Dt B C URT

Transcription

1 Felicia A. Mobley (SBN ) MOBLEY LAW OFFICES 352 North Robertson Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90048, Cris assigned 0) (310) Jed Attorney for Plaintiff Carol rader LOS Dt JOHypiCeRKE, CLER BY MARY V/ARCLA, DEPU URT CAROLYN TRADER, VS. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiff, UNITED CALIFORNIA SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC., a California Corporation; INFINITY INVESTMENT AND LOAN; INFINITY HOME REALTY; FIRST ESCROW SERVICES, INC., a California Corporation; PREMIER VALUATION SERVICES; TICOR TITLE Co. OF CALIFORNIA; MARTHA LYDIA GORDILLO, an individual; CAROLYN DRAYTON, an individual; CHEKA ABUBAKARI, an individual; GERALD DUNCAN, an individual; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 10, inclusive, Defendants. FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Case No.: BC FOR: GENERAL ALLEGATIONS B C BREACH OF ORAL CONTRACT 2 FRAUD 3 BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY/CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD 4) NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION 5) RECISSION 6) INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 7) NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 8) AIDING AND ABETTING 9) NEGLIGENCE 10)UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES 11)ACCOUNTING COMES NOW Plaintiff CAROLYN TRADER (hereinafter "the Plaintiff') and alleges as follows: 1. Plaintiff CAROLYN TRADER ("Plaintiff) is, and at all times relevant herein *as, a resident of the County of Los Angeles, State of California. ti 2. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant, UNITED CALIFORNIA SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC., ("UCSI") is, and at all times

2 relevant herein was, a California Corporation authorized to and doing business in the 2 County of Los Angeles, State of California with his primary place of business located at Century Park East, #2550, Los Angeles, California Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant 5 INFINITY INVESTMENT AND LOAN ("Infinity Investment") is, and at all times relevant 6 hereto was, doing business in an unknown form in the County of Los Angeles, State of 7 California with its primary place of business located at 222 N. Sepulveda Blvd, Suite , El Segundo, California Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant 10 INFINITY HOME REALTY ("Infinity Home") is, and at all times relevant herein was, 11 doing business in an unknown form in the County of Los Angeles, State of California 12 with its primary place of business located at 222 N. Sepulveda Blvd, Suite 2000, El 13 Segundo, California Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant 15 FIRST ESCROW SERVICES, INC. ("FES") is, and at all times relevant herein was, a 16 California corporation authorized to and doing business in the County of Los Angeles, 17 State of California with its primary place of business located at 2501 Cherry Avenue, 18 Suite 265, Signal Hill, California Plaintiff is further informed and believes and 19 thereon alleges that Defendant Escrow is licensed by the California Department of 20 Corporations, license number Defendant PREMIER VALUATION SERVICES ("Premier") is, and at all 22 times relevant herein was, doing business in an unknown form in the County of Los 23 Angeles, State of California with its primary place of business located at 1628 E. Palm 24 Avenue, Suite 2, El Segundo, California Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant 26 TICOR TITLE CO, OF CALIFORNIA ("Ticor") is, and at all times relevant herein was, a 27 California Corporation licensed to and doing business in the County of Los Angeles, F: 28 State of California.

3 O 9. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon MARTHA LIDIA GORDILLO ("Gordillo") is, and at all times resident of the County of Los Angeles, State of California real property located at 46 East Montana Street, Pasadena Property"). 10. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon CHEKA ABUBAKARI, (hereinafter "Abubakari") is, and at a a resident of the County of Los Angeles, State of California Investment and/or Infinity Home. Plaintiff is further informei alleges that Abubakari is an agent of Infinity Investment anc. ges that Defendant levant herein was, a the owner of that certain ;alifornia (the "Subject eges that Defendant times relevant herein was, nd employed by Infinity and believes and thereon or Infinity Home. 11. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant GERALD BERNARD DUNCAN (hereinafter "Duncan") is, and at all times relevant herein was, a resident of the County of Los Angeles, State of California. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that Duncan is a California licensed real estate broker, license number and the owner and/or an agent of Infinity Investment and/or Infinity Home. 12. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant CAROLYN DRAYTON (hereinafter "Drayton") is, and at all times relevant herein was, a resident of the County of Los Angeles, State of California. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that Drayton is a California licensed real estate appraiser and the owner and/or agent of Premier. 13. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of the defendants sued herein as Does 1 through 10, inclusive, and therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will seek leave of Court to amend this Complaint to is Vlege the true names and capacities of Does 1 through 10, inclusive, when ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereupon alleges, that each of the fictitiously named defendants is responsible in some manner for the occurrences herein 'alleged. GO M PLA4NT

