170914 exhibits

Page 1

EXHIBIT 1


~

·..

1 2 3

4 5 6

7

PHILLIP C. SAMOURIS, ESQ. (Bar No. 163303) samouris@higgslaw.com RABIL K. SWIGART, ESQ. (Bar No. 225881) swigart@higgslaw.com HIGGS FLETCHER & MACK LLP 401 West "A'' Street, Suite 2600 San Diego, CA 92101-7913 TEL: 619.236.1551 FAX: 619.696.1410 Attorneys for Plaintiffs JOHN SCOFIELD HAGE and BONNIE GRACE HAGE

8

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9

10 11

12

13 14

¥~:~if~~w£~:d!~!Lm~~ BONNIEGRACEHAGEFAMILYTRUST '' ·.:, .,,,.,,·,,.,. ,, ................. ············ and Co-Managers of SD 32ND STREET APARTMENTS, LLC, a California limited liability company,

15 16

17 18 19 20

21

Plaintiffs,

v. GOTMORTGAGE.COM, a Califomia corporation; JAMES M. OSBORN, JR., an individual; TARGET MORTGAGE INC., a California corporation; ANDREA HAEWON PARK, an individual; THOMAS IPING LO, an individual; NILDA ANN MARIE MEG, an individual, and_ DOES 125, inclusive, Defendants.

22 23

Plaintiffs, JOHN SCOFIELD HAGE ("Scody") and BONNIE GRACE HAGE ("Bonnie,"

24 25

collectively with Scody, "Hage" or "Plaintiffs"), submit this Complaint against Defendants

26

GOTMORTGAGE.COM ("GotMortgage"), JAMES M. OSBORN, JR. ("Osborn"}, TARGET

27

MORTGAGE ("Target"), ANDREA HAEWON PARK, THOMAS !PING LO, NILDA ANN

28

MARIE MEG, and Does 1-25 (collectively "Defendants"). Plaintiffs allege as follows:

lJGGS FLETCHER&: MACKLLP ATTOlt.NEYS AT LAW SAN DIP.GO

5435738.2

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES


1

property located in San Diego that were financially detrimental to the Plaintiffs for the :financial

2

benefit of Target and its principals 6.

3

4

or representative of the other Defendants and/or is responsible in some way for the dam.ages

5

and/or conduct herein alleged.

6

II.

7

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

8

A.

Properties Owned By The Plaintiffs 7.

9

The Tennyson Street Property is located at 3746-48 Tennyson Street in the City of

10

San Diego ("Tennyson Property"). The Plaintiffs purchased the property in July 2013 and

11

transferred the property to SB 32nd Street Apartments LLC, a California limited liability company

12

("SB 32nd"). Plaintiffs are the sole members and sole co-managers of SB 32nd • 8.

13

The Kansas Property is located at 4167-71 Kansas Street in the City of San Diego

14

(the "Kansas Property"). The Kansas Property was purchased in January 2010 and in February

15

2010, the Plaintiffs transferred title of the Kansas Property to SB 32nd ; the Kansas Property was

16

owned free and clear of any debt. 9.

17 18

The Savoy Property is located on Savoy Street in the City of San Diego ("Savoy

Property"). The Plaintiffs purchased the Savoy Property in October 2013. 10.

19

The Elliott Property is located at 3510 Elliott Street in San Diego ("Elliott

20

Property"). The Plaintiffs, through their family trust, The J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage

21

Family Trust, own a one-half interest in the Elliott Street Property. The other one-halfinterest is

22

owned by the John Scofield Hage Trust under the Survivors Trust of the Fred Scofield Hage Trust

23

Dated March 25, 1981 ("1981 Trust"). Scody is a beneficiary and trustee of the 1981 Trust.

24

B.

In or about July of 2013 > Scody contacted GotMortgage to obtain a loan in

26

connection with the prospective purchase of the Tennyson Street Property, In response,

27

GotMortgage assigned its "Vice President of Sales" and ''Senior Account Executive," Osborn, to

28

assist the Hages in obtaining the loan. The Plaintiffs had not previously met or dealt with Osborn.

:1GGS FL!TCHER & MACKLLP AnoK)UlYt AT LAW

Introduction To GotMortgage and Osborn 11.

25

SAN 011!.CO

In doing the things alleged herein, each of the Defendants was an agent, employee

5435738.2

3 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES


·-~, L0"4JW 1 2 3 4

5 6 7

,i:;zf

PHILLIP C. SAMOURIS, ESQ. (Bar No. 163303) samouris@higgslaw.com RAHIL K. SWIGART, ESQ. (Bar No. 225881) swigart@)1iggslaw.com HIGGS FLETCHER & MACK LLP 401 West "A" Street, Suite 2600 San Diego, CA 92101-7913 TEL: 619.236.1551 FAX: 619.696.1410

:IZ],

Scan \ '

Client

~· Calendar

CZJ·

¢

Attorneys for Plaintiffs JOHN SCOFIELD HAGE and BONNIE GRACE HAGE

FIie Bill

D-

8

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 9

CENTRAL DIVISION

10 11 12

JOHN SCOFIELD HAGE; and BONNIE GRACE HAGE, Plaintiffs,

13 14

v.

15

GO1MORTGAGE.COM, a California corporation; JAMES M. OSBORN, JR., an individual; TARGET MORTGAGE INC., a California corporation; ANDREA HAEWON PARK, an individual; THOMAS IPING LO, an individual; NILDA ANN MARIE MEG, an inoividual, and DOES 125, inclusive,

16 17 18 19

CASE NO. 37-2016-00003885-CU-FR-CTL

NOTICE TO APPEAR AT TRIAL TO NILDA ANN MARIE MEG [C.C.P. §1987 (b)] DEPT.: IC JUDGE:

C-73 Hon. Joel R. Wohlfeil

Defendants.

20 21

TO NILDA ANN MARIE MEG AND TO HER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

22

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure

23

§1987(b), PLAINTIFFS JOHN SCOFIELD HAGE and BONNIE GRACE HAGE, hereby

24 request your attendance at the trial of this matter, currently scheduled to begin on March 24, 25 26 27

Ill

28

Ill

HICCS PLETCHER &

MACKLLP AffOKNIYI AT LAW SAN OIECO

2017, at 8:30 a.m., in Department C-73, (Hon. Joel R. Wohlfeil) of the above-entitled court,

7870962.1

NOTICE TO APPEAR AT TRIAL (NILDA MEG)


EXHIBIT 2


Print Article: Portrait of a scam artist

Page 1 of 3

ORANGE COUNTY

REGISTER Portrait of a scam artist By ANDREW GALVIN

2008-08-15 03:00:00

First of two parts. To be successful, a con man needs to make people believe in him.

J\mrny 0'5oom \Yao \ha\ a'DW.t-J. "One day, out of the clear blue sky, he caHed, and that's how itaH starited," said Rodney Fowle.r, who losta house in Rialto because of Osborn's lies. Osborn, 45, was a mortgage salesman. He would later admit in court that between 2003 and 2007, he stole more than $500,000 from people who were seeking to refinance their home loans. He caused 10 families to lose their homes to foreclosure, prosecutors said. ~

Court records show Osborn, who lived in Trabuco Canyon, had a series of encounters with local law enforcement over the past decade. He was convicted of offenses including insurance fraud, carrying a loaded firearm in a vehicle and driving while his license was suspended or revoked because of driving under the influence. He was ordered in 2004 by the California Department of Real Estate to "desist and refrain" from arranging mortgage loans without a real estate license. Yet despite his criminal record and the Department of Real Estate order, Osborn apparently had little trouble finding employment with Orange County mortgage companies such as Avrek Financial of Santa Ana and HomeloanAdvisors.com of Costa Mesa. Even after the police caught up with him and he was awaiting trial, he was hired by a Newport Beach firm, Worldwidesavers.com, where he continued his crimes. California's system for regulating real estate transactions, where responsibility is divided between multiple agencies, seems designed to allow the unscrupulous to slip through the loopholes. If not for the persistence of one of Osborn's victims in trying to. bring him to the attention of authorities, and some dogged police work by a Santa Ana detective, he probably wouldn't be serving a 10-year sentence in state prison today. Here's how Osborn operated: He found people, often with damaged credit, who badly needed a new loan. He'd promise he could cut their monthly payments or get them cash out of their homes. He demanded that they send him money in advance, in cash, purportedly for appraisals, loan processing costs and other fees, prosecutors and victims said. He'd string them along for months or years, often telling them to stop paying their current mortgage while he negotiated a new one. In most cases, he never delivered a new loan. "He made the world very rosy and sunny," said Kim Koslovic, an Ohio mother of three who turned to Osborn to refinance her house when her husband was out of work. "The man can talk the talk, that's for sure. Pretty much we handed ourselves over to him, and in the end he pretty much took everything we had, or caused it to be taken."

..-,_

"He was pressuring me for money," said Grace Festa, who was looking to refinance her Pennsylvania home. "(He said he) had to get the house appraised, had to investigate and see where he could get the loans, and he said I had to pay to set up the loans because he was working with someone else. aâ‚Ź1 He needed $500 at first. Then he needed another $1,000. Then $1,200."

\. http://wMv.ocregister.com/common/printer/view.php?db=ocregister&id=l90164

1/19/2017


Print Article: Portrait of a scam artist

Page2of3

When Festa protested that she was unemployed and didn't have the money, Osborn told her to borrow from friends. Then he told her to stop paying her mortgage. "He said, 'If you keep making the payments and I'm working on this loan for you, the numbers will keep changing,'" Festa recalled. Osborn got sales leads from his employers, who bought them through sites like LendingTree.com and LowerMyBills.com, said George Mcfetridge, a deputy district attorney in Orange County who prosecuted Osborn. Osborn seemed to have a knack for finding folks he could manipulate. "These people were In trouble. They were in financial straits. They needed to refinance. They were persuaded to go with Osborn, who then proceeded to loot them when they were vulnerable," Mcfetridge said. "Many were persuaded to send payments via Western Union or MoneyGrams..That might be a red flag, (but) he was so persuasive. I think he was giving them stories like 'I'll front this money but you've got to pay me back.' I kept telling (the) victims, 'Don't feel like a fool. He was a very, very smooth talker."'

BAD FAITH Nobody believed in Osborn more than Steve Ryancarz. Ryancarz, 62, an Ohio businessman, wanted to refinance his 5,000-square-foot luxury house on a 5-acre lot to get some cash out for his refrigeration company. A major customer had gone belly up, owing Ryancarz's firm $1.2 million, he said. Ryancarz wasn't just trying to get a loan for himself. He also was trying to do a favor for a friend, Kirn Koslovlc. Ryancarz was engaged to Koslovic's mother. Koslovic, 38, and her husband had filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy protection while he was unable to work because of an injury. In order to keep her modest, $107,000 house, she needed to refinance, but she couldn't find a lender in Ohio who would take a chance on her. Ryancarz said he found Osborn online in 2003 through HomeLoanAdvisors.com. Ryancarz, who had good credit, figured that by bundling a loan for himself with one for Koslovic, Osborn might find a lender willing to take both. "No matter how much money I had, I always help people out," Ryancarz said. "That's just how I am. Everybody needs a break. What I could do to help them - could help them get to a point where they tum their lives around, it's worth it." There were warning signs, even early on. The first loan Osborn delivered for Ryancarz was bungled, resulting in much higher payments than Ryancarz had expected. Osborn blamed the problem on his boss. Ryancarz said he called Osborn's boss, but the man wouldn't speak to him, so Ryancarz believed Osborn. "It just snowballed after that," Ryancarz said. Osborn said he would help Ryancarz sue the first lender, but he wanted money up front to pay for the lawsuit. Ryancarz sent thousands In fees. Here's how much sway Osborn was able to exert over his victim: Ryancarz sent Osborn money to ball him out of jail when he was arrested for driving without a license. He also sent Osborn money to pay off a purported fine from the Department of Real Estate, according to records Ryancarz provided. Ryancarz even sent $5,000 to pay for Osborn, his gir1friend and their children to take mini-vacations at the Loews Coronado Bay Resort. "He said, 'I've done all this work for you. You owe me a favor. How about putting us up for the weekend?"' Ryancarz recalled. Ryancarz said he believed that Osborn was working very hard trying to get loans for him and Koslovic, and if these loans didn't come through, well, that was understandable. "I just thought they were axing the loans because of Kim's credit," he said.

http://www.ocregister.com/common/printer/view.php?db=ocregister&id= 190164

1/19/2017


Print Article: Portrait of a scam artist

Page 3 of3

Ryancarz never met Osborn in person. Over the phone, he sometimes heard Osborn use abusive language to office assistants, calling them nasty names if they made a mistake or didn't have the right paperwork. (

\

"He was smooth to the clients, but as far as the people that done his work for him, he wasn't too kind," Ryancarz said. To dispel any doubts about Osborn, Ryancarz would call the lenders that Osborn said he was worl<ing with. Each time, Ryancarz said, he got confirmation. "You gotta figure he's gotta be on the up and up. He's not going to be jeopardizing his reputation talking to these people or lying to you and saying he did," Ryancarz said. "You fall back on the sense of well, he's doing his job, it's just a little tougher than you thought it would be and blah blah blah." Or, as Koslovic put it, "It's easy to push time away with the excuse of paperwork and glitches and technicalities, with all those words that everyone uses." Ultimately, Ryancarz and Koslovic lost their houses. It turned out that Ryancarz could have done a much better deed for Koslovic if he'd simply paid off her mortgage rather than trying to get her a new loan through Osborn. Her house was worth $107,000. Ryancarz paid Osborn more than $370,000, court records show. "I almost done it and I decided, no, that's not getting them where they want to be," Ryancarz said. "So I didn't do that. Hindsight indicates I should have."

Coming tomorrow: How the cops nabbed Jimmy Osborn. Contact the writer: 714-796-6045 or aqalvin@ocreqister.com Š Copyright 2017 Freedom Communications. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy & Terms of Service I Copyriaht I Site Mao

http://www.ocregister.corn/common/printer/view .php?db=ocregister&id= 190164

1/19/2017


EXHIBIT 3


I

0MB Approval No. :&l2-92Gi •.\,

· A. Settlethenlltatciment (HUD-1)

FINAL ,l}'poott.oan"',

1,

,

RHS

3,

Con,•, Jns.

4.

-

IRJ Conv, Unln.,

· ·... •,,!:~_... ,, ;·: 6.

FIie Numoar.

24(1.1400292-KM

··.

·.-·

.

~

·• ·.::.• · :

a.

7, Loan Numbor:

·

·

Mortgage Insurance Caso Number:

201<.12

C. Nole: This fonn Js furnished to 111vo you o stotomonl of actual ••tuomont co,1s. Amounts paid to and by th• liBlllomenl aoont aro ~hown. flsmsm•rl<•d '{p.o.oJ' won, pa1doutslds Iha closlnu: th,y aro shown hora for/,ilonr.sllonaf pu,posoiond er, not lno/Udod In lho

O, Name and A:!::!ro,a of Barrowor: SB 32nd Strool Apartment.; LLC

E. Name and ,\Cdicss of So1Je::

4167-4111 Kmas st

LOTS 7 ¥, B DLK 154 TR LP0008PG

F. Name und Address ;:if Leridar: Alliance Portfolb

120 Vont!s suite 515

San Diego, CA 92104

G, Property Locotlorc 4167-4171 Kansat Street San Ole;o, CA 921 Ol San Olepo County, Colllornla

lo/1~~... ~oom•••mi

Allso Vlo)o, CA 92556 H. Sottlument Agen~ TJ!le,:365 Ccmpany_

949475395 L S811omenl Palo:

5000 Birc.'i s:roa~ Sulle 300 Newport Sc•oh, CA S2G60

Place oC Se-ttt0mant 5000 Birch $!root Suito 300 t~a~JJOr1 Bta:h, CA $2650

fu,~rdln;Oale:: F•btulll\' 11,2014

Dl1tx.tmim1nl 01tr.

Certified lo bo a true and correct copy of the signed original. Tllle365 Company

av:

t'at<a ;/ft,.owt

P/ovtous edlflon!I tire o!),olefo

p,nt,d m11,112ou· ,,, 2:1:twM

2~0.1«o1t2,XWJS HU0.1,P•;t1

HAG/ALLl/001890


3000,00

211.65

...,;. . ... ,..

·.,

98.DO

...

:IDD.00 liSD.00 450.DO 245.00 liQ,ll()

3,DOD.llO

541.117 29.1111

........._. ...·~"I!.

. . .., ··\."t.'!.o• ~

.,. .......

1 14.211

Cenllled to be a true and eorreot copy of !he signed origlna~ 1lllu365 Company

BY:

t'ar-a ;f,/rg~~t

HAGIALU/001891


•••J••. f

•L•

•,

# 805 ti 1201

Talul Increase bolwaflll GFE and HUl>-1 Chargva

ga,•:::;:;.,.-.,. . ., ....,11"....,.·-::•

Loan Terms

' \00,00oa,b . , ~ .....,.. r, : ,

2.50 years

·-·

10,t!ID.OO'l't 4·91§,_n-·

• ..

1o

•t4-:·

Includes

D Principal l!l lnteteal D Mortgage 1nsmanoe . Ii] No D Yea, II can rise to a lllllldmwn of

%, lh• 11111

dnu1ia wll be and can change aguln DVGIY after , Ewiy chen!la dlllu, your lntenist rat, can tncruaaa ar dacieaa ~ "'· over tho llfe af the loan, your lnlaresl 111111 la guaranlaed to never ba llllver1han % ot higher than % 00 No O Yea, llcan rlaa to a maximum of$

to,

Iii No D Yea, the ftrat tnarease can be on

and the monthly amount owed c:un d&e The maximum ncan evar r1ae to ta s D No Iii Yes, yout maximum prepaymenl panal'° 11 $~.II~.

D Na 'due!n

Iii

Yaa, you have a balloDII payment or$ yearaon

-:,(p~P.i,~

Ii] You do net have a numthly e8CIOW payment for llams, auch aa property laxBII Bild horn,owne,. lnf\ll'UICD, You naist psry lhesa

Hems dttecllyyouraalf,

' D You have an addlUonal monthly oacrow payment af, that IIISU!is In a !Dial lnlllal monlhl)' amount owsd of$ _Thia Includes pllnclpal, lnlorest. any martgage 1n1urance and 11111 • • Items chsdald bBICIW:

..

! .•

~

'":

Cort!lled to be e true and correct copy of the signed original. 11lle366 Company _ • BY:

~ #~ze-t

-~ Note: If you hllVo any 9uestl'0111 about 'tho seWemsnt C)uirges and Loan Terma &tad on lhls fonn. pl118se contBOI yaur lender, f'1'Ylolll odltlon•.,.. ob50Je11

.

-oo,ilv,111'11111...,,.

•-™ IIU0-1..... 1

HAGIALU/00189.Z


EXHIBIT 4


~

CANYON ESCROW, INC. 1669 East Lincoln Avenue, Orange CA 92865 • Tel: (714) 279-9082 • Fax: (714) 279-9089 BORROWER STATEMENT Final

Escrow Number: Escrow Officer. Borrower:

Property:

Title Order Number: 00224096-997-CF

1S255-CD Claudia De Anda

Date: Closing Date:

03/27/2015 03/1212014

John Scofield Rago, Trustee oftbe John Scofield Hage Trust under the Survivors Trust of the Fred Scofield Hsgo Trust dated March 25, 1981, as to an undivided 50% Interest, and and J. Scofield Hage snd Bonnie Grace Hage. Co-Trustees of the 1. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage family Trust dated October 8, 2002, as to an undivided 50% interest 3510 Elliot Street. San Diego, CA 92106

f!;:1J11.:'_;]_Z~lr: ···.:::i· ::_ ;~}i~.t,~Xf~ffgi]!fil;~~t~;::t:::~~t~

·~

~

" "•

i

110

I'; ..

~'

1

~ti~, t ;..,]!' ~~\-..~{i';aN,tfftf.G~·..:L~ '' :.. • 1 i<>1•• ~ • l : ~ :;_~J:,-""Y ,.\:-.!,

~...,;,,

~

•~I

.,,,m;~ .

,-._.

~~!,j/1 i ~t.l }t.--.')!::.: .. J ~ • .s -.:.::.·1~..... .:

TOTAL CONSIDERATION TITLE CHARGES Lcnder/Mormuco Premium for 156 000,00: Ticor Title 2nd 1/2 Taxes 2013-14: Ti.cor Title Reoordin2 Peca: Ticor Title Endorsement: Tloor Title 1 ¥/Sitmin!Z Fee: Safe SiminllS Escrow & Lender Services, LLC ESCROW CHARGES T01 Canvon Escrow Inc. Escrow Fee Messcnecr Fee Wire Fee LENDER CHARGES New Deed of Trust to Darius Ouernsev Jr.: Intcrost Adjustment From 3/11/2014 To 4/01/2014, 20 Days, @ 32.0548/per day: Darius

425.00 672.78 88.00 25.00

17.S.OO 675.00 75.00 35.00 130,000.00 641.10

Oucmsev Ir.

OrlirlnAtion Fee: T.D. Co. Tax Service: T.D. Co. Morll!B.2e Broker F~: OotMorts!:lle:e.Com Dooament Pre11aration: Don J. DoHadwa.v Insoeotlon Fee: Don I. DuHadwav Wire Fee: New Lcndc:r BALANCE DUE YOU

TOTALS

5.200.00 100.00 7,800.00 525.00 325.00 35,00 113,203.12 no,000.00 I

130,000.00

E,XHIBIT_~..J.--

_W_TT_N_ES_S ~ b!I ~Ge

OATE:J-1\--J 1 C, 0A"IS, CSR 1:W10 Ex722


EXHIBIT 5


Message

From: Sent:

Nilda Meg [targetmortgage@yahoo.com]

To: CC: Subject:

Scody.hage@cox.net

10/2/2014 12:30:09 PM occloser@gmail.com

Elliott St

scody do you want to keep the vesting with the two trust if so we need a copy of the second trust

Elliot: per current vesting on prelim, there are 2 trusts, but we received only 1 trust cert. We need to know if borr wants to keep the vesting as is, if so, we need 2 trust certs or if borr would like to put it in 1 trust per the trust cert provided, we need a grant deed reflecting this change for the underwriter to review and approve prior to sending the loan to closing.

HAGE - 010223

Ex. 716 42 of 71

I


3/1(g)16

Print

Cc: occloser@gmail.com Subject: RE: Elliott St Scody Here is a copy of your current vesting we need a copy of the other trust. We have the 1. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage Family Trust dated October 8, 2002

-------On Thu, 1012/14, Hage <scody.ha.ge@cox.net> wrote: Scody

Subject: RE: Elliott St To: '"Nilda Meg111 <targetmortgage@yahoo.com> Date: Thursday, October 2, 2014, 2:28 PM Nilda, To reco~ the vesting of the 3510 Elliott Street property must remain in the vesting as it is today. As you will see, it is the Survivors Trust out of my tathets estate, which is the restated trust following my mother's death. This abstract was written to cover the trust certifications following my father's death. Please have the title company draw up a certification with the appropriate infonnation to attach to this abstract and include it in the documents for signature at the time of signing. Please acknowledge to me that this is acceptable to the title company's needs.

~codyHage Cell: Phone: PAX: Bmail:

(619) 865-8672 (619) 222-5425 (619) 86S-8672 Scody.hage@cox.net

--original Message-

From: Nilda Meg [mailto:targetmortgage@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 12:30 PM To: Seedy.bage@cox.net Cc: occloser@gmail.com Subject: Elliott St

Scody

do you want to keep the vesting with the two trust if so we need a copy of 213

IRGI PEI 000942 Ex. 716 38 of 71


3{1Q.l2018

the second trust

Billot: per current vesting on prelim, there are 2 trusts, but we received only 1 trust cert. We need to know ifborr wants to keep the vesting as is, if so, we need 2 trust certs or if borr would like to put it in 1 trust per the 1l'Ust cert provided. we need a grant deed reflecting this change for the underwriter to review and approve prior to sending the loan to

closing.

ara

TR'9T DFT 9980..9 Ex. 716 39 of 71


EXHIBIT 6


¥velocity ...--//~"commercial capital LoanNo.-

SEMI-ANNUAL ADJUSTABLE TERM NOTE October 13, 2014

$661,500.00 For value received, the undersigned SB 32nd Street Apartments, LLC, a California llmlted liabillly company (the "Borrower"), promises to pay to lhe order of Velocity Commercial Capital, LLC (together with its successors and assigns, the "Lender"), the principal amount of Six Hundred Sixty-One Thousand, Five Hundred Dollars and Zero Cents ($661,600.00) on or before November 1, 2044 (the "Maturity Date"), as set forth below, together with Interest from the date hereof on the unpaid principal balance from time to time outstanding until paid In full. The Borrower shall pay consecutive monthly Installments of principal and Interest, as follows: $4,849.24 commencing on December 1, 2014, and the same amount (except the last Installment which shall be the unpaid balance) on the 1st day of each month thereafter. The aggregate principal balance outstanding shall Initially bear Interest thereon at a fixed rate equal to Seven and Ninety-Nine Hundredths Percent (7.990%) per annum. The Interest rate on the aggregate principal balance shall change on November 1, 2017 (the "Special Change Date") to a fixed rate equal to Four Percent (4.00%) above the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate (as hereinafter defined) as of 30 days prior to such Special Change Date, except that In no case shall the Interest rate on the Special Change Date be greater than Two Percent (2%) above the Initial rate. The Interest rate on the aggregate principal balance shall change again on May 1 1 2018 and on the 1st day of each month every sixth month thereafter (each a "Change Date'') to a fixed rate equal to Four Percent (4.00%) above the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate as of 30 days prior to such Change Date. On the Special Change Date and each Change Date each monthly installment due and payable until the next Change Date shall be recalculated (Increased or reduced) to reflect the adjusted Interest rate, the outstanding principal balance at such time and the remaining term of the 360 month amortization period commencing on the date of this Note In accordance with the Lender's calculation In the Lender"s sole discretion. The calculation of the payment amount Is based on a 360 month amortization period. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary In this Note, the interest rate on this Note Is limited by a floor and a ceiling as follows: (I) the maximum Interest rate (i.e. celling) Is 13.990% per annum and (Ii} the minimum Interest rate (I.e. floor) Is 7 .990% per annum. In addition, on each Change Date the Interest rate on this Note shall be changed (Increased or reduced) by no more than 1% per annum. Wall Street Journal Prime Rate means the rate published from time to time by the Wall Street Journal as the Prime Rate on corporate loans posted by at least 70% of the 10 largest U.S. banks, or, In the event the Wall Street Journal ceases publication of the Prime Rate, the base, reference or other rate then designated by the Lender, In Its sole discretion, for general commercial loan reference purposes, It being understood that such rate is a reference rate, not necessarily the lowest, established from time to time, which serves as the basis upon which effective interest rates are calculated for loans making reference thereto. The effective Interest rate applicable to the Borrower's loans evidenced hereby shall be rounded to the nearest One·Elghth Percent (.125%). Principal and interest shall be payable at the Lender's main office or at such other place as the Lender may designate In writing in immediately available funds In lawful money of the United States of America without set--off, deduction or counterclaim. Interest shall be calculated monthly on the basis of a 360.day year based on twelve (12) thirty (30) day months except that Interest due and payable for a period of less than a full month shall be calculated by multiplying the actual number of days elapsed In such period by a dally rate based on said 360-day year.

Ex 767

HAGE· 002424


Borrower:

401 West A Street, Suite A San Diego, California

92101

7

Ex 76iiinlssory Notes

Š 2014 Medici, a c!Mslon of Wolters Kluwer Financial Services


EXHIBIT 7


LoanNo.-

SEMI-ANNUAL ADJUSTABLE TERM NOTE October7, 2014 $577,500.00 For value received, the undersigned SB 32nd Street Apartments, LLC, a California llmlted llablllly company (the "Borrower'?, promises to pay to the order of Velocity Commercial CapHal, LLC (together with 11s successors and assigns, the aLende(?, the principal amount of Five Hwtdred SuvunfySeven Thousand, Five Hundred Dollars and Zero Cents ($577,500.00) on or before November 1, 2044 (lhe aMaturily Date"), as set forth below, together With Interest from the date hereof on the unpaid principal balance from time to time outstanding until paid In full. The Borrower shall pay consecutive monthly Installments of principal and Interest, as follows: $4,233A7 commencing on December 1, 2014, and the same amount (except the last Installment which shall be the unpald balance) on the 1st day of each month thereafter. The aggregate principal balance outstanding shall lnltlally bear frtterest thereon at a fixed rate equal to Seven and Nlnefy-Nlne Hundredths Percent (7.990%) per annum. The Interest rate on the aggregate princfpal balance shall change on November 1, 2017 (the 0 Special Change Date") to a fliced rate equal to Four Pen:ent {4.00%) above the Wall Stleet Journal Prime Rate {as hereinafter defined) as of 30 days prior to such Speclal Change Date, except that In no case shall the Interest~ on the Special Change Date be greater than Two Percent (2%) above the Initial rate. The Interest rate on the aggregate princfpal balance shall change again on May 1, 2018 and on the 1st day of each month every sixth month thereafter (each a "Change Date") to a fixed rate equal to Four Pereent (4.00%) above the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate as of 30 days prior to such Change Date. On the Special Change Date and each Change Date each monthly Installment due and payable until the next Change Date shaU be recalculated (Increased or reduced) to reflect the adjusted interest rate, the outstandfng principal balance at such time and the remaining tenn of the 380 month amortization perfod commencing on the date of this Note In accordance with the lender's calculatlon In the lender's sole discretion. The calculation of the payment amount Is based on a 360 month amortization pertocl. Notwithstanding anythrng to the contrary In this Note, the Interest rate on this Note Is limited by a floor and a celling as follows: (I) the maximum Interest rate (i.e. ceUlng) Is 13.980% per annum and (i0 the minimum Interest rate (I.e•.floor) Is 7.990% per annum. In addition, on each Change Date the fnterest rate on this Note shall be changed (Increased or reduced) by no more than 1% per annum.

