Showing posts with label PETERSEN DEAN. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PETERSEN DEAN. Show all posts

Monday, May 27, 2019

UPDATE, MY SON JAMES IS GRAVELY ILL




  







UPDATE: JAMES MARSHALL HAS METASTATIC CANCER SPREAD TO THE LUNG. He will have surgery this week.
Also, his teeth cannot be saved. For years the HERO property tax scam and Petersen Dean’s Case BC661819 blocked our access to the equity in our house and stopped us from being able to cap James’s teeth and destroyed us financially. James will have no teeth to chew with as he tries to recover from cancer in a gutted house. Because of his autism he can’t wear false teeth. He is so weak he has to sit everywhere he goes. His life has been cut short by these horrible financial crimes. We must file criminal charges. Some Los Angeles County employees have done the opposite of their duty to protect consumers and have protected HERO / Renovate America instead. This must be investigated and all parties who participated in the financial fraud must be brought to justice. I begged HERO and PETERSEN DEAN for my son’s life many times in writing. I asked LA County to investigate HERO and they shelved my official complaint and told me they could help me and my son transition into a homeless shelter. They told me not to go after HERO. They refused to accept documentation that would incriminate HERO.
My son and I fought alone,  in pro per for our home because LA County would not help us and told us to give up and just let HERO’S contractor take our home. Everyone who profited from this property tax financing home repair scam must be brought to justice. They have destroyed a lot of lives and they will destroy more. I see my son suffer every minute of every day and night. Greedy people could not resist the temptation to steal, cheat and lie. They didn’t care if it killed James. HERO, Petersen Dean and some LA County employees loved money more than life and were willing to kill for it. Every step of the way I cried out that James was sick and getting sicker because of the horrible things HERO and PETERSEN DEAN were putting us through to cover up their property tax scam. The trial by jury was set for April 2019 but Petersen Dean dismissed their case to avoid the jury from seeing what they did to James to try cover up their home repair scam.
 



Thursday, February 14, 2019

It's Raining in LA and the PETERSEN DEAN roof is LEAKING


From: Jennifer E Marshall
Date: February 14, 2019 at 6:23:38 AM PST
To: George Konstantin Milionis Petersen Dean Attorney <gmilionis@petersendean.com>, Helena Shi <hshi@petersendean.com>, Rose Montes <rmontes@petersendean.com>, piu@doj.ca.gov, CapSpecialty Pat Framke Claim 00180540-06 # 0041327141 <pframke@capspecialty.com>, Blake J Woodhall Elite Legal Group <blake@elitelegalfirm.com>, Andrew Khouri <andrew.khouri@latimes.com>, Samuel Luquin CA17-013771 <sluquin@dcba.lacounty.gov>, CMiller@isd.lacounty.gov, DOJ AG Desirée Tulleners Deputy Attorney General State <Desiree.Tulleners@doj.ca.gov>, FRONTLINE <viewermail@frol.us>, Ted Lieu <lieu.staff@mail.house.gov>, San Diego Union Jeff McDonald <jeff.mcdonald@sduniontribune.com>, LA CITY ATTORNEY Consumer Protection <mike.n.feuer@lacity.org>, Frank Capetillo <frank.capetillo@lacity.org>, Dakota Smith <dakota.smith@latimes.com>, LA County Pace / HERO Cynthia Miller <rmohr@isd.lacounty.gov>, LA Times David Zahniser <david.zahniser@latimes.com>, CA Dept Of Insurance <thomas.goetzinger@insurance.ca.gov>, Donnette CDSS IHSS APB Cindy Inquiry Response <donnette.desantis@dss.ca.gov>, Court Call Judge Murphy Dept 32 <requestform@courtcall.com>, Joe Buscaino District 15 Fernando Navarrete <fernando.navarrete@lacity.org>, Sam Karimzadeh License 319914 <skarimzadeh.sklaw@gmail.com>, Sam Karimzadeh License 319914 <sam.karimzadeh@gmail.com>



Subject: The roof is leaking. My son might die because of what HERO FINANCING and PETERSEN DEAN have done to his life.

Dear DOJ AG  DesirĂ©e Tulleners Deputy Attorney General State,
and

George Konstantin Milionis, Petersen Dean Attorney BC661819, License 213092,
and

Sam Karimzadeh License 319914, Attorney for Petersen Dean who also mocked me in court for mentioning James was ill and in pain.