4 14. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that at all times mentioned herein each of the defendants was the agent and employee of each of the remaining defendants and in doing the things hereinafter alleged, was acting within the course and scope of such agency and with the permission and consent of the other defendants. ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION 15. In or about March 2007, Infinity Investment, Infinity Home, Abubakari and Duncan made efforts to represented and assisted Plaintiff with a refinance of her residence. The lender for the proposed refinance was Washington Mutual Bank. 16. The refinance was not finalized due to unacceptable terms. However, thereafter, defendants Infinity Investment, Infinity Home, Abubakari and Duncan approached Plaintiff to inquire if she would be interested in making a real estate investment in distressed properties. 17. Infinity Investment, Infinity Home, Abubakari and Duncan informed Plaintiff that they were Gordillo's agents and represented her in connection with the refinance of the Subject Property. 18. In the course of their discussion, defendants presented Plaintiff with two alleged real estate opportunities, one of which was the Subject Property. 19. Defendants provided photographs of the Subject Property as well as an appraisal prepared by defendants Drayton and Premier wherein they valued the Property at $449, As explained by Infinity Investment, Infinity Home, Abubakari and Duncan, defendant Gordillo had fallen behind in her mortgage payments and did not have the credit to refinance her mortgage. She was therefore seeking an investor so she would not lose the Subject Property to foreclosure. 21. The terms of the investment would be for Plaintiff to purchase the Subject iproperty from Gordillo for the sum of $ 449,000.00, obtain a mortgage in her own name Using her own good credit and then leased the Subject Property back to Gordillo for a period of one year.

5 As explained by Infinity Investment, Infinity Home, Abubakari and Duncan, Gordillo would continue to live at the Subject Property for the one year period, pay rent in the amount of the mortgage and also pay all other related property expenses including but not limited to homeowners insurance, property taxes, and utility bills. 23. Additionally, Infinity Investment, Infinity Home, Abubakari and Duncan represented that Plaintiff would receive a fee of $25,000 in consideration for giving Gordillo the right to exercise an option to repurchase the Property at the prevailing market rate at the end of the one year period (the "Option Fee"). 24. Gordillo represented and assured Plaintiff, through her agents, infinity Investment, Infinity Home, Abubakari and Duncan, that, as a condition of Plaintiffs agreement to enter into the proposed investment, Gordillo would execute a written rental agreement setting forth the above-stated terms and conditions. 25. Infinity Investment, Infinity Home, Abubakari and Duncan also represented to and assured Plaintiff that her investment in the Subject Property was a solid deal that would create no risk to Plaintiff. 26. To induce Plaintiffs confidence, Defendants and each of them represented and promised Plaintiff that she would receive the $25,000 Option Fee immediately upon the close of escrow. 27. On or about April 24, 2007, in reliance on Infinity Investment, Infinity Home, Abubakari and Duncan's expertise, representations, promises and assurances, Plaintiff agreed to proceed with the proposed investment transaction and executed a Residential Purchase Agreement ("RPA"). (A true and correct copy of the RPA is,attached hereto as exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference.) 28. Ticor thereafter opened Title Order No on or about April 30, ;;4007 wherein Plaintiff was identified as the proposed new owner of the Subject Property. -;, 29. Plaintiff, who had good credit, thereafter applied to Washington Mutual _ Bank to finance her purchase of the Subject Property.

6 30. To satisfy a loan andlor funding condition by Washington Mutual and unbeknownst to and without Plaintiffs permission, Infinity Investment, Infinity Home, Abubakari and Duncan attempted to and did deposit monies into an account owned by Plaintiff at Washington Mutual to induce Washington Mutual grant the loan to Plaintiff. 31. Also unbeknownst to Plaintiff, defendants and each of them conspired together to falsify loan application documents and forge Plaintiffs signature in order to create the appearance that Plaintiff qualified for a loan far greater than she was actually qualified to and capable of paying. 32. Infinity Investment, Infinity Home, Abubakari and Duncan thereafter advised Plaintiff that Washington Mutual Bank had declined her loan application and that they had submitted her application to UCSI instead. 33. Defendants and each of them thereafter advised Plaintiff that they had secured a new mortgage loan, loan number (the "Loan") for Plaintiff from UCSI in the amount of $449,000. Defendants and each of them also advised Plaintiff that the Loan had a 3 year prepayment penalty, a variable interest rate of 10.3% and a monthly mortgage payment of approximately $3, commencing on August 1, Although the loan amount and payment terms were far greater than what Plaintiff could afford, Defendants and each of them represented and promised that Gordillo had the ability to pay the monthly mortgage payments and all other fees and costs associated with the transaction. 35. Defendants and each of them also repeatedly reassured Plaintiff that the investment was sound and risk free. 36. Based upon defendants' assurances and representations that the Investment was sound and risk free and that Gordillo had agreed to execute a rental agreement and pay the monthly mortgage payment and all other costs, fees and g(penses incurred in connection with the Loan, Plaintiff agreed to proceed with the investment transaction.

7 37. Unbeknownst to Plaintiff, FES had already opened Escrow Number SV (the "Escrow") on or about April 7, 2007 wherein Plaintiff was identified as the buyer of the Subject Property. 38. Escrow for the transaction closed on or about July 2, At that time, Plaintiff became the title owner of the Subject Property and legally obligated for the repayment of the Loan and the monthly mortgage payments in the amount of $4, (????) to avoid default and destruction of her credit. 39. Despite defendants' promises and assurances, however, Plaintiff did not receive any portion of the $25,000 Option Fee and is informed and believes that the Option Fee was paid by FES to Gordillo and/or the remaining Defendants. 40. In addition, Gordillo has failed and refused to execute a rental agreement or any other agreement, despite her previous promise to do so. Gordillo has also failed and refused to pay the agreed upon rent or other expenses, costs and fees associated with the new Loan. 41. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Gordillo also received approximately $50,000 upon the close of Escrow. 42. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Abubakari, Duncan and Infinity Home received and shared $24,980 in real estate commissions upon the close of Escrow. 43. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Abubakari, Duncan and Infinity Investment received and shared $10,000 in commission fees upon the close of Escrow. 44. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that UCSI received Approximately proximately $15,000 in Loan, commission and other fees associated with the transaction. z. 45. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Premier, Orayton, Ticor and FES also received substantial compensation upon the close of Escrow.