.

::¡

Wall Street Journal Prime Rate means the rate published from 11me to time by the wall Street Journal as the Prime Rate on corporate loans posted by at least 70% of the 10 largest U.S. banks, or, In the event the Wall Street Journal ceases publication of the Prfme Rate, the base, reference or other rate then di3Slgnated by the Lender, In its sole discretion, for general commercial loan reference purposes, it being understood that such rate Is a reference rate, not necessarily the lowest, es1abllshed from time to time, which serves as the basis upon whfch effective interest rates are calculated for loans making reference thereto. The effective Interest rate applicable to the Borrower's loans evidenced hereby shall be rounded to the nearest One-Eighth Percent (.125%). Principal and Interest shall be payable at the Lender's main office or at such other place as the Lender may designate In writing In immediately avallable funds in lawful money of the United States of America Without set-off, deduction or counterclaim. Interest shall be calculated monthly on the basis of a 360-day year based on twelve (12) thirty (30) day months except that Interest due and payable for a period of less than a full month shall be calculated by multiplying the actual number of days elapsed In such period by a daily rate based on said 360-day year.

HAGE - 002692

Ex 768


Borrower:

=~~ ~z::~:c;:=/41 Bonnie Grace Hage, Manager

.

~

401 WestA Street, Suite A San Diego, California 92101

7 Promissory Notes(2}

Ex768

Š 2014 Medici, a division of Wolters Kluwer Financial Services


EXHIBIT 8


SEMI-ANNUAL ADJUSTABLE TERM NOTE

LoanNo.October 7, 2014

$644,000.00 For value received, the undersigned John Scofield Hage, Co-Trustee and Bonnie Grace Hage, Co-Trustee of J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace ijage Family Trust dated October 8, 2002, a Callfomfa trust (the "Borrower"), promises to pay to the order of Velocity Commercial Capital, LLC (together with Its successors and assfgns, the "Lender',, the principal amount of Six Hundred Forty-Four Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($644,000.00) on or before November 1, 2044 (the ¡Maturity Date"), as set forth below, together with Interest from the date hereof on the unpaid principal balance from time to time outstanding until paid In full. The Borrower shall pay consecutive monthly Installments of principal and Interest, as follows: $4,720.96 commenc!ng on December 1, 2014, and the same amount (except the last installment which shall be the unpaid balance) on the 1st day of each month thereafter. The aggregate prfnclpal balance outstanding shall Initially bear Interest thereon at a fixed rate equal to Seven and Ninety-Nine Hundredths Percent (7,990%) per annum. The Interest rate on the aggregate principal balance shall change on November 1, 2017 (the "Special Change Date'? to a fixed rate equal to Four Percent (4.00%) above the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate (as hereinafter defined) as of 30 days prior to such Special Change Date, except that in no case shall the Interest rate on the Special Change Date be greater than Two Percent (2%) above the Initial rate. The Interest rate on the aggregate principal balance shall change again on May 1, 201 B and on the 1st day of each month every sixth month thereafter (each a "Change Date'? to a fixed rate equal to Four Percent (4.00%) above the Wall Street Journal Prime Rate as of 30 days prior to such Change Date. On the Speclal Change Date and each Change Date each monthly Installment due and payable until the next Change Date shall be recalculated (Increased or reduced) to reflect the adjusted Interest rate, the outstanding principal balance at such time and the remaining term of the 360 month amortization period commencing on the date of this Note In accordance with the Lendel's calculation in the Lendel's sole discretion. The calculation of the payment amount Is based on a 360 month amortization period. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary In this Note, the interest rate on this Note Is llmlted by a floor and a celling as follows: (I) the maximum Interest rate (I.e. ceiling) Is 13.990% per annum and (II) the minimum interest rate (I.e. floor) is 7.990% per annum. In addition, on each Change Date the Interest rate on this Note shall be changed (Increased or reduced) by no more than 1% per annum, Wall Street Journal Prime Rate means the rate published from time to time by the Wall Street Joumal as the Prfme Rate on corporate loans posted by at least 70% of the 10 largest U.S. banks, or, In the event the Wall Street Journal ceases publication of the Prime Rate, the base, reference or other rate then designated by the Lender, In its sole discretion, for general commercial loan reference purposes, it being understood that such rate Is a reference rate, not necessarily the lowest, established from t!me to time, which serves as the basis upon which effective Interest rates are calcula1ed for loans making reference thereto. The effective interest rate applicable to the Borrower's loans evidenced hereby shall be rounded to the nearest One-Eighth Peroent (.125%). Principal and Interest shall be payable at the Lendel's main office or at such other place as the Lender may designate In writing In immediately available funds In lawful money of the United States of America without set-off, deduction or counterdalm. Interest shall be calculated monthly on the basis of a 360-day year based on twelve (12) thirty (30) day months except that interest due and payable for a period of less than a full month shall be calculated by multiplying the actual number of days elapsed In such period by a dally rate based on said 360-day year.

HAGE - 004176

7t 1

Ex 769


Borrower:

1125 Savoy Street San Diego, California 92107-3914

7 Promissory Notes(2)

Ex 769

Ci' 2014 Medld, a division of Wolters Kluwer Financial Services


EXHIBIT 9


MEG OFT 000725 ....

·-·--·--·-··-

-

-·---·--'

.....

----··-

.


0~ .Ll81HX3


3.110121>18

Print

Subject: Fwd: cash-out Letters for Kansas From:

Nilda Meg (nildameg@yahoo.ccm)

To;

MJWarfel,LaserJet@hpeprfnt.com;

Date:

Wednesday, Maroh 9, 2016 9:13 PM

Sent ftom my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Target <t@metmortpge@yahoo.com> Date: February 22, 2016 at 9:00:58 PM PST To: N"tlda Meg <njldamcg@yahoo.com> Subject: Fwd: Cash-out Letters for Kansas

Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message:

From: "Scody Hage" <scody.hage@cox.net> Date: September 22, 2014 at 2: 16: 18 PM PDT To: 11Nilda Meg" <targetmortgage@3ahoo.com> Subject: Cash-out Letters for Kansas

Nilda,

Attached are the letters requested today. I have also asked our attorney to prepare the changes in the LLC papers to comply with your request. I am hopeful that these letters will be available today, if not they should be here tomorrow. Next, I am trying to make an appointment to get together with my banker to take care of the additional payments being required to get this loan closed before the end of the month. I will keep you posted with the progress of those items still in progress.

Scody

Cell:

(619) 86S-8672

abau1:blan1c

Ex. 716 33 of 71

TRGT DFT 00095a


311012D16

Print

Subject Fwd: Amendment to LLC Operating Agreement From:

Nilda Meg (nfldameg@yahoo.com)

To:

MJWarfel.LaserJet@hpeprint.com;

Date:

Wednesday, March 9, 2016 9:00 PM

Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Target <tamebnQrtsa,ie@Jrahoo.com> Date: February 22, 2016 at 9:01:20 PM PST To: Nilda Meg <nildameg@yahoo.com> Subject: Fwd: Amendment to LLC Operating Agreement

Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: "Scody Hage" <scody.ha,ge@cox.net> Date: September 23, 2014 at 8:23:01 AM PDT To: ''Nilda Meg" <tarptmortgage@yahoo.com> Subject: Amendment to LLC Operating Agreement Attached is the First Amendment to the LLC operating Agreement appointing Bonnie as co-manager. I will be sending documents to the State today for :filing and registration with the Secretary of State of California.

Scody

Cell:

(619) 865-8672

Phone: (619) 222-542S PAX:

(619) 865-8672

TRGT OFT 00098Q Ex. 716 34 of 71


Message From:

Sent:

To: Subject:

Nilda Meg [targetmortgage@yahoo.com] 9/22/2014 12:14:53 PM Scody.hage@cox.net; occloser@gmail.com Kansas

Entity Documents for SB 32nd street Apartments, LLC: a) amendment to the operating agreement to change section 5.1 from one manager to one or More Manager's b) provide a notice signed by all members where Bonnie Grace Hage was added as additional manager c) amendment to the articles of organization to change the management from "ALL MEMBERS" to More than one Manager - we just need a copy of the to be filed form and notice from them that they will file it...

Also need the same handwritten letter for cash out and typed letter for cash out the same one you did for the other properties.

HAGE-010243

Ex. 716 32 of 71


3'111r'2D16

Print

Phone: (619) 222-5425

FAX:

