticize Sandy Seddon evidencing his complete misunderstanding of the facts and the law related to confidentiality and privilege
Our HOA attorney-debt collector represented Sandy Seddon in her divorce eight days after:
Clarkson denied me access to documents requested as a member of the Board attacking me, defaming me, and misquoting the law
Our HOA attorney-debt collector represented Sandy Seddon in her divorce one day after:
Sandy Seddon published Clarkson’s defamatory, legally-inaccurate explanation justifying my removal from the board – that I was profiting from being on the Board
Click on photo for 4-minute Darcy Spears video. Slide right of bell for sound.
Lucky buyer got a half million dollar house for $30,000…
but he’s getting an even bigger windfall
He won’t make a mortgage payment – an HOA sale extinguishes the bank’s right to foreclose according to the Nevada Supreme Court
He may not pay property taxes. The bank will probably keep paying them property taxes while the case winds its way through the courts over the next few (or not so few) years
He didn’t pay Real Property Transfer Tax (RPTT) on the full market value because the Recorder’s office didn’t notice that he claimed the market value was $30,000
Nice deal if you can get it
…but just exactly how did that guy, Frank Komorowski from Williamsville New York, even know about the auction.
The homeowner and her real estate agent didn’t know it was going to auction and neither did the potential buyer who had an offer on the table.
The sale was advertised in the Nevada Legal News, but that seems to be a hard way for a guy off the street to find out about how to take advantage of such a spectacular windfall.
Frank is a Super Shopper indeed
I’m not saying Frank Komorowski is a straw buyer, but he’s gotten some really great deals in 2018 besides the one in Darcy’s story:
Red Rock Financial sold him a condo in Gowan Cliff Shadows for $5,000 on 2/13/18 at an unknown sale location
National Default Servicing sold him a place in Monteverdi HOA for $30,000
Hampton & Hampton gouged him out of $6,541 to buy unit 221, 5751 Hacienda Ave., $0.50 more than the unpaid debt, without even bothering with the pretense of an auction
Who was notified about the sale?
That’s a very good question, and, now my curiosity is piqued. So, to find out, I’m doing a little more public records research.
If random guy can make a killing at these mysterious HOA sales, who’s on the losing end of the deal?
Just about everybody else
It’s not just the homeowner that loses.
Taxpayers subsidized the sale by his shorting the county on the property transfer tax (Frank paid $153 on each $30,000 sale and instead of the $2,200 that he would have had to pay if he had declared the fair market value.
According to Nevada Realtors Association, the property value of each house in an HOA is diminished 1.7% for each foreclosure, but since there are two HOAs mentioned on the foreclosure deed, it’s not clear which homeowners.
The homeowners in Summerlin West will pick up the tab for all the attorneys fees while the bank sues Frank and the homeowner sues Frank, and the debt collectors will ride off into the sunset with the $30,000 Frank paid less the nine months of assessments plus interest that the HOA gets.
The real estate agent who worked hard on the short sale will be paid zero because the sale was snatched out from under him as well.
The bank loses big (unless it’s a bank that’s contributing to the problem by recording false affidavits on titles (but that’s another story for another time).
That can’t be right!
Well, it’s certainly not morally right for HOAs to allow their agents to engage in abusive debt collection practices.
Doesn’t the law limit collection fees?
Yes. It’s definitely not legal to keep money that’s not yours. NRS 116.31164 says exactly how the proceeds of an HOA sale are to be distributed. The debt collectors just don’t do it.
Keeping all the money (except nine months of assessments to the HOA plus interest) is just about all they distribute because they have been getting away with it.
Moral hazard
No big surprise.
When there is so much money to be made by cutting corners and playing fast and loose with the rules, lots of people who are supposed to be fiduciaries go to the dark side.
What about at SCA?
SCA is no better. SCA has been ripped off by EVERY ONE OF ITS DEBT COLLECTORS, to a greater or lessor degree, since 2014 (that I know of, for sure).
For example, in April, 2015, SCA hired some very crooked attorneys, Alessi & Koenig, LLC, as debt collectors, after SCA dumped Red Rock Financial Services (who was really SCA managing agent FSR in disguise).
A & K filed for chapter 7 bankruptcy in January, 2017, allegedly because A & K was named in over 500 lawsuits out of the 800+ HOA foreclosures they did between 2011-2015, not to mention a $640,000 judgment against them for bid rigging and racketeering in the Melinda Ellis case. (You’re right. They stiffed her.)
When the A & K bankruptcy was dismissed, and the creditors were told to pound salt, it looks like the attorney/debt collectors had kept $2.6 million out of $2.9 million they admitted receiving in HOA sales proceeds.
And there’s a multi-million dollar mansion in David Alessi’s sister’s trust’s name in Malibu (unless he’s picked a new place to hide assets from creditors).