8 46. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that the appraisal prepared by Premier and Drayton was false and that the Subject Property did not have a value of $449,000 at the time it was prepared. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR BREACH OF ORAL CONTRACT (Against Defendants Gordillo, Abubakari, Duncan, Infinity Home, Infinity Investment, and Does 1-10) 47. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 46 above and incorporates them by reference as though fully set forth herein. 48. In or about April 2007, Defendants and each of them entered into an oral agreement with Plaintiff whereby Defendants agreed to (1) pay rent on the Subject Property in an amount equivalent to Plaintiffs monthly mortgage payments under the Loan, (2) pay all expenses, costs and fees incurred in connection with the new Loan and Plaintiffs purchase of the Subject Property, (3) execute a written lease agreement for the Subject Property on the terms hereinabove described, and (4) pay Plaintiff the sum of $25,000 in consideration for her agreement to enter into the above-described transaction for the purchase of the Subject Property. 49. Plaintiff has performed all conditions, covenants and promises required by her to be performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the oral agreement with defendants, except those conditions and covenants that have been excused or rendered impossible of performance by defendants' conduct. 50. Defendants and each of them breached the oral agreement by failing and refusing to: (1) pay rent on the Subject Property since the close of Escrow in an 'Amount equivalent to Plaintiffs monthly mortgage payments under the Loan, (2) pay all expenses, costs and fees incurred in connection with the new Loan and Plaintiffs purchase of the Subject Property and (3) execute a written lease agreement for the ubject Property on the terms hereinabove described. 51. Defendants and each of them have further breached the oral agreement to pay Plaintiff the agreed upon $25,000 Option Fee at the close of Escrow.

9 52. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and on that basis alleges that Defendants breached the oral agreement by paying themselves substantial fees and commissions at Plaintiffs expense and to her extreme detriment. 53. As a proximate result of defendants' breach of the oral agreement, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount as yet unascertained, but believed to be in excess of $500,000. Plaintiff will seek leave from this Court to amend this Complaint when said amount becomes known or upon proof thereof. All sums due to Plaintiff from defendants and each of them shall bear interest at the legal rate of 10% per annum from the due date. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR FRAUD (Against All Defendants) 54. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 53 above and incorporates them by reference as though fully set forth herein. 55. Defendants, and each of them, knew that Plaintiff was an inexperienced real estate investor and used their superior knowledge, skills and experience to misrepresent and mislead Plaintiff into believing that her purchase of the Subject Property was a valid, risk free investment. 56. Defendants' representations, assurances, promises and suppression of material facts were intentionally and falsely made by defendants, and each of them, and known to be false when made, and were made with the intent and as part of a fraudulent scheme designed to deceive and induce Plaintiff to enter into the RPA and to accept the Loan. 57. Defendants, and each of them, made these misrepresentations and acted the manner described hereinabove with the knowledge and belief that the Plaintiff 3,yould rely upon their misrepresentations and enter into the subject transaction, which she did. 58. At the time said representations were made by defendants and each of them, Plaintiff was ignorant of their falsity and believed the representations to be true.

10 59. As intended by defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff was induced to and did in fact believe and reasonably rely upon the representations made by defendants for the purpose of inducing Plaintiff to enter into the RPA and accept the Loan. 60. Had Plaintiff known of the falsity and incompleteness of defendants' representations, Plaintiff would not have executed the RPA or accepted the Loan. 61. As a proximate result of defendants' representations, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount as yet unascertained, but believed to be in excess of $500,000. Plaintiff will seek leave from this Court to amend this Complaint when said amount becomes known or upon proof thereof, 62. Defendants actions, as described above, were malicious, willful and made in conscious disregard of Plaintiffs rights and therefore warrant, in addition to compensatory damages, an award of exemplary and/or punitive damages. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION FOR BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY/CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD (Against All Defendants) 63. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 62 above and incorporates them by reference as though fully set forth herein. 64. A special relationship of trust and confidence existed between plaintiff and defendants, and each of them, by virtue of the fact that defendants and each of them held themselves out as experts in the fields of real estate purchases, sales, appraisals, escrows, finance and made representations and promises to Plaintiff designed to induce her to rely upon their expertise and experience. By virtue of this relationship of trust and confidence created by defendants and each of them, the relationship between the parties was fiduciary in nature and as a result, defendants owed Plaintiff the highest fkluciary duties of loyalty and care and the obligation to conduct themselves in good faith. 65. Because of Plaintiffs confidence in defendants and each of them caused 'Plaintiff to entrust them to act on her behalf, a confidential relationship existed between