Blake J Woodhall Elite Legal Group, Attorney for Petersen Dean,
and

CA Dept Of Insurance Tom Goetzinger,
and

Consumer Business Affairs  Case RE 17-01371 Samuel Luquin
and

LA County Pace / HERO Cynthia Miller
and

CapSpecialty Pat Framke Claim 00180540-06 # 0041327141,
and

Congressman Ted Lieu, my representative, et al,


I woke up 2 am to the sound of water leaking from our roof. My autistic son had a long day of medical appointments and tests. Tomorrow we have to get up early for more tests.

As Pat Framke Of Petersen Dean’s bond can confirm by emails and voice mails, I began begging for my son’s life when Petersen Dean and HERO FINANCING took us hostage financially in the fall of 2016. Petersen Dean bullied us after H&R Block warned me that HERO and Petersen Dean we’re scamming me. HERO didn’t dare put the lien on our house once they were caught red handed, they abandoned the project and Petersen Dean ordered me to sign documents that claimed the job was finished when it clearly was not finished. I was given the choice to let HERO take our house via the scam or Petersen Dean would illegality put Mechanics Liens on an unfinished job and take the house that way. If I signed and allowed HERO to complete the scam, I would receive $2000 from Petersen Dean. That was not enough to remediate the stucco dust, exposed wires and rotten wood left of the roof. It was mean to be moving money to help us move out of our home. Samuel Luquin also offered to help us adjust, “transition” to losing our home to criminals but I declined the offer. If LA County was not to to help us fight for justice, because they were over whelmed by the sheer numbers of victims of property tax financing scams, I would fight alone until I found help. In the 2008 housing crisis my elected officials told me to stay and fight and I saved our home by taking their advice. I refused to believe I had to let criminals take our home. Bet Tzedek also refused to help us. The reason we were turned away again and again was that agencies were overwhelmed with the number of victims. The CSLB was so overwhelmed that they told me they had to create a new division to handle the sheer volume of solar scam victims. Going solar is supposed to save you money, not bankrupt you and cause you to lose your home a year after going solar when the property tax scam kicks in. Getting a new roof is not supposed to cause leaking. My old roof didn’t leak. Paying EXTRA to have rotten wood removed only to find out the new shingles are on top of that rotten wood AND you are being sued with Mechanics Liens even after the CSLB verified the rotten wood is still there, is a nightmare. Being cast as the defendant to prevent you from filing as a plaintiff is twisted and almost worked for Petersen Dean because it made the case “too complicated” for pro bono attorneys. My son and I did what our elected officials told us to do during the housing crisis... we stood out ground, we fought for our rights alone when no one would help us because Petersen Dean made it too messy, too complicated, too expensive to take. We are still standing but we are very badly hurt now. My son’s doctor shuttered today when she told us she is so sorry this is happening to us. It is “unimaginable” pain just like Petersen Dean employees promised me it would be when they began threatening us in 2016. They used the word “unimaginable” to describe what George Milionis was going to put us through. They mentioned my son James specifically by name and specifically mentioned that they were aware of his illness and the difficult year he had suffered, especially after they doused him and his stuffed animals with stucco powder and he got the first lung infection. They deliberately mentioned my son while threatening me if I refused to sign documents they wanted signed.

Now they have decided to cut and run. They seem to believe that Roy Guthrie and HERO escaped justice by running and saying it never happened. Now Petersen Dean is abandoning case BC661819 because in spite of all their fear tactics that kept us in fear of homelessness every  single day and night for over two years, we refused to give up our right to a trial by jury, our only hope of getting our lives back.

My autistic son might lose all his teeth and his legs because of our being held hostage so many years. I begged George Milionis for more time to answer his frivolous and life destroying BC661819 Complaint when James could not walk in spring 2018. Mr Milionis cruelly refused to give us another week. James was in a wheelchair for the first time in his life. It was terrifying but I had to answer the complaint while helping James cope with the pain. James got sicker. Petersen Dean’s attorneys mocked me in court for mentioning my son’s agony. The stress put him in James in an even faster downward spiral as he began autistic self injurious behaviors because the stress of the case disrupting his routines was unbearable to him. All 2018 Petersen Dean’s attorneys tried to scare me out of the trial by jury and mocked me when I begged, in writing, over and over from my son’s life.

In August 2018 the CSLB fined and cited Petersen Dean. That did not stop Petersen Dean from STILL trying to get the court to let them take away our home with the invalid Liens on an unfinished job. They were determined to try to enforce invalid Liens.