(619) 86S-8672

Email: Scody.bage@cox.net

From: Target [Jnailto;targetmortgage@yahoo,cOJJil Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 3:SS PM To: Scody.ha,ge@cox.net Subject: Fwd: SB 32ND STREET APARTMENTS LLC ( HAGE)

~~~~

lI

Begin forwarded message:

!

From: Suzie Archuleta <suziea@designescrow.com> Date: September 10, 2014 at 2:41:03 PM PDT To: 'Tasha Riclnnond1 <tasha,targetmortp.ge@yahoo.com>, 'Nilda Meg'

l 'I

;

<tar,getmortgage@yahoo.com>

Subject: SB 32.ND STREET APARTMENTS LLC ( HAGE) Hi,

l ,\

l

!,

Attached please find the demands. Is the borrower staying in the LLC? Ifs , please orward the Ope'8ling Agreement and LLCI. 'lbankyou

Sincerely,

Suzie Archuleta Design Escrow Inc 128 B. Huntington Dr Arcadia. CA 91006 626-44S-6137 626-445-1380 fax Please be advised that this private and confidential communication (and any .attacbmeo.t) is intended only for the addressee and may not be forwarded to any other party-without qiy express written consent. I am not an attorney, accountant or financial advisor and ther+fore : nothing contained herein shall be considered legal, tax or financial advice. :

I ~

-rkoTi Ex. 716 17 of 71

Ii

9F1i ooogas


3'10/2018

Print

Subject: Fwd: conditions for loan

From:

Nnda Meg (nildameg@yahoo.com)

To:

MJWarfeJ.LaserJet@hpeprfnt.com;

Date:

Wednesday, March 9, 2016 9:32 PM

Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message:

From: Target <targebnortgage@yahoo.com> Date: February 22, 2016 at 8:57:12 PM PST To: Ntlda Meg <nildameg@yahoo.com> Subject: Fwd: conditions for loan

Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: "Scody Hage" <scody.hage@cox.net> Date: September 16, 2014 at 10:44:51 AM PDT To: "'Nilda Meg'" <targetmortga,ge@yahoo.com> Subject: RE: conditions for loan Nilda,

Attached is the package you sent me yesterday completed except for the "Certification of Trust by Trustees" and the "Certificate of Good Standing" from the State of California". My attorney Is working on both of the previously n:ientioned documents. I hope to have both documents today. The one that may not come that quickly, Is the Certificate of Good Standing, which may take an additional day or two.

The following Evidence of Insurance documents are as follows: 1.) 3510 Elllott Street's Is renewing on 10/01/2014 for another 12 months (a copy of the new policy Is attached with Invoice and I believe I forward~d the existing policy to you earlier ••• If you do not have It, let me know and I -!viii forward another copy to you.);

TRGT OFT 00089a Ex. 716 18 of 71


3110f2018

Print

Subject Fwd: Department of Treasury Taxpayer EIN Letter for SB 32nd Street LLC

From:

NJlda Meg (nlldameg_@yahoo.com)

To:

MJWarfeU.aserJet@hpeprfnt.com;

Date:

Wednesday. March 9. 2016 9:12 PM

Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Target <tar,getmortgase@yahoo.com> Date: Fobrwuy 22, 2016 at 8:59:20 PM PST To: Nilda Meg <nildameg@yahoo.com> Subject: Fwd: Department of Treasury Taxpayer EIN Letter for SB 32nd Street LLC

Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message:

From: 11Scody Hage" <,cody.ha,ge@cox,net> Date: September 18, 2014 at 10:37:47 PM PDT To: ''Nilda Meg" <tar.gettnortgage@yahoo.com> Subject: Department of Treasury Taxpayer EIN Letter for SB 32nd Street LLC

Nilda,

I believe the attached letter is what you were looking for from SB 32nd Street Apartments, LLC. Please let me know ifthis satisfies the final conditions for which you were requesting earlier today.

ScodyHage

Cell:

(619) 86S-8672

ab0utblank

Ex. 716 22 of 71

TRGT OFT 00096i


EXHIBIT 11


1 2

3

Q

And then do you compare them when the loan

actually closes to make sure that it's in the ballpark? A

I don't look at it that closely, but I know that

4

those were not shown on the closing statements because of

5

the size of the checks.

6 7

Q

10

The moneys to Osborn.

So is it fair to say that you didn't see any of the checks that you paid to Mr. Osborn on any of the Target closing statements?

11

A

No.

12

Q

Okay.

13

A

Well --

14

Q

I may be going a little fast.

15

I'm talking about

excluding that.

8 9

Right.

Which

I'm sorry.

Let

me slow down a little bit. So the loans were in close proximity.

16 17

why I'm asking them all together.

18

it one by one, we can do that.

19

A

No.

20

Q

Okay.

That's

So if you want to do

We don't have to do that. So my question is did you expect to see

21

as expenses on any of the Target loans any of the moneys

22

you had paid to Osborn prior to that time?

23

MR. SAMOURIS:

24

Did you have an expectation at that time?

25

THE WITNESS:

California Deposition Reporters

Calls for speculation.

No. Page: 87


1

BY MR. WARFEL: Q

2

Were you surprised that none of the moneys you

3

had paid to Osborn were disclosed on the closing

4

statements for the Target Mortgages -- Target Mortgage

5

loans?

6

A

No.

7

Q

Other than the money that you paid to

8

Mr. Osborne, were there any expenses that you can recall

9

that were disclosed on the final closing statement that

10

had not been previously disclosed when you first applied

11

for the loan

or before you accepted the loan?

12

A

Repeat the question, please.

13

Q

Okay.

14

A

Yeah.

15

Q

So what I'm trying to figure out is whether in

Here's what I'm trying to get at.

16

your opinion, based on your review of the document and

17

your experience, if the rate terms and expenses and costs

18

of the loans that you applied for with Target were

19

accurately disclosed -- accurately and fully disclosed by

20

Target in the paperwork they gave you prior to your

21

accepting the loan? (Mr. Williams exits the room)

22

MR. SAMOURIS:

23 24

speculation.

25

Ill

California Deposition Reporters

Objection.

Calls for

Page:88


1 2

BY MR. WARFEL: Q

And so I'm just asking for whether or not you

3

believe that there was some additional discrepancy, other

4

than the fact that the $300,000 you had paid to

5

Mr. Osborn weren't disclosed on there?

6

MR. SAMOURIS:

7

You can answer if you understand the question.

8

THE WITNESS:

9

Calls for speculation.

The expenses that were on the

closing statement were direct expenses that I would have

10

expected to have seen on the closing statement, yes.

11

BY MR. WARFEL:

12

Q

Okay.

So I just wanted to clarify, your not --

13

and I believe -- just tell me if I'm wrong -- you're not

14

claiming that Target misrepresent those types of cost,

15

are you -- the normal costs?

16

MR. SAMOURIS:

17

You can answer if you understand.

18

THE WITNESS:

19 20 21

Calls for speculation.

Those were expected charges.

BY MR. WARFEL: Q

Okay.

And did you feel misled by Target as to

the charges and the costs?

22

A

No.

23

Q

Did you understand what the fees would be that

24

you would be paying to Target if the loan were

25

accepted -- before you accepted the loan?

California Deposition Reporters

Page:89


1

A

Outside of the fees --

2

Q

Out of anything to Mr. Osborn?

3

A

They appeared to be in line.

4

Q

Okay.

Can you think of a way that Target

5

Mortgage could have possibly known that you were sending

6

cashier's checks to James Osborn's at his personal

7

residence made payable to him?

8 9

MR. SAMOURIS:

12

Argumentative.

Calls

for speculation. THE WITNESS:

10 11

Objection.

No.

BY MR. WARFEL: Q

Can you think of any way that Target could have

13

known about the personal checks that you began writing

14

after all the Target loans had closed to all of the

15

people at the bottom of page 1 and then continuing onto

16

two and three?

17 18

MR. SAMOURIS:

speculation.

20

21

Calls for

It's also argumentative.

THE WITNESS:

19

Same objections.

No.

MR. WARFEL: Q

When did you first become aware that your son

22

knew you were writing checks -- or had written checks to

23

James Osborn?

24

25

MR. SAMOURIS:

When did he first become aware

that his son became aware?

California Deposition Reporters

Page:90


EXHIBIT 12


1

these conversations without knowing what was going on

2

around me.

3

Q

Well, these were not directed to you.

I'm just

4

asking -- I'm just using this as something to hopefully

5

refresh your recollection. Is there anything that would refresh your

6 7

recollection as to whether you pulled $50,000 out in

8

October 2014 from the Tennyson property refinance?

9

A

Okay.

Yes.

Because that $52,000 was

10

reimbursing me for costs of improvements on that property

11

that I had taken out of my personal checking.

12

Q

So you increased the basis?

13

A

That's right.

14

property.

15

exchange, and I didn't want to pierce that veil of going

16

over what the costs were in that property.

And I was very careful on this

Because, again, this was the subject of 1031

17

Q

Okay.

18

A

And the initial cost was improvements.

19

Q

And so you wanted to get as much out as you

20

could at that time?

21

A

Yes.

22

Q

Okay.

25

The next one --

MR. SAMOURIS:

23

24

And so --

Well, hold on.

That's not what

he said. MR. WARFEL:

California Deposition Reporters

He just said yes. Page: 137


MR. SAMOURIS:

1

I think he said that he wanted to

2

take out as much as he could, without piercing the veil.

3

He wanted to be really careful about doing that. MR. WARFEL:

4 5

That's right.

Well, up to that

point, he wanted to get as much out as -THE WITNESS:

6

And no more than what was invested

7

in the property as additional cost basis on the property.

8

BY MR. WARFEL:

9

10

Q

Because that would affect your taxes on a

complex 1031 exchange

11

A

Yes.

12

Q

--

14

A

Correct.

15

Q

Exhibit 19 is an e-mail from you to Nilda Meg.

13

to later do it in the future?

(Exhibit 19 marked)

17

MR. CHO:

18

MR. WARFEL:

What's the dates? Dated January 13, 2016.

It's

Hage-11710 at the bottom. Can you review that please.

20 21

document.

22

BY MR. WARFEL:

23

Q

Do you recall --

24

A

Wait a minute.

25

Thank

you.

16

19

Okay.

It's a two-page

I'm trying to figure out what

transaction we're in the midst of here in 2015.

California Deposition Reporters

Page: 138


EXHIBIT 13


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

FRAUD - PURPOSE

HAGE, JOHN 5/2/17 VOL 1 1

036:02 - 036:17

036:02 03

11

269,200,

do you see that?

11

Subtract --

A

Right.

Q

And then, "minus 58,500," do you see

07

A

Yes.

08

Q

So I'm guessing the 269,200 is the amount

04 05 06

09

that you gave to Jimmy, because earl- -- above the

10

page, I see the arrow to Jimmy. MR. SAMOURIS:

10:59:29

You mean gave to Jimmy or

12

planned to give to Jimmy.

13

BY MR. CHO:

14

Q

Planned to give to Jimmy.

15

A

Yes.

16

Q

Do you see that?

17

A

That's correct.

040:02

Q

Well, let's -- let's lay the foundation.

10:59:36

03

What was the plan when you minus 269,200 with an

04

arrow to Jimmy?

Objection.

Lacks

THE WITNESS:

08

BY MR. CHO:

09

Q

Okay.

To go to the reserve fund.

That's what you intended when you

wrote that, right?

11:04:11

11

A

That's correct.

12

Q

Right below it, that amount that went

13

into the reserve fund, now you're subtracting

14

$58,500 from that.

15 16 17

Do you see that?

A

Yes.

Q

That was intended to go to Jimmy or to

11:04:23

the reserve fund?

18

A

To the reserve fund.

19

Q

So you're going to get it back, and then

20 21 22

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

11:04:03

foundation, assumes facts not in evidence.

07

10

What was the purpose of that?

MR. SAMOURIS:

05 06

10:59:11

that?

11

040:02 - 041:17

Look a little bit lower from the same

Q

page.

put it back in?

A

No.

11:04:30

That's additional money coming out of

the 200 -- that's -- that is coming out of the 269.2,

6/17/17

Page 6 of 72


23

additional money coming out, which leaves

24

210,000

25

Q

041:01

about?

A

02

transactions that were -- that -- that we had talked

05

about.

06

to go into the reserve fund, and then an additional

07

58,500 that was going into the reserve fund. Q

A

Ultimately, yes.

Q

Do you

12

A

That's the net that's going into the

044:01

11:05:26

Q

Do you see -- you said that rebate and

reserves are synonymous, right?

Right?

Yes or no?

A

The way -- the way I look at this today,

Q

So I think I'm understanding you, so I

want to make sure I understand you -- understanding

03

you correctly in that when i t -- when we're talking

04

about the cashout loan from Target Mortgage, the

05

proposed plan was that 269,200 was going to go to

06

Jimmy for the purposes of the reserve fund, true?

07

A

Correct, yes.

08

Q

We're in agreement on that?

09

A

Yes.

045:09

Q

You see the 269,200 in the page going

into the reserve account?

A

Yes.

12

Q

Do you see that?

13

A

Yes.

Q

And i t has an arrow to Jimmy.

11

14

And your

testimony is that that is for the purposes of

16

building up a reserve account?

17

A

That's correct.

098:02

Q

Okay.

11:09:15

11:10:25

15

11:10:31

Now, one of these documents, you

03

testified to that you were going to give a certain

04

amount of money to Osborne after he

05

loan brokered from Velocity Commercial Capital by

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

11:05:44

yes.

02

10

098:02 - 098: 16

That's --

reserve fund.

16

5

Do you see where it says?

11

17

11:04:59

But then you see how it has 210,700 goes

back to Scody?

14

045:09 - 045:17

There was a 269,200 that was going to Jimmy

10

15

11:04:47

There were

04

13

4

Going into the reserve fund.

two trans- -- two -- obviously, two different

09

044:01 - 044:09

What additional money are you talking

03

08

3

a net 210,700 that stays with me.

6/17/17

you got a 12:29:45

Page 7 of 72


06

Nilda Meg.

07

A

I don't.

08

Q

Do you recall making an agreement with

09

Mr. Osborne that's reflected in these notes that

1.0

you were going to give him several hundred thousand

1.1.

dollars after you got the proceeds of a loan

1.2

brokered by Nilda Meg?

1.3

MR. SAMOURIS:

099:02 - 100:23

Objection.

foundation, assumes facts not in evidence,

1.5

argumentative.

099:02 03 04

12:30:16

THE WITNESS: Q

THE VIDEOGRAPHER:

MR. SAMOURIS: MR. WARFEL:

09 1.0

We're down to five

minutes left.

06

08

No.

Please look at Hage 15984.

05

07

15984?

12:30:41

Yes, sir.

BY MR. WARFEL: Q

Does that document accurately reflect a

conversation that you had with James Osborne?

A

Four years later being able to testify how

1.1.

accurate this is, my recollection,

1.2

They're numbers that I wrote down on a piece of paper

1.3

in a conversation I had with him.

1.4

BY MR. WARFEL:

1.5 1.6 1. 7 1.8

1.9

Q

And did you have that conversation on

A

That's what the notes say.

Q

I'm asking you if you had the

conversation on October 3rd at 8:40? A

That's what these notes say.

Q

I know that.

notes say.

A

I can too.

24

Q

Right.

So why -- can you answer my

question, please?

12:31:30

1.00:01.

A

What's the question?

02

Q

The question is:

Did you make these

03

notes on October 3rd at -- 201.4 at 8:40 a.m. in the

04

morning?

05

A

Yes.

06

Q

And i t says, "Total cashout from Nilda on

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

12:31:20

I'm not asking what the

I can read the notes.

23

07

12:31:12

October 3rd at 8:40 a.m. --

21.

25

12:30:59

I -- I don't know.

20

22

12:30:00

Lacks

1.4

1.6

6

Do you recall that document?

12:31:44

10/12/2014," does i t not?

6/17/17

Page 8 of 72


EXHIBIT 14


'

..

-ft·,

.

'· 1

2 3 4

JUL

5

-a 2017

By: J, CERDA

6 7 8

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

9

FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

lO

11 12 13

JOHN SCOFIELD HAGE and BONNIE GRACE HAGE, individually and as TRUSTEES OF THE J. SCOFIELD AND BONNIE GRACE HAGE FAMILY TRUST and Co-Managers of SD 32 10 STREET APARTMENTS, LLC, a California limited liability company,

14

Plaintiffs,

15

v.

16 17 18 19 20 21

Case No. 37-2016-00003885-CU-FR-CTL

STATEMENT OF DECISION Hon. Joel R. Wohlfeil Dept. 73

GOTMORTGAGE.COM, a California corporation; JAMES M. OSBORN, JR.; TARGET MORTGAGE INC., a California corporation; ANDREA HAEWON PARK; THOMAS IPING LO; and NILDAANNMARIEMEG, Defendants. AND ALL RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS.

22 23

24 25 26 27 28

This case came on regularly for trial on June 5, 7, 8, 12 - 15, 19, 20 and 29, 2017 before the Honorable Joel R. Wohlfeil, Judge presiding. Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants John Hage, Bonnie Hage, both individually and as Trustees of the J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage Family Trust and Co-Managers of SD 32nd Street Apartments, LLC ("Plaintiffs") were represented by Phillip C. Samouris and Rabil Swigart of HIGGS FLETCHER & MACK LLP; Defendants and CrossComplainants Target Mortgage, Inc. and Nilda Meg ("Defendants") were represented by Mark J.

STATEMENT OF DECISION


.

1

Warfel and Desiree Meguerditchian of LAW OFFICES OF MARK J. WARFEL. The Court, after

2

hearing testimony of witnesses (James Osborn, Thelma Herrera, Ocie Smith, Nilda Ann Marie

3

Meg, Joffrey Long, Richard Holstrom, John Scofield Hage, Bonnie Grace Hage, Alexis Olstensen,

4

Lydia Ortega, Richard Davidson, Henry Park, William Burch, David Bilandzija and LaTasha

5

Richmond), receiving exhibits into evidence (Exhibits "l, 2, 6, 8, 9, 13, 6, 27, 61, 93 -97, 101,

6¡

102,105,108,111,126,133,166,178,179,182,193,196,198,202,203,207,208,225,227,228,

7

231,232,237,240,242,245,248, 250-252, 254,255,257,263 -271, 284-287, 327, 329-331,

8

339, 347, 348, 354- 357, 360, 701, 704- 707, 711, 713, 715, 716, 719, 723 - 730, 732, 733, 736,

9

739, 740, 742, 745, 747, 749, 750, 753, 755 (pages 2 -11, 20, 44- 46, 53, 54, 66, 70, 154 and 282

10

only), 756 (pages 3 - 7 and 27 only), 757 (pages 2, 6 - 10, 23, 27 and SO - 52 only), 764, 767 -

11

769, "), hearing arguments of counsel, reading Plaintiffs and Defendants' respective briefs and

12

motions, and good cause appearing therefore, hereby issues this Statement of Decision ("SOD").

13

Introduction

14

This case starts with Plaintiffs Scody and Bonnie Hage, a couple in their 70's, whose lives

IS

appear to have been characterized by devotion, service and community. Zealous advocacy has

16

spotlighted their aging, capacity to deliberate and, at times, exercise of unreasonable judgment; the

17

latter of which has been, from the Court's perspective, difficult to divine plausible economic

18

motivation.

19

Defendant Nilda Meg is a mature person, with astute business skills, who prides herself in

20

the endurance of her referral network, the fuel for her 30-year old real estate brokerage company,

21

Defendant Target Mortgage, Inc.

22

The bridge between Plaintiffs and Defendants was Defendant Jam.es (aka "Jimmy") Osborn,

23

a convicted felon, with no moral compass, whose only objective was to prey on vulnerable people

24

of means. The inevitable result of Osborn's felonious manipulation was two-fold: I) to

25

compromise the fidelity of his brokers, like Defendants, for honesty and good faith; and 2) to leave

26

his victims, like Plaintiffs, less prosperous if not approaching destitution.

27 28 -2STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

The ultimate question is whether Defendants engaged in conduct to enable Osborn to

2

accomplish his felonious scheme to harm Plaintiffs. The answer is "Yes;" however, the much

3

harder question is to quantify the hann caused by Defendants' conduct.

4

Operative Pleadings

5

On February 4, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint for claims of breach of fiduciary duty,

6

violation of Civil Code 2923 .1, negligence, elder abuse, violation of Business & Professions Code

7

17200 and fraud against Defendants. ROA # 1.

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

On July 1, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a Cross-Complaint for claims of fraud, promissory estoppel, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of written contract against Defendants. ROA# 55. On June 1, 2016, Defendants filed Answers to Plaintiffs' Complaint and asserted twentyfour (24) affirmative defenses. ROA# 45, 46. On August 22, 2016, Defendants filed their General Denials to Plaintiffs' Cross-Complaint and asserted four (4) affirmative defenses. ROA# 89, 90. On March 30, 2017, Plaintiffs dismissed all claims, except for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty, against Defendants. ROA# 291.

16

On February 23, 2017, Defendants filed their First Amended Cross-Complaint for claims of

17

breach of written contract (against both Plaintiffs JOHN SCOFIELD HAGE and BONNIE GRACE

18

HAGE) and negligence and equitable indemnity (against Plaintiff Bonnie Hage only). ROA #171.

19

At trial, the Court granted Defendants' Motion for leave to amend their Cross-Complaint to

20

conform to proof at trial, the effect of which was to name all Plaintiffs as Cross-Defendants to

21

Defendants' claims for negligence and equitable indemnity.

22 23 24 25

26

On July 1, 2016, Plaintiffs filed their Answer to Defendants' operative Cross-Complaint and asserted nineteen (19) affirmative defenses. ROA # 54. Joint Trial Readiness Conference {"TRC") Report/ Advance Trial Review Order (" ATRO")

In their TRC Report (ROA # 219), which was prepared and filed before Plaintiffs settled

27

their claims with Defendants Attorney for GOTMORTGAGE.COM, ANDREA HAEWON PARK,

28

HENRY PARK and THOMAS LO, the parties described the nature of this dispute as follows: -3STATEMENT OF DECISION


1 2

3 4

5

6

7 8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

"Plaintiffs John and Bonnie Hage were clients of Defendants Gotmortgage.com, Inc. and Target Mortgage, Inc., mortgage brokers. Gotmortgage is owned and managed by Defendants Henry and Andrea Park in Fountain Valley, Orange County, California. Defendant James Osborn was a 'Sr. Account Executive' and a 'VicePresident of Sales and Marketing' at GotMortgage. Defendant Thomas Lo was the designated broker of record for Gotmortgage. Defendant Target Mortgage is owned and managed by Defendant Nilda Meg, its designated broker of record, in Arcadia, California. While working as a mortgage salesman in Orange County between 2003 and 2007, James Osborn stole more than $550,000 from people who were seeking to refinance their homes. Osborn was convicted of 76 felony counts of grand theft in 2008 for which he was sentenced to serve 10 years in prison. Osborn was released from prison in 2011 and was hired by GotMortgage in late 2011. Plaintiffs, who were over the age of 65, procured numerous mortgage loans through Gotmortgage and Target Mortgage. James Osborn dealt with Plaintiffs on these loans. Plaintiffs allege that Osborn, through undue influence, induced Plaintiffs to obtain numerous mortgage loans that were :financially detrimental to Plaintiffs and to pay more than $650,000 to Osborn to refinance their mortgage loans. Osborn has pied guilty to numerous felony counts of "theft from an elder" based on his treatment of Plaintiffs and is in jail and awaiting sentencing. Plaintiffs contend that Gotmortgage breached its fiduciary duty to Plaintiffs by negligently hiring and failing to properly supervise James Osborn. Plaintiffs :further allege that Defendants Gotmortgage and Target Mortgage breached their fiduciary duties to Plaintiffs by improperly arranging mortgage loans that were financially detrimental to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs :further allege that all Defendants acted negligently and caused Plaintiffs to incur serious financial losses. Finally, Plaintiffs allege that the conduct of Defendants Osborn, GotMortgage, Henry Park and Andrea Park constitutes elder abuse. Defendants deny Plaintiffs' claims and allege that Defendants acted reasonably. Target Mortgage contends that Plaintiffs breached a real estate listing agreement and seeks monetary damages from Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs deny Target Mortgage's claim and allege that the listing agreement was rescinded and unenforceable."

27 28 -4STATEMENT OF DECISION


1 2

Plaintiffs and Defendants identified the legal issues in dispute as follows: "Liability. Causation. Damages."

3

After the parties filed the TRC Report, the Court entered the ATRO (ROA# 218).

4

Non-Jury Trial

5

Plaintiffs agreed to waive their right to a jury trial. Defendants failed to deposit jury fees

6

and waived their right to a jury trial. ROA # 368.

7

Witnesses and Exhibits at Trial

8

James Osborn, Thelma Herrera, Ocie Smith, Nilda Meg, John Hage, Bonnie Hage, Alexis

9

Olstensen, Lydia Ortega, Richard Davidson, Henry park, David Bilandzija and LaTasha Richmond

10

testified to their recollection of events which took place years ago. The recollection of these

11

witnesses have been influenced by his or her bias, prejudice or personal stake in how this case is

12

decided. If for no reason other than the passage of time, the Court questions the capacity of these

13

witnesses to accurately recollect and communicate his or her perception of the events. They have

14

"testified untruthfully about some things but told the truth about others" and, accordingly, the Court

15

has accepted the part it perceives to be true and has ignored the rest. CACI 107,211,212.

16 17

James Osborn through his depositions taken on February 21, March 1, March 6 and March 9, 2017 and trial testimony taken on March 20 and 21, 2017:

18

He is currently incarcerated in County Jail as a result of multiple felony convictions

19

involving Plaintiff Scody Hage while he worked at Gotmortgage.com between 2013 and 2015. He

20

was convicted of felonies for work as a mortgage salesperson in 2003. He has never been a real

21

estate licensed person in the State of California. He described his fraud of Steve Ryancarz, a

22

sophisticated business person in Ohio, while at Homeloanadvisors. He also worked at Avrick

23

Financial and Worldwide Savers in Orange County. He previously pied guilty to 76 felony counts.

24

He served nearly 5 years in state prison. He was released from prison on August 19, 2011. He

25

reported to his parole officers, Agents Ruiz and Witzel. He worked at Gotmortgage.com from

26

December 2011 to November 2015. He described his duties in return for which he was paid wages

27

and commissions. His supervisors included Thelma Herrera and OC Smith. He disclosed his

28

felony history to Smith. He disclosed his felony convictions to Henry Park. He saw them with an

-5STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

article of him in the Orange County Register "Portrait of a Scam Artist." Kim Williams was

2

Smith's administrative assistant. Smith was director ofGotmortgage.com's finance. He saw that

3

Andrea Park observed his conversation with Smith and Henry Park. His superiors also included

4

Larry Evans and Mike Daniels. Herrera also had a criminal background. He told Smith that he has

5

never been licensed. His duties included cold calling brokers, one of whom was Nilda Meg. He

6

considered Meg to be a "beautiful princess." He told Meg of his criminal background over dinner

7

at Meg's house. He estimated that the dinner meeting with Meg took place around a year after he

8

started with Gotmortgage.com. He recognized his July 25, 2012 email exchange with Meg (in

9

which he identified himself as VP of Sales & Marketing at Gotmortgage.com). He solicited

10

mortgage broker from the beginning at Gotmortgage.com. Gotmortgage.com's management

11

allowed him "to run in sales." Thomas Lo was his broker. When in his "sales mode," he was "like

12

a tiger in a cage." Lo worked closely with him to develop a pre-approval letter for Hage. He

13

reviewed Hage' s August 2, 2013 financial statement. He considered himself a "mortgage

14

professional" and recognized the opportunity in Hage's free and clear properties ... "it's cha-ching,

15

equity, money. There is money there." He recognized his July 10, 2013 email exchange in which

16

he described his "business friendship" with Hage. He was paid a commission from the refinancing

17

ofHage's Tennyson property. His agreement with Gotmortgage.com was that he be paid 50% of

18

the broker fees "on every Hage deal." His practice is to sell the highest, maximum rate to the

19

borrowers. He was paid a commission from the refinancing ofHage's Kansas property. He spoke

20

to Hage at least once a day. He developed a relationship with Hage in which he believed Hage

21

trusted him. Augue Quintero was a secondary marketing manager at Gotmortgage.com. He and

22

Hage openly discussed their faith and prayed together. Kathey Kemp was a broker on the sale of

23

Rage's Savoy home. Jackie Heydari was Gotmortgage.com's underwriter. He repeatedly told

24

Hage that the interest only loan on the Savoy property could be refinanced with a two percent thirty

25

year fixed loan. He told Hage "lies and deception" to persuade Hage to give him "cash payments."

26

He considered Hage to be accommodating, cordial, non-argumentative and trusted him. He

27

represented that, in return for the payments, the Hages would receive a two percent, thirty year

28

fixed loan and all of his properties would be paid off. He did all of the Hages' loans through -6STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

Gotmortgage.com and Target Mortgage. He characterized the short term loans "as a deceptive

2

bridge ... to get to the end of the rainbow." In February 2014, he told Hage that he was a convicted

3

felon. He told Hage he has made mistakes in the past, he has paid for his mistakes which is why he

4

is still in the "mortgage business." In March 2014, he persuaded Hage to refinance the Elliot street

5

property. He assured Hage that he would "end up with a 1.85 percent, 30 year fixed with a

6

payment of only $2,000 per month, all properties paid off." He orchestrated Hage's last three loans

7

to "Alternative B, Target Mortgage." In October 2014, Hage told him about Hage's meeting with

8

representatives of US Bank. US Bank told Hage to be careful with Osborn. He wanted to distance

9

Hage from US Bank. Hage said US Bank would no longer allow Hage to draw cashier's checks

10

payable to him. He helped Hage close three loans with Target Mortgage in October 2014. Meg

11

encouraged him to bring Target Mortgage loans, and agreed to pay him commissions. He helped

12

Target Mortgage generate about $70,000. He made about $50,000 from loans with Target

13

Mortgage. His SOP with Meg was to send her the criteria of the loans and she would approve, or

14

not, the deal. Meg never told him not to send her any deals. He heard Meg say that Hage would be

15

in a "financial mess" or "a nightmare." After he was arrested, the DA's office took possession of

16

his cell phone. He authenticated the accuracy of the transcript of his cell phone's text messages.

17

Exh. "330." He identified Hage's cell phone number as 619-865-8672. Counsel stipulated that

18

Osborn was arrested in early November 2015. Seneca was a collection company which contacted

19

Hage in November 2015 with the Elliot loan. Hage texted him about the status of the PNC loan

20

documents. Hage said he and Bonnie were "suffering from declining health throughout this

21

process." Hage said he was upset ("blood boil") because Alliance threatened to serve a NOD.

22

Hage was beginning to get a barrage of collection calls. He told Hage he was working on Hage's

23

credit rating with B of A. Hage said that no one at Seneca or Alliance was aware a payoff was in

24

process. Hage expected the Seneca collection to be paid off with PNC loan. His reference to Bank

25

of America was a stall tactic, a lie. Hage believed he was working on a PNC loan until he was

26

arrested. In September 2015, Meg emailed Hage a loan application (Fannie Mae Form 1003). He

27

recognized Meg's cell phone to be 626-484-8884. Meg texted him to say she needed Rage's

28

updated social security award letter and pension. He told Hage that a fictitious person by the name

-7STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

of Steve Forsyth from PNC was working with Seneca. In October 2015, Hage demanded the return

2

of his funds and ''the house of cards for the last three years crumbled." He and Hage were not

3

involved in money laundering. Hage followed his recommendations based on his false promises.

4

Meg confirmed her intention to squeeze as much out of the loans with Hage to the max. He asked

S

Meg to help the Hages sell their Kansas Street property. Meg sent Hage a listing agreement to sell

6

the Kansas Street property. He and Meg considered themselves to be a part of the same team. Meg

7

confirmed her expectation that Hage would have "financial difficulties with these loans." Meg

8

knew from day one of their relationship that he was a convicted felon. As a salesman, he

9

embellished to the max. Meg always honored her agreement to pay him. He told Meg that he was

10

in direct contact with Hage to advise him as the client. He described his use of the $650,000 he

11

took from the Hages. He gave the Parks $100,000 from the funds he took from the Hages. He did

12

not tell Meg that he took money from the Hages. Hage never lied to him. Hage never asked him to

13

break the law. He persuaded Hage to pull out an additional $100,000 from a refinance of the

14

Kansas Street property. Hage then paid him $63,412 from the Kansas Street refinance. He

15

considered the $63,412 "my Hail Mary of all time." He told Hage he would deposit the $63,412

16

into a reserve account. He received a $1,500 commission from American Warehouse Lenders

17

which Henry Park said he created to "protect himself." He could not have arranged the loans for

18

the Hages without "a broker to work for." In October 2014, he persuaded Hage to take out three

19

more loans. On November 3, 2015, he was arrested. The three loans, which were arranged through

20

Target Mortgage, were on the Elliott, Kansas and Tennyson properties. Hage was under severe

21

pressure which included, but was not limited to, caring for his spouse. Hage did not forget things.

22

Meg consistently encouraged him to bring her business. His agreement with Meg was to pay him

23

45% of each deal. Meg encouraged him to solicit loans on her behalf. Meg paid him eight

24

commission checks and once in cash. He authenticated the commission checks Meg paid him. He

25

did not perform any clerical work for Target Mortgage. He did not work as a clerk. Meg told him

26

that "we were both money-driven people." Meg is "all about money." He did not want Meg to

27

probe Hage and be "overly honest." Meg never turned him down on a request for a commission.

28

He never heard Hage say he needed the money from the loans. He did not agree to be Rage's -8STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

employee. He did not try to inflate Rage's qualifications to borrow money. He asked for a Form

2

W-9 from Hage to protect himself ("cover my ass"). Meg insisted that he complete a Form W-9

3

with Target Mortgage. He has never paid truces to the IRS. He proposed to pay Hage a rebate of

4