11 the parties at all times mentioned herein which required defendants to represent Plaintiffs interests against any misconduct. 66. As a result of Defendants' representations, promises, assurances and position of superior knowledge, Plaintiff placed her trust and confidence in them and entrusted them to be honest about the nature of the transaction, to obtain a loan for her on fair and reasonable terms, to properly and truthfully prepare all documents necessary to complete the transaction and to fairly represent her interests in all matters pertaining to the transaction. 67. At the time the aforesaid representations and omissions were made, defendants, and each of them, knew that Plaintiff had no knowledge of, and was not aware of, the falsity of said representations, and Plaintiff believed defendants' representations that her investment in the Subject Property and acceptance of the Loan was a valid and risk free transaction. 68. At the time said misrepresentations were made by defendants and each of them, Plaintiff was ignorant of their falsity and believed the representations to be true. 69. As intended by defendants, and as a result of their fiduciary and confidential relationship, Plaintiff was induced to and did in fact believe and reasonably rely upon the representations made by Defendants, and each of them, as set forth above, and reasonably relied on their assurances that they would fairly represent her economic interests, thus causing her to accept the Loan and purchase the Subject Property 70. Had Plaintiff known of the falsity and incompleteness of defendants' representations, Plaintiff would not have purchased the Subject Property or accepted the Loan. 71. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants and 47 4ach of them breached their fiduciary duties to Plaintiff and violated the relationship of 1-1- gust and confidence by engaging in the unlawful actions hereinabove described, (eluding but not limited to falsifying loan documents, forging Plaintiff's name, misrepresenting the nature of the transaction, and failing to represent Plaintiffs

12 economic interests, all to Plaintiffs extreme financial detriment and for the specific purpose of cheating Plaintiff out of her money and causing her to become indebted far beyond her ability to repay. 72. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants, in disregard of and in further breach of their fiduciary duties to Plaintiff, directed, encouraged and aided and abetted with one another in the conduct described above, all of which was designed to cheat Plaintiff out of her money and cause her to become indebted far beyond her ability to repay. 73. As a direct and proximate result of the above-described negligent misrepresentations of defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff became improperly obligated under the terms of the Loan while Defendants and each of them were unjustly enriched at Plaintiffs expense and detriment. As a proximate result of defendants' representations, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount as yet unascertained, but believed to be in excess of $500,000. Plaintiff will seek leave from this Court to amend this Complaint when said amount becomes known or upon proof thereof. 74. Plaintiff will seek leave from this Court to amend this complaint when said amount becomes known or upon proof thereof. 75. By reason of the foregoing, defendants, and each of them, should be required to compensate Plaintiff for all such damages, together with all interest thereon allowed by law. 76. Defendants actions, as described above, were malicious, willful and made in conscious disregard of Plaintiffs rights and therefore warrant, in addition to compensatory damages, an award of exemplary and/or punitive damages. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION (Against All Defendants) 77. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 Through 76 above and incorporates them by reference as though fully set forth herein.

13 Defendants, and each of them, knew that Plaintiffs purchase of the Subject Property and acceptance of the Loan was based upon their representations, assurances and promises that Gordillo would: (1) pay rent on the Subject Property from and after the close of Escrow in an amount equivalent to Plaintiffs monthly mortgage payments under the Loan, (2) pay all expenses, costs and fees incurred in connection with the new Loan and Plaintiffs purchase of the Subject Property and (3) execute a written lease agreement for the Subject Property on the terms hereinabove described. 79. Defendants, and each of them, also knew that Plaintiffs purchase of the Subject Property and acceptance of the Loan was based upon their representations, assurances and promises that Plaintiff would receive the Option Fee upon the close of Escrow. 80. Defendants, and each of them, knew or should have known that their representations were false and that Gordillo did not intend to honor her oral promises and that Plaintiff would not receive the Option Fee. 81. The Defendants, and each of them, made these representations with the knowledge and belief that the Plaintiff would rely upon their representations and purchase the Subject Property and accept the Loan, which she did. 82. Because of defendants' expertise and superior knowledge of real estate and mortgage lending of the kind involved in this case, Plaintiff relied to her detriment on defendants' representations and entered into the oral agreement, executed the RPA and accepted the Loan. 83. As a direct and proximate result of the above-described negligent misrepresentations of defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff became improperly obligated under the terms of the Loan while Defendants and each of them were unjustly w nched at Plaintiff's expense and detriment. 84. As a further and proximate result of defendants' negligent representations, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount as yet unascertained, but believed to be in b'xcess of $500,000. Plaintiff will seek leave from this Court to amend this Complaint 7,f when said amount becomes known or upon proof thereof.

14 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR RESCISSION (Against Defendant GORDILLO, UCSI and DOES 1 10, INCLUSIVE) 85. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 84 above and incorporates them by reference as though fully set forth herein. 86. Defendants Gordillo, UCSI and Does 1-10 contend that Plaintiff voluntarily and willingly accept the Loan and executed a written agreement obligating her to its terms and conditions. 87. Plaintiff executed the RPA and accepted the Loan as a result of Defendants' fraudulent misrepresentations and in the mistaken belief that the Loan was fair and that Defendants and each of them would honor their oral agreement and promises, as set forth above. 88. Had Plaintiff known the true facts, as alleged above, she would not have accepted the Loan or agreed to purchase the Subject Property. 89. Plaintiff will suffer irreparable and substantial harm if the Loan and RPA are not rescinded and all consideration paid by Plaintiff is not returned to her. 90. Given Defendants' fraud and Plaintiffs mistake of the facts, the Court should rescind the Loan and all agreements obligating Plaintiff to its terms. SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS (Against All Defendants) 91. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 90 above and incorporates them by reference as though fully set forth herein. 92. Defendants, and each of them, intentionally engaged in the foregoing *rongful conduct with the specific purpose of cheating Plaintiff out of her money, :knowing that she would become indebted far beyond her ability to repay. 93. Defendants, and each of them, engaged in this conduct with the fkpowledge and belief that the Plaintiff would rely upon their representations, accept the Loan proceeds and purchase the Subject Property, which she did.