I begged Petersen Dean Attorneys and Cap Specialty for my son’s life in the winter of 2018 when doctors said I must stop working on the legal case and focus only on James and surely Petersen Dean would not expect me to do legal work during the Christmas holiday, but Petersen Dean hit me with an ex parte action, made me use my fee waiver to cover the hearing expenses and then canceled the night before and threatened to do it again when they felt like it with a one day notice for me to drop everything and scramble to prepare for. In November and December 2018 James was in the emergency room for fainting, then again for extreme pain and then again for limping and trouble walking and again for loss of control of his bodily function and again for swollen feet and again for infection. All the while Petersen Dean Attorneys were pressuring me, complaining that I wasn’t doing legal work to their satisfaction fast enough.

I begged and begged for my son’s life. In writing and over the phone. Petersen Dean and Cap Specialty were ice cold without mercy. Now Petersen Dean has decided to follow HERO FINANCING’S example and run away as if none of this happened. They don’t want to help James get the surgeries they blocked when they held us captive financially for years. They don’t want to fix the roof that the CSLB fined them for. They left the rotten wood they wanted to be paid for replacing and they are running away from the jury that was going to hold them accountable in April 2019. And now the Roof is leaking and instead of resting before James’s medical test tomorrow, we are looking for buckets to put under the leaks.

A jury might have saved James’s life in April 2019 by holding Petersen Dean accountable for their actions. Now I have to find a way to save James without that trial by jury i was counting on for rescue.

To be tortured, falsely imprisoned financially and wrongfully and systematically and slowly destroyed financially since November 2, 2016 via a trumped up case with invalid liens on an unfinished job, to have James’s three dental surgeries canceled because we could no longer access our own equity because Petersen Dean thought if they held us hostage long enough they would win by “crushing” us and then to have the roof leak on top of it all is all the more painful.

Not only has Petersen Dean made no offer to help James have a shot at recovering from the devastating mental and physical harm that having his life hijacked and his daily routines taken away from him has caused, Petersen Dean is dismissing their frivolous BC661819 with the stipulation that the threat CONTINUE to loom over us forever, that we may know no peace emotionally in addition to having no help recovering from the financial devastation they caused us. They are asking the court to dismiss their own case “WITHOUT PREJUDICE” so they can blow up our lives again whenever they feel like it.

God help us. I have been begging Petersen Dean, HERO and Cap Specialty for my son’s life for years now. Petersen Dean employee’s warned me in 2016 that if I did not sign documents that would amount to financial suicide, they would turn me over to George Milionis and there would be no mercy, that they knew James had a bad summer and was ill and they asked me if I wanted to put James through that. I told Pat Framke at Cap Specialty that Petersen Dean employee’s threatened my son’s life and tried to force me to sign documents that would ALSO destroy his life by destroying us financially.

HERO ran and lied to LA County attorneys, claiming they were not the financing the project in spite of mountains of documentation proving they had been the financing it and now Petersen Dean is running away too.

What is going on here is two businesses trying to escape responsibility by pretending they are not liable because they did not successfully complete the financial crimes. It is exactly as if a bank robber held a gun to everyone in a bank, demanding the money and upon hearing police sirens, abandoned the scene before collecting any money. Petersen Dean, HERO and Cap Specialty are asking the law to excuse them because their financial fraud crimes were interrupted by H&R Block stating they were conducting a scam, a Property Tax Financing Scam.

Petersen Dean threatened my son in 2016 and now in 2019 they are running away from the April 2019 trial by jury I begged Judge Daniel Murphy for while Petersen Dean was telling Judge Murphy they were not expecting a trial and never prepared for it. I was forced to do interrogatories while my son was in agony. Petersen Dean does not want a jury to hear all the employees listed in my interrogatories testify. Petersen Dean employees threatened my son and their actions in the years after the threat caused him permanent harm that he is struggling to survive and may not survive.

I can’t let the terror of all this freeze me. Yesterday I saw the mortified look on my son’s doctor’s face as she considered what James endured because we were at Petersen Dean’s merciless pressure in BC661819 for so long. It’s incomprehensible to many doctors. They can’t believe an autistic person was treated this way. They couldn’t believe Petersen Dean pulled the ex parte stunt right before Christmas and threatened to pull it again, “when they felt like it”, constantly keeping the terror of homelessness looming over our heads. Petersen Dean didn’t care that James was in the emergency room in agony, they just kept the pressure on us to drop everything to defend our home, even if it killed James. Doctors told me to forget BC661819 and focus on James. I told them Petersen Dean will take our home and that might be enough stress to destroy James’s chances of recovery. I was in a no win situation. I had to do my legal work or we would lose our home.