$100,000 to persuade him to sign documents. He misled Hage the entire time ... down the line.

5

Exh.'s "9, 13, 26, 27, 61, 93 -97, 101, 102, 108, 126, 133,193,207,208,271,329, 330." He

6

started his "crimes" with Hage "the very day I first spoke" to Hage. He served nearly 5 years in

7

prison for his prior felony convictions. He discussed his felony convictions with Hage. He

8

considered Hage to be an intelligent person. He assured Hage he had "learned his lesson." He has

9

been convicted of 76 counts of grand theft. He corrected his testimony that he was charged with 76

10

counts of grand larceny but only convicted of one felony, involving 16 persons. He met with

11

Samouris three times in jail. He considered himself to be "mortgage buddies" with Meg. He

12

considered Meg to be "a very intelligent, successful business person" and not to be "a criminal."

13

He reviewed the rough drafts of his prior depositions. He considered the connection of the "victim

14

impact report" on his sentence. He believes he can return to work with Orange County brokers and

15

"can start immediately sending the Hages money that I owe them that I took from them." He

16

agreed to a sentencing range of 6 to 11 years in prison. He has not made any deals with the Hages.

17

He talked to Samouris because he understood he "had to cooperate." He did not tell Meg he took

18

money from the Hages. He elicited a promise from Hage that Hage would not contact Meg about

19

the money the Hages were giving to him. He told Hage that the PNC loan would be lost (or

20

"killed") if Hage contacted Meg about the money Hage was giving to him. He wanted Hage to

21

keep "secret" the money Hage was giving to him. Meg was paid $70,000 and he was paid $50,000

22

from the three loans which Target Mortgage brokered in October 2014. He lost money in a start-up

23

company known as Taco Ninja, the source of which was money he misappropriated from Hage. He

¡ 24

repaid loans from the Parks with cash he had stolen from the Hages. He repaid loans fr~m Lo with

25

cash he had stolen from the Hages. He mixed the amounts he sought from Hage to avoid Hage

26

from becoming suspicious that the amounts were too rounded and that, instead, the amounts "made

27

more sense." He brought the Hages to Gotmortgage as his clients, "a retail deal," "a jumbo." He

28

accurately estimated there to be "a lot of phone calls" on his cell with Hage. Meg told him she had -9STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

a good reputation as "an extremely good loan person." Meg "knows exactly what she's doing and

2

she's a professional." He never stepped foot inside Target Mortgage's office. He described his

3

limited social contact with Meg. He texted and emailed Meg. On November 3, 2015, he was

4

arrested. Meg said she did not think he had any idea what he was doing. Meg had dinner with him

5

at his house. Meg submitted two or three loans to him at Gotmortgage. Meg used other

6

representatives at Gotmortgage. He discussed with Meg that the two of them were Catholics. He

7

understood the notation "Outside Services" on one of Meg's checks to him to mean "Outside sales

8

rep." He described the "concern" Hage communicated to him from his associates at US Bank about

9

the checks Hage was giving to him. US Bank characterized the checks Hage was giving to him as

10

"a red flag." Hage sent him a $250,000 cashier's check which he FedEx'ed back to Hage out of

11

concern of "getting arrested." US Bank, out of concern for Hage, asked Hage why he was giving so

12

much money to Osborn. He told Hage that Hage must have "misunderstood what I said" and

13

returned the two large cashier's checks of $150,000 each to Hage. He told "Scody, we had a

14

miscommunication" and he returned the cashier's checks to Hage. Hage sent him the large

15

cashier's checks after the Tennyson, Kansas and Elliott loans in October 2014. Hage told US Bank

16

that Hage had "a close relationship ... business relationship" with him. He is "computer illiterate."

17

Augie Quintero is a secondary marketing manager for Gotmortgage. He did not understand ''the

18

nuts and bolts of the actual loans." He did not know that SFD means "single family dwelling."

19

Jackie Heydari was an underwriter at Gotmortgage. Meg made clear she would give him an answer

20

on a potential deal right away and not "waste her time." He did not know how to read a rate sheet.

21

He did "sales" and the brokers "loved" his enthusiasm. He did not understand the Frank Dodd Act.

22

Once he "had a deal," he would turn the processing over to the brokers. He did not know how to

23

complete the loan applications. He kept the loans moving by eliciting missing information from the

24

applicants. He described his understanding of hard money loans. He emphasized that, when he

25

talked to Hage about specific terms, he would refer Hage to "the good faith estimate, full

26

disclosure." He kept telling Hage that Hage would get a "two percent from PNC bank, 30-year

27

fixed, $2,000 a month payment." He did not understand a 1031 exchange. The loan applications

28

were completed by obtaining the information from the clients over the phone, then provided to the -10STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

broker's underwriter. He considered Target Mortgage to be one of the "shops" in the broker

2

business. He was not aware of Target Mortgage's loan products. He started a business with Lo

3

called Centurion Alliance Recovery. He was unable to arrange the last three loans through

4

Gotmortgage in October 2014, so he arranged the loan through Target Mortgage. Ricardo

5

Talamentes is a loan officer at Gotmortgage. Hage never told him he needed the money from the

6

loans. Jim Perry refused to work with Osborn. None of the Hages' properties were in foreclosure

7

in October 2015. By October 2015, he was "desperate" and believed he was running out of time.

8

He relied on a friend's advice to send Hage a Form W-9, a form he understood "has something to

9

do with income taxes," the purpose of which was "to cover myself." He has never reported the

10

income he stole from the Hages. He has never filed tax returns. He developed a "rapport" with

11

Hage. He believed he had Rage's ''trust ... after the first loan." He described the purpose of the

12

payments Hage made to him starting with the first payment in August 2013 to include handling

13

fees, "getting his credit up into the 800's and ... part of the cost" of getting him all loans paid off ...

14

and all of his current mortgages paid off." Gotmortgage fired Larry Evans for selling loans to a

15

competitor. Hage insisted on doing "everything by the book." He engaged in "a lot of risk taking

16

in deceptive sales tactics." In 2014, Hage was under heavy "stress" with lots of "sleepless nights."

17

He did about 15 loans other than Gotmortgage and Target Mortgage but whose memory of the

18

identity of the brokers was suspiciously vague (although one was Richard at All American Funding

19

in Riverside County). He estimated that 90% of his and Rage's calls or texts were on their cell

20

phones. In the beginning, Hage said he preferred to give Hage a personal check and was not

21

comfortable with giving him a cashier's check. He was not present when the Hages signed their

22

loan documents with Meg. Meg said she would arrange for the Hages to sign the loan documents.

23

He acknowledged that his "crimes are my dark side." He encouraged Hage to contact him once he

24

got the GFE from Meg. He dissuaded Hage from any objections he had to the terms in the GFE.

25

Hage asked him about how to identify the "cash out" on the loan applications. He discouraged

26

Hage from mentioning the PNC loan. He told Hage that Hage would be paid approximately 60% of

27

the payments made to him as a "rebate" from the PNC loan. He described the purpose of the

28

"reserve account." He proposed to arrange a "jumbo loan" for Hage. He considered Hage to be -11STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

"an A+ credit" client. He considered Hage to have "a good memory." He agreed that Target

2

Mortgage would know about a PNC loan for the Hages which was brokered by Target Mortgage.

3

He described his explanation of the "Portrait of a Scam Artist" article to Hage. His only

4

explanation for sending Hage a Form W-9 was to protect himself but he was unable to explain how

S

a W-9 would protect him. He admitted to stealing money from Hage between August 1, 2013 and

6

October 2015. Hage said he "tells his wife everything that he has a good marriage." He said that

7

"it was causing (Bonnie) a great deal of stress." He identified the Form W-9 he got from Target

8

Mortgage. He initiated all¡ofthe loans he arranged for the Hages. He testified as an integral

9

witness in a homicide case as a result of information he acquired while in custody at Bailey. He

10

agreed to swap information with the DA's office in return for consideration at his sentencing in this

11

case. After he was arrested, the police confiscated his phone and downloaded all of his incoming,

12

outgoing and missed calls. In 2004, Osborn was ordered to "cease and desist" from any mortgage

13

activities. He made sales presentations to Hage, which were motivated by Hage's financial

14

condition. He was not licensed to act as a real estate agent or broker. He was employed with

1S

Gotmortgage until he was arrested in November 2015. He participated in all of Gotmortgage' s

16

employee activities and considered himself to be an executive. He worked regular hours at

17

Gotmortgage. He described the nature of Centurion Alliance's business with Lo. He was identified

18

as a director and officer with Centurion. He never paid the IRS any taxes. He described his recall

19

of the terms of his plea agreement which includes consideration of a positive impact statement from

20

Hage. The potential impact on his sentence appears to be a bias to influence his testimony in favor

21

of the Hages. He turned to Meg when Gotmortgage would not do any more loans with the Hages.

22

Counsel for the parties have met with him in jail.

23

Thelma Herrera:

24

Thelma Herrera worked as an account executive at Gotmortgage.com from 2009 to

25

February 2013. She interviewed with QC Smith and met Henry Park. She was uncomfortable with

26

Smith. Smith was very strict. She worked with Osborn, both of whom reported to Smith. She and

27

Osborn moved to the main corporate office. Osborn became her team leader. Osborn told her he

28 -12STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

was a convicted felon. Sh_e helped Osborn write an email to Osborn's parole agent. Exh. "8." She

2

spoke to Phillip Samouris after her deposition. Samouris scared her.

3

Ocie Smith through his deposition taken on February 28, 2017:

4

Ocie Smith is an entrepreneur and, formerly, worked at Gotmortgage.com. He worked at

5

Gotmortgage.com from 2008 to late 2013. He was senior director of finance at Gotm.ortgage.com.

6

He described his duties as director of fmance. He was licensed in real estate in California, though

7

he appeared to change his testimony to say he was not licensed. Before Gotmortgage.com, he

8

worked as an information analyst. He expressed impatience at being asked questions about his life.

9

He interviewed Jimmy Osborn for a telemarketer' s position. Osborn said he had been arrested and

10

he had cleaned up his life. His boss was Henry Park. Osborn "dazzled" him by auditioning on the

11

telephone. Osborn said he had a probation officer. He spoke to Osborn's probation officer on the

12

telephone. He hired Osborn to meet and introduce brokers to Gotmortgage.com. He told Osborn to

13

act as a cheerleader only. Osborn was not "vice president of anything." Thelma Herrera worked as

14

a telemarketer. He did not send anything to Agent Witzel. He became increasingly intolerant and

1S

less credible as his examination unfolded. He did not have any knowledge that Osborn's past had

16

"anything to do with this." He considered Osborn's method as "very aggressive." Thomas Lo was

17

Gotmortgage.com's broker. Exh. 's "6, 203."

18

Nilda Ann Marie Meg:

19

Nilda Ann Marie Meg is the sole owner and broker for Target Mortgage. In March 2012,

20

Target Mortgage entered into a broker agreement with Gotmortgage.com. She met Jimmy Osborn

21

in or about March 2012. Osborn became Target Mortgage's account executive. She developed a

22

social relationship with Osborn. Osborn called her Princess Nilda. They talked while Osborn went

23

on his nightly walks. As of July 2012, she did not want Osborn to be "my account rep." Osborn

24

told her that Gotmortgage.com needed underwriters and she submitted an application as an

25

underwriter. Gotmortgage.com offered her a job but she declined. At that time, business was slow

26

at Target Mortgage. Osborn visited her at her home on two occasions. Osborn spent the night at

27

her home. Osborn did not tell her about his past legal problems. Osborn told her that he had had

28

"problems with the subprime market." She did not check Osborn's background. Her denial of -13STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

Osborn's legal background was not credible. She did not discuss with Osborn his previous

2

employment or experience. She never asked Osborn for references. Osborn is the only account rep

3

she has loaned $16,000 to. She never knew whether Osborn had a real estate license. Osborn

4

introduced the Hages to her. She would not have met the Hages but for Osborn. She denied that, in

5

July 2013, Osborn referred Hage to her for a loan on the Savoy property. She authorized Mark

6

Warful, as her attorney, to send Exh. "285" to Samouris. She did a second review of whether the

7

Hages qualified for a loan to purchase the Savoy property. She agreed with Gotmortgage.com that

8

the Hages did not qualify for a purchase loan. She has reviewed Osborn's text messages in Exh.

9

"330." She denied that the three loans Target Mortgage arranged for the Hages in October 2014

10

were "hard money loans." She described the Hages as having "expensive tastes." She visited the

11

Hages at their home. She ran the Hages' credit. In 2014, she predicted that the Hages would

12

experience a financial "burden" from the loans she brokered for them. Osborn asked her to

13

evaluate three loans on separate properties for the Hages. She authenticated Exh. "225" as the

14

disclosure of her fiduciary duty to the Hages as her borrowers. She agreed that her duty was to

15

insure that the Hages could afford the loans and steer them away from loans they could not afford.

16

She knew that the sources of the Hages' income was social security, pension and rental income.

17

She authenticated Exh. "265" as the final settlement statement for the Elliott property loan. She

18

took the loan application and put the Hages and the lender together. She believed that the Hages'

19

Trust had the ability to repay the loan. She believed that the Hages' rental income was sufficient to

20

repay the loan. She believed that the Savoy house was under the Hages' individual names. She

21

denied that the Hages' Trust is treated as a "disregarded entity." The Hages received approximately

22

$494,000 from the Elliott property loan. Exh. "265." She was paid a commission of $16,795 from

23

the Elliott property loan. Exh. "266." She authenticated Exh. "228" as the Hages' Elliott property

24

loan application. The amount of the Elliott property loan was $644,000. The amount of the

25

monthly payment on the Elliott loan was $4,917. The Elliott property rental income was $3,672 per

26

month, net after payments. She believed that, after the loans, the Hages had net rental income of

27

$3,672. The net rental monthly income on all of the Hages' properties was $4,500. The rental

28

income on the Elliott property was $2,666 per month compared to a monthly payment of $4,917. -14STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

She denied that she owed the same duty on commercial property, like the Elliott property, as she

2

did to the Hages on their primary residence. Exh.'s "26,111,225,227,228,231,232,264,265,

3

266,267,269,270,285, 330." The Elliott loan was for the total amount of $644,000 with "cash

4

out" of$494,000. Her commission was $16,795. She authenticated Exh. "263" as the Elliott Street

5

loan application. The Kansas Street loan was for the total amount of $612,050 with "cash out" of

6

$159,350. Her commission was $18,886.25. The Kansas Street loan payment was $4,764 per

7

month. The total amount of the Tennyson Street loan was $577,500. The monthly loan payment

8

was $4,233. Her commission was $12,245. She completed the loan applications with the Hages by

9

way of email and telephone. The total monthly payments of the Hages after the loans, including the

10

Savoy property, was more than $21,000. The Hages' net annual income was approximately

11

$184,000, or approximately $15,000 per month. She authenticated Exh. "250" as her email to Davd

12

Bilandzija on the subject of his questions about the transaction. She authenticated Exh. "257" in

13

which she confirmed that Bonnie Hage was in the hospital. She authenticated her receipt ofExh.

14

"251" which confirmed the maximum amount of the Hages' loans. She received Osborn's October

15

2, 2014 text in which he said Hage wanted to "max cash out" of the loans. Exh. "330." She

16

responded affirmatively on the same day. Exh. "330." She authenticated Osborn's 2015 texts in

17

which he said the Hages want to refinance the loans once again. She texted that Hage was "going

18

to get in financial problems." Exh. "330." She agreed to "move on the loans." She was aware that

19

the Hages were "late on all" of the loans. At her deposition, she denied any discussions about the

20 .Hages with Osborn. Her testimony is inconsistent with the multiple texts she exchanged with 21

Osborn about the Hages. Exh. "330." She inconsistently testified about whether Osborn asked her

22

out on a date. She received more than $47,000 in commissions from the Hage loans. She

23

authenticated her preparation of a Form W-9 which she sent to Osborn, Osborn completed and

24

returned to her. On October 17, 2014, the same day as escrow closed on the Hages' loans, she

25

issued four checks to Osborn. Exh. "271." She denied that the checks were commission payments

26

to Osborn. She denied that Osborn acted as her agent. Her testimony on the character of the checks

27

was not credible. In discovery, she denied any agreements with Osborn existed, any business

28

relationship with Osborn existed and any commissions were paid to Osborn, and produced no -15STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

documents. In discovery, she identified only two payments she made to Osborn, the purpose of

2

which were loans to Osborn. In discovery, she produced the two checks in a supplemental

3

document production, both of which were in her files since 2014. Exh. "314." She printed a copy

4

of the two checks by going online with her account at Wells Fargo. Counsel stipulated that she

5

produced the two checks from her account at Wells Fargo which appears to be inconsistent with her

6

discovery responses that the source of the checks were her files. Counsel stipulated that Meg

7

produced the two checks to Plaintiffs in discovery in November 2016. At her deposition, she

8

testified that she made total payments of$16,000 as loans to Osborn. She testified that her loans to

9

Osborn were interest free and have not been re-paid. She acknowledged that it is illegal for her to

10

pay commissions to an unlicensed agent. She provided a listing agreement, at Osborn's request, to

11

the Hages. She authorized her lawyer to confirm to the Hages' counsel that the listing agreement

12

was cancelled and released. Exh. "287." The Hages' taxable income, after expenses, was

13

$185,0000. She authenticated Exh. "704" as a good faith estimate for the Tennyson loan. The

14

Tennyson loan had an adjustable interest rate and a prepayment penalty, both of which were

15

inconsistent with representations in Exh. 's "704 and 757." She admitted that the Hages' income

16

was a factor in making the loans. The Kansas and Elliott loans had an adjustable interest rate and a

17

prepayment penalty, both of which were inconsistent with representations in Exh.'s "755 and 756."

18

She is 62 years old. She has been in business for herself since 1988. 100% of her business is from

19

referrals. She has done no advertising. She initially sought to obtain better loans for the Hages

20

with a fixed interest rate and no prepayment penalty. The loans she ultimately obtained from

21

Velocity Commercial Capital included terms not disclosed on the good faith estimates. The lenders

22

are now responsible for making the disclosures to the borrowers. Latasha Richmond, her loan

23

processor, prepared the disclosures. She described the purpose of the good faith estimates to the

24

Hages. She denied that the Hages were locked into the terms of the good faith estimates. The

25

Hages reported adjusted gross income of$184,000. The adjusted gross income was arrived at after

26

the Hages had deducted the Schedule E expenses. The Hages' home mortgage was identified on

27

Schedule A. The source of the Hages' income included, but were not limited to, rental income.

28

The Kansas loan had an interest only payment provision with a balloon payment in 2016. The -16STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

refinance loan replaced the existing loan with a thirty year amortized loan. The Elliott loan also

2

had a balloon payment due in 2016. The Hages lived in the Savoy residence with a balloon

3

payment due in 2016. The Hages benefitted from the refinance loans with better interest rates plus

4

$700,000 in cash. Hage said the purpose of the cash "future investments." After the October 2014

5

loans, Hage approached her about refinancing the Savoy property. Hage applied for a loan with

6

another broker for the Savoy property. She was not surprised when Hage approached her about

7

refinancing the Savoy property. She has four children and seven grandchildren. She is solicited

8

almost daily by persons like Osborn. She did not treat Osborn any different than any other referral

9

source in the last 28 years. Hage said he wanted "Jimmy" involved. She denied that she told the

10

Hages that Osborn worked for her. In 2012, she first met Osborn at Gotmortgage. She has attended

11

conventions to meet lenders. She described the process of becoming an "approved lender." She

12

described her standard commission rate to be 2.5%. She described the distinction in compensation

13

rates between residential and commercial loans. The compensation rates are higher with a

14

commercial loan than a residential loan. She considered the Hages' loans to be commercial loans.

15

Velocity does not do any residential loans. She denied that Hage complained about the rates she

16

charged on the loans. In September 2015, Hage again applied for loans from her. Her initial

17

impression of Osborn was that he was flamboyant, loud and unknowledgeable. Osborn was her

18

contact person at Gotmortgage. She was dissatisfied with the first two loans she arranged through

19

Gotmortgage. Osborn never stepped foot inside of her office. She arranged for Osborn not to be

20

her contact person at Gotmortgage. She is solely dependent on the accuracy of the information she

21

gets from the borrowers. She described the purpose of providing good faith estimates to the

22

borrowers. She has not made loans to any other account representatives. She has made loans to

23

other persons but, like with Osborn, did not memorialize the loans. Osborn said he and his brother

24

were opening up a taco shop, and that's why he obtained loans from her. He retrieved cancelled

25

checks from her online account at Wells Fargo. She denied that she tried to hide any checks. She

26

believed that Osborn worked for Gotmortgage. Lenders encourage her, as a broker, to "sign up

27

with them." The mortgage broker association hosts an annual meeting. She issued a W-9 to

28

Osborn, at Osborn's request. She sent him a blank form which she arranged for Richmond to send -17STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

to Osborn. Richmond and Jorge Abich report to her at Target Mortgage. She commonly receives

2

referrals from people in the real estate industry. She did not consider Osborn's referrals to be

3

unusual. She authenticated Exh. "707" as the Truth-in-Lending statement signed by the Hages on

4

August 6, 2014. She denied that the Hages complained they did not receive the same loan reflected

5

in Exh. "707." She described the circumstances under which Osborn stayed the night at her house.

6

He could not start his motorcycle, and she did not want him traveling on a freeway if the

7

motorcycle broke down. She denied that Osborn disclosed he had been convicted of any financial

8

crimes. In October 2013, she reviewed Gotmortgage's underwriting on the Hages' application for a

9

loan on the Savoy property. She decided not to accept an underwriting job at Gotmortgage. She

10

considers herself an experienced underwriter and can "review a file pretty quickly." She

11

acknowledged that she owed a fiduciary duty and a duty of loyalty to the Hages as borrowers. In

12

her opinion, she complied with her fiduciary duty to the Hages. She authenticated Exh. 's "767 and

13

768" as the notes of 32nd Street Apartments LLC with Velocity Commercial Capital LLC. The

14

notes were signed by the Hages on behalf of 32nd Street Apartments LLC. She authenticated Exh.

15

"769" as the note of J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage Family Trust dated October 8, 2002 with

16

Velocity Commercial Capital. She denied that the Hages complained to her about the terms of the

17

loans with Velocity. She understood that the Hages had two separate Trusts, both of which Hage

18

made clear to escrow. Before the Hages refinanced their loans in October 2014, they were already

19

paying $21,000 in monthly payments. In addition to receiving $700,000, the Hages obtained 30-

20

year amortized notes instead of interest only loans. Hage's $184,000 in adjusted gross income was

21

inconsistent with his income representation in his application. He observed the Hages sign their

22

closing documents. She denied that Osborn provided any documents from the Hages for their

23

loans. She described the duties Richmond performed as a loan processor. She worked as an

24

underwriter with a lender for 10 years. She described underwriting as the person who makes the

25

decision on the loan. She described a "conditional loan approval." She described the term "loan

26

docs." The escrow company which handled the Hages' loans was located in Arcadia. She drove

27

with a notary to obtain the Hages' signatures at a restaurant in San Diego. The second set ofloan

28

documents were not signed until after Bonnie Hage' s surgery. She and a notary traveled to San -18STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

Diego, met the Hages at their residence on Savoy, and obtained their signatures at that time. Hage

2

said he wanted the loan documents to be signed quickly and, if possible, before Bonnie Hage's

3

surgery. All of her communications were with Hage. Osborn texted or called her to ask if she

4

needed anything. She did not inform Osborn of Target Mortgage's loan programs, the terms of

5

which change daily. He spoke to Hage about the purpose of the loans. She denied that Hage said

6

Osborn had anything to do with his decision making, which appeared to be inconsistent with

7

Hage's references to "Jimmy." She denied she paid Osborn anything in connection with the loans

8

to the Hages, which testimony is not credible. She received the listing agreement from the Hages

9

on Columbus Day. She traveled to San Diego to pick up the listing agreement. The Hages signed a

10

listing agreement on both the Kansas and Savoy street properties. She observed the Hages sign the

11

listing agreement at their Savoy residence. Hage showed her and her former spouse - John - their

12

residence. After picking up the listing agreement, Hage refused to return her calls. Sandicor said

13

that the Hages wanted Target Mortgage to de-list the Savoy property. The Hages re-listed the

14

Savoy property within a few days. Within few more days, the Savoy property was de-listed

15

because the property was sold. She agreed to cancel the Savoy property listing agreement. She

16

cancelled her listing agreement while reserving her right to be paid a commission. Her commission

17

percentage was 3%. The Hages' loans were increased to the maximum amount permitted by

18

Velocity. The Hages' 2014 tax returns were not available to her at the time the October 2014 loans

19

were issued. She understood that the Hages were her clients. She identified the borrowers as the

20

Hages. Exh.'s "704, 732, 739, 740, 750." The Hages were identified as the loan applicants. Exh.

21

"707." She provided disclosure of her fiduciary duty to the Hages. Exh. "225." She completed

22

loan applications for the Hages on each of the three loans. The Hages are identified as the

23

borrowers in each of the applications. She authenticated Exh. "237" as among her earlier her email

24

exchanges with David Bilandzija at Velocity. The disclosure statements mistakenly represented

25

that the loans will have fixed interest rates and no prepayment penalties. She did not have an office

26

in San Diego and has had no employees in San Diego. The Hages' Savoy property is the only

27

property she has listed in San Diego. The Court admitted Exh.'s "284, 284A, 285,286 and 287" for

28

the limited purpose of establishing the complete context in which Target Mortgage represented that -19STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

it would cancel the Hages' listing agreement. She cancelled her listing agreement on October 29,

2

2015. Exh. "347." Kathy Kemp listed the Savoy property on November 5, 2015. Exh. "348." She

3

obtained conditional loan approval from Velocity on August 29, 2014. She has listed property in

4

San Diego County, which appeared to be inconsistent with his earlier denial that she has listed

5

property in San Diego. She sought loan approvals from both Mega Capital and Velocity, the

6

purpose of which was to obtain a better loan for the Hages. She tried to cancel her listing

7

agreement subject to a reservation of right to collect a commission. Hage did not say he was

8

confused by her disclosures. The Hages did not disclose their intention to obtain the loans in the

9

name of a Trust or an LLC until later in the process. She did not know, before she agreed to cancel

IO

the listing agreement, that the Hages had already engaged Kemp to list their property. She

11

recognized Exh. "268" as the Fonn W-9 dated October 16, 2014 Target Mortgage sent to Osborn.

12

She did not send Osborn a Form 1099. Exh. "268" reflects a fax number in the upper left comer.

13

She caused a blank Form W-9 to be sent to Osborn. Counsel stipulated that he first date of

14

Osborn's deposition was February 21, 2017. Osborn asked to borrow money after he injured

15

himself. She initially declined to make him a loan. She declined Osborn's proposal that she invest

16

in one of his business endeavors with Lo. She has loaned money to her family. She agreed to loan

17

money to Osborn when she thought he was going into business with his brother. Osborn never paid

18

her back. She mailed the loan checks to Osborn. She was very critical of Osborn and

19

Gotmortgage's business skills. Osborn referred clients, including the Hages, to her. She described

20

her conversations with Hage including her request for documents from Hage. Richmond is

21

licensed. She directed Osborn to follow up with Hage to obtain documents. Hage was motivated to

22

close the loans because of upcoming commitments. She described the benefits to the Hages from

23

the loans. When she discovered that the Hages' interest rate was lower than he said it was, she

24

cancelled the loan. Hage said he was disappointed because he needed the money. The Hages

25

incurred a net increase in their mortgage payments of $5,800 per month. The Hages received

26

$707,000 in cash from the loans. She denied any concerns that the Hages could not meet the

27

increased mortgage payments from the loans. She denied that Hage complained about the loans or

28

that he could not afford to re-pay the loans. The Savoy loan was a 10% interest rate only. Hage -20STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

could have used the cash out to pay down the Savoy loan. Hage immediately wanted to refinance

2

the Savoy loan after the October 2014 loans had closed. She denied that the Hages disclosed the

3

$700,000 in liquid assets on his loan application. She wondered what happened to the cash out.

4

The Savoy loan application was denied. In 2015, Hage applied for more loans, after Osborn told

5

her to call Hage. Hage said that the values of his properties had increased but, upon review, she

6

was not persuaded that the values had increased. She determined that Hage's credit scores had

7

dropped. She was shocked. She also learned that the Hages were behind by 2 payments. In 2015,

8

Osborn said that the Hages wanted to sell the Kansas property. She spoke to Hage and sent him a

9

listing agreement. Hage said that they wanted to sell the Savoy property instead of the Kansas

10

property. She sent him a listing agreement for the Savoy property. She arranged to meet the Hages

11

at the Savoy house, take photos and pick up the listing agreement. She recommended that the

12

Savoy property be listed in the same amount as the appraisal. She described the required real estate

13

disclosures she made to the Hages. She made the disclosures in the presence of both of the Hages.

14

She saw Bonnie Hage sign the Kansas listing agreement. With the Hages' consent, she walked

15

around the house and took photos. They agreed to show the house by appointment only. She listed

16

the Savoy property and received interest from approximately 5 people. The Hages did not tell her

17

that they had gone to the DA's office, and they stopped returning her calls. She considered the

18

Savoy property to be beautiful. She recognized Exh. "728" which reflected that the Kansas

19

property was not habitable. Hage explained that they were renovating the Kansas property and

20

emphasized they did not want any "delay." Velocity caused a delay in funding by adding

21

conditions to the loan. She denied that Osborn was the primary conduit between Target Mortgage

22

and Hage. She asked Hage to send their 2012 and 2013 tax returns. Exh. "716." She explained the

23

printing problem she encountered when producing documents in discovery to Plaintiffs. She re-

24