15 94. Defendants also knew that, when the Plaintiff learned of the true facts, she would experience severe and extreme emotional distress which, in fact, has occurred. 95. The Defendants' false representations, forgeries, conspiracy to defraud Plaintiff and knowledge that the Plaintiff would be severely and emotionally overwrought when she learned the true facts, as alleged above, were done with the intent to distress Plaintiff and were done with malice, thereby entitling the Plaintiff to exemplary damages from the Defendants, and each of them. 96. As a result of the Defendants' false representations, forgery, conspiracy to defraud and knowledge, the Plaintiff has suffered extreme emotional distress, including but not limited to stomach pains, lack of sleep, nausea, and headaches and will also incur attorney's fees in an effort to set aside the fraudulent transaction and restore her good credit, as set forth above. 97. As a further and proximate result of defendants' representations, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount as yet unascertained, but believed to be in excess of $500,000. Plaintiff will seek leave from this Court to amend this Complaint when said amount becomes known or upon proof thereof. SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS (Against All Defendants) 98. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 97 above and incorporates them by reference as though fully set forth herein. 99. Defendants, and each of them, knew or should have known at the time they engaged in the foregoing wrongful conduct, that Gordillo did not intend to honor her agreement to sign a lease agreement for the Subject Property and that the terms of r e Loan were onerous, unfair and would cause Plaintiff to become indebted in an 'amount far beyond her ability to repay Defendants, and each of them, recklessly engaged in this conduct knowing *at Plaintiff would rely upon their representations, accept the Loan proceeds and purchase the Subject Property, which she did.

16 101. Defendants also knew or should have known that, when the Plaintiff learned of the true facts, she would experience severe and extreme emotional distress which, in fact, has occurred The Defendants' knew or should have known that their acts and conduct, as alleged above, would cause Plaintiff to suffer severe emotional upset when she learned the true facts As a result of the Defendants' acts and conduct, as alleged above, Plaintiff has suffered extreme emotional distress, including but not limited to stomach pains, lack of sleep, nausea, and headaches, and will continue to incur attorney's fees in an effort to set aside the fraudulent transaction and restore her good credit, as set forth above As a further and proximate result of defendants' representations, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount as yet unascertained, but believed to be in excess of $500,000. Plaintiff will seek leave from this Court to amend this Complaint when said amount becomes known or upon proof thereof. EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR AIDING AND ABETTING (Against All Defendants) 105. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 104 above and incorporates them by reference as though fully set forth herein Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendants and each of them agreed and knowingly conspired amongst themselves to deceive Plaintiff as to the true nature of the transaction, thereby inducing and causing her to accept the.,loan and purchase the Subject Property. -_t 107. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants and -Teach of them aided and abetted, instructed, informed, participated in, agreed with, ;encouraged and gave substantial assistance to each other to breach their fiduciary ":duties to Plaintiff and engage in the wrongful conduct alleged herein for the ultimate purpose of defrauding Plaintiff.

17 Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants' actions constitute the aiding and abetting of unlawful acts, including breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, unfair business practices, intentional and/or negligent infliction of emotional distress, usury and negligence, as alleged in this complaint As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' wrongful acts, as alleged herein, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer substantial damages in an amount to be determined, but which is believed to be in excess of $500, Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times mentioned herein, defendants and each of them knowingly, intentionally, willfully, fraudulently and maliciously engaged in the wrongful conduct alleged herein to defraud and oppress Plaintiff. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to exemplary or punitive damages. NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE (Against All Defendants) 111. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 110 inclusive as though set forth in full By agreeing to act on behalf of Plaintiff to obtain a loan and broker Plaintiff's purchase of the Subject Property, and by virtue of their confidential and fiduciary relationship, Defendants had a duty to ensure that the terms and conditions of the Loan secured by them on behalf of Plaintiff were fair, accurate and consistent with Plaintiffs ability to comply with its terms By agreeing to act on behalf of Plaintiff to obtain a loan and broker Plaintiffs purchase of the Subject Property, and by virtue of their confidential and fiduciary relationship, Defendants had a duty to make sure that the rental and other E;.V fiecessary documentation to complete the transaction was properly prepared and would tie simultaneously executed by Gordillo at the time Escrow was scheduled to close. 28