How is this to end? I will remain calm and take James to the doctor in the morning.

We were also referred to the UCSF to see if they can do James’s dental surgery with his insurance or pro bono. We can’t afford the trip to San Francisco and the hotel stay during the treatments. We could no longer qualify for a home equity loan to pay for surgery because we are so damaged financially by the years Petersen Dean and HERO have held us hostage. Mold remediation was disrupted. 



Our home is not fit to live in but we ran out of funds for a hotel. Hotel expenses were astronomical and documented by Cap Specialty and in BC661819 case filings. Our hope was that a jury would hold Petersen Dean and HERO responsible for their outrageous actions against us and make them pay for James’s dental surgeries that are not covered by his insurance as well as relocation funds to a safe place to live. The lower floor is where the mold remediation was disrupted. The second story is where the roof is leaking. The garage is where Petersen Dean knocked electrical wires out of the wall with a sledgehammer and never put the wires safely back inside the wall. The air vents are sealed shut because Petersen Dean filled them with stucco powder on November 2, 2016 and decided it was too expensive to clean the vents and the house of the powder. That means we could not use the heater. There is a HAZE in the house that will not go away. James and I both ended up in the emergency room with breathing problems and bloody noses, burning eyes.



I have to focus on James now. When he reaches a stable point I will seek justice in all ways possible, in criminal and civil courts.

A criminal isn’t absolved of crime simply because they ran from the scene of the crime before the police arrived. A criminal isn’t innocent simply because the crime was not successfully executed. HERO FINANCING has been trying to sell that theory to LA County. It’s only a crime if you get caught? It’s only a crime if the crime is profitable? I don’t agree.

To be continued...

Sincerely,
Jennifer Marshall and son James Marshall









Thursday, September 6, 2018

MEET AND CONFER: JAMES BEGINS PHYSICAL THERAPY, PETERSEN DEAN INCREASES THREATS


Copies of this document have been sent via email, FAX and US Postal Service to GEORGE MILIONIS of PETERSEN DEAN INC, ROY GUTHRIE of HERO/RENOVATE AMERICA and PAT FRAMKE of CAP SPECIALTY INSURANCE. A copy will be filed in Stanley Mosk Courthouse in downtown LOS ANGELES in case BC661819.





Attorney SAM KARIMZADEH has claimed for months that he wants to settle the PETERSEN DEAN case BC661819 privately, out of court, without a trial by jury. 




SAM KARIMZADEH has yet to make a single good faith settlement offer to that effect. 

In this public MEET AND CONFER, since I refuse any more "secret torture sessions", I invite MR. SAM KARIMZADEH to make his very FIRST good faith settlement offer. I hope that offer will not be an insult to the ongoing suffering PETERSEN DEAN'S actions have caused JAMES MARSHALL for years that may result in the loss of all his teeth and possibly his feet and legs. 


Furthermore, I pray that this first settlement offer from PETERSEN DEAN does not consist of: 

"We will remove our two invalid Mechanics Liens if you cancel the trial by jury and promise not to counter sue us, HERO FINANCING and CAP SPECIALTY."


 I can tell you right now that it is not legal to barter with invalid liens. The trial by jury will make this crystal clear.

 The two Mechanics Liens filed by George Milionis do not meet the requirements for filing and therefore are invalid. I have therefore asked the STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA to review this improper use of Mechanics Liens and to consider revoking George Milionis's license to practice law because he willfully filed Mechanic Liens he knew were invalid and for years tried to enforce Mechanics Liens he knew were invalid. I will take the matter to the CALIFORNIA SUPREME COUNT if need be. 

I will not traffic in invalid liens. I will not stoop to pretend recognize invalid liens as valid just to stop a bully from hurting me.

 I will not consider any settlement offer that attempts to force me to pretend these two liens are valid.

PETERSEN DEAN has a legal obligation to remove both liens and to pay all legal fees concerned with the removal of these invalid liens. 

There is nothing to negotiate in regards to these two invalid Mechanics Liens. There is plenty to answer for in regards to the ongoing damage to JAMES MARSHALL that these invalid liens caused him. I trust a jury will sort this out fairly. I do not trust PETERSEN DEAN to police themselves and do the honorable thing.

MR. KARIMZADEH, if you have a settlement offer, please submit it or stop constantly referring to your desire to settle out of court when you actually have nothing in mind. 