iterated that she reminded "Jimmy" to follow-up with the Hages to encourage them to return

25

documents to Target Mortgage. She spoke to Hage about questions she had about their rental

26

agreements. She explained that Velocity followed standard procedure by obtaining the Hages'

27

authorization to run their credit. Hage said he wanted the borrowers to be the Trust and the LLC.

28

She provided LOE's to the Hages which needed to be in their "own handwriting." Velocity -21STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

required a letter that the LLC was in good standing. Hage provided the taxpayer identification

2

number for the LLC. She reviewed the bank statements Hage provided to Target Mortgage. She

3

denied that she saw any of the checks Hage gave to Osborn on the bank statements. She started the

4

loan process in August and the loans closed in October 2014, during which time, Hage did not

5

complain or say he felt rushed. Hage met with his lawyer and banker during the loan process. She

6

asked Hage to provide her with a copy of the second of the 2 Trusts. Hage mentioned that he got

7

documents from her while he was in the hospital because of Bonnie Hage's surgery in October

8

2014. Hage emailed that he did not want to "hold up the funding" because he would not get home

9

from the hospital until later in the day. She denied she sent any emails only to Osborn asking him

10

to do anything in connection with the Hages' loans. Within a couple of weeks after the October

11

2014 closings, Hage provided her with bank statements on a loan for the Savoy property. She

12

denied that the Hages intended to take cash out of the Savoy loan. Hage provided her with 12

13

months of bank statements on the Savoy re-financing loan. She recognized Hage's handwritten

14

note in Exh. "757;" however, upon review, the Court notes that the handwriting appears to be a bit

15

difficult to interpret if not strained. She described the loans made to the Hages as "asset based."

16

She had no doubt that Hage knew what he was doing with the loans. On October 20, 2015, she

17

learned of a problem with the Hages' loans. Exh. "284." She described the emotional and physical

18

distress she sustained from the Hages' complaints. She incurred legal expenses of approximately

19

$20,000 to respond to the Hages' complaints before they filed this lawsuit. The complaints have

20

affected her ability to work. Her denial she could have done anything differently with the Hages

21

struck the Court as unreasonable in view of her relationship with Osborn and the real estate

22

activities she paid him in connection with the Hages. She denied that she paid Osborn an illegal

23

kickback which the Court finds to be unreasonable. She evaluated the Hages' applications to

24

determine whether they "qualified for the loan based on the program." She authenticated Exh.

25

"755" page 70 as an underwriting summary of the Hages' loan on the Kansas property. The Hages'

26

obligations to income was 146.884%. She authenticated Exh. "228" as the Hages' loan application

27

on the Elliott property. The Hages' mortgage payment was $975 per month on the Elliott property,

28

$4,036 per month on the Kansas property and $2,743 per month on the Tennyson property for a -22STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

total of$7,754 per month which, after the October 2014 loans, became a total of approximately

2

$13,900 per month. Exh. 's "767, 768, 769." The Hages' debt service, after the loans, exceeded the

3

rental income on the properties. Osborn emailed the W-9 to her which is inconsistent to her

4

deposition and trial testimony. She never spoke to Osborn's brother, David, but she agreed to loan

5

Osborn money for them to start.a restaurant business. By October 8, 2015, she was aware from

6

Osborn that the Hages were behind on "all" of their mortgage payments. As of September 29,

7

2015, she was attempting to arrange more loans on the Kansas and Elliott properties for the Hages.

8

The Hages were already under water "before they came" to her. The text messages admitted into

9

evidence do not include the universe of messages she exchanged with Hage.

10

Joffrey Long:

11

Joffrey Long's occupation is in mortgage lending. He has worked in the industry for 40

12

years. He originates hard money loans. He identified his trade association memberships. His

13

qualifications as a mortgage lending expert are adequate. Most of his income is generated from

14

originating and servicing loans. He identified the materials he reviewed as part of his engagement.

15

The foundation on which he based his opinions is adequate. He defmed a hard money loan. He

16

opined that the three loans brokered by Target Mortgage are hard money loans. Osborn's

17

interactions with the Hages and the compensation paid to Osborn fell below the standard of care.

18

The payments to Osborn appeared to be commissions. He referred to his notes to identify his

19

opinions. The loan terms were not properly disclosed to the Hages. The good faith estimates

20

needed to be updated and re-provided to the Hages as the terms of the loans changed. The loans

21

were unsuitable for the Hages. Target Mortgage "churned" loans with the Hages. The Hages' 2013

22

monthly income was approximately $15,600. The Hages' 2013 tax return reflects that their taxable

23

gross income was approximately $122,000. The Hages' 2012 monthly income was approximately

24

$9,100. Without a mortgage company, like Target Mortgage, Osborn could not have set up the

25

loans with the Hages. He disagreed that, in business purpose loans, the broker is not required to

26

consider the borrower's ability to pay a loan. The churning of the loans consumed a larger

27

proportion of the Hages' monthly income. He expressed his criticism of the opinions of Target

28

Mortgage's mortgage lending expert. Target Mortgage's failure to follow "proper procedures" by -23STATEMENT OF DECISlON


1

allowing Osborn to interact with the Hages would have prevented the Hages' losses. He did not see

2

any evidence that Hage did not understand the loan terms. He emphasized that Target Mortgage

3

should have provided the Hages with an updated and accurate good faith estimate of the loans as

4

the terms changed. He acknowledged that Hage was aware of Osborn's criminal history. Target

5

Mortgage should not have allowed Osborn to interact with the Hages, whether he was a convicted

6

felon or not, and whether Osborn was licensed or not. He is aware that Hage interacted with

7

Osborn daily and he trusted Osborn. Target Mortgage, as the licensee, had a duty to use utmost

8

care. He agreed that Target Mortgage could not have stopped Osborn from interacting with the

9

Hages. Osborn's name pops up on the BRE licensing website. Target Mortgage should not have

10

proceeded with the loans without "precautions and safeguards" to avoid the Hages from being

11

subjected to fraud by Osborn. He analyzed the Hages' monthly income before the loans from

12

Target Mortgage. He disagreed that the Hages would necessarily have lost the properties without

13

the Target Mortgage loans. He was equivocal about how to consider Rage's mortgage banking

14

experience. He disagreed that the Hages should have used the $700,000 in cash to repay the Target

15

Mortgage loans. He understood that the Hages had upcoming balloon payments in 2016. He

16

deferred in answering any questions about the tax consequences of the Hages' sale of the properties

17

in advance of the balloon payments. He also deferred in answering any questions about the

18

potential of the Hages filing for bankruptcy. The prepayment penalties from the Target Mortgage

19

loans were a deterrent for the Hages to sell the properties. Osborn performed loan origination

20

services for Target Mortgage.

21

Richard Holstrom:

22

Richard Holstrom is a CPA and a forensic accountant. He has been associated with RGL

23

Forensics. He described his education and his expert witness experience. He was engaged by

24

Plaintiff's counsel to prepare a damages calculation based on his review of the loan documents. His

25

qualifications are adequate. The foundation on which he based his opinions is adequate. The

26

Hages' total damages are $1,522,275.06. The past losses include interest and closing costs on the

27

Kansas, Elliott and Tennyson loans. The Hages sold the Kansas property on September 6, 2016.

28

The past loss on the Kansas property is $113,679.70. The past loss on the Elliott property is -24STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

$149,840.99. The past loss on the Tennyson property is $55,708.66. His damage calculation

2

includes payments to Osborn after October 14, 2014. His damages calculation includes a total past

3

loss of$740,170.96 and future losses, reduced to present cash value as of June 12, 2107, in the

4

amount of $782,04.10. He applied a present day calculation of 5%. He applied a 7% simple

5

interest rate of return dating back to October 2014. He does not know if the Kansas property

6

resulted in a profit to the Hages. He assumed that the Hages owned the Kansas and Elliott

7

properties free and clear prior to the October 2014 loans. His calculations did not take into

8

consideration the Hages' existing loans on the properties. On the Kansas property, the Hages were

9

paying an interest rate of 10.99% interest rate. The refinance loan resulted in a lower interest rate.

10

The proceeds from the refinance loan were, in part, paid to Osborn. He assumed that the Hages

11

paid Osborn $367, 227 after October 2014, which is the basis of his calculations. He did not

12

express any opinion on the issue of fault or cause of the Hages' damages. The purpose of the

13

Tennyson loan was different than the purpose of the refinance loans on the Kansas and Elliott

14

properties. The interest rate on the refinance loan on the Tennyson property increased from the

15

Hages' existing loan. He has not evaluated the Hages' revocable and irrevocable Trusts. He made

16

an alternative calculation based on the differential in the principal amounts of the loans before and

17

after Target Mortgage, and on the interest paid on the additional principal of the loans. The

18

additional interest on the Kansas property is $42,567 and on the Elliott property is $122,451. He

19

made the new calculations over the past weekend. He essentially calculated the difference between

20

the refinance loans and no loans on the Kansas and Elliott properties.

21

John Scofield Hage:

22

John Scofield Hage is retired and 70 years of age. He was born in San Diego. He graduated

23

from Point Loma HS in 1965. He married Bonnie Hage in 1972. He worked in banking for 38

24

years and retired in 2007. He described his experience including business origination. He did not

25

work within the lending department. In 2008, he became the CEO of the San Diego Food Bank.

26

His primary duties were to raise money for the food bank. In 2013, he retired from the food bank.

27

He has been active in community affairs, his favorite one of which is the Boy Scouts. He and his

28

wife sold their home and moved into their son's home on Elliott street. They sold a rental property -25STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

and were looking for a 1031 exchange. In March 2013, his wife fell and hurt herself. He took care

2

of her. In 2013, he located a replacement property on Tennyson Street. He met Jimmy Osborn at

3

Gotmortgage. He owned the Kansas and Elliott Street properties free and clear. In July 2013, they

4

purchased the Tennyson Street property. He met Osborn at a UTC restaurant. He told Osborn that

5

they wanted to purchase a new home and their price range of approximately $1,300,000. He wrote

6

Osborn a check for him to assist them with credit services. Exh. "329." Osborn said he could help

7

them lower their interest rate on the Tennyson property. Osborn gave him Exh. "133" as an interest

8

rate reduction agreement. He located the residence on Savoy Street as a family home. They used

9

Kathy Kemp to locate the Savoy residence. Osborn called him frequently and solicited their real

10

estate business. He authenticated Exh.'s "122 and 125" as preapproval loan letters from Osborn.

II

He believed they could afford the Savoy residence. He communicated with Osborn on a daily

12

basis. In 2013, he wrote Osborn a checks for mortgage fees ''to build liquidity for our balance

13

sheets." Exh. "329." He mailed the checks to Osborn at Gotmortgage. At Osborn's request, he

14

started to send Osborn cashier's checks. His memory that the purpose of the numerous checks was

15

for "processing or mortgage fees" struck the Court as genuine but curious. He authenticated his

16

email exchange in Exh. "166." He had not known of Alliance Portfolio's involvement. Osborn

17

said he had approached other lenders, like Sun West and PNC, "to take us out." He closed hard

18

money loans on the Kansas and Savoy properties. They took out a second hard money loan on the

19

Kansas property. Exh. "196." In February 2014, he gave Osborn a cashier's check for $63,412, the

20

purpose of which to set up a reserve fund at PNC Bank. Osborn said they would get "most of the

21

money back." Jim Perry at Alliance told him that Osborn had a criminal conviction which was the

22

first he had heard of Osborn's criminal background. In February 2014, he received an email with

23

an article which described Osborn as a scam artist. He confronted Osborn who said he had

24

straightened his life out. He forgave Osborn and did not expect him to re-offend after having

25

already served jail time. He continued to trust Osborn. Osborn discussed his Christian faith. They

26

prayed together about his wife's health. In March 2014, Osborn persuaded him to refinance the

27

Elliott property. He gave Osborn a cashier's check for $60,000 to continue building a reserve for

28

the PNC loan. Osborn always told him that the PNC would close within the next 45 to 60 days. -26STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

The close was always "right around the comer." The close of the PNC loan was a "constant

2

concern" of his. He described his wife's health issues in 2014. Osborn suggested that they do

3

additional financing by building up reserves for the PNC loan. He pulled more than $700,000 in

4

equity out of the three rental properties they re-financed with Target Mortgage in October 2014.

5

Osborn said the funds he paid to Osborn would come back to them and reduce the debt on the other

6

loans. Osborn referred to Meg as a "beautiful lady" who had access to financing beyond

7

Gotmortgage. He read and relied on Target Mortgage's fiduciary duties to them. Exh. "225." He

8

did not believe Osborn was working on behalf of Target Mortgage. Osborn relayed daily

9

information from Meg to him. He believed the information Osborn provided to him from Meg was

10

accurate. Osborn's style of business always contained a sense of"urgency." He denied that Meg

11

counseled him on the suitability of the loans. He frequently discussed his balance sheets with Meg

12

but did not discuss their ability to pay the debt service. His conversations with Meg were limited to

13

completing the loan applications. He identified Exh. "339" as handwritten notes he took of his

14

conversations with Osborn. He expected that, after the PNC loan closed, they would get a "rebate"

15

of a portion of the funds he had paid to Osborn to build up a reserve fund. In April 2014, Osborn

16

said he could get a 30-year term, "all inclusive" loan. In July 2014, Osborn said he would get a

17

"rebate" of $130,000 from the funds he had paid Osborn. In October 2014, Osborn said he would

18

get a "rebate" of $157,200 from the funds he had paid Osborn. Osborn said that a portion of the

19

funds from the Target Mortgage loans in October 2014 would be paid to Osborn for the reserve

20

funds for the PNC loan. He noted "Jimmy's Birthday" among a series of calculations. He noted

21

that Osborn's representation that the PNC loan would reduce the Savoy loan by $200,000 because

22

of the reserve funds. He noted Osborn's representation that Osborn would arrange for late fees with

23

Sun West and Alliance be waived. He noted Osborn's request that he issue Osborn a 1099 which

24

he did not do. In October 2014, his goal was to complete the loan process, "getting the PNC loan,"

25

but he was getting frustrated at "the delays that I couldn't reconcile." Osborn talked about the

26

Hamp legislation which favored people with high interest rates. He thought Osborn's explanations

27

made sense but he was overwhelmed and Osborn dictated "everything that was going on." Meg did

28

not counsel him on the subject of the increased interest rate on the Tennyson property refinance -27STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

loan. Osborn suggested that he do the refinancing loans. He recommended the refinancing to

2

increase the Hages' cash liquidity and strengthen their balance sheets. He described his

3

conversation with Jim Perry at US Bank. US Bank told him they would no longer issue cashier's

4

checks payable to Osborn. His meeting with US Bank took place shortly before November 11,

5

2014. Exh. "329," page 54. He described Osborn's recommendation that he use Meg to list the

6

Kansas and Savoy properties for sale. Meg drove to San Diego and took photos of the houses on

7

her smartphone. He had previously listed homes for sale with Kemp. He denied he had any

8

interview with Meg about the properties. He told his wife they were having "some problems" and

9

they needed to list the properties quickly. They held title to the Savoy property in their revocable

10

Family Trust. He described their meetings with their son and their lawyer before meeting with the

11

DA's office. He has been diagnosed with cognitive impairment with symptoms of memory loss

12

and confusion. They sold the Savoy home. They sold the Kansas property. The Elliott property has

13

a $600,000 mortgage on it after they had owned it free and clear. This ordeal has been

14

"devastating" to his family financially. This ordeal has been devastating to him physically and he

15

wakes up in the mornings in tears. He has read Osborn's testimony and considers the testimony to

16

be credible. He was surprised by the terms of Osborn• s proposed loan before accepting the

17

purchase loan for Savoy. He has had a lot of experience in reviewing balance sheets. He expected

18

to pay the loan payments from his cash flow and not from assets on his balance sheet. He does not

19

understand the term "seasoning funds." He wrote more than $400,000 in personal checks to third

20

parties with cash returned to him and he provided cash to Osborn. He had a personal relationship

21

with PNC Bank for a number of years. He agreed that he has not heard of any bank which refused

22

to make a loan to a customer who also had an account at the bank. He understood that Osborn was

23

a felon. In February 2014, he understood Osborn was a felon and unlicensed. He believed that the

24

funds he provided to Osborn were going to Gotmortgage. Before October 2014, he understood that

25

the address he sent checks to was not Gotmortgage's address. He did not contact Gotmortgage

26

because of Osborn's assurances he was acting on their behalf. He met with Osborn at

27

Gotmortgage's address, he had a business card from Gotmortgage and he expected Gotmortgage to

28

act on behalf of his interests. He expected a loan from PNC which Gotmortgage brokered. He -28STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

expected that the funds he paid to Osborn would be deposited into a reserve account at PNC. He

2

kept track of all household expenses but did not keep track of the checks he paid to Osborn on his

3

computer, which was out of character for him. He denied he invested his funds into a business with

4

Osborn. He never applied for a loan from PNC. He expected to receive an application for a loan

5

from PNC. He understood he could have contacted PNC directly to obtain a loan application. He

6

denied that he applied for a refinancing loan for $900,000 on Savoy. Interest rates were declining

7

in the 2014-2015 time period. He skipped a couple of payments in 2015 in anticipation of the

8

PNC loan. He has spoken to the CEO of Alliance - Jim Perry. He asked Perry to reverse late fees

9

on 2 payments. Osborn said that Alliance was in Court ready to file a notice of default. ("NOD").

10

He followed Osborn's Friday afternoon suggestions to list the Savoy property with Meg. He had

11

already given Osborn $650,000, had been waiting for the PNC loan to close for 2 years, knew

12

Osborn was a con man and a convicted felon, and knew that Osborn was the subject of a cease and

13

desist order to engage in real estate activities as of September 2015. He still believed Osborn and

14

followed his instructions. He believed the funds he gave to Osborn were building a reserve

15

account, paying for mortgage fees and were in anticipation of the PNC loan. He and Osborn

16

developed a financial plan which, at the time, made sense to him. The plan involved the

17

refmancing of the properties and taking equity out of the properties. He relied on Osborn's

18

employers to exercise their fiduciary duties to oversee Osborn's activities. He was blinded by

19

Osborn. He denied that he discussed with Target Mortgage that Osborn was a convicted felon.

20

Before the Target Mortgage loans funded in October 2014, he had agreed to pay Osborn $269,000.

21

He understood he was obligated to complete a loan application accurately. He did not reflect the

22

reserve account funds on his balance sheet. He believed the reserve account funds existed but he

23

did not have corroboration of the account funds. He did not know the name under which the

24

reserve account funds were held. He identified all assets under his control on the Target Mortgage

25

loan applications. He provided Meg with bank statements to corroborate the funds he represented

26

on the loan applications. In reviewing Exh. "339," he cannot recall if Osborn asked him for a 1099.

27

Osborn provided him with financial services. He believed that Stephen Forsythe was Osborn's

28

contact at PNC, although he noted Sun West next to Forsythe's name in Exh. "339." He noted that -29STATEMENT OF DECISION


I

he expected to pay $269,200 to "Jimmy" for the reserve with $359,800 to be paid to him for the

2

total financing from ''Nilda." He consistently talked about his expectation to receive a "rebate" of

3

money he had paid to Osborn. He denied that he funded "real estate loans" to Osborn. Counsel

4

stipulate that he gave checks to Osborn exceeding $300,000 after the October 2014 loans. He

5

denied that Osborn gave him any money back. He interpreted a handwritten reference to be

6

"means" instead of"names" in context of comments he memorialized form Osborn (Exh. "339" at

7

page 70) in response to a cross-examination question that "Hage will be finalized by all names with

8

all documentation 2/1/2015." Hage kept US mail slips and kept track of all expenses in his

9

accounts, while expecting to be reimbursed. He denied that he paid funds to Osborn as a business

IO

investment, and that he told Meg he had an agreement with Osborn. He made improvements of

11

approximately $130,000 on the Savoy property. His relationship with Osborn before the October

12

2014 loans was strictly over the telephone, and he declined to socialize with Osborn. Sending

13

Osborn checks to his residence was inconsistent with his own business experience. Osborn did not

14

give him "a straight answer'' when he asked Osborn about the change from Gotmortgage to Target

15

Mortgage. The PNC loan was strictly for the Savoy property. He drove up to meet Osborn 6 to 8

16

times in Orange County. The Hage Survivors Trust is different that the Hage Family Trust, the

17

distinctions between which he described, but which, he acknowledged, are "confusing." He

18

authorized Osborn to contact any lender to obtain the refinancing loans. He considered Osborn to

19

be his "relationship manager." He considered Osborn to be his "financial advisor" in searching for

20

loans for him. He reimbursed himself$52,000 for improvements to the Tennyson property while

21

not compromising a potential 1031 exchange. Osborn introduced Forsythe to him over the

22

telephone as a representative of PNC. He later learned from the DA's office that Forsythe did not

23

exist. He denied any discussion or agreement with Osborn about profit from any business activities

24

together. His first meeting with Osborn was after the Tennyson loan closing in or around July

25

2013. In September 2015, Meg emailed him with a request that he sign a blank residential loan

26

application and return it to her. He authenticated Exh. "770" as an email exchange with Meg on her

27

request to "just sign" and provide her with "updated retirement and social security income." He

28

agreed that he never completed a loan application with PNC. In September 201 S, he stopped -30STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

making mortgage payments at Osborn's instructions. Counsel stipulated that the checks in Exh.

2

"329" are organized in chronological order. He understood that the funds he paid to Osborn for the

3

reserve account were required by PNC. He believed that the Savoy property would be refinanced

4

through a PNC loan. He did not know whether Target Mortgage would be brokering the PNC loan.

5

He authenticated Exh. "727" as his 2015 email exchange with Robert Mallison to refinance the

6

Savoy property.

7

Bonnie Grace Hage:

8

Bonnie Grace Hage is 74 years old and has been married to Scody Hage for 45 years. They

9

were married in 1972. She described her trust in her husband based, in part, on his 38 years of

10

banking experience. In 2013, she broke her back from a fall while living in their home on Elliott

11

Street. They sold their home on Carlton Square in Point Lorna to downsize, and moved into the

12

home on Elliott Street. Her husband took care of her including laundry, cooking and cleaning. In

13

2014, she had six "major operations" and was in the hospital for 6 days. In 2013, she noticed a

14

change in her husband's cognitive ability- easily confused, very forgetful. She and their son

15

thought it was because of stress. She had two interactions with Jimmy Osborn, the first one of

16

which was in early fall 2014 and the second in the DA's office. She usually did not overhear her

17

husband's conversations with Osborn. She heard her husband talk about the PNC loan, the purpose

18

of which was to reduce the interest rate. Her husband did not disclose that he had written checks to

19

Osborn. She called her son when she learned from her husband that Meg was coming to San Diego

20

to list the Savoy and Kansas properties, which caused them to contact the DA's office. She met

21

Meg twice. The first time she met Meg was for her and her husband to sign documents in 2014.

22

She does not recall the type of documents. The second time was when Meg appeared at their home

23

to take photos to list their home for sale. Meg was accompanied by a man. Her friend, Kathy

24

Kemp, has listed their properties in the past. She had limited conversation with Meg. Her husband

25

communicated with Ann Navarra in an attempt to arrange a short term loan. They obtained a loan

26

from Navarra and have since repaid the loan. She observed her husband talk to Osborn while they

27

were meeting with the DA's office. Exh. "327." In the conversation, Osborn kept repeating that he

28

had explained the PNC loan hundreds of times, raised his voice and did his best to put the Hages on -31STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

the defensive, all of which struck the Court as very manipulative. Osborn kept representing that

2

their payments would reduce their principal balances and, in exasperation, directed them to "write it

3

down." After the conversation, she wanted nothing more to do with Osborn and decided to engage

4

Kemp the Savoy property. They did not list the property with Kemp until after Meg had cancelled

5

her listing with Savoy property. She had no contact with Meg. They contacted their attorney, met

6

with the DA's office and, within a week, had decided to file this lawsuit. Her husband had her

7

authority to act on her behalf. They had 2 properties free and clear and she had no idea that

8

mortgages had been placed on them. She described the business of 32nd Street Apartments LLC

9

which owned their rental properties. She is not sure "what an LLC does." She authenticated her

10

and her husband's signatures on behalf of 32nd Street Apartments LLC in Exh. "767." She did not

11

take any steps to verify the accuracy of the loan information with any of the loans in October 2014.

12

She signed the loan documents at her husband's request based on her trust in him. She

13

authenticated her and her husband's signatures on behalf of 32nd Street Apartments LLC in Exh.

14

"768." Like with Exh. "767:' she signed the documents because she trusted her husband. They had

15

an accountant. Bruce Orona is their property manager. Kemp is her long-time friend. She

16

authenticated her and her husband's signatures on beh~f of the Hage Family Trust dated October 8,

17

2002 in Exh. "769." The Elliott property was owned one half by a revocable Trust and the other

18

half by an irrevocable Trust. She did not know what a co-trustee is. She believed her husband was

19

capable of"running the household finances," but she had concerns about his memory and

20

confusion. She found herself asking him to do something 2 or 3 times. Her husband kept detailed

21

financial records. Her husband has managed the Hamilton Trust for his Aunt and her 3 children.

22

He has also managed his sister's Trust which is also managed by the Trust department at US Bank.

23

She had called his doctor to express her concerns about her husband. She was aware that he had

24

made some payments to Osborn but she thought they were "real estate fees." She thought that the

25

PNC loan was expected to close before October 2014. She agreed that she had not signed a loan

26

application. After she confirmed the Savoy residence was listed by Meg on the MLS, they turned

27

the matter over to their attorney. After turning the matter over to the DA's office, her husband said

28

he had paid checks of more than $650,000 to Osborn. Her husband said he "felt really badly about -32STATEMENT OF DECISION


I

what he had done." She has never been involved in the family finances. He later described the

2

conversation he had had with US Bank about being leery of him writing checks to Osborn. He later

3

described him learning that Osborn had a criminal past. He wrote checks to third parties in return

4

for cashier's checks he paid to Osborn. In 2015, she heard her husband complain of how long the

S

PNC loan was taking to close. She was not aware of "what documents I had signed." Before

6

meeting with the DA's office, she did not know that Osborn had asked her husband for large

7

amounts of money. She did not know they were applying for loans. Richard Shaw has been their

8

estate lawyer for 35 years. She later learned that her husband was sending Osborn payments to

9

Osborn's house rather than Gotmortgage's address. He understood that the Tennyson and Savoy

IO

house had high interest loans, and the PNC loan would combine the two loans into a single loan

11

with a lower interest rate. She denied her husband complained that Osborn was demanding too

12

much money. She heard her husband say he was mailing checks to "Jimmy." She denied that she

13

heard her husband raise his voice while speaking to Osborn. She understood that Meg was going to

14

list both the Kansas and Savoy Street properties for sale. She signed loan documents while she was

15

in the hospital but she cannot say whether it was a Target Mortgage loan. She heard her husband

16

promote Meg's services. Her husband said Osborn said to stop making their mortgage payments.

17

She considered the listing with Meg to be "a kind of bogus-type listing." She considered the listing

18

with Meg to be "a fake listing agreement for the purpose of satisfying a lender." Kemp said she

19

had wanted to list the Savoy house for "weeks and weeks." Kemp was ''very careful" not to take

20

the listing until after Target Mortgage had dropped the listing. She spoke to Kemp about her being

21

"very careful" about taking the listing before Target Mortgage dropped the listing on the MLS. She

22

recognized their listing Agreement with Target Mortgage dated October 9, 2015, to sell the Savoy

23

house. The Savoy house sold for more than the property was listed for on the MLS. The property

24

sold one day after the property was listed. On October 13, 2015, Scody and Will Hage went to the

25

DA's office. By that time, they had contemplated filing a criminal complaint and civil lawsuit.

26

The Savoy house sold for $1,550,000. They hired Kemp from Pacific Real Estate Center. They

27

gave the buyer $45,000 in concessions to sell the Savoy house. They did not sign an agreement

28

with Kemp until after Target Mortgage had dropped the listing agreement. She did not see the -33STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

MLS listing. Kemp's photographer took photos of the Savoy house, which were not published

2

before the house sold. She became aware that her husband sent Osborn two checks for $250,000

3

each. She did not want to sell the Kansas street property.

4

Alexis Olstensen:

5

Alexis Olstensen has been an escrow officer since 1987. Her company is known as Design

6

Escrow. She was the escrow officer for the 3 loans in October 2014, one of which involved the

7

Elliott property. She did not consider these escrows to be unusual. She was paid a flat fee. She

8

makes referrals to her brokers and agents, including Meg. She considers Meg to be knowledgeable.

9

She has heard no complaints about Meg. She does not recall receipt ofExh. "248," but identifies

10

the recipient to her assistant. She prepared the HUD 1 based on the GFE's from the broker. Exh.

11

"252." Target Mortgage has been a customer for almost 20 years. Meg has not paid her any

12

referral fees. Exh. "354" identified the Hage Family Trust as the borrower on the Elliott loan.

13

Lydia Ortega:

14

Lydia Ortega has been a traveling notary for 25 years. She has been notarizing real estate

15

documents for Target Mortgage and Meg since 1995. She has not questioned Meg's integrity in

16

any of the transactions. In October 2014, she met the Hages at a restaurant to sign loan documents.

17

She was accompanied by Meg. The Hages offered to buy her and Meg lunch but they declined.

18

The conversation was casual. The meeting lasted an hour or more. She does not recall Osborn's

19