18 Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants 2 acted negligently in failing to ascertain that the terms of the Loan were fair, accurate 3 and consistent with Plaintiffs and Gordillo's ability to comply with their terms Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants 5 breached their duty of due care by negligently in failing to ensure that a rental 6 agreement was prepared and ready to be signed by Gordillo at the same time that 7 Plaintiff signed the Loan documents and committed herself to their terms Defendants further breached their duty of due care by negligently 9 requesting, drafting, preparing, editing, and reviewing the Loan documents such that 10 they contained unfair and usurious terms and conditions with which Plaintiff was not 11 financially capable of complying Defendants knew or should have known that the Loan terms were usurious 13 and otherwise unfair and that Plaintiff should not sign any Loan documents until a renta l 14 agreement was prepared in accordance with the promises and the terms made by 15 Defendants and each of them, as set forth hereinabove, and that Gordillo was prepared 16 to sign the rental agreement Because of defendants' breach of their duty, Plaintiff has suffered 18 damages in an amount to be determined at the time of trial. 19 TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION 20 FOR UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES 21 (Against All Defendants) Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 23 1 through 118 inclusive as though set forth in full Beginning in or about April 2007, defendants and each of them engaged in 25 *umerous unfair business practices designed to cause Plaintiff to purchase the Subject 4-; 26,Property and become obligated to the Loan under false pretenses, in violation of 1-f! 27 -Business and Professions Code Section k

19 121. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendants committed the above-mentioned acts with the intention of causing financial and emotional injury to Plaintiff Defendants' conduct as alleged hereinabove and incorporated herein by this reference, constitutes fraud, aiding and abetting, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty and consequently constitute unfair and unlawful business acts and practices within the meaning of Business and Professions Code Section Defendants' deliberate attempts to defraud Plaintiff and induce her to enter into a transaction under false pretenses to her extreme financial detriment have been particularly harmful to Plaintiffs financial and emotional well-being As a direct and proximate result of the unlawful, unfair and fraudulent actions of cross-defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff has suffered substantial damages in an amount to be determined, but believed to be in excess of $500, Furthermore, defendants' actions were undertaken with a conscious disregard for Plaintiffs rights and with an intent to deceive and vex, injure and/or annoy her, such as to constitute oppression, fraud or malice, thereby entitling Plaintiff to punitive damages in an amount appropriate to punish, deter and set an example of defendants. ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR ACCOUNTING (Against All Defendants) 126. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 125 inclusive as though set forth in full Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendants and 4ach of them have improperly made a profit by deceiving Plaintiff into purchasing the ::Subject Property and accepting the Loan The acts of defendants and each of them that necessitate an accounting LAre set forth hereinabove and are incorporated herein by this reference.

20 Defendants conduct as described hereinabove was a fraudulent scheme designed to cheat her out of her money and unfairly profit at her expense, in violation of their fiduciary duties to her. Plaintiff thus requests an accounting of all profits wrongfully obtained by defendants. 5 WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff prays for judgment as follows: For general damages in a sum according to proof; 2. for incidental and consequential damages in a sum according to proof; 3. For punitive and exemplary damages; 4. For restitution; 5. For an order rescinding the Loan and the RPA and declaring the Loan and RPA to be void ab initio; 6. Pursuant to Business and Professions Code Sections and pursuant to the equitable powers of the court, restitution to Plaintiff from Defendants of all funds acquired by means of any practice determined to constitute unfair business practices; 7. For an accounting of all profits wrongfully obtained by defendants and for the imposition of a constructive trust on the profits in favor of Plaintiff; 8. For damages arising from severe emotional distress, including (but not limited to) reasonable medical expenses (past and future) and lost earnings/loss of earning capacity (past and future), according to proof. 9. For reasonable attorney's fees, according to proof. 10.For interest at the legal rate 11.For costs of suit incurred herein and, 12. For such other and further relief as the Court m deem appropriate. bated: November 10, 2007 M0,3 EY LAW OFF CES ey orneys for Plaintiff Carolyn Tra er

21 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, SWItr number, and address) : "Felicia A. Mobley, Esq.x Mobley Law Offices 352 N. Robertson Blvd., Los Angeles, CA TELEPHONE NO.: FAxNo.: ATTORNEY FOR (Namer Carol yn Trader SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF Lo S Angeles STREET ADDRESS: 1.11 N. Hill St. MAILING ADDRESS: crry ANc ziecooe Los Angeles BRANcri NAME: Central CASE NAME:,_ CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET x Unlimited ---'. Limited (Amount (Amount demanded demanded is exceeds $25,000) $25,000 or less) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 1811) Items 1-5 below must be completed (see instructions on page 2). 1. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case: Auto Tort Auto (22) Uninsured motorist (46) Other PI/PD/WD (Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death) Tort Asbestos (04) Product liability (24) Medical malpractice (45) Other PUPD/WD (23) Non-PIIPDAND (Other) Tort Business tort/unfair business practice (07) Civil rights (08) Defamation (13) Fraud (16) 'Intellectual property (19) Professional negligence (25) Other non-pi/pd/wd tort (35) Employment Wrongful termination (36) Other employment (15) Form Adopted for Mandatory Use Judicial Council of California CM.010 [Rev. January 1, Complex Case Designation._, Counter L _ Joinder Filed with first appearance by defendant Contract Breach of contract/warranty (06) Collections (09) Insurance coverage (18) Other contract (37) Real Property Eminent domain/inverse condemnation (14) Wrongful eviction (33) : Other real property (28) Unlawful Detainer Commercial (31) ' Residential (32) Dru g s (38) Judicial Review Asset forfeiture (05) Petition re: arbitration award (11) Writ of mandate (02) Other judicial review (39) FOR COURT USE ONLY CM-010 Los ANGEFLEIsidsuEpERI*0' 7-7 DEC N:l. JOH,WC?RKE, CLERK _4: B Y MARY DEpti fy CASE NUM B : JUDGE DEPT: 0,&ciA, B C Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation (Cal. Rules of Court, rules ) _ Antitrust/Trade regulation (03) Construction defect (10) Mass tort (40) Securities litigation (28) Environmental/Toxic tort (30) Insurance coverage claims arising from the above listed provisionally complex case types (41) Enforcement of Judgment _ Enforcement of judgment (20) Miscellaneous Civil Complaint RICO (27) Other complaint (not specified above) (42) Miscellaneous Civil Petition 7 Partnership and corporate governance (21) Other petition (not specified above) (43) 2. This case is x is not complex under rule 1800 of the California Rules of Court. If the case is complex, mark the factors requiring exceptional judicial management: a.large number of separately represented parties d. Large number of witnesses b. Extensive motion practice raising difficult or novel issues that will be time-consuming to resolve e. ; Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court c. Substantial amount of documentary evidence f Substantial postjudgrnent judicial supervision 3. Type of remedies sought (check all that apply): a. x monetary b. _x nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief C. _.x punitive 4. Nuer mb of causes of action (specify): Thisase is _x is not a class action suit. 6. If there are any known related cases, file and serve a notice of related case. Date: Z1/20/07 Felioke A. Moble y, Esq.x (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY FOR ARTY) NOTICE Plaintiff must file this cover sheet with the first paper filed in the action or proceeding (except small claims cases.r cases filed undeirahe Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule ) Failure to file may resultlin sanctions. File this cover sheet in addition to any cover sheet required by local court rule. If this case is complex under rule 1800 et seq. of the California Rules of Court, you must serve a copy of this cover sheet on all other parties to the action or proceeding.. Unless this is a complex case, this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes only. Pap102 CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET al Cal. Rules of Court. rules 201.8, ; Standards of Judicial Administration, 18 So 11Sus.