MR. KARIMZADEH, 
please submit your settlement offer that takes into account what JAMES MARSHALL, an autistic person, has been put through as a result of the HERO/PETERSEN DEAN property tax financing scam that H&R Block helped expose and the invalid use of Mechanics Liens that the CSLB requirements show clearly have not legally met the requirements for filing.



JAMES MARSHALL has recovered enough to begin physical therapy in August 2018. Since November 2016 when PETERSEN DEAN first threatened to make the stress on JAMES "unimaginable" if I didn't sign a document I was never allowed to see, JAMES could not understand why life suddenly became so frightening and all his routines were disrupted. 

JAMES has severe autism and responded by pounding his own thighs with his fists every time we were forced to search for attorneys and do mountains of paper work instead of his normal daily routine. Every time we were threatened financially by PETERSEN DEAN, they knew they were pushing an autistic person beyond his ability to cope. JAMES lost mobility of his legs and could not walk on several occasions since PETERSEN DEAN began saturating our lives with nonstop stress.

In August 2018, after nearly a year of being in diapers, also due to stress caused by PETERSEN DEAN, JAMES recovered enough to be able to begin physical therapy to attempt to regain the ability to bend his legs and increase his range of motion.

Stress caused James to pound his own legs with his fists every time PETERSEN DEAN forced me, his mom, to fight for our lives instead of seeing James through his normal daily routines. Blood pooled inside JAMES'S thigh muscles and calcified, forming bone like striations in his muscles which severely limited his range of motion and ability to bend his legs. The X-rays of JAMES'S legs will make you cry when you see them.

* UPDATE: Below are the X-rays of JAMES MARSHALL'S legs, damaged due to stress beyond an autistic person's ability to cope with. 











There is no way to calm JAMES when MR. SAM KARIMZADEH forces us to cancel physical therapy sessions  so we can do paperwork that amounts to time and money consuming, frivolous busy work and to spend a disabled man's grocery money we were going to buy chicken with to buy postage to serve papers when the matter has really been covered well enough already and MR. SAM KARIMZADEH is clearly just after our grocery money and refusing to let JAMES heal. 

PETERSEN DEAN began using my son JAMES as leverage to try to force me to sign documents and began threatening to stress JAMES in 2016, mentioning JAMES by name and acknowledging his autism, his emergency room visit  PETERSEN DEAN made good on the threat to keep JAMES stressed, indicating I could end it by complying with their wishes. 

It is as if MR. SAM KARIMZADEH thinks the court and the jury won't notice this.

PETERSEN DEAN sees this as a time to increase the stress upon JAMES, an autistic individual and has threatened me with sanctions that are not really necessary beyond their value as an attempt to frighten us into just letting PETERSEN DEAN get away with crime so they won't hurt us more. 

It is obvious that PETERSEN DEAN seeks to overwhelm me and disrupt the intake process we are in with THE PUBLIC LAW CENTER. 

It is obvious that PETERSEN DEAN seeks to destroy any hope of recovery for JAMES MARSHALL by constantly interrupting his physical therapy sessions, taking away his grocery money, ALL THE WHILE KNOWING THE MECHANICS LIENS WERE INVALID ACCORDING TO THE LAW, and forcing his mom to do mountains of unnecessary, repetitive paperwork and to take away all of the precious free moments our family has left for calling attorneys and doctors to ask for help and instead spend every free moment doing paperwork that the court will ultimately see for what it is: avoidance and censorship of the facts of this case and pure harassment. 

Instead of taking responsibility, PETERSEN DEAN makes threats. See the ongoing, threat of sanctions below:

Date:
Wednesday, September 5, 2018 3:08 PM
From:
Sam Karimzadeh <skarimzadeh.sklaw@gmail.com>
To:
Jennifer E Marshall
Subject:
Meet and Confer re: Discovery Responses: Form Interrogatories (Set One)
Dear Ms. Marshall:

We are in receipt of your responses to Form Interrogatories Set One propounded by Petersen-Dean, Inc.  This correspondence shall serve as Petersen-Dean’s attempt to meet and confer with you over deficiencies in your responses described below.  If further responses revised by you in an attempt to address the deficiencies identified in this letter are not served within two weeks of the date of this letter, Petersen-Dean will be forced to take more formal steps to address the deficiencies including the filing of a motion to compel further responses and a request for an order of monetary sanctionsagainst you from the Court.