name. She saw Bonnie Hage review the documents. She identifies October 7, 2014 to be the exact

20

date based on her review of her notary book. Meg was pleasant and helpful in answering questions.

21

On October 14, 2014, she met with the Hages at their residence to sign another set ofloan

22

documents. She was accompanied by Meg. The meeting lasted about an hour. She saw the Hages

23

sign the loan documents. She noticed that the chandelier was "really big." She heard Scody Hage

24

ask when the money would be available. Bonnie Hage participated in the tour of the house

25

including the upstairs. She saw Bonnie Hage "take breaks to sign slowly." She has referred

26

business to Target Mortgage and Meg. She trusts Meg's "integrity and her knowledge." She

27

considers Meg to be a friend. She recalls the Hage notaries based, in part, on the distance she

28

traveled to meet the Hages. She authenticated the notarizations in Exh.'s "355 and 356."

-34STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

Richard Davidson:

2

Richard Davidson has been a loan officer with US Bank for 6 ½ years. Hage is one of his

3

clients. He is a relationship manager. He authenticated the cashier's checks as US Bank cashier's

4

checks in Exh. "329." In October 2014, he talked to Hage about Osborn's attempt to cash 2 large

5

cashier's checks issued by US Bank. Hage told him that Osborn could cash the checks. US Bank

6

refused to allow Osborn to cash the checks. Four representatives of US Bank met with Hage to

7

discuss their concerns about Osborn. They told Hage that Osborn had a background in mortgage

8

fraud and cautioned Hage to be careful in dealing with Osborn. They advised Hage not to do

9

business with Osborn. Hage appeared to be surprised about Osborn's background. Hage said he

10

would talk to Osborn and try to get the checks back. Hage said the purpose of the checks were for

11

property refinancing.

12

Henry Park through his deposition taken on January 16, 2017:

13

Henry Park described the compensation Gotmortgage paid to Osborn in 2014 and believed

14

that Osborn was cheating on Gotmortgage with Meg and Target Mortgage.

15

William Burch:

16

William Burch has worked in the mortgage business for 29 years. His qualifications are

17

adequate. The purpose of his engagement was to evaluate whether Target Mortgage processed the

18

loans in a manner consistent with the standard of care. The foundation on which he based his

19

opinions is questionable in view of his failure to review Meg and Osborn's depositions. The hard

20

money loans were subject to a lower level of regulation. Hard money loans are only available for

21

investment property. The rates and terms of the hard money loans were typical. Target Mortgage

22

was not obligated to assess the borrowers' business decision. Osborn did not act as an agent of

23

Target Mortgage. The Hages failed to disclose material facts, like payments they made to Osborn,

24

to Target Mortgage. He works at Residential Wholesale Mortgage in San Diego. He did not

25

review the depositions of Meg and Osborn before he wrote his report. He did not review Ex:h. 's

26

"268 and 271" before he prepared his report. He denied any connection between Osborn and

27

Target Mortgage in processing the Hages' loans. He agreed that, hypothetically, Meg and Target

28

Mortgage's conduct fell below the standard of care if they used an unlicensed, convicted felon to -35STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

solicit loans on their behalf. He disagreed that Osborn perfonned any activities for which a license

2

was required. Referral sources are not considered agents of the broker, and are generally not paid.

3

He agreed that Target Mortgage and Meg owed the borrowers a fiduciary duty. Underwriting

4

considers reserves in an institution under the borrower's name only, the inference of which is that

5

underwriting does not consider reserves not on deposit at an institution and not under the

6

borrower's name. The borrower is obligated to disclose reserves not on deposit at an institution and

7

not under the borrower's name, as an asset on the loan application. Exh. "228" on page 3, section

8

6. He discussed his decision not to review Osborn's deposition with Defendants' counsel, and

9

considered Osborn's testimony not to be useful. He considered Osborn, as a felon, not to be

10

"sufficiently reliable." His later review of Meg's deposition did not change his opinion that Osborn

11

did not act as Target Mortgage's agent. Loan brokers own multiple fiduciary duties to every

12

borrower ... honesty, good faith, integrity, following instructions. He agreed that the broker owes

13

no duty to "someone not involved in the transaction." Underwriters consider more liquid assets to

14

be a favorable factor. He denied that Osborn had any effect on the terms of the loans to the Hages.

15

The broker provides the lender with initial set of disclosures but, ultimately, the lender is

16

responsible for making the disclosures to the borrower. The broker is obligated to make accurate

17

disclosures to the borrower.

18

David Bilandziia:

19

David Bilandzija has worked as an account executive at Velocity Commercial Capital.

20

Velocity makes business loans. He has the ability to communicate directly with the borrower but

21

usually does not. The broker is Velocity's primary contact. Velocity insists on accurate

22

information from the broker on behalf of the borrower. Velocity has a "zero fraud tolerance" with

23

its brokers. Velocity requires a handwritten business letter. Velocity's lending decisions are based

24

on full disclosure of the borrower's assets and reserves. The Hages did not disclose their payments

25

to Osborn. He authenticated Exh. "357" as Velocity's 2014 broker agreement with Target

26

Mortgage. Velocity required that Target Mortgage comply with all of the state's licensing

27

requirements. He denied that he was aware that Target Mortgage made payments to Osborn. Exh.

28

"271." He denied that he has seen Exh. "268." He does not recall his receipt ofExh. "242," but -36STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

does not doubt that the email with Meg is genuine. He authenticated Exh. 's "254 and 255" as his

2

email exchanges with Meg. Meg is one of Velocity's clients, and he is her account representative at

3

Velocity. He has had a relationship with Meg for 4 years. He authenticated the uniform

4

underwriting summary on page 70 of Exh. "707." He is familiar with the "debt to income rate

5

ratio." Velocity made the final decision to make the loans to the Hages.

6

LaTasha Richmond:

7

LaTasha Richmond has worked as a loan processor for 14 years at Target Mortgage. She ¡

8

described her loan processing duties. She has a real estate license. Target Mortgage has had

9

approximately 3 staff in the office. In 2014, she emailed a Form W-9 to Osborn. She described the

10

process by which she printed and emailed the W-9 to Osborn. She authenticated Exh. "70 l" as the

11

loan submission checklist from Velocity. She referred to the loan officer as "LO." She described

12

her communications with Hage who provided her with the requested documents. She authenticated

13

Exh. "705" as the loan fraud zero tolerance signed by the Hages. She agreed that, if Target

14

Mortgage submits false information to lenders, Target Mortgage's license may be at risk. She

15

authenticated Exh. "706" as Velocity's underwriting conditions to the loan approval. Exh. "706"

16

required the Hages to "detail the specific use of cash out proceeds.'? She authenticated Exh. "713"

17

as the loan submission for the Hages to Mega Capital. Target Mortgage was looking for the "best

18

possible rate and terms for the borrower." She authenticated Exh. "729" as the Hages' first

19

payment letter. She authenticated Exh. "730" as the Hages' handwritten note identifying the

20

Tennyson property as a rental property and that the loan proceeds would be used for business

21

purposes only. She authenticated Exh. "732" as the references provided by Bonnie Hage. She

22

authenticated Exh. 's "733 and 750" as the affidavits of the Hages on Target Mortgage's status as

23

the broker. She authenticated Exh. "736" as the Hages' certification that they made no

24

misrepresentations to obtain the loans. She authenticated Exh. "742" as a description of the

25

fiduciary duties Target Mortgage owed to the Hages, including care, integrity, honesty and loyalty.

26

She denied that Target Mortgage provides or tax or business advice to the borrowers. She

27

authenticated Exh. 's "745 and 749" as the Hages' cash out explanations that the cash out will be

28

used for "future investments." Osborn called her to introduce himself as an account executive on -37STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

behalf of Gotmortgage. She denied any other calls with Osborn. She prepared draft letters of

2

explanations ("LOE's") for Meg to review for the Hages to sign. Exh. "245." She authenticated

3

Exh. "357" as Target Mortgage's broker agreement with Velocity. Target Mortgage agreed to

4

comply with all real estate licensing laws as a condition of its broker agreement with Velocity. She

5

estimated that, on average, she deals with 10 borrowers per week, the signatures for every one she

6

can recognize. She denied she is aware of any outside services Osborn performed for Target

7

Mortgage. She denied she was aware of any of the checks to Osborn in Exh. "271."

8 9

1. Plaintiffs John Hage, Bonnie Hage, both individually and as Trustees of the J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage Family Trust and Co-Managers of SD 32nd Street

10

Apartments, LLC were harmed by Defendants Target Mortgage, Inc. and Nilda Meg's

11

negligence (CACI 400).

12

Defendants negligently employed and compensated Osborn who was not licensed and, in

13

Meg's opinion, was not competent to perform the services for which a license was required. Meg's

14

denial that she employed and compensated Osborn, as her agent, for the work he did with Plaintiffs

15

is not credible. CACI 3701, 3710. Exh.'s "268 and 271." With Meg's knowledge, Osborn did

16

much more than find Plaintiffs and bring Plaintiffs and Defendants together. The loans which

17

Defendants ultimately brokered for Plaintiffs would not have occurred but for the negotiations

18

engaged in by Osborn. CACI 418. Business & Profession Code Section 10137. Preach v. Monter

19

Rainbow (1993) 12 Cal. App. 4th 1441, 1452 ("If the broker takes any part in the negotiations, no

20

matter how slight, he is not a middleman but a broker. Rees v. Department of Real Estate (1977)

21

76 Cal.App.3d 286, 295.")

22 23

Plaintiffs were harmed by Defendants' employment of and compensation paid to Osborn, the nature and amount of which is discussed below.

24

Defendants' negligence was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiffs' harm. CACI 430.

25

The Court agrees with Plaintiffs that, but for Defendants making their license available, Osborn

26

would not have been able to feloniously manipulate Plaintiffs as he did. Ultimately, the source

27

from which Osborn defrauded Plaintiffs were the funds Defendants brokered on behalf of Plaintiffs.

28 -38STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

2. The alleged negligence of Plaintiffs John Hage, Bonnie Hage, both individually and

2

as Trustees of the J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage Family Trust and Co-Managers of SD

3

32nd Street Apartments, LLC did not contribute to their harm caused by Defendants Target

4

Mortgage, Inc. and Nilda Meg (CACI 405).

S

Defendants' theory is that Plaintiffs breached their duty by submitting "materially false and

6

misleading" loan applications based, in part, on Plaintiff's Bonnie Hage's failure to adequately

7

monitor and disclose Plaintiff's John Hage's "diminished mental capacity and judgment." ROA#

8

171, par. 59. The Court recognizes the ages and diminishing faculties of Plaintiffs, and empathizes

9

with the challenges John Hage was confronted with during the Osborn era; however, the Court also

10

appreciates Defendants' argument that John Hage has 38 years of banking experience and, before

11

Osborn introduced Plaintiffs to Defendants, John Hage was aware of Osborn's felonious past. The

12

Court also agrees with Defendants that part, if not much, of John Hage's explanation of why he

13

gave so much money to Osborn is difficult to make sense of. Though the plausibility of his

14

explanation is questionable, the Court does not find, in the slightest, that John Hage engaged in

15

wrongdoing. The Court rejects Defendants' argument that John Hage participated in a money

16

laundering scheme. True, under challenging circumstances, John Hage exercised, at times,

17

unreasonable judgment, the price for which is discussed below; however, the Court is not persuaded

18

that Defendants have carried their burden to show that Plaintiffs submitted "materially false and

19

misleading" loan applications, or that Bonnie Hage failed to adequately monitor and disclose John

20

Hage's "diminished mental capacity and judgment."

21

3. The alleged negligence of Kathy Kemp, Bruce Orona and Gotmortgage.com did not

22

contribute to the harm to Plaintiffs John Hage, Bonnie Hage, both individually and as

23

Trustees of the J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage Family Trust and Co-Managers of SD

24

32nd Street Apartments, LLC caused by Defendants Target Mortgage, Inc. and Nilda Meg

25

(CACI 406).

26 27

Defendants have not carried their burden to show that Kathy Kemp and Bruce Orona were negligent, much less that any conduct they engaged in was a substantial factor in causing to harm to

28 -39STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

Plaintiffs. None of Plaintiffs' damages will be reduced because of any conduct engaged in by

2

Kathy Kemp and Bruce Orona.

3

Based on this limited record - recognizing that Defendants Gotmortgage.com and its

4

principals entered into a settlement with Plaintiffs before trial - the Court questions the propriety of

5

the conduct engaged in by Gotmortgage.com and its relationship with Osborn vis-a-vis Plaintiffs;

6

however, Gotmortgage.com's allegedly questionable conduct involved multiple loans which took

7

place prior to the three loans Defendants brokered for Plaintiffs. None of Gotmortgage.com's

8

questionable conduct was a substantial factor in causing the harm to Plaintiffs at issue in this trial,

9

and none of Plaintiffs' damages will be reduced because of any conduct engaged in by

10 11

Gotmortgage.com 4. The negligence of Defendant James Osborn contributed to Plaintiffs John Hage,

12

Bonnie Hage, both individually and as Trustees of the J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage

13

Family Trust and Co-Managers of SD 32nd Street Apartments, LLC's harm caused by

14

Defendants Target Mortgage, Inc., Nilda Meg (CACI 406).

15

Defendant Osborn negligently performed services for which he was not licensed in

16

connection with the multiple loans he referred to, negotiated and was paid for by Defendants.

17

Defendant Osborn's negligence was a substantial factor in causing harm to Plaintiffs;

18

however, Osborn's misconduct was, in part, a superseding cause of Plaintiffs' alleged damages

19

against Defendants Target Mortgage, Inc. and Nilda Meg (CACI 432 and 433), the allocation of

20

which is attributable solely to Osborn and not to Defendants as explained below.

21

S. Plaintiffs John Hage, Bonnie Hage, both individually and as Trustees of the J.

22

Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage Family Trust and Co-Managers of SD 32nd Street

23

Apartments, LLC were harmed by Defendants Target Mortgage, Inc. and Nilda Meg's

24

breach of the fiduciary duty to use reasonable care (CACI 4101).

25 26 27 28

Defendants acted as Plaintiffs' mortgage broker on the Kansas, Elliott and Tennyson property loans. Defendants acted on behalf Plaintiffs for the purpose of brokering the Kansas, Elliott and Tennyson property loans for Plaintiffs. -40STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

Defendants failed to act as a reasonably careful mortgage broker would have acted under the

2

same or similar circumstances by employing and compensating Osborn who was not licensed and,

3

in Meg's opinion, was not competent to perform the services for which a license was required.

4

Meg's denial that she employed and compensated Osborn as her agent for the work he did with

5

Plaintiffs is not credible. CACI 3701, 3710. Exh.'s "268 and 271." With Meg's knowledge,

6

Osborn did much more than find Plaintiffs and bring Plaintiffs and Defendants together. The loans

7

which Defendants ultimately brokered for Plaintiffs would not have occurred but for the

8

negotiations engaged in by Osborn. Business & Profession Code Section 10137. Preach v. Monter

9

Rainbow (1993) 12 Cal. App. 4th 1441, 1452 ("If the broker takes any part in the negotiations, no

10

matter how slight, he is not a middleman but a broker. Rees v. Department of Real Estate (1977)

11

76 Cal.App.3d 286, 295.")

12 13

Plaintiffs were harmed by Defendants' employment of and compensation paid to Osborn, the nature and amount of which is discussed below.

14

Defendant's conduct was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff's harm. The Court agrees

15

with Plaintiffs that, but for Defendants making their license available, Osborn would not have been

16

able to feloniously manipulate Plaintiffs as he did. Ultimately, the source from which Osborn

17

defrauded Plaintiffs were the funds Defendants brokered on behalf of Plaintiffs.

18

6. Defendants Target Mortgage, Inc. and Nilda Meg did not carry their burden on

19

their affirmative defense of unclean hands to show that Plaintiffs John Hage, Bonnie Hage,

20

both individually and as Trustees of the J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage Family Trust and

21

Co-Managers of SD 32nd Street Apartments, LLC violated conscience or good faith towards

22

Defendants.

23

Defendants did not carry their burden on their affirmative defense of unclean hands to show

24

Plaintiffs engaged in misconduct which affected the relations between Plaintiffs and Defendants.

25

Firebrand Paper Products Corporation v. East Bay Union of Machinists, Local 1304, United

26

Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO (1996) 227 Cal. App. 2nd 675, 728, 729.

27 28

7. The damages sustained by Plaintiffs John Hage, Bonnie Hage, both individually and as Trustees of the J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage Family Trust and Co-Managers of SD

-41STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

32nd Street Apartments, LLC as a result of the wrongful conduct of Defendants Target

2

Mortgage, Inc. and Nilda Meg.

3

Plaintiffs John Hage and Bonnie Hage as Trustees of the J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage

4

Family Trust and Co-Managers of SD 32nd Street Apartments, LLC claim economic damages, and

5

Plaintiffs Bonnie Hage and John Hage claim economic damages and emotional distress damages.

6

CACI 3900, 3903 and 3905.

7

During trial, Defendants suggested that Plaintiffs J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage Family

8

Trust and SD 32nd Street Apartments, LLC were the only real parties in interest; and Plaintiffs John

9

and Bonnie Hage were not the real parties in interest and, therefore could not have been damaged

10

by Defendants' misconduct. The briefing by both Defendants and Plaintiffs on this issue is

11

woefully inadequate, and is frustratingly difficult for the Court to discern without more assistance

12

from the parties. Defendants' counsel appeared to acknowledge the insufficiency of the briefing

13

during closing argument. The Court finds that Defendants' representations of "utmost care,

14

integrity, honesty and dealing with the borrower" were intended to influence, and were in fact relied

15

upon by, John and Bonnie Hage (Exh.'s "225 and 742"). John and Bonnie Hage are real parties in

16

interest, and therefore entitled to recover damages to the extent they have been damaged by

17

Defendants' misconduct.

18

Plaintiffs presented their economic damages through their accounting expert, Richard

19

Holstrom. Though Defendants challenged Holstrom's damages analysis on cross-examination,

20

Defendants elected not to call their own accounting expert. The Court, except as noted, has

21

accepted Holstrom's un-contradicted opinions. In view of Plaintiff John Hage's acknowledgment

22

that he was aware, prior to his introduction to Defendants, of Osborn's felonious past, Plaintiffs'

23

payments of$367,227.44 to Osborn after October 14, 2014 (and prejudgment interest of

24

$57,596.04) will not be charged against Defendants. They are recoverable against Osborn but not

25

against Defendants herein. The Court awards a total past loss in the amount of $319,229.35, and a

26

total future loss in the amount of $782,104.10, the total amount of which is $1,101,333.40 against

27

Defendants jointly and severally.

28

-42STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

Plaintiff John Hage credibly testified to what the Court perceived to consist of mental

2

suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, inconvenience, anxiety, humiliation and emotional distress

3

(CACI 3905A). The Court awards John Hage non-economic damages in the amount of$150,000;

4

however, the Court apportions 50% of John Rage's hann to Osborn's responsibility and,

5

accordingly, reduces his net non-economic recovery to $75,000. Civil Code section 1431.2; Aetna

6

Health Plans of Calif. v. Yucaipa-Calimesa Joint Unified School Dist. (1999) 72 Cal. App. 4th

7

1175, 1190.

8 9 10 11 12 13

Plaintiff Bonnie Hage did not introduce much, if any, evidence of her emotional distress and, therefore, did not carry her burden warranting a recovery of non-economic damages. Finally, the Court emphasizes that Plaintiffs' damages against Osborn, arising from the totality of the harm he caused Plaintiffs, will be determined at a future hearing. 8. Cross-Complainant Target Mortgage, Inc. did not carry its burden to show that Cross-Defendants John Hage and Bonnie Hage breached the listing agreement (CACI 303).

14

Cross-Complainant and Cross-Defendants entered into a contract for Cross-Complainant to

15

sell the residence located at 1125 Savoy Street, San Diego, California 92107, as Cross-Defendants'

16

broker. Exh. "715."

17

Cross-Complainant did not do all, or substantially all, of the significant things that the

18

contract required it to do, and it was not excused from doing those things in the contract, in that

19

Cross-Complainant employed Osborn, an unlicensed agent, to induce Cross-Defendants to enter

20

into the agreement, and to assist Cross-Complainant to perform its obligations under the agreement.

21

Cross-Defendants did not fail to do something that the contract required them to do, and

22

Cross-Defendants did not do something that the contract prohibited them from doing. Cross-

23

Defendants were entitled to demand that Cross-Complainant relieve Cross-Defendants from their

24

obligations, if any, under the agreement, and Cross-Complainant understandably agreed to "cancel

25

the listing agreements." Exh. "287." Cross-Complainant's argument that its agreement to "cancel"

26

Exh. "715" was vitiated by Cross-Defendants' alleged misconduct is without merit. As reflected by

27

the Court's findings and orders herein, and as corroborated by Osborn's felony plea agreement,

28

Osborn "stole or embezzled money from the Hages," the sole basis Cross-Complainant's -43STATEMENT OF DECISION


I

"cancellation of both listings." Exh. "287." Cross-Complainant freely and knowingly gave up its

2

right to have Cross-Defendants perform their obligations, if any, by terminating the agreement.

3

CACI 336.

4

5

9. Cross-Defendants John Hage and Boonie Hage's affirmative defense of equitable estoppel is moot.

6

Equitable Estoppel is whenever a party has, by his own statement or conduct, intentionally

7

and deliberately led another to believe a particular thing true and to act upon such belief, he is not

8

permitted to contradict it, the specific elements of which are (1) a representation or concealment of

9

material facts, (2) made with knowledge, actual or virtual, of the facts, (3) to a party ignorant,

10

actually and permissibly, of the truth, (4) with the intent, actual or virtual, that the latter act upon it,

11

and (5) the party must have been induced to act upon it. Bailey v. Outdoor Media Grp. (2007) 155

12

Cal. App. 4th 778, 790.

13

In view of the Court's findings that Cross-Complainant Target Mortgage, Inc. did not carry

14

its burden to show that Cross-Defendants John Hage and Bonnie Hage breached the listing

15

agreement, and that Cross-Defendants carried their burden on their afflI'lllative defense of waiver to

16

show they did not have to pay Cross-Complainant any commission, Cross-Defendants' affirmative

17

defense of equitable estoppel is moot.

18

10. Cross-Complainants Target Mortgage, Inc. and Nilda Meg did not carry their

19

burden to show that they were harmed by the negligence of Cross-Defendants John Hage,

20

Boonie Hage, both individually and as Trustees of the J. Scofield and Bonnie Grace Hage

21

Family Trust and Co-Managers of SD 32nd Street Apartments, LLC, and are not entitled to

22

equitable indemnity from Cross-Defendants.

23

Cross-Defendants were not negligent. CACI 400. Cross-Complainants' theory is that

24

Cross-Defendants breached their duty by submitting "materially false and misleading" loan

25

applications based, in part, on Bonnie Hage's failure to adequately monitor and disclose John

26

Rage's "diminished mental capacity and judgment." ROA# 171, par. 59. The Court recognizes

27

the ages and diminishing faculties of the Hages, and empathizes with the challenges John Hage was

28

confronted with during the Osborn era; however, the Court also appreciates Cross-Complainants' -44STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

argument that John Hage has 38 years of banking experience and, before Osborn introduced the

2

Hages to Cross-Complainants, John Hage was aware of Osborn's felonious past. The Court also

3

agrees with Cross-Complainants that part, if not much, of John Hage's explanation of why he gave

4

so much money to .Osborn is difficult to make sense of. Though the plausibility of his explanation

5

is questionable, the Court does not find, in the slightest, that John Hage engaged in wrongdoing.

6

The Court rejects Cross-Complainants' argument that John Hage participated in a money

7

laundering scheme. True, under challenging circumstances, John Hage exercised, at times,

8

unreasonable judgment; however, the Court is not persuaded that Cross-Complainants have carried

9

their burden to show that Cross-Defendants submitted "materially false and misleading" loan

IO

applications, or that Bonnie Hage failed to adequately monitor and disclose John Rage's

11

"diminished mental capacity and judgment."

12

Further, in view of the Court's findings and orders that Cross-Defendants did not engage in

13

wrongful conduct, Cross-Complainants are not entitled to be equitably indemnified by Cross-

14

Defendants. CACI 406, 3800.

15

11. Cross-Defendants Bonnie Hage and John Hage claim that Cross-Complainants

16

Target Mortgage, Inc. and Nilda Meg's own negligence contributed to their harm is moot.

17

In view of the Court's findings that Cross-Complainants Target Mortgage, Inc. and Nilda

18

Meg did not carry their burden to show that they were harmed by Cross-Defendants' negligence,

19

Cross-Defendants' claim that Cross-Complainants' own negligence contributed to their harm is

20

moot. CACI 405.

21

Conclusion

22

The Court finds, as set forth above, in favor of Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants and against

23

Defendants and Cross-Complainants. The parties are directed to serve their objections, if any, to

24

the Court's SOD within the time required by law. The Court sets a Status Conference on August

25

10, 2017 at 3:00 pm for the purpose of hearing the objections, if any, to the Court's SOD. If there

26

Ill

27

Ill

28

Ill -45STATEMENT OF DECISION


1

are no objections, the Court directs Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants to prepare a Judgment

2

consistent with the Court's SOD.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4

5 6 7 8

9 10

11 12

13 14

15 16 17 18 19

20 21 22

23 24

25 26 27

28 -46STATEMENT OF DECISION


EXHIBIT 15


SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CENTRAL MINUTE ORDER

DATE: 08/11/2017

TIME: 11 :16:00 AM JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Joel R. Wohlfeil CLERK: Juanita Cerda REPORTER/ERM: Not Reported BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT:

DEPT: C-73

CASE NO: 37-2016-00003885-CU-FR-CTL CASE !NIT.DATE: 02/04/2016 CASE TITLE: HAGE vs. Gotmortgage.com [IMAGED] CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: Fraud APPEARANCES

The Court, having taken the above-entitled matter under submission on- 8/10/17 and having fully considered the arguments of all parties, both written and oral, as well as the evidence presented, now rules as follows: The Court has reflected on the arguments of counsel and re-reviewed Defendants' objection, Plaintiffs' response and Defendants' reply papers. The Court confirms, except as modified at the hearing on August 10, 2017, its tentative ruling as the Court's order to OVERRULE Defendants' objection, DENY Defendants' Motion for a further Statement of Decision ("SOD"}, and GRANT Defendants' request for an offset in the amount of $500,000, which was paid by the settling co-Defendants Gotmortgage.com, Thomas Lo and the Parks to Plaintiffs. The Court directs that Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants to prepare a Judgment, consistent with the Courts' findings and orders in the Court's SOD (ROA# 430) and as modified herein.

Judge Joel R. Wohlfeil

DATE: 08/11/2017 DEPT: C-73

MINUTE ORDER

Page 1 Calendar No.


EXHIBIT 16


1

2

FI

3

L

E

Clerk ol the Sup1rlor Court

D

4

AUG 2 9 2017

5

By: J. CERDA

6 7

8

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

9

CENTRAL DIVISION

10 11 12 13 14

JOHN SCOFIELD HAGE and BONNIE GRACE HAGE, individually and as TRUSTEES OF THE J. SCOFIELD AND BONNIE GRACE HAGE FAMILY TRUST and Co-Managers of SD 32ND STREET APARTMENTS, LLC, a California limited liability company,

15

v.

17

GOTMORTGAGE.COM, a California corporation; JAMES M. OSBORN, JR., an individual; TARGET MORTGAGE INC., a California corporation; ANDREA HAEWON PARK, an individual; THOMAS IPING LO, an individual; NILDA ANN MARIE MEG, an individual, and DOES 125, inclusive,

19

20

[P~08:ED] JUDGMENT DEPT: IC JUDGE:

C-73 Hon. Joel R. Wohlfeil

Plaintiffs,

16

18

CASE NO. 37-2016-00003885-CU-FR-CTL

21 Defendants.

22 23

AND ALL RELATED CROSS-CLAIMS.

24

25

Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants JOHN SCOFIELD HAGE and BONNIE GRACE HAGE,

26

BOTH INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEES OF THE J. SCOFIELD AND BONNIE GRACE

27

HAGE FAMILY TRUST AND CO-MANAGERS OF THE SB 32ND STREET APARTMENTS,

28

LLC ("Plaintiffs") appeared in person and by their counsel ofrecord, Phillip C. Samouris and 8118537.1

JUDGMENT


1

Rabil K. Swigart of Higgs Fletcher & Mack LLP. Defendants and Cross-Complainants NILDA

2

ANN MARIE MEG ("Meg") and TARGET MORTGAGE, INC. (collectively the "Subject

3

Defendants") appeared in person and by their counsel of record, Mark J. Warfel of the Law

4

Offices of Mark J. Warfel and Desiree Meguerditchian of Foothill Law Group. After a three-

s

week trial, where oral and documentary was presented and the matter argued and submitted, and

6

pursuant to the Court's Statement of Decision filed July 6, 2017 (ROA #430, as modified after the

7

hearing on August IO, 2017, per the Minute Order dated August 11, 2017), and good cause

8

appearing, therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:

9

10

1.

On Plaintiffs complaint, Judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against the

11

Subject Defendants, jointly and severally, for "economic" damages in the amount of

12

$1,101,333.40-less the $500,000 offset for the settlement of defendant GotMortgage.com, for a

13

net award of economic damages of $601,333.40 against the Subject Defendants. The Court

14

further awards plaintiff John Hage "non-economic" damages in the amount of $150,000;

15

however, the court apportions 50% of plaintiff John Hage's non-economic harm to defendant

16

James M. Osborn's responsibility and, accordingly, reduces plaintiff John I-Iage's net non-

17

economic recovery to $75,000 against the Subject Defendants, jointly and severally.

18

2.

Meg shall be identified as "NILDA ANN MARIE MEG aka NILDA MEG aka

19

NILDA ANN MARIE MEGERDICIAN aka NILDA MEGERDICHIAN aka NILDA

20

MERGEDICIAN aka NILDA MEGUERDITCHIAN".

21

3.

The Subject Defendants shall take nothing by way of their cross-complaint.

22

4.

Plaintiffs shall recover from the Subject Defendants their costs in the amount of

23

$- - - - -

24

5.

25

Plaintiffs shall recover from the Subject Defendants their attorney's fees in the

amount of$- - - -

26 27

DATED: _......:.[?'_•_2-----'--9'.....:...•/_,__7_ _

JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 28 8118537.1

2 JUDGMENT


EXHIBIT 17


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

FELON - RUNNING TOTAL

HAGE, JOHN 5/2/17 VOL 1 1

019:23 - 020:16

019 23

Q

24

slips?

25 020 01 02

A

I keep records of every expense that I make whether it's groceries, whether it's loan

payments that are not related to this.

06

expenses that I make, any income that I make, I have

07

a record of every transaction that I do in my — my

08

bank accounts.

Q

Why did you keep the U.S. mail slips?

10

A

I just told you.

11

Q

Well, you told me about the FedEx slips.

I'm asking is that the same reason, same answer? A

Because I keep records.

14

Q

Were you expecting to be reimbursed for

these expenses?

10:39:26

16

A

Yes.

034: :09

Q

Look a little bit below that.

That were related to this, yes. You see

where it has "$269,200 to Jimmy"?

10:56:18

11

A

Yes.

12

Q

And so I'm presuming that the $628,000

was the loan cashout loan you received from Target?

14

A

629.

15

Q

629.

16

A

Yes.

17

Q

Out of the $629,000 cashout loan you

Is that correct?

10:56:37

18

received from Target Mortgage on or about October

19

2014, you write — you distributed or proposed to

20

distribute 269,200 to Jimmy; is that right? MR. SAMOURIS;

21 22

Objection.

You can answer.

24

THE

Created with TranscriptPad for (Pad

10:56:53

Lacks

foundation.

23

035:02

10:38:58

10:39:14

13

13

035:02- 035:12

Any kind of

09

10

10:38:35

bank account that I spent money on FedEx expenses.