22 CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION (CERTIFICATE OF GROUNDS FOR ASSIGNMENT TO COURTHOUSE LOCATION) This form is required pursuant to LASC Local Rule 2.0 in all new civil case filings in the Los Angeles Superior Court. Item I. Check the types of hearing and fill in the estimated length of hearing expected for this case: JURY TRIAL? 15I YES CLASS ACTION? EYES LIMITED CASE? EYES TIME ESTIMATED FOR TRIAL 4 q HOURS! Z1 DAYS Item II. Select the correct district and courthouse location (4 steps If you checked "Limited Case", skip to Item Ill, Pg. 4): Step 1: After first completing the Civil Case Cover Sheet Form, find the main civil case cover sheet heading for your case in the left margin below, and, to the right in Column A, the Civil Case Cover Sheet case type you selected. Step 2: Check one Superior Court type of action in Column B below which best describes the nature of this case. Step 3: In Column C, circle the reason for the court location choice that applies to the type of action you have checked. For any exception to the court location, see Los Angeles Superior Court Local Rule 2.0. Step 0 t ō SHORT TITLE. TRADER V. GORDILLO Applicable Reasons for Choosing Courthouse Location (see Column C below) 1. Class Actions must be filed in the County Courthouse, Central District. 2 May be filed in Central (Other county, or no Bodily Injury/Property Damage). 3. Location where cause of action arose. 4. Location where bodily injury, death or damage occurred. 5. Location where performance required or defendant resides. A Civil Case Cover Sheet Category No. Type of Action B (Check only one) CASE NUMBER 6. Location of property or permanently garaged vehicle. 7. Location where petitioner resides. 8. Location wherein defendant/respondent functions wholly. 9, Location where one or more of the parties reside. 10. Location of Labor Commissioner Office. Auto (22) q A7100 Motor Vehicle - Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death 1., 2., 4. Uninsured Motorist (46) q A7110 Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death Uninsured Motorist 1., 2., 4. q A6070 Asbestos Property Damage 2. ir, C Applicable Reasons - See Step 3 Above 't 0 a) o a it?: O 'E Q Ta 0 o h. O. a R o Asbestos (04) q A7221 Asbestos - Personal Injury/Wrongful Death 2. Product Liability (24) q A7260 Product Liability (riot asbestos or toxic/environmental) 1., 2., 3., 4., B. Medical Malpractice (45) q q A7210 Medical Malpractice - Physicians & Surgeons A7240 Other Professional Health Care Malpractice 1., 2., 4. 1., 2., 4. q A7250 Premises Liability (e.g., slip and fall) 1., 2., 4. Other q A7230 Intentional Bodily Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death (e.g., Personal Injury assault, vandalism, etc.) Property Damage 1., 2., 4. Wrongful Death A7270 Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 1. 2., 3. (23) q A7220 Other Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death 1., 2., 4. t ga. 2 Ira o_ 9 ch O a) cs) M. to E o m Z Business Tort (07) q A6029 Other Commerdal/Business Tort (not fraud/breach of contract) 1., 2., 3. -.,- Civil Rights (08) q A6005 Civil Rights/Discrimination 1., 2., 3. :).;,= : Defamation (13) q A6 10 Defamation (slander/libel) 1., 2., 3. = Fraud (16) LACIV 109 (Rev. 01/07) LASC Approved A6013 Fraud (no contract) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION 1., 2., 3. LASC, rule 2.0 Page 1 of 4