FAILURE TO RESPOND TO INTERROGATORY NO. 15.1 AND WAIVER OF OBJECTIONS THERETO

Your responses to Form Interrogatory Set One included responses to Interrogatory Nos. 1.1 and 50.1.  However, the box to Interrogatory No. 15.1 was also checked and required a response from you.  Also, because you did not timely respond to Interrogatory No. 15.1 initially, you have waived your right to assert any objections or the ability to produce writings in lieu of a response. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290(a).)   As such, please provide your response to 15.1 without objections.
FAILURE TO OBJECT AND WAIVER OF OBJECTIONS TO INTERROGATORY SERIES 50.0

While your Form Interrogatory Set One responses appear to assert general objections at the beginning of the responses, no specific objections were lodged by you to the 50.0 series of questions.  Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.210, subdivision (c) provides in relevant part that, “Each answer, exercise of option, or objection in the response shall bear the same identifying number or letter and be in the same sequence as the corresponding interrogatory . . . .”  The general objections made in the beginning of your response were not repeated to coincide with your responses to the 50.0 series.   As such, your responses to the 50.0 series are effectively without objections. Thus, when providing further responses to the 50.0 series please provide the responses without objections.

NON-RESPONSIVE MATTER AND INCOMPLETE RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORY SERIES 50.0

Interrogatories are a discovery tool designed to elicit specific information, not to elicit everything under the sun that you think Petersen-Dean and/or Hero Renovation did wrong to you.  The 50.0 series of interrogatories are designed to elicit your contentions surrounding the breach-of-contract cause of action that is the subject of this lawsuit. 

The 50.1 series seeks information about what writings and verbal statements you contend to be a part of the agreement and any modification of the agreement alleged in Petersen-Dean’s complaint.  Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.220, subdivision (a) provides, “Each answer in a response to interrogatories shall be as complete and straightforward as the information reasonably available to the responding party permits.”  “Parties must state the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in answering written interrogatories.” (Scheiding v. Dinwiddie Const. Co. (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 64, 76.)  Much of the matter you set forth in your responses to the 50.0 series and the specific sub-categories thereof is not straightforward, does not respond to the calls to the questions, and amounts to superfluity and/or unnecessary and irrelevant additional information volunteered by you. 

The responses to the 50.0 series need to be pared down to provide matter that is only responsive to the questions asked.  Thus, for example, when responding to Interrogatory No. 50.1(a), you should limit your response only to the identification of the writings that you contend comprise the agreement at issue and the identities of individuals you contend have copies of those writings.  Including further information unrelated to the identified documents and persons with those documents amounts to a non-responsive response and is improper.  Only the matter that is responsive to the question should be included in your responses. 

Similarly, while your response to Interrogatory No. 50.1(b) identifies purported verbal communications between you and Dave Shanholtzer and you and Helena Shi that you contend were parts of the agreement not in writing, it goes on to state additional matter that has no bearing on the question.  For example, part of your response to the interrogatory goes on about a written mechanic’s lien:

MECHANICS LIENS were filed upon my property the week the solar panels were supposed to be removed. I was not served copies of the MECHANICS LIENS. I found out about the existence of the MECHANICS LIENS from an attorney I consulted because both PETERSEN DEAN and HERO had stopped communicating with me and I wanted to sue HERO as well as PETERSEN DEAN. I had to purchase copies of the liens. I also had to purchase copies of the SUMMONS and COMPLAINT because PETERSEN DEAN did not serve me and when they did provide an emailed copy the day my answer to the complaint was due, I found out from THE PUBLIC LAW CENTER that it was not really a copy of the complaint. I had to send PUBLIC LAW CENTER a copy of the copy I purchased from the court.

The issue of a written mechanic’s lien on your property has no bearing on whether you contend that part of the agreement at issue was not in writing.  Adding this matter to your response is improper and a further response must be provided that removes all non-responsive material.

Further, while your response to Interrogatory No. 50.1(b) adds superfluous information it nonetheless still fails to state what parts of the agreement that you contend were not in writing or identify the dates that the parts not in writing were made part of the agreement. 

Similar issues abound with your responses to the remaining subsections of the 50.1 interrogatory.  For example, your response to Interrogatory No. 50.1(c) fails to identify with specificity any writings you contend support that a part of the agreement not in writing was ever made by you and any other person.  Your response fails to identify by specific date a specific document that supports this very specific contention.  Instead you state that Petersen-Dean has all emails from November 2016 through mid-January 2017.  That is not a straightforward and complete response to the question being asked.  Please provide a further response that gives more specific information responsive to the question.