04

15

3

It was part of the transaction, because I

05

12

034:09 - 034:24

"Why did you keep the FedEx

kept the FedEx slips so that I could record in my

03

2

Thank you.

Q

WITNESS:

Yes.

Below that, $359,800 with an arrow that

6/17/17

Page 2 of 72


03

04

06

request that he had made for the 269.2.

09

to Jimmy 2- — giving to Jimmy $269,200?

093:10 - 094:24

That was to go to the — that was money

11

that was going into the — the fund that he was

12

building, the — for the PNC loan refinance.

088 20

Q

Well, I'm just clarifying what — you're

21

not saying that the sum total of all your

22

calculations is in this bag?

A

had with Osborne are in that bag.

25

on the telephone and talk about the running total.

089 01

We would compare notes, and they would relate with

090 10

Q

So if you were keeping a running total.

093: :10

Q

Did you ever tell your wife that the

11

reason you were taking this bank bag with you to

12

the bank was because you were getting cashier's

13

checks for James Osborne?

A

doing carrying a bank bag to the bank and what

16

purpose it was for. Q

Okay.

bank bag as opposed to putting them in a file

19

folder?

20

A

That's my file folder.

21

Q

Okay.

25 094:01

And is there a running total

A

Yes.

And it's been submitted as — in our

previous depositions. Q

Okay.

And there was a — I'm sorry.

12:25:40

Then I — let me clarify my question.

Was there a running total that you were keeping that has been produced?

04

A

Yes.

05

Q

In what form was it?

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

12:25:22

somewhere else of the money that you paid Osborne?

02 03

12:25:10

And why did you stuff those in the

18

24

12:24:58

I don't recall telling my wife what I was

15

23

12:22:00

where were you keeping that total? In that bag.

22

12:20:36

the notes that I had in the bag.

A

17

12:20:11

He and I would get

12

14

10:57:38

I'm saying that my conversations that I

24

11

6

A

10:57:15

So what was the 200 — at the time that

you made this note, what was the purpose of getting

02

090:10 - 090:12

Q

08

23

5

That's the net proceeds out of that loan

that would come to me after I had paid to Jimmy the

10

088:20 - 089:02

A

05

07

4

says, "Scody to keep from Nilda."

6/17/17

I don't recall

12:25:53

Page 3 of 72


06

seeing it. A

07 08

It's —

09 10 11

A

— something that you have because

Q

So you --

So your running total was on your

A

Yes.

15

Q

And would you put the numbers in before

18

A

Those numbers came out of Quicken,

Quicken —

Q

Well, how did they get into Quicken?

20

A

Anytime I wrote a check out of Quicken, it

Q

But you didn't write checks to the bank

when you got the cashier's checks, did you?

24

A

No.

095:24

Q

Why isn't that running total in the bank

A

Because it's in the computer.

25 096:01

bag?

12:27:10

I

02

didn't — I didn't make a copy of it and put it in

03

the bank bag.

04

Q

Well, did you use any documents that were

05

ever in the bank bag to help you enter into Quicken

06

your running total?

07

A

Yes.

08

09

not related to Osborne?

Q

Am I going to put those in the bank bag.

Did you — okay.

What documents that

11

were in the bank bag did you use to make Quicken

12

entries?

13

A

12:27:42

All of the checks that were written to

14

Osborne are on a list that I took out of Quicken,

15

because it was a search for all checks written to

16

Osborne.

Created with TranscriptPad for IPad

12:27:20

I — Quicken has all of my personal

expenses.

10

12:26:26

went into the record.

22 23

12:26:11

you went to the bank or after or how did that work?

19

21

12:26:03

computer?

17

095:24- 096:16

Okay.

14

16

7

Q

you — you've asked me questions off that list.

12

13

That's why I'm asking.

It was a listing from my Quicken.

12:27:57

That is what was presented months ago.

6/17/17

Page 4 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

FRAUD - PNC ACCOUNT

HAGE, JOHN 5/2/17 VOL 1 1

041:18 - 042:10

041:18 19

Q

But look below that.

Do you see how you

have 157,200 and the 207 — 210,700, you add it up.

20

you come up to 367,900, arrow, back to me.

21

not synonymous.

MR. SAMOURIS:

22 23

24 25

It's

Objection.

Argumentative.

BY MR. CHO;

Q

Can you tell me about that by looking at

your handwriting? MR. SAMOURIS:

:01 042: 02

the question?

11:06:15

Tell you about — what's

03

BY MR. CHO:

04

Q

Are they synonymous or not?

05

A

There's another date here, October 10th.

06

And that is — I believe that that is what, at that

07

point in time, the total reserve fund was.

08

we would review that at the end of every

09

conversation, where we are as far as the total of the

10

reserve fund at that point in time.

Created with TranscriptPad for IPad

11:06:02

It's two different concepts.

6/17/17

11:06:23

Because

11:06:58

Page 5 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

FRAUD - PURPOSE

HAGE, JOHN 5/2/17 VOL 1 1

036:02 - 036:17

036 102 03 04

05 06

Look a little bit lower from the same

Q

"269,200," do you see that?

page. A

Right.

Q

And then, "minus 58,500," do you see

040:02 - 041:17

07

A

Yes.

08

Q

So I'm guessing the 269,200 is the amount

09

that you gave to Jimmy, because earl- — above the

10

page, I see the arrow to Jimmy.

MR. SAMOURIS:

10:59:29

You mean gave to Jimmy or

12

planned to give to Jimmy.

13

BY MR. CHO:

14

Q

Planned to give to Jimmy.

15

A

Yes.

16

Q

Do you see that?

17

A

That's correct.

040:02

Q

Well, let's — let's lay the foundation.

10:59:36

03

What was

the plan when you minus 269,200 with an

04

arrow to

Jimmy?

THE WITNESS:

08

BY MR. CHO:

09

Q

11 12

Okay.

A

Q

Right below it, that amount that went reserve fund, now you're subtracting

$58,500 from that.

18 19

20 21

22

Created with TranscriptPad for IPad

11:04:11

That's correct.

14

17

11:04:03

To go to the reserve fund.

wrote that, right?

into the

15

Lacks

That's what you intended when you

13

16

Objection.

foundation, assumes facts not in evidence.

07

10

What was the purpose of that?

MR. SAMOURIS:

05

06

10:59:11

that?

11

2

Subtract —

Do you see that? 11:04:23

A

Yes.

Q

That was intended to go to Jimmy or to

the reserve fund? A

To the reserve fund.

Q

So you're going to get it back, and then

put it back in? A

the 200

No.

11:04:30

That's additional money coming out of

— that's -- that is coming out of the 269.2,

6/17/17

Page 6 of 72


23

additional money coming out, which leaves

24

210,000 -- a net 210,700 that stays with me.

25

Q

041:01

about?

02

04

transactions that were — that — that we had talked

05

about.

to go into the reserve fund, and then an additional

07

58,500 that was going into the reserve fund.

Ultimately, yes.

11

Q

Do you —

12

A

That's the net that's going into the

17

044: :01

11:05:26

Q

Do you see — you said that rebate and

reseirves are synonymous, right?

Right?

Yes or no?

A

The way — the way I look at this today.

Q

So I think I'm understanding you, so I

want to make sure I understand you — understanding

03

you correctly in that when it — when we're talking cashout loan from Target Mortgage, the

04

about the

05

proposed plan was that 269,200 was going to go to

06

Jimmy for the purposes of the reserve fund, true?

07

A

Correct, yes.

08

Q

We're in agreement on that?

09

A

Yes.

045: :09

Q

You see the 269,200 in the page going

11

into the reserve account? A

Yes.

12

Q

Do you see that?

13

A

Yes.

Q

And it has an arrow to Jimmy.

14

And your

testimony is that that is for the purposes of

16

building up a reserve account?

17

A

That's correct.

098:02

Q

Okay.

11:10:31

Now, one of these documents, you

testified

to that you were going to give a certain

04

amount of

money to Osborne after he -- you got a

05

loan brokered from Velocity Commercial Capital by

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

11:09:15

11:10:25

15

03

11:05:44

yes.

02

10

098:02- 098:16

That's —

reserve fund.

16

5

Do you see where it says?

A

15

11:04:59

But then you see how it has 210,700 goes

back to Scody?

14

045:09 - 045:17

There was a 269,200 that was going to Jimmy

10

13

4

— two — obviously, two different

06

Q

11:04:47

There were

two trans--

09

044:01 - 044:09

Going into the reserve fund.

A

03

08

3

What additional money are you talking

6/17/17

12:29:45

Page 7 of 72


06

Nilda Meg.

07 08

A

I don't.

Q

Do you recall making an agreement with

09

Mr. Osborne that's reflected in these notes that

10

you were going to give him several hundred thousand

11

dollars after you got the proceeds of a loan

12

brokered by Nilda Meg? MR. SAMOURIS:

13

099:02 - 100:23

Objection.

foundation, assumes facts not in evidence.

15

argumentative.

Q

No.

Please look at Hage 15984. THE VIDEOGRAPHER:

03 04

12:30:16

THE WITNESS:

099:02

05

MR. SAMOURIS:

MR. WARFEL:

15984?

Q

Does that document accurately reflect a

conversation that you had with James Osborne?

A

10

Four years later being able to testify how

11

accurate this is, my recollection, I — I don't know.

12

They're numbers that I wrote down on a piece of paper

13

in a conversation I had with him.

14

BY

15

16

MR.

Q

And did you have that conversation on

A

That's what the notes say.

Q

I'm asking you if you had the

conversation on October 3rd at 8:40?

20

A

That's what these notes say.

21

Q

I know that.

23 24

25 100:01 02

notes say.

I can read the notes.

A

I can too.

Q

Right.

So why — can you answer my

question, please?

12:31:30

A

What's the question?

Q

The question is:

Did you make these

notes on October 3rd at -- 2014 at 8:40 a.m. in the

04

morning?

06

07

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

12:31:20

I'm not asking what the

03

05

12:31:12

October 3rd at 8:40 a.m. —

18

22

12:30:59

WARFEL:

17

19

12:30:41

Yes, sir.

BY MR. WARFEL:

08 09

We're down to five

minutes left.

06 07

12:30:00

Lacks

14

16

6

Do you recall that document?

12:31:44

A

Yes.

Q

And it says, "Total cashout from Nilda on

10/12/2014," does it not?

6/17/17

Page 8 of 72


08

A

Yes.

09

Q

And then two lines under that, it says.

10

"269,200," and there's an arrow pointing to the

11

words "to Jimmy."

12

A

Yes.

13

Q

Did you intend, on October 3rd, to give

14

$269,200 of the net loan proceeds to Jimmy once the

15

Target — the loans from Velocity Commercial

16

brokered by Target closed?

17 18

account, I would send Jimmy a check for $269,200 for the reserve fund.

21

22 23

101:10 - 102:25

101:10

Q

And did you agree to do that by no later

A

Upon funding, I would do it.

Now, whether

funding was on October 3rd, I don't know. •Q

Well, you haven't, so I'll repeat it.

Did you agree to give the money to Jimmy Osborne

12

whenever the loan funded?

13

A

Yes.

14

Q

Okay.

or before the day you wrote this note? A

I presume so.

17

Q

Well, I presume so too.

if you want to clarify.

I just want to confirm

whether I — that presumption is ac- — likely to

20

be accurate.

22 23

A

12:33:38

That's what the notes — I don't know.

Let's read them. Q

Okay.

That's why I make notes. Do you have any reason to believe

24

you hadn't made an agreement by this time, that you

25

were going to give the money to Jim — James

102:01 02

A

These notes reflect what the conversation

was as I was writing the notes down, and I would

04

presume that these are what I agreed to upon funding

05

of the loan.

07

Q

12:34:01

Did you ever tell Nilda, Nelda, or Target

Mortgage or Velocity Commercial Capital about this

08

agreement you had with James Osborne prior to

09

funding?

10

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

12:33:47

Osborne?

03

06

12:33:23

I'm just asking

19

21

12:33:08

And did you make that agreement on

16

18

12:32:32

than October 3rd when these notes were written?

11

15

12:32:14

Upon funding, the cash was in my bank

19 20

7

A

12:31:57

Do you see that?

A

I had no reason to do so.

6117117

12:34:16

Page 9 of 72


Did Mr. Osborne tell you not to tell

11

12 13

14

15

anybody? A

No, not that I recall.

Q

And was that money for some kind of

business investment?

16

17

MR. SAMOURIS:

12:34:29

Objection.

Lacks

foundation, argumentative.

18

THE WITNESS:

I think I've testified

19

numerous times that that money was going into the

20

reserve account.

21 22

23 24 25

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

THE VIDEOGRAPHER:

12:34:37 One minute.

BY MR. WARFEL:

Q

So it was not for a business investment,

in other words? A

No.

12:34:43

6/17/17

Page 10 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

Hage - Target NOT doing PNC

HAGE, JOHN 2/1/17 VOL 2 1

079:04 - 079:07

079:04

Q

Okay,

Were you ever at any time advised that

05

Target Mortgage was able to do any loans through PNC

06

Bank?

07

A

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

No.

6/17/17

Page 11 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

JH - 2015 DOCS AND NAMES

HAGE, JOHN 5/2/17 VOL 1 1

048:03 - 050:24

048:03

04

Q

Let's go to another page, page 15986.

Are you there, sir?

05

A

Yes.

06

Q

Is that your handwriting?

07

11:29:12

A

Yes.

08

Q

And it's also dated 10/3?

09

A

Correct.

Q

Footnote, "Hage will be furnished" —

10 11

"provided"

12

Is it furnished or provided?

13 14

A

wrote it

11:29:18

— is that — what — what's that word?

I can't —

I can't read it.

It was — I

quickly and — 11:29:36

15

Q

So

16

A

Will be pro- — all names will —

17

Q

Because the way I read it is, "Hage will

18

be provided with all names with all documentation

19

February 1, 2015." 11:29:53

20

A

Yes.

21

Q

Does that sound right?

22

A

That sounds right. MR. SAMOURIS:

23 24

finalized with all, but...

THE WITNESS:

25

049:01

I think it might say

finalize

Finalized — that —

-- I think, yeah, "finalized by all."

02

BY MR. CHO:

03

Q

Okay.

So let's — let's start again.

04

think it might be finalized now that you said it

05

here, so let's say —

06

A

10 11

Yeah.

MR. WARFEL:

08 09

problem.

I said it.

Well, exactly.

Which is the

You're contaminating the deposition, sir. MR. SAMOURIS:

Well, you know, if he can

11:30:16

speculate: as to a word, why can't I?

12

MR. WARFEL:

13

(Unintelligible crosstalk.)

14

MR. CHO:

Created with TranscrlptPad for IPad

I

11:30:10

MR. SAMOURIS:

07

11:29:59

Because it's not your turn.

We can go off the record because

6/17/17

Page 12 of 72


I don't

16

BY MR. CHO:

17

Q

So let's —

18

It says, "Hage will be finalized by" — Well, let me ask you.

I don't know if

don't know if I see finalize.

20

I — I

21

make sense so —

It doesn't

22

A

I know.

23

Q

— look at it and tell me what you think

A

050:01

there.

02

Q

I think finalized is — is the right word

Okay.

documentation February 1, 2015"? A

Right.

05

Q

Any doubt about February 1, 2015?

06

A

Now — now — now that — the January date

Okay.

Q

09

A

With all documentation.

Q

What are the names and documentation

11 12 13 14

11:30:53

has been changed to February 1.

08

10

11:31:05

you're referring to in your hand — hand notes? A

I don't know.

Q

You don't have any — names, meaning

whom?

15

A

I'm —

16

Q

Documentation of what?

17

A

Loan documentation.

18

Q

Which loan documentation?

19

A

The final loans.

11:31:22

I'm — I don't know.

11:31:33

20

Q

Final loans of what?

21

A

That's going to close this thing out.

22

Q

What — so why do you need names

23

associated with those loans?

24

A

(No audible response.)

051:12

Q

Okay.

13

I look

So I understand your answer.

But

at these notes, and it talks about late

14

payments to Jimmy for certain loans, late payments

15

to you as though that there is a revenue stream

16

associated with it.

17

So let me finish my question, sir.

18

It also looks like names and

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

11:30:42

"With all names with all

04

07

11:30:36

that your handwriting is.

25

03

051:12 - 052:10

All right.

11:30:23

19

24

2

want to eat up my time, so —

15

ennii

11:32:26

Page 13 of 72


documentation provided that you're asking for, it looks like that the — the plan was for you to

11:32:39

provide monies to Jimmy so that Jimmy can make loans and make revenue so that you guys could share in that.

Was that ever contemplated by you and

Jimmy?

052:01

A

No.

11:32:55

Q

Let's look at that same page.

What does

that mean on the middle where it has, "85 percent to fund in December"?

What does that mean?

A

I don't know.

Q

It wasn't 85 percent of the loans that

11:33:15

Jimmy was going to fund, the units, that he was going to use the money you provided him?

That

wasn't what this meant?

A

I don't know.

means.

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

I don't know what that 11:33:35

6/17/17

Page 14 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

JH - CASH OUT

HAGE, JOHN 1/30/17 VOL 1 1

112:04 - 113:01

112 04

Q

So the Elliott Street — the cash out loan of a

05

130,000 — was dated — closing date of March 12,

06

2014, — the previous exhibit. You still agree with that; right?

07 08

A

Yeah.

09

Q

You have no reason to doubt?

10

A

No.

11

Q

And then the $100,000 cash out loan from Kansas

12

That's why I got my list out.

property was February?

13

A

Right.

14

Q

And your position on both of those loans were

15 16

17

because of the shrinking cash or liquidity; right? A

Right.

Q

Is that because of what Jimmy told you, or is

18

that because, in fact, you were actually shrinking on the

19

cash?

20

A

I could see the money going out the door, and he

21

was acknowledging it.

22

PNC loan to start processing, instead of these other

23

loans.

24 25 113:01

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

And I was pushing him to get the

And he said, "Well, it's going to be a few more months, but we've got to have the cash on your balance

sheet so you can continue servicing these loans."

6/17/17

Page 15 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

JH - IMPROVEMENTS

HAGE, JOHN 1/30/17 VOL 1 1

125:04- 125:25

125 04 05

property after acquiring it? A

Yes.

Q

What were some of those improvements?

08

A

Total cost of improvements was around $130,000.

09

Q

And what improvements did you make?

A

We replaced windows.

10

We refinished hardwood

11

floors, upgraded the kitchen, and added hardwood floors

12

in two

13

14

15 16 17

18 19 20

spaces that were — had been — were carpeted.

Q

Anything else?

A

Just little minor plumbing and electrical work

that was done.

Q

I heard something about a chandelier.

Did you

guys get any chandelier improvements? A

Yeah, that's minor electric.

Q

It was just described to me as something

substantial.

I was just curious.

A

It was a beautiful chandelier.

22

Q

But total improvements —

23

A

Total improvements were 130,000, which included

21

24

126:20 - 127:16

Did — did you make any improvements on Savoy

07

06

2

Q

Yes.

the chandelier.

25

Q

Was there any other improvements made on the

126:20

Q

And how did you pay for the $130,000 in

21

improvements for the Savoy property?

22

A

Cash.

23

Q

You didn't get another loan or anything; right?

24

A

No.

25 127:01

it was

a plan that we had from the very beginning when we

acquired the property. And I asked Jimmy, "Okay.

02 03

When — when I talked with Jimmy about it.

far as

Where do we stand as

finalizing this whole thing?" Our contractor we've used over the years for our

04

05

personal needs was about to leave town for a big job in

06

Hawaii

07

a half,r two years. We decided it was time to do that before he

08

09

Created with TranscriptPad for IPad

that he was going to be out of town for a year and

left.

So we were under time pressure there.

6/17/17

Page 17 of 72


10

And Jimmy, as soon as I mentioned improving the

11

property, Jimmy jumped in and encouraged us to go forward

12

and not worry about it.

13

Q

Okay.

14

A

And it entailed replacing two bay windows and

15

one slider and putting in French doors on either side of

16

the one large bay window in the family room.

Created with TranscriptPad for IPad

6/17/17

Page 18 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

JH - KEEPS DETAILED RECORDS

HAGE, JOHN 5/2/17 VOL 1 1

019:23 - 020:16

019:23

Q

24

slips?

25

020 01 02

A

Thank you.

Why did you keep the FedEx

It was part of the transaction, because I

bank account that I spent money on FedEx expenses. I keep records of every expense that I

03 04

make whether it's groceries, whether it's loan

05

payments that are not related to this.

06

expenses

that I make, any income that I make, I have

07

a record

of every transaction that I do in my -- my

08

bank accounts.

Any kind of

09

Q

Why did you keep the U.S. mail slips?

10

A

I just told you.

11

Q

Well, you told me about the FedEx slips.

12

A

Because I keep records.

14

Q

Were you expecting to be reimbursed for

16

Created with TranscriptPad for I Pad

10:38:58

10:39:14

I'm asking is that the same reason, same answer?

13

15

10:38:35

kept the FedEx slips so that I could record in my

these expenses? A

Yes.

10:39:26

That were related to this, yes.

6/17/17

Page 19 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

JH - OSBORN RELATIONSHIP

HAGE, JOHN 1/30/17 VOL 1 1

138:19 - 141:06

How would you describe your relationship with

138 19

20

Jimmy right after the closing of the Savoy loan? A

It was good.

22

Q

Would you consider him a friend?

23

A

Yes.

24

Q

Did you guys — did you and Mr. Osborn

21

25

socialize?

139 01

02

You guys never went out to lunch or dinner

Q

together

o

A

05 06

We had conversations on the phone, but they

were business conversations.

03

04

No.

A

Nope.

He was encouraging it, but I said, you

know, you're in Orange County.

We're in San Diego.

First time I met him was when I was having a

07 08

hard time getting ahold of him on the phone, and I was

09

getting concerned because he wasn't communicating with

10

me.

And I finally one day just jumped in the car and

11

12

drove up

there.

13

Q

Drove up to where?

14

A

To Orange County.

15

Q

Where did you go?

16

A

To Gotmortgage.

17

Q

And who did you see at Gotmortgage when you got

18 19

there? A

I've forgotten.

It was one of the people who

20

had processed the loans.

It was a familiar name.

21

now I can't remember who it was.

But it was somebody from Gotmortgage.

22

Right

And she

23

pointed to his desk, and she said, "That's his desk right

24

there, just inside the door.

25

is."

But we don't know where he

140:01

Q

So had you met him before that —

02

A

This was the first time of my attempt to meet

03

him.

04

Q

When was that, do you think?

05

A

I don't have a concept of time as far as that is

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

6/17/17

Best estimate?

Page 20 of 72


06

07 08

concerned.

Q

that helps refresh your recollection.

You testified you had a hard time to get ahold

09

10

of him to get status on the PNC loan; am I understanding

11

that right?

12

13 14

A

Yeah.

Q

And you got concerned and drove down to Orange

County; right?

15

A

Drove up to Orange County.

16

Q

Or drove up to Orange County.

And we know that the first two loans on Tennyson

17 18

was done.

19

the Kansas loan was done.

21

were two s\absequent loans for 100, 130 against the Kansas property.

So my question is that's around early 2014?

24

A

Right.

25

Q

So based on that, does it refresh your

141: :01 02 03

154:22 - 155:23

recollection when you could have drove up to Orange County to see, "Hey, Jimmy, what's the status?" A

Well, it had to have been before the large loan

04

went on Elliott Street.

05

time frame, it was some time between March and October

06

of 2014.

So I'm guessing now, just from a

So he helped you process the Tennyson loans, the

141:23 24

Savoy loan, Kansas loan, and you hadn't met him at all;

25

is that right?

142:01

A

I had not.

02

Q

And simply a professional relationship where

03

3

Then there

22 23

141:23 - 142:10

We know that Savoy and the — I think it was

So four loans had already been done.

20

2

Well, let's look at your list of loans to see if

you —

04

A

Over the telephone.

05

Q

You're interactions with Jimmy Osborn from the

06

first Tennyson loan until at least the six loans at

07

Gotmortgaged was either the lender or the broker, your

08

relationship with him — with Jimmy — was over the phone

09

only?

10

A

154:22 23 24

Created with TranscriptPad for I Pad

Yes.

MR. WARFEL:

Do you remember how you got the

checks to him?

THE WITNESS:

6/17/17

Yes.

He asked that they be sent

Page 21 of 72


Overnite Express — U.S. mail. MR. WARFEL:

155:01

And was that to his home address or

his business address? THE WITNESS:

MR. WARFEL:

His home address.

And so you knew — had you ever

been to do his home? THE WITNESS:

No.

I've never been to his home.

Although, after my first visit to Orange County, I know that it was opposite the complex that Gotmortgage is located in.

MR. WARFEL:

So he represented to you that you

were sending these to his home address? THE BY

WITNESS:

Yes.

MR. CHO:

Q

Did you have any issues with sending a check

directly to Jimmy Osborn — James Osborn to his home address?

A

At the time, no.

Q

Has that ever — something like that ever

occurred to you in your banking career? A

No.

Q

Did you ever in your banking career ask a client

to pay you money for a service? A

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

No.

6/17/17

Page 22 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

IH - OSBORN WORKS HAGE

HAGE, JOHN 1/30/17 VOL 1 1

117:16 - 118:01

117 16 17

Look at Exhibit 11.

Q

paid off the first two loans of Kansas.

18

A

19

Q

Yep.

Who did you think your mortgage broker was? MR. SAMOURIS:

20 21 22 23

2

119:24- 120:25

This is the $361,000, which

Asked and answered.

BY MR. CHO:

I didn't get an answer.

Q

24

A

Jimmy.

25

Q

Who did Jimmy work for?

118 01

A

I thought Gotmortgage.

119 24 25 120:01

Who was your mortgage

broker?

BY MR. CHO:

Yeah.

Q

I'm still not clear about what your

relationship with Target Mortgage was. Up to this point you thought Gotmortgage was

02 03

your mortgage lender all the way through, because

04

Jimmy

05

A

06

He didn't give me a straight answer why all of a we were dealing with another mortgage company.

sudden

07

Q

Did you guys have a conversation about that?

08

A

Yes.

09

Q

Do you recall when that was?

10 11

No.

A

And I said, "why aren't we going through

12 13

Gotmortgage?" And he said because — made some excuse as far

14 15 16 17

as Target Mortgage had better sources at that point. Okay.

Q

As I recall.

A

wanted

19

me it's

And he kept telling

right around the corner. And I had to believe him, because up until that

20

time, he had this plan that he never could carry out.

Do you recall if that conversation with Jimmy

22

Q

23

about

24

of the

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

I mean, I was in a state that I

to get this thing finished.

18

21

It was about the time that Target Mortgage

up on the paper.

showed

Target Mortgage was before the loan closed — any three loans that Target Mortgage actually —

6/17/17

Page 23 of 72


25

Created with TranscriptPad for IPad

I don't remember what it was.

6/17/17

Page 24 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

3H - PNC LOAN

HAGE, JOHN 1/30/17 VOL 1 1

114:09-114:11

:09 114: 10

130:25 - 131:07

And the PNC loan was strictly for the Savoy

property; correct?

11

A

Yes.

130:25

Q

Okay.

131:01 02

133:21 - 137:25

Q

And this plan that you testified about

that Jimmy had, you said something about it must have happened prior to the Savoy acquisition; right?

03

A

I think it was in conjunction with the Savoy.

04

Q

They were all about the same time?

05

A

It was about the same time.

And that plan was

06

to do a low interest rate on Savoy, and in the meantime,

07

paying off these other loans.

133:21

Q

So when you were answering my question, you said

22

there had to be, or I wouldn't have done something.

23

Are you speculating about that —

24 25

A

No.

I'm not speculating.

1 would not bet on a

$900,000, nonamortizing loan without a plan.

134:01

Q

So —

02

A

That would not make sense to me.

03

Q

So you're saying that —

04

A

1 needed n exist plan on that $900,000 loan.

05

Q

And we're talking about the Savoy property?

06

A

Yes.

07

Q

Because you talked about Tennyson in the

08

09 10

beginning?

A

I'm talking about Savoy.

Savoy is the carrot.

Q

And first thing part of your answer sounded like

11

you don't recall and that had to be the reason, meaning

12

there had to be a plan.

13

As you sit here right now, this plan that Jimmy

14

hatched, you recall that, and you guys talked about it

15

specifically?

16 17

A

conventional amortizing loan as quickly as possible.

18 19

20

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

The plan was to get Savoy refinanced on a

MR. SAMOURIS:

If you'd listen to the question.

He's --

THE WITNESS:

6/17/17

Okay.

Page 25 of 72


21

MR. SAMOURIS:

He's asking if you specifically

22

recollect a discussion with Jimmy about the plan.

23

is that right?

24

25 135:01

THE WITNESS;

Am I—

Yes.

/// BY MR. CHO:

02

Q

When do you think that was?

03

A

Before we closed Savoy.

Q

Did you ever have conversation with anyone —

04 05

Jimmy, Kathy — you would not qualify for traditional

06

conventional financing for the Savoy acquisition.

07 08

09

Was that conversation ever had between anybody and you?

A

I cannot specifically remember a conversation,

10

but I can tell you that I knew that I could qualify,

11

whether it was through Jimmy or anybody else at that

12

point in time with the cash flow that we had.

13

Q

14

that?

15

A

Where are you getting that opinion — basis for

From my knowledge of the -- of lending.

I would

16

not be betting on that if I didn't feel comfortable I

17

could get it.

18

Q

So if that's the case about getting conventional

19

financing, why did you not choose to get a short-term

20

high interest rate for the Savoy acquisition?

21 22

A do it.

23

Because that's the way Jimmy said he wanted to And that was the beginning of the plan.

I was not happy about paying ten percent

24

interest, but when he said that he had this other exit

25

plan, and it made sense to me, because I ran the numbers

136:01

two and three-eighths percent on a $900,000 amortizing

02

loan, there wouldn't have been any problem with me to

03

service that debt.

04

Q

But also testified earlier about a plan B?

05

A

Plan B was to start selling real estate if that

06 07 08

09

10

didn't come through. Q

But you also knew that there was a chance

that —

A

Well, yeah.

You've got to have more than one

plan when you jump into something like this.

11

Q

That was considered prior to —

12

A

in my mind, I felt comfortable that I had a

13

Created with TranscriptPad for IPad

backup plan that if that didn't work that I knew I

6/17/17

Page 26 of 72


14

qualified for that kind of financing.

15

out.

MR. SAMOURIS:

16

17

18

Q

And was the PNC loan that you testified about.

19

was that already being discussed at the time of the Savoy acquisition in 2013? A

I believe it was, yes.

Because I mean -- yes.

I can't tell you when that conversation took

22

it was

23

place, but it was before we closed the transaction.

And I kept pushing Jimmy to get the transaction

24 25

closed

137:01

Q

02

and it was taking him time to get it closed. The PNC loan?

A

No.

03

Q

The Savoy?

04

A

The Savoy.

05 06 07

dragging his feet. Q

We almost lost Savoy because he was

I didn't know what was going on.

But at that point in time you believe Jimmy had

a plan to refinances you around two and two-thirds —

08

A

Two and three-eighths.

09

Q

— three-eighths interest rate?

10

A

That's the number he had given me.

Q

And based on your knowledge of the banking

11 12 13 14

industry, you felt that was reasonable? A

Yes.

Q

And that you were going to be able to, at some

15

point. refinance the Savoy loan from a, I think, ten

16

percent or 9.9 percent —

17 18

A

9.9 percent.

Q

— into a two and three-eighths loan.

It was ten percent in essence.

And was it with any institution or just PNC?

19 20

A

With PNC.

21

Q

And that was — go ahead.

22

A

But I knew that I could get a better rate than

23

145:13 - 146:22

You've answered the question.

BY MR. CHO:

20

21

4

The ratios work

ten percent — 9.9 percent somewhere —

24

Q

Okay.

25

A

— if that didn't work out.

145:13

Q

So the carrot, as you call it, the plan was to

14 15

16 17

Created with TranscrlptPad for I Pad

get a refinancing on the Savoy loan? A

Right.

Q

Two and three-eighths, whatever that rate that

you claim or say that Mr. Osborn represented to you;

6117117

Page 27 of 72


right? A

Yes.

Q

He believed that you can get that loan in the

open market or about there?

A

About there.

At that point in time, probably

half a percent higher than that.

But it was — the

mortgage market was -- jumbo loans was in that vicinity. Q 146:01

So if that's what you believed, why didn't you

get a different lender and get a loan for the Savoy, instead of chasing down Mr. Osborn six or eight times in Orange County?

MR. SAMOURIS: speculation.

Objection.

Calls for

Argumentative.

If you had a thought, you're certainly welcome to it.

But as you sit here today, don't make it up. THE WITNESS:

At the time I felt comfortable

with him. BY

MR. CHO:

Q

But it sounded like, based on your earlier

testimony, that you were frustrated with Mr. Osborn? A

There were times of frustration, yes.

Q

The distance between San Diego and Orange County

is about a hundred miles; correct? A

Yes.

Q

And you drove up there six times -- to eight

times; correct? A

Yes.

Q

And yet you never reached out to a different

lender?

A

Created with TranscrlptPad for jPad

That's correct.

6/17/17

Page 28 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

JH - Trust Ownership

HAGE,JOHN 1/30/17 VOL 1 1

105:17 - 108:25

105 17 18

Q

Now, I want to direct your attention to the

borrower section on the top. It has John Scofield Hage, trustee of the John

19

20

Scofield Hage Trust under the survivors trust of the Fred

21

Scofield Hage Trust, dated March 25, 1981; do you see

22

that?

23

A

Uh-huh.

Q

I think I was trying to ask you earlier —

24 25

that's what I was referring to.

Can you explain to me if there still exists a

106 01 02

John Scofield Trust under the survivors trust?

03

A

Yes.

04

Q

And that's different than the John and Bonnie

05 06 07

Family Trust; correct? A

Correct.

Q

Okay.

And so tell me what your understanding of

08

what an undivided interest -- how is the ownership

09

structured on the Elliott Street property back in, let's

10

say, March 12, 2014?

11

A