23 SHORT TITLE: TRADER V. GORDILLO CASE NUMBER A Civil Case Cover Sheet Category No. B Type of Action (Check only one) C Applicable Reasons -See Step 3 Above Professional q A6017 Legal Malpractice 1., 2., 3. Negligence (25) q A6050 Other Professional Malpractice (not medical or legal) 1., 2., 3. Other (35) q A6025 Other Non-Personal Injury/Property Damage tort 2.,3. C E 0 C. E a C 0 0 Wrongful Termination (36) CI A6037 Wrongful Termination 1., 2., 3. Other Employment (15) q A6024 Other Employment Complaint Case 1., 2., 3. q A6109 Labor Commissioner Appeals 10. Breach of Contract/ q A6004 Breach of Rental/Lease Contract (not Unlawful Detainer or wrongful eviction) 2., 5. Warranty (06) 2,, 5. (not insurance) q A6008 Contract/Warranty Breach -Seller Plaintiff (no fraud/negligence) q A6019 Negligent Breach of Contract/Warranty (no fraud) q A6028 Other Breach of Contract/Warranty (not fraud or negligence) 1., 2., 5, 1., 2., 5, Collections q A6002 Collections Case-Seller Plaintiff 2., 5., 6. (09) q A6012 Other Promissory Note/Collections Case 2., 5. Insurance Coverage (18) q A6015 Insurance Coverage (not complex) 1., 2., 5., 8. Other Contract q A6009 Contractual Fraud 1., 2., 3., 5. (37) q A6031 Tortious Interference 1,, 2., 3., 5. q A6027 Other Contract Dispute(not breach/insurance/fraud/negligence) 1., 2., 3., 8. Eminent Domain/Inverse q A7300 Eminent Domain/Condemnation Number of parcels 2. Condemnation (14). Wrongful Eviction q A6023 Wrongful Eviction Case (33) Other Real Property q A6018 Mortgage Foreclosure 2., 6. (26) q A603 Quiet Title 2., Other Real Property (not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, foreclosure) 2., 6. Unlawful Detainer- Commercial (31) El A6021 Unlawful Detainer-Commercial (not drugs or wrongful eviction) 2., 6. Unlawful Detainer- q A6020 Unlawful Detainer-Residential (not drugs or wrongful eviction) 2., 6. '''.:' Residential (32),r... Unlawful Detainer-,z. iiiiii iii, Drugs (38) q A6022 Unlawful Detainer-Drugs 2., 6. Asset Forfeiture (05) Li A6108 Asset Forfeiture Case 2., 6. 'Petition re Arbitration q rt.i A6115 Petition to CompeVConfirmNacate Arbitration 2., 5. i:.--j (11) LACIV 109 (Rev. 01/07) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM LASC, rule 2.0 LASC Approved AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION Page 2 of 4

24 SHORT TITLE. TRADER V. GORDILLO CASE NUMBER A B C Civil Case Cover Sheet Type of Action Applicable Reasons - Category No. (Check only one) See Step 3 Above q A6151 Writ - Administrative Mandamus 2., 8. Writ of Mandate q A6152 Writ - Mandamus on Limited Court Case Matter 2. (02) LI A6153 Writ - Other Limited Court Case Review Other Judicial Review q A6150 Other Writ /Judicial Review 2., 8. (39) Antitrust/Trade Regulation (03) q A6003 Antitrust/Trade Regulation 1., 2., 8. Construction Defect (10) q A6007 Construction defect 1, Claims Involving Mass Tort (40) Securities Litigation (28) Toxic Tort Environmental (30) El A6006 Claims Involving Mass Tort 1., 2., 8. q A6035 Securities Litigation Case 2. 1., 2., 8. 0 q46036 Toxic Tort/Environmental 1., 2., 3., 8. Insurance Coverage q A6014 Insurance Cover-age/Subrogation (complex case only) 1., 2., 5., 8. Claims from Complex Case (41) q A6141 Sister State Judgment 2., 9. q A6160 Abstract of Judgment Enforcement 2., 6. of Judgment q A6107 Confession of Judgment (non-domestic relations) 2., 9. (20) q A6140 Administrative Agency Award (riot unpaid taxes) 2., 8. q A6114 Petition/Certificate for Entry of Judgment on Unpaid Tax 2., 8. q A6112 Other Enforcement of Judgment Case 2., 8., 9. U of 0 ci a E 0 U RICO (27) q A6033 Racketeering (RICO) Case 1., 2,, 8. q A6030 Declaratory Relief Only 1., 2., 8. Other Complaints q A6040 Injunctive Relief Only (not domestic/harassment) 2., 8. (Not Specified Above) q A6011 Other Commercial Complaint Case (non-tort/non-complex) 1., 2., 8. (42) q A6000 Other Civil Complaint (non-tortmon-complex) 1., 2., 8. Partnership Corporation q A8113 Partnership and Corporate Governance Case 2., 8. Governance(21) q A6121 Civil Harassment 2., 3., 9. q A6123 Workplace Harassment -7, 2., 3., 9. iii= 4 --:. q A6124 EtcterlDependent Adult Abuse Case 2., 3., 9. 4= Other Petitions ANot Specified Above) q A6190 Election Contest 2. i..2 q A6110 Petition for Change of Name. (43) 2., q A6170 Petition for Relief from Late Claim Law 2., 3., 4., 6. q A6100 Other Civil Petition 2., 9. LACIV 109 (Rev. 01/07) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM LASC, rule 2.0 LASC Approved AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION Page 3 of 4