Interrogatory No. 50.1(d) solely asks you to identify any documents that you contend constituted a modification of the agreement and to identify all persons in possession of such documents – nothing else.  Your response goes on to state immaterial matter that fails to respond to a question seeking only very limited information:

I was told that it could not be avoided, that there was additional wood that needed replacing and so I agreed to have it replaced. What is horrible about this is that the STATE CONTRACTOR’S LICENSING BOARD inspector found that in spite of my being charged extra, there was still rotten wood that had not been replaced. I had confronted PETERSEN DEAN about rotten wood that could be seen with the naked eye from the ground. I was told that this was not “rotten wood” that it was “thirsty wood”. Additionally, the incorrect sized pieces of wood that replaced SOME of the rotten wood caused the side of the roof to be C-shaped instead of a straight line. I sent pictures of this to HERO and PETERSEN DEAN. Nothing was going to be done about it otherwise. PETERSEN DEAN wanted me to tell my neighbors about them and at first I did but my neighbors could see the side of my roof was C-shaped instead of a straight line and they could see things going wrong over and over. My neighbors were appalled by the sight of me and my autistic son struggling alone trying to clean the stucco powder off our laundry, wearing masks as we tried to salvage electronic equipment and employees of the MARRIOTT where we stayed saw us both come down with serious lung infections over and over during that time period. THE MARRIOTT employees said for me not to fax documents to the CLSB from our house anymore since it was making us so sick that we had to go to the emergency room and they faxed hundreds of pages for us from their office instead. We were too sick to keep food down on Thanksgiving Day 2016 because of what PETERSEN DEAN did to us. My son and I both had occasions where we stopped breathing and fainted, James more times than me. This had never happened to me before. I was terrified that my son was going to be alone in a hotel room with a deceased mom.
It is ironic that PETERSEN DEAN drew up a document about needing more money than originally agreed upon to replace rotten wood and then STILL left rotten wood that was discovered and documented by the CSLB roof inspector. They refused to draw up a document that was clear and understandable about the “free roof if you go solar” agreement. PETERSEN DEAN and HERO/RENOVATE AMERICA kept urging me to believe nothing was wrong, that I was getting that offer that wasn’t reflected anywhere in writing. DAVE SHANHOLTZER was in charge of getting me to sign to pay more for additional wood. I was also asked to sign for an inspection that never happened and I protested that my carbon monoxide detectors had not been inspected because I don’t have any and that some of my fire alarms had stopped working. The truth was not wanted. I was told it didn’t really matter. If it didn’t really matter, why was my signature needed? DAVE SHANHOLTZER also urged me on several different occasions, with a “wink-wink, nod-nod” attitude, to lie to the IRS, to lump the solar and the roof together as if it was all the solar expense and get a bigger tax credit. I was dumbfounded that he assumed that it was alright to tell me this. The series of events presented a pattern which I can only describe as a criminal mindset. PETERSEN DEAN AND HERO/RENOVATE AMERICA behaved like criminals and seemed so steeped in crime that they had the warped idea that everyone was as into crime as they were.
I was astounded and deeply upset by the dishonesty. DAVE SHANHOLTZER’S phone number is (714)309-0837 dshanholtzer@petersendean.com. A jury will be presented with all the documents and asked the question, “What homeowner in their right mind would wake up one day and knowingly decide they wanted to pay three times more for electricity than they currently did?” PETERSEN DEAN and HERO FINANING both knew I was not in the tax bracket to be a candidate for property tax financing.

The material above identifies neither a document of a modification of the agreement or a person in possession of such a document.  The example above is indicative of the improper manner by which you have inserted non-responsive matter into most of your interrogatory responses.  Here you offer non-responsive matter such as neighbors’ views of you and your son with stucco on your laundry, faxing issues from your home, Marriott employees witnessing you and your son purportedly contracting lung illnesses, and Petersen-Dean’s purported “criminal” behavior.  This is a breach-of-contract case and none of the foregoing allegations are germane to the subject matter of this legal action.  Responding to an interrogatory in this manner is improper.  To the extent your response fails to identify documents supporting a purported wood replacement modification to the agreement, you should not offer it or insert it at all anywhere in your response to Interrogatory No. 50.1(d). While you may ultimately get your chance to state your case with supporting “facts” for issues unrelated to Interrogatory No. 50.1(d), muddying your interrogatory response with unrelated and unsupported allegations is not a proper method of responding to discovery requests.