Retained quite a bit over the legal limit, I’d say.
Next time
More to come about the exciting ways HOA agents make the big bucks for a few lucky winner while the HOA homeowners foot the bill.
Contact13’s Darcy Spears highlighted Sun City Anthem’s excessive executive compensation on the “HOA Hall of Shame” on Channel 13 action news last Thursday.
Living in Las Vegas can cost more when your home is in an HOA, but where does all the money go? Contact 13 looks at who’s getting a big slice of the pie in one of the largest communities in Southern Nevada. Click on photo to watch 3 1/2-minute video.
Threatened with legal action? Really?
Did you catch that report at the end of the video?
Neither the GM or the Board would even answer KTNV’s call to explain how the SCA Board justified such big payouts.
“Instead, they had an attorney respond who claimed State law prohibited the HOA from discussing anything about salaries and we learned the HOA threatened legal action against some owners after Contact13 started asking questions about manager pay rates.”
Is any of that true?
It is 100% true that the GM has used OUR attorney to threaten legal action to try to keep her pay a secret.
against me personally,
against other owners,
against the association itself, and
in this case, against a TV station,
But, it is 100% legally and morally wrong to use our SCA attorney to unlawfully hide from owners how much of OUR money is going into her pocket.
Are any SCA employee salaries/ benefits confidential by nevada law? Short answer: No.
Per NRS 116.31175, most personnel records are confidential, but not compensation.
…4(a) The personnel records of the employees of the association (are confidential), except for those records relating to the number of hours worked and the salaries and benefits of those employees;
Why would the SCA attorney say employee compensation is confidential when the law clearly says the opposite?
In my view, he is simply representing the wrong client.
As the SCA association attorney, he is being paid by the owners to act as OUR agent, not to be the GM’s agent.
In fact, there is a law specifically prohibiting him from representing the GM because it is a conflict of interest. See NRS 116A.640(6). He is duty bound by law to act, solely and exclusively, in the best interests of the association membership as a whole.
But, is he?
I certainly don’t see it. I see the GM approving tons of unnecessary attorney fees that owners pay to protect her imaginary privacy rights.
And like Ricky Ricardo, I think Adam Clarkson has some ‘splainin’ to do.
Why did I get a threatening letter because of this story?
I was told this story was taped, after the fact, last October, but then nothing happened, and I forgot about it.
On 12/22/17, I submitted a written request for SCA to update the 2017 employee compensation table that had been given to another resident on 1/31/17. The budget was ratified in November, and I suspected the Board had given the GM another bonus in secret despite the petition for a vote of no confidence signed by 825 owners and her failure to meet the 12/31/17 target about the restaurant.
When CAM Elyssa Rammos emailed me around 1/15/18 that the 2018 salary table was ready to pick up at the front desk, I was in Mexico and asked for it electronically.
When I got no response, I asked Ruby Leong to pick it up and email it to me before the MLK 3-day weekend. They gave her the run around.
“It’s not ready.
We gave it to someone else.
We have to make changes.”
None of which was true.
The reason for the stonewalling was exactly what Darcy Spears said. Between the time Elyssa Rammos had notified me that the 2018 employee compensation chart was ready, and Ruby Leong could drive a few blocks to pick it up, Sandy Seddon had gotten a call from someone at KTNV.
Quick as a flash, Adam Clarkson manufactured an absolutely false legal interpretation out of thin air that the 2018 version of the previously-released 2017 table was now confidential because Contact13 was doing a story.
Wow. It’s magic.
Documents become invisible, and our money disappears.
SCA’s $325/hour attorney blocked the release of the 2018 update of the 2017 SCA employee compensation table that was already in the public domain. SCA homeowners had to foot the bill for Clarkson to write “legal letters”, in SCA’s name, in January to threaten legal action against me if I told KTNV what the GM’s pay was (even though they already knew) and against KTNV if they ran the story.
There was no Board action authorizing this threat of legal action – unless, of course, they took the action in a secret meeting.
And, by the way, NRS 116.31088 requires a VOTE of the membership, before SCA can file a civil action. But no big deal.
This is a provision of the law that Adam Clarkson made disappear when the SCA Board filed a civil action to evict the Foundation Assisting Seniors. I’m sure Adam Clarkson’s convoluted reading of the law will come up with some magical way that allows the GM to use him to threaten litigation, against anybody or everybody, in SCA’s name, and on SCA owners’ dime.
What did I do about this “legal letter”?
I filed an affidavit under penalty of perjury on 1/31/18 with NRED. I requested that this complaint be incorporated with the ongoing investigation into the harassment and retaliation complaint which precipitated my unlawful removal from the Board on 8/24/17.
It is my understanding that these complaints will be heard by the CIC Commission on November 6, 2018.
More to come.
The next few blogs will discuss the magnitude of the GM’s misuse of the association attorney to act as her personal fixer.