Your responses to the remaining subsections of the 50.1 and the other interrogatories (Nos. 50.2, 50.3, 50.4, 50.5, and 50.6) should be limited to matter that solely responds to the question.  If you continue to insert non-responsive matter into the responses Petersen-Dean will be forced to take further steps to compel you not to do so.

Interrogatory 50.2 asks if you contend that there was a breach of any agreement and if so, to “give the date of every act or omission that you claim is the breach of the agreement.”  Your response to 50.2 fails to give dates of any of the events surrounding any purported breaches.  Please provide further responses to 50.2 to provide the dates of all the events you describe therein.

Interrogatory 50.3 asks you if performance by a party to the agreement was excused.  You responded “No,” but then go on to state additional matter not called for unless your response was a “Yes”:

Absolutely not. No performance of any agreement alleged in the pleadings was excused. The CSLB Citation that will remain on PETERSEN DEAN’S bond/license for five years does not grant any excuse for unfinished work, damages and financial fraud. The CSLB fine paid by PETERSEN DEAN also does not absolve PETERSEN DEAN from having to make repairs, restitution, remediation such as removal of rotten wood. The CSLB did not put in writing that because of the FIVE-YEAR CITATION attached to PETERSEN DEAN’S bond, PETERSEN DEAN was hereby absolved from having to remove the rotten wood mentioned in the citation.
PETERSEN DEAN lied about making the arrangements to remove the solar panels and filed two MECHANICS LIENS that week instead. None of the agreed upon repairs were made. I was left with the task of having to pay for all the repairs and I could not afford to. The solar panels were never turned on because they were to be removed according to agreement. PETERSEN DEAN abandoned the job and all the agreements.

Again, this conduct is improper, and your further response must eliminate this immaterial and non-responsive matter. 

The same exact issue presents in your response to Interrogatory No. 50.4 which asks only if an agreement was terminated by a mutual agreement, release, accord and satisfaction, or novation.  You insert non-responsive and immaterial matter such as your son’s need for a dental surgery and circumstances surrounding a purported solar permit refund.  None of this matter relates to a release, novation, accord and satisfaction, etc.  Since you responded “No” to both Nos. 50.3 and 50.4, please provide further responses that delete all matter appearing after the word “No” to those two questions.

Interrogatory No. 50.5 asks you if any part of the agreement between you and Petersen-Dean was unenforceable.  Your response goes on to discuss a mechanic’s lien that is separate from the agreement in the pleadings and your relationship with Hero Renovation which is not a party to this action.  Similarly, you reference informal communication attempts to settle this case and your mentioning of your intention to file a cross-complaint against other potential parties have no bearing on the call to the question.  Your further response to this interrogatory needs to eliminate references to matter unrelated to terms of the agreement at issue that you contend are unenforceable.

Finally, Interrogatory No. 50.6 states verbatim: “Is any agreement alleged in the pleadings ambiguous? If so, identify each ambiguous agreement and state why it is ambiguous.”  Your response to this interrogatory was “Yes,” followed by additional language as follows:

All verbal agreements with PETERSEN DEAN were extremely ambiguous and often changed without warning or explanation or disappeared completely without explanation as if they had never been made. The sheer number of ambiguous verbal agreements with references to equally ambiguous, mysterious, never materializing written agreements, verbally suggested to me by PETERSEN DEAN from November 2016 to January 2017 quickly became a veritable rat’s nest of ambiguities that would exhaust anyone. . . .

Your response claims several ambiguous agreements but never identifies those agreements or the context surrounding the purported ambiguities.  Other than reference to a “computer-generated contract,” there does not appear to be reference to any specific agreement or a specific ambiguity therein.  The response also goes on to insert non-responsive immaterial matter such as your visits to the police and your unsupported allegations of purported threats made to you and your son by unidentified Petersen-Dean personnel.  Please provide further responses that identify the ambiguous agreements and the context (e.g. substance, content, dates, witnesses, etc.) surrounding those ambiguities and remove the matter that does not respond to the question.

CONCLUSION

As stated earlier in this letter, we will expect that you will serve further responses without objections and in compliance with the terms and conditions of this letter within the next two weeks.  If we do not receive proof of service of those responses within that time frame, I will assume that you do not wish to resolve this issue informally and will take steps to more formally protect my client via a motion to compel and a request for an order of sanctions against you from the Court.

Sincerely,

Sam Karimzadeh, Esq.