The survivors trust — well, let me back up.

When you have a family trust and after the death

12 13

of the first person in that trust, then that sets aside

14

50 percent of that.

15

Q

Okay.

16

A

Remains as it was in the beginning, which

17

represents the decedents side of that trust — that A-B

18

trust.

19

Q

Okay.

20

A

The other side of the trust remains to be

21

changed by the survivor.

22

My father was a survivor of their family trust.

23

which was the owner of that house prior to their demise.

24 25

107:01

Q

Okay.

A

Upon his death -- or upon my mother's death —

it becomes a survivors trust.

That is the piece that

02

owned the — that was left under my father's ownership

03

after my mother's passing.

Created with TranscrlptPad for IPad

6/17/17

Page 29 of 72


04 05

And then the other piece was transferred to me out of my father's estate.

06

Q

Okay.

07

A

So that house and one other asset in here was

08

affected by that.

09

trust of my father's estate, and the other half was in

10

his trust that I inherited.

11

12

Where half of it is in the survivors

Q

Got it.

A

So I inherited both of those pieces.

So that

13

house has two deeds on it.

One on the survivors trust,

14

and one in my father's estate, which then converted to my

15

family trust.

16

Q

And again —

17

A

Survivors trust is — cannot be changed.

18

Because that was — that was the piece — the way it was

19

when my mother was living.

20

Q

Okay.

21

A

You follow the transaction?

22

Q

I think so.

23

probate attorney.

I'm not a wills and trust or

So it's just very confusing to me?

24

A

It is very confusing.

25

Q

And one of the questions that I wonder, is there

108:01

It is.

Most definitely.

a reason why once the trustor is passed on, why the

02

property just transfers to the beneficiaries?

03

doesn't it remain in —

Why

04

A

Because that the way it's set up.

05

Q

Is there some tax advantage used for keeping it

06

that way, do you know?

07

MR. SAMOURIS:

08

BY MR. CHO:

09 10

Q

You're still entitled to answer.

MR. SAMOURIS:

Calls for speculation.

BY MR. CHO:

13

Q

You can answer.

14

A

Could you repeat your question.

15

16

MR. SAMOURIS:

I'm not sure what it has to do

with this case, but if you want to ask it, I guess it's

17

your nickel.

18

BY

19

MR. CHO:

Q

I'm trying to understand why leave it in this

20

ownership structure.

21

was for tax reasons; is that true?

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

What is that

benefit?

11 12

Calls for speculation.

And one of the speculations I had

6/17/17

Page 30 of 72


22 23 24

25

Created with TranscriptPad for IPad

A

That's true.

Property taxes don't change when

it's passed on from one generation to the next. There's a million dollars house there, and I

paid $1,200 a year in property taxes.

6/17/17

Page 31 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

JH 15984 - $269200 TO JO

HAGE,JOHN 5/2/17 VOL 1 1

033:18 - 034:24

033 18 19 20

A

Yes.

Q

And it has, "Rebate $157,200 to me,"

which is you, Mr. Hage; is that right? A

That's correct.

24

Q

You were expecting $157,200?

25

A

Yes.

034 01

Q

What's the $1800 below that?

02

A

I don't know.

10:55:51

MR. SAMOURIS:

05

THE WITNESS: BY

MR.

As I sit here today, to

that, I can only say —

look at

04

06

Don't speculate.

All right.

10:56:11

SHO:

07

Q

So your answer is you don't know?

08

A

I don't know.

09

Q

Look a little bit below that.

10 11 12

13

You see

where it has "$269,200 to Jimmy"?

10:56:18

A

Yes.

Q

And so I'm presuming that the $628,000

was the

loan cashout loan you received from Target?

A

629.

15

Q

629.

16

A

Yes.

17

Q

Out of the $629,000 cashout loan you

14

10:56:37

Is that correct?

18

received from Target Mortgage on or about October

19

2014, you write — you distributed or proposed to

20

distribute 269,200 to Jimmy; is that right? MR. SAMOURIS:

21

22

035:02 - 037:15

10:55:37

23

03

2

That's your

handwriting, right, sir?

21 22

Let's go to 15984.

Q

Objection.

You can answer.

24

THE

03 04

Lacks

foundation.

23

035:02

Q

WITNESS:

Yes.

Below that, $359,800 with an arrow that

says, "Scody to keep from Nilda." A

That's the net proceeds out of that loan

05

that would come to me after I had paid to Jimmy the

06

request that he had made for the 269.2.

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

10:56:53

6/17/17

10:57:15

Page 32 of 72


07

Q

So what was the 200 — at the time that

08

you made this note, what was the purpose of getting

09

to Jimmy 2- — giving to Jimmy $269,200?

10

A

That was to go to the — that was money

11

that was going into the — the fund that he was

12

building, the — for the PNC loan refinance.

13 14

Q

Right above it, there's a $157,200 rebate

coming to you.

When was that going to come?

15

A

159,000.

16

Q

Okay.

17

A

18 19

20 21

10:58:05

I guess —

157.2 plus the 1800 adds up to 159,000.

MR. SAMOURIS: BY

What's the question?

MR. CHO:

Q

When was that going to be given to you?

A

As I sit here and read these notes,

22

there's an arrow that says, "January of 2015."

23

was money that was going to be coming back to me from

24

the — as a rebate in January of 2015.

25

Q

When did you think you made this note?

A

On October 3rd at 8:40 in the morning.

02

Q

Look a little bit lower from the same

page.

"269,200," do you see that?

A

Right.

05

Q

And then, "minus 58,500," do you see

A

Yes.

08

Q

So I'm guessing the 269,200 is the amount

09

that you gave to Jimmy, because earl- — above the

10

page, I see the arrow to Jimmy.

11

MR. SAMOURIS:

10:59:29

You mean gave to Jimmy or

12

planned to give to Jimmy.

13

BY MR. CHO:

14

Q

Planned to give to Jimmy.

15

A

Yes.

16

Q

Do you see that?

17

A

That's correct.

18

Q

And what did — what was the $58,500

19

reflecting?

21

10:59:36

Where was that going to go?

MR. SAMOURIS: THE WITNESS:

If you recall. I don't recall.

10:59:50 But based

22

upon my notes, it appears that 58,500 was a request

23

that was coming out of that 269.2 that would be going

24

to Jimmy for the — the — for the fund — the — the

Created with TranscriptPad for IPad

10:59:11

that?

07

20

10:58:42

Subtract —

04

06

10:58:18

That

036:01

03

10:57:38

6/17/17

Page 33 of 72


25

037.01 02

financing that was going to be done with PNC. BY MR. CHO:

Q

were — you were going to give Mr. Jimmy Osborne

04

$269,200 once the cashout loan with Target Mortgage

05

closes.

06

going to give that amount to Mr. Jimmy Osborne.

4

039:16 - 039:22

040:02 - 041:21

Once you received the money, you were

08

were going to either keep — have Mr. Jimmy Osborne

09

keep 58,500, and that 210,700 difference between

10

what you gave to Jimmy goes back to you, Scody.

11

Isn't that what this note seems to restate?

A

that's what I — would be left after I paid the

14

58,500 to Jimmy for the rebate fund that was being

15

billed.

Q

11:01:26

As of October 3rd, 8:40 when you made

17

this note, the plan was to give Mr. Osborne 58,500;

18

is that right?

19

A

To go into the reserve fund, yes.

20

Q

Well, it looks like, if I look at the

21

earlier portion, the initial plan was to put

22

269,200 into the reserve fund.

040:02

Q

What was the plan when you minus 269,200 with an

04

arrow to Jimmy?

06

THE WITNESS: BY MR. CHO:

09

Q

12

Objection.

Lacks

Okay.

To go to the reserve fund.

That's what you intended when you

wrote that, right?

11:04:11

A

That's correct.

Q

Right below it, that amount that went

13

into the reserve fund, now you're sxjbtracting

14

$58,500 from that.

Do you see that? 11:04:23

15

A

Yes.

16

Q

That was intended to go to Jimmy or to

17

the reserve fund?

18

A

To the reserve fund.

19

Q

So you're going to get it back, and then

20

Created with TranscriptPad for IPad

11:04:03

foundation, assumes facts not in evidence.

08

11

What was the purpose of that?

MR. SAMOURIS:

07

10

11:03:42

Well, let's — let's lay the foundation.

03

05

11:01:02

That's what — goes back to me meaning

13

039 16

11:00:42

And then what it looks like is that you

07

3

But then the plan looks like you

03

12

11:00:21

put it back in?

11:04:30

6117117

Page 34 of 72


21

23

additional money coming out, which leaves

24

210,000 — a net 210,700 that stays with me.

25

Q

041 01

about?

02

A

Going into the reserve fund.

two trans- — two — obviously, two different transactions that were — that — that we had talked

05

about.

06

to go into the reserve fund, and then an additional

07

58,500 that was going into the reserve fund.

There was a 269,200 that was going to Jimmy

Scody?

Do you see where it says?

10

A

Ultimately, yes.

11

Q

Do you —

12

A

That's the net that's going into the

reserve

15

17 18

11:05:26

Do you see — you said that rebate and 1 are synonymous, right?

reserves

Right?

Yes or no?

A

The way -- the way I look at this today.

Q

But look below that.

19 20

you comes

21

not synonymous. Q

Do you see how you

and the 207 — 210,700, you add it up.

up to 367,900, arrow, back to me.

It's

So I think I'm understanding you, so I make sure I understand you — understanding

02 03

you correctly in that when it — when we're talking

04

about the cashout loan from Target Mortgage, the

05

proposed plan was that 269,200 was going to go to

06

Jimmy for the purposes of the reserve fund, true?

07

A

Correct, yes.

08

Q

We're in agreement on that?

09

A

Yes.

045:09

Q

You see the 269,200 in the page going

A

Yes.

Q

Do you see that?

13

A

Yes.

14

Q

And it has an arrow to Jimmy.

15

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

And your

testimony is that that is for the purposes of

6/17/17

11:09:15

11:10:25

into the reserve account?

12

11

11:06:02

It's two different concepts.

want to

10

11:05:44

yes.

have 157 ',200

044:01

That's —

fund.

Q

16

11:04:59

But then you see how it has 210,700 goes

Q back to

11:04:47

There were

04

14

045:09 - 045:22

What additional money are you talking

03

13

6

— that's — that is coming out of the 269.2,

the 200

09

044:01 - 044:09

That's additional money coming out of

22

08

5

No.

A

11:10:31

Page 35 of 72


16

building up a reserve account?

17

A

That's correct.

18

Q

And do you see right below it

19

where — 269,200, and you have a minus sign with

20

58,000 —

A

21 22

7

047:08 - 047:16

was coming out and going into the reserve fund. Q

047 08

099:02 - 100:23

And my question to you is;

The 157,200

09

on the top and the 210,700 are two different

10

figures that you're adding up to ultimately expect

11

to get that back; that was the plan as of

12

October

A

That's —

14

Q

— 3rd — Correct?

11:12:50

16

A

Yes.

099 02

Q

Please look at Hage 15984. THE VIDEOGRAPHER:

03 04

05

MR. SAMOURIS:

MR. WARFEL:

15984?

Q

Does that document accurately reflect a

conversation that you had with James Osborne?

A

10

Four years later being able to testify how

11

accurate this is, my recollection, I — I don't know.

12

They're numbers that I wrote down on a piece of paper

13

in a conversation I had with him.

14

BY

15 16

Q

And did you have that conversation on

A

That's what the notes say.

Q

I'm asking you if you had the

conversation on October 3rd at 8:40?

20

A

That's what these notes say.

21

Q

I know that.

notes say.

23

A

I can too.

Q

Right.

So why — can you answer my

c[uestion, please?

12:31:30

100:01

A

What's the question?

02

Q

The question is:

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

12:31:20

I'm not asking what the

I can read the notes.

24 25

12:31:12

October 3rd at 8:40 a.m. —

17

22

12:30:59

MR. WARFEL:

18

19

12:30:41

Yes, sir.

BY MR. WARFEL:

08 09

We're down to five

minutes left.

06 07

11:12:41

13

15

8

11:10:44

269,200 minus 58.5, which was money that

6/17/17

Did you make these

Page 36 of 72


03

notes on October 3rd at — 2014 at 8:40 a.m. in'the

04

morning?

05 06 07

Q

And it says, "Total cashout from Nilda on

12:31:44

10/12/2014," does it not? A

Yes.

09

Q

And then two lines under that, it says.

10

"269,200," and there's an arrow pointing to the

11

words "to Jimmy." A

Yes.

13

Q

Did you intend, on October 3rd, to give

14

$269,200 of the net loan proceeds to Jimmy once the

15

Target — the loans from Velocity Commercial

16

brokered by Target closed?

A

18

account, I would send Jimmy a check for $269,200 for the reserve fund.

21 22 23

101: :10

And did you agree to do that by no later

A

Upon funding, I would do it.

Now, whether

funding was on October 3rd, I don't know. Q

Well, you haven't, so I'11 repeat it.

Did you agree to give the money to Jimmy Osborne

12

whenever the loan funded?

13

A

Yes.

14

Q

Okay.

or before the day you wrote this note? A

I presume so.

17

Q

Well, I presume so too.

if you want to clarify.

I just want to confirm

whether I — that presumption is ac- — likely to

20

be accurate.

22 23

A

12:33:38

That's what the notes -- I don't know.

Let's read them. Q

Okay.

That's why I make notes. Do you have any reason to believe

24

you hadn't made an agreement by this time, that you

25

were going to give the money to Jim — James

102:01 02

12:33:47

Osborne?

A

These notes reflect what the conversation

03

was as I was writing the notes down, and I would

04

presume that these are what I agreed to upon funding

05

of the loan.

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

12:33:23

I'm just asking

19

21

12:33:08

And did you make that agreement on

16

18

12:32:32

than October 3rd when these notes were written?

11

15

12:32:14

Upon funding, the cash was in my bank

19

Q

12:31:57

Do you see that?

12

20

101:10 - 102:25

Yes.

08

17

9

A

12:34:01

6/17/17

Page 37 of 72


Q

06

Did you ever tell Nilda, Nelda, or Target

07

Mortgage or Velocity Commercial Capital about this

08

agreement you had with James Osborne prior to

09

funding?

10

11 12

I had no reason to do so.

Q

Did Mr. Osborne tell you not to tell

14

A

No, not that I recall.

Q

And was that money for some kind of

business investment?

MR. SAMOURIS:

16

17

12:34:ie

anybody?

13

15

A

12:34:29

Objection.

Lacks

foundation, argumentative. THE WITNESS:

18

I think I've testified

19

numerous times that that money was going into the

20

reserve

THE VIDEOGRAPHER:

21 22 23 24

25

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

account.

BY

12:34:37

One minute.

MR. WARFEL:

Q

So it was not for a business investment,

in other words? A

12:34:43

No.

6/17/17

Page 38 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

JH 2015 LOANS TO OTHERS

HAGE, JOHN 5/2/17 VOL 1 1

056:12- 057:25

A

056:12

As we — as I sit here today three years

13

later, it's difficult for me to say whether or not

14

these are two different conversations or one

15

continuous conversation.

Q

16

17

11:39:17

But you see how when you add 375,400 to

4000, you get 379,400, and you put 380,000 rounded.

18 19

A

Right.

Q

I see where that is, and that seems like

20

a rebate you're anticipating from Jimmy, correct?

21

Or that's what Jimmy told you he was going to give

22

you, correct?

23

A

That's correct.

24

Q

And then you — and then —

25

A

It appears, yes.

Q

And right below that, you have 318,800,

057:01

11:39:44

02

and you're adding 7500 to get to a total of 326,300

03

with an arrow to Jimmy, and I think that amount was

04

for the reserve fund that Jimmy wanted you to pay

05

him, correct?

11:40:02

06

A

That's what it appears, yes.

07

Q

Now, right below it, real estate loans of

08

330,000 rounded, $209,000.

09

loan with Jimmy?

Were you making another

11:40:27

10

A

I ~

11

Q

Is that what —

12

A

— don't recall.

That's a number

13

— that's why I have a question mark — I put a

14

question mark there. Q

Is that what Jimmy was proposing to you

17

A

I don't recall.

18

Q

Let me finish my question, Mr. Hage.

15 16

to

11:40:35

Was that — was Jimmy proposing to you.

19 20

Mr. Hage, to make a loan to a third party of

21

$330,000?

22

A

No.

23

Q

Was Jimmy proposing to you to make a loan

Created with TranscriptPad for IPad

11:39:35

6/17/17

11:40:43

Page 39 of 72


24

25

2

058:12 - 059:13

058 12

of $209,000 to a third party? A

No.

Q

Are you sure that this page is not a

13

summary of the deal term you have with Jimmy,

14

meaning that Jimmy was going to service the third

15

party loans and get late fees if there were

16

any —

17

Let me finish my question, Mr. Hage.

18

— and that you were ultimately going to

19

20

slips were going to be reimbursed; that you were going to get two checks to reimburse for the money

22

that was given to Jimmy for these third party

23

loans, and then you were going to make a rebate and

24

you were going to get refunded fees ten days after

25

the close of these loans?

02

MR. SAMOURIS:

THE WITNESS:

The way I interpret this

reverse late fees.

That means -- "late fees to Jimmy," he's going to

09

take care of the late fees.

That was his responsibility.

FedEx fees were going to ultimately be

11

coming back to me because he was — he was keeping

12

track of the Federal Express fees.

13

would be coming back ten days after funding.

060:02

05 06

Q

No.

That's your handwriting that says,

"1099 for personal services" —

A

1 never said anything about a third party 11:44:32

loan.

Q

Okay.

But you did say, "1099 for

personal financial services rendered."

08

handwriting, right? MR. SAMOURIS:

09

22 23

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

Objection.

That's your

Asked and 11:44:40

answered. THE

11

073:21

11:43:38

And these refunds

07

10

11:43:05

today and what I was writing is he was going back to

08

04

073:21 - 074:19

Asked and

07

03

4

Objection.

answered, cumulative.

10

060:02 - 060:11

11:42:51

Mr. Osborne agreed upon?

05 06

That was not the purpose

11:42:40

of that — it's not a summary of what you and

03

04

11:42:28

sell it to Sun West or Alliance, and that the FedEx

21

059 01

3

11:40:58

Q

WITNESS:

Yes.

Go to the next page, 15983.

Is that your

handwriting, sir? A

Yes, it is.

6/17/17

Page 40 of 72


Q

Now, I — I see numbers again.

in the middle with the circle, 159,000. 074:01

I think I think we

12:01:58

talked about that number being the rebate, right? And I think I know how you got to 269,200, which is

on here, which is the — you get there by adding 267,400 to 1800.

Does — do you have any recollection of

12:02:21

what you were trying to do when you made this note? A

Nope.

Q

Sounds like — it looks like the $159,000

in rebates plus the $269,200 are two separate amounts being added up —

12:02:42

A

That doesn't say rebate next to it.

Q

I'm not saying it does.

"What I'm saying

is they're two separate n\imbers. A

They're two separate numbers, that's

right.

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

12:02:54

Q

That you're adding up separately —

A

Right.

Q

--to arrive at that number, right?

A

That's right.

6/17/17

Page 41 of 72


4

159:25 - 160:11

11

10

same street.

Gotmortgage's business were opposite each other on the

And at that point in time, I realized that I

Got you.

BY MR. CHO:

A

Q

12

13

MR. SAMOURIS:

THE WITNESS:

MR. SAMOURIS:

Yes.

On New Hope.

New Hope.

Their both addresses are on --

were going to his house, which is right there next door.

But now, at this point in time, I know that they

thought that I was sending them to Gotmortgage.

14 15 16 17

19

THE WITNESS:

18

20

And, again, you can't narrow the time period any

BY MR. CHO:

21 22

Q more than March through October of 2014, when you

23

actually went up to Orange County; correct? Correct.

24

A

So at least the six to eight times that you

25 158 01

Q

you ever stop into Gotmortgage and say, "What's going on

drove up to Orange County to meet with Mr. Osborn, did

02

04

No.

We met at Denny's restaurant, which was a

But if you're willing to drive a hundred miles

to see Mr. Osborn in person, my belief would be that

Q

few blocks away from where Gotmortgage is located."

A

with my loan?"

03

05

06 07

09

08

you're somewhat frustrated.

I was to a certain extent.

I questioned him as

Is that — were you

10

frustrated?

to what was taking so long.

A

11

12 13

These checks were supposedly covering expenses.

reserve account.

building the reserve account — kept referring to it as a

14 15

17

the PNC loan.

checks, and he'd refer to it as the reserve account for

We'd account to it when I sent him

16

18

20

his apartment was there — there close to the same

on the large complex — multi-use type complex — that

realized he was in the same driveway as Gotmortgage was

And it was, as I say, when I drove up there and

21

address.

19

23

Well, these checks written out to James

6/17/17

this list — did you think you were paying James Osborn,

Osborn — like taking the first 20 or so that I see in

Q

22

159:25

02

160:01

Created with TranscriptPad for IPad

Page 43 of 72


03 04 05 06

or did you think you were paying Gotmortgage? A

I thought that he was representing Gotmortgage.

Q

Did he tell you that, or is that — did he

actually say that to you?

07

A

Yes.

08

Q

What did he say to you?

A

He represented himself as being Gotmortgage.

09 10

don't remember the specific words, but it was always he

11

was representing Gotmortgage.

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

6/17/17

I

Page 44 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

Osborn - NOT Target Employee

HAGE, JOHN 2/1/17 VOL 2 1

079:04 - 080:06

Q

079 04

06

Bank?

07

A

No.

Q

Gotmortgage and Target Mortgage are not the only

09

two lenders that James Osborn had communicated with on

10

your behalf, are they?

11

MR. SAMOURIS:

Calls for speculation.

12

Do you understand the question?

13

THE WITNESS:

14

Say it again and let me clarify what exactly

I'm thinking through the question.

15

what you're asking for.

16

BY

MR. WARFEL:

Q

17

Target Mortgage and Gotmortgage are not the only

18

lenders that James Osborn contacted on your behalf, are

19

they?

20

MR. SAMOURIS:

21

THE WITNESS:

22 23

BY

Calls for speculation. No.

MR. WARFEL:

Q

What other lenders did he tell you that he had

24

made contact with, other than Target Mortgage or

25

Gotmortgage?

080:01

A

Alliance Mortgage.

02

Q

Anybody else?

03

A

No one that I recall.

04

Q

Okay.

05

A

Let me clarify that there was one other private

06

159:02 - 160:05

Were you ever at any time advised that

Target Mortgage was able to do any loans through PNC

08

2

Okay.

05

lender — an individual by Guernsey, G-u-e-r-n-s-e-y.

159:02

Q

Do you recall sending this e-mail to somebody?

03

A

I remember giving Jimmy — giving the

04

authorization for another lender to obtain information

05

from Jimmy, knowing that he had all of my information.

06

Q

And —

07

A

But I don't specifically recall this e-mail.

08

other than the fact that — no.

09

my -- a copy of my letterhead.

10

Created with TranscrlptPad for IPad

Q

I just — and this is on

Does that look like your signature at the bottom

6/17/17

Page 67 of 72


11

of the second page?

12

A

It is.

13

Q

And do you recall signing a document similar to

14

this?

15

A

No.

16

Q

Do you recall making authorization for him?

17

A

Yes.

Q

And do you recall the lender that it was — that

18 19

it's prepared in connection with?

20

A

I don't.

21

Q

And were you exploring a loan through that

22

lender, or was it your understanding that Mr. Osborn was?

23

160:19 - 161:24

A

I don't remember the circumstances surrounding

24

this e-mail, other than the fact that I had given Jimmy

25

authorization to use this information and provide it to

160 01

3

But that doesn't mean that I —

other lenders.

02

Q

And provide it to lenders?

03

A

Yes.

04

Q

So any number of lenders?

05

A

At his discretion, yes.

160:19

Q

So is it fair to say that James Osborn was

20

authorized to contact any lender on your behalf that

21

might be

22

wanted?

As he was searching for sources at

funding.

25 161:01

Yes.

A

23 24

able to refinance and obtain the rates he

Q

And so did you consider him to be kind of your

relationship manager?

02

A

I did.

03

Q

And so —

04

A

I entrusted him.

Q

And then you were paying him for expenses; is

05 06

that right? MR. SAMOURIS:

07

THE WITNESS:

08 09

expenses

10

PNC loan

11

BY

12

Lacks foundation.

I was refunding what he said were

and giving him money to set up reserves for the •

MR. WARFEL:

Q

And if he incurred expenses in searching out

13

other lenders, is that a type of expense that you believe

14

you would have been reimbursing him for?

15

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

A

No.

Not — I mean this — these kind — I don't

6/17/17

Page 68 of 72


16

see any expenses surrounding this kind of inquiry.

He's just packaging information and sending it

17 18

out.

Q

19 20

MR. SAMOURIS:

21 22

4

162:15 - 163:08

speculation.

THE WITNESS:

24

one way or the other.

Q

162:15

Calls for

I couldn't answer that question

Was he more a your financial — did you consider

him to be more your financial advisor?

17

MR. SAMOURIS:

18

THE WITNESS:

19

MR. SAMOURIS:

Objection. He

you don't speculate now.

21

time.

THE WITNESS:

was

Asked and answered.

Go ahead.

20

22

It's important that

It's your state of mind at the

At the time I entrusted him as

23

my -- having the fiduciary responsibility to advise me

24

and process the loans.

25

BY MR. WARFEL:

Q

163:01 02

When you say advise you, do you mean regarding

your overall financing? MR. SAMOURIS:

03

THE WITNESS:

04

174:07 - 176:07

Objection.

Argumentative.

23

16

5

And were — did you think he was an employee of

each of those lenders to whom he sent the information?

05

loans.

06

BY

Lacks foundation.

As it relates to negotiating the

MR. WARFEL:

07

Q

Including searching out loans on your behalf?

08

A

That's what he was there for.

174:07

Q

Okay.

08

09 10

11 12

Did you think that Mallison was working

on the PNC Bank loan at this time? A

No.

Q

And so what were you trying to accomplish then

in May of 2015, regarding loans?

A

I'm not sure what I was trying to accomplish or

13

what Jimmy was trying to accomplish.

14

to my mind as a response.

15

16

That's what comes

Q

Okay.

A

Because he was out there working these loans and

17

he would call me and said he said this to this person and

18

he was directing me to send things out.

19 20

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

Q

Okay.

And so this was Mallison asking for your

tax returns, and then you apparently asking Nilda, her

6117117

Page 69 of 72


21

saying I don't want them give them out.

22

get them into the wrong hands?

I don't want to

23

A

Right.

24

Q

So I'm a little confused?

25

A

I am too.

Q

Why would he be talking to other lenders on your

175:01 02

behalf during all of 2015 if there was any PNC Bank loan

03

or more than one PNC Bank loan that was your real

04

objective?

05

MR. SAMOURIS:

06

Do you know what was in Jimmy's mind when he was

07

doing that?

08

09

THE

BY

WITNESS:

No.

MR. WARFEL:

10

Q

11

that?

12

A

13

Calls for speculation.

Well, what was in your mind as far as him doing

At this point in time I was following him as my

trusted advisor and --

14

Q

And you just can't remember what he said?

15

A

I'm — yeah.

Q

So in January you're telling your insurance

16 17

agent — if I'm understanding you correctly — I'm going

18

to do one more set of refinancings — and you're

19

referring to the PNC loan?

20

21

A

Uh-huh.

Q

Then in January you're applying to Target.

You

22

didn't think they had anything to do with the PNC loan,

23

did you?

24

A

No.

25

Q

And then in May, you're having communications

176:01 02

with Robert Mallison.

You didn't think he had anything

to do with a PNC loan?

03

A

No.

04

Q

And so did you have — did you ask any questions

05

about why you're applying -- were there other people that

06

didn't have anything to do with the PNC loan?

07

Created with TranscriptPad for iPad

A

I don't recall.

6/17/17

Page 70 of 72


Case

Hage V Got Mortgage Depos

Issue Code

TEN1014 - REIMBURSEMENT PURPOSE

HAGE, JOHN 2/1/17 VOL 2 1

137:06 - 138:14

Is there anything that would refresh your

137 06

07

recollection as to whether you pulled $50,000 out in

08

October

09

2014 from the Tennyson property refinance?

A

Okay.

Yes.

Because that $52,000 was

10

reimbursing me for costs of improvements on that property

11

that I had taken out of my personal checking.

12

Q

So you increased the basis?

13

A

That's right.

And I was very careful on this

14

property

Because, again, this was the subject of 1031

15

exchange

and I didn't want to pierce that veil of going

16

over what the costs were in that property.

17

Q

Okay.

18

A

And the initial cost was improvements.

19

Q

And so you wanted to get as much out as you

20

could at that time?

21

A

Yes.

22

Q

Okay.

The next one —

MR. SAMOURIS:

23 24

And so —

Well, hold on.

That's not what

he said.

MR. WARFEL:

25

He just said yes.

MR. SAMOURIS:

138:01

I think he said that he wanted to

as much as he could, without piercing the veil.

02

take out

03

He wanted to be really careful about doing that. MR. WARFEL:

04

05

That's right.

Well, up to that

point, he wanted to get as much out as — THE WITNESS:

06

And no more than what was invested

07

in the property as additional cost basis on the property.

08

BY

09 10

MR. WARFEL:

Q

Because that would affect your taxes on a

complex 1031 exchange —

11

A

Yes.

12

Q

— to later do it in the future?

13 14

Created with TranscrlptPad for iPad

Okay.

Thank

you. A

Correct.

6/17/17

Page 72 of 72


EXHIBIT 18


0MB Approval No.2507'02aS

A

A.Settlementjiateinent(HUD-1) WiNAL

RrtR

RHS

3.

Conv. Unlns.

Conv. Ins.

6. FOsNumbef:

7. LoanNumbon

240.1304517-KM

20139B

8. Mortgago Insifsncs Case Number 1

C. Note; lh\s Tonn /s tumtshod to give you b slalomenl ofBcluaf setilemenl oosls. Amounts paid to end by the satUsmonl ogont are shown.

Hemsmatked '(p.o.c)' wore pa/dout^do tte etoslng;thoyero shown horo ta-lafoimaOonalpurpozBS end are not kaivded In the E. Name and Address of ScHer

D. Name and Address of Boriowan

5 B 32Nd Street Apartments Us

i F. Name and Address of Lender ASianco Portfolio UOVantis, Suite 515 Aliso Vtep. CA 926S9

<187 Kansas St

SanDlBga,CAB2104

K. Seliiement Agent: Tltb955 Company

6. Property Ljjcailon:

84D4753959 L SetlivmonI Dale;

SOOO Birch Street. Suite 300 Newport Beactr. CA 82650

4187 Kansas 8t

SattDlo90.CAS2104

October IB,2019 ReeofiSng Dale:

Place of Somemei\t: 5000 Birch Street Suite 300

San Diego County,Caitfotnla

October 1B.2019 CHsbuncment Date:

Newport Beach, CA 92660

J.Summary of BorTOv/or*sTraiisacllDn

OdoborlB,20l9

1 K-Summary of Scllat's Transaction * . ' ' mmmm-

101. Contraot sales prico 102.Farsonat propartv.

401.'Con(rad sales price

402. Parsonal property

-.103. Settlement chBrcoi to borrower(Qne 1400) 104. Payoff of first mortoaqe loan •

246,552.48

105. Payoff of second mortqage loan

403. 404. 405.

Adjustrrients for Home paid by BOller in advance

Adjuatmanta for Items paid by selier In advance

103, Cilvn'own laxee

406. City/Town takes

107. County taxea 109. Aesassments 10B. . m . .

♦ .

407. County taxes 403. Assessments 409. 410. 411.

.

..

111.

112.

1

I

.

412.

120. Groes amount due front'Borrower

246.552.46

4tiO. Gross amount du« to SelI.er'

mmsmmsimmimmmmsm 201. DdpoaS oTBameat money 202.Pifndoal amount of now loanfs) 203. Bdstlnq loanfs)taken eubled to

375.000.00

204.

205. •• 203.

207. 203. 209.

501. Excess deoosR fsee Instructions) 502. SetilemcrdaHeroeslosallarfiins 1400) 603. Exislinq loanfs) taken subied to 604. Payoff of first mortqaqo foan 506. Payoff of second morloBQB loan 506.

.

507. 508. 509:.

. •• •

Adjuslfnenls for Itomi unpaid by soller* 210. CIty/ToWn taxea 211. County(axes 212. Assessments

.

AtQustments for Items unpaid by scilor 510. CIlv/Town toxes 611. County taxes

I

612. Assessments 513.

213.

214. 215. 216.• 217. 21B.

514. 515. 516; 617. 618. 51B.

• .

219.

220;Tola) paid byffor Borrower

375.000.00

301. Gross amount due from Borrower(Une 120) ■

302. Less aniounl paid by/for Borrower(Unb<220) 303. CASH TO BORROWER

I

620. Total reduction amount due Setter

60.1. Gross amount due to Seller(Una 420)

246.552.48 375,000.00)

002. Lees reductbns due Seller ftJna 520)

128,447.52

603. CASH TO/FROM SELLER

(

)

.

1>t» Pvbfe Reptnftng Burden for|N» oollecOon of InlorntaBtm li eattmDled at 9E mlnulee par reipome (sr collocUnB,revlevrtne. and ropsHlng the data. Tbic agency may not coHod this

Infetnulbn.end you are not requbad to conflate Siis {otm. unless It displayt t eunrontiy valid DMB eonltol number. No canndenfoRt/ ti assurod; tills disclosure it nsandalory.7hls is dsiigned to piovldo Die parflua to a RES.°A ccvured traneaclbn vtllh InlomiBlte)Oudng l^iO seUlBmenl process.

Certified to be a true and correct copy of the signed original. TltieSBS Company BY:

Dept

Previous edilions are obsololo

PlW»d OB ion WOIS si 13<38PM

2«MTO<5J740WM HU0-I.PSBI1

HAG/ALU/001295


^?L;,seurctheniciiaTQcs

■■'V-vs:'-/V i"

\

sniir^f |

1 ' • DMslan ofcmmlssfon (Bno TWj as loaaw^w

1 701.

to

1 702.

IS

to

H

703. OoRvnlaton paid at salUemenl 704« • .. .

BDl.'Guroriglnallon'chaTgft-

.

. •

'

.

1. 1

.

S* 9.375.1)0 (ffofir6F&#t)

802. Year efedn or charge (points) for the-spedneinterest rate chosen 803.?fourBdiusted'origlhBtlon'charoB8

{from.GFE ff2f (fromGFEM)

B04.Appral6adYa8

(&omGFE#3i

*

-805. Credtf repbit to AIHanco Portfolio B06.Tax sorvtoe to Coraboic Tax Servtca 807. Flood carUftoatbn

9,376.00 50.00

(from GFE 03) (from GFE 93) (from GFE #3)

96.00

9.37S.0D

60S. Broker origination fee to Got Mortgage

750.00

609. Froceadns fee to MHanca PorifoBo Bl0.t.oan doournentfee to AtBanca Portfolio 811. Undonv^ng-fee to ASbnce Portfolio 612. Consumer reports to Afibnce Portfolio 813.\Mro.transf8rfeB to ASanco Poitfollo

750.00 Bsaoo

245.00 160.00

1 • 901; blereist from 10/16/13.1041/01/13 to ARlanco Portfol @ 3 B5.79452/day (IB days (a 9.98000%) < 802. Mortgaga'lASU/ah$d>premIum for 903rHoii»oWhBi'6:(nsuranco*.:

004,.

.m'onUrto

• *

for

1003. Mortgage bsuranoe

1004. Property taxes 1005. 1008. 1007.

.

.

.

.

(from QPE99)

months (S 9

perrnonth

months® $

perrnonth

months® 3

perrnonth

months@3 ' moiith6®3 -months.® S

••

1.458,00

(fromQEESII).

»year.io •

1001. Initial dapDsIl for your escrow account' 1002. Homeownatb insurance

1,539.55

(from GFE910)

(from GFE 93)

..:foF.:J,0yoW.lo.*';5lh5iAmerfcahSpeclaUy

1

1

1

1 1

perrnonth • pertmonlh ' . por month

1101. Hfo sen/toes'and tandar^ HUa* Insulanea Id Thlbass Company 1102«S6ttbnMnt'ordoBlngfsbtoTUte365Comparry

j

1.770.001

(from GFE #4) $

i

|

450.00

f 103. Ownerb title Insurance

(from GFE 55)

1104. (.oanPoBcyPrsnOum to Tlt)a366 Company $ 1,020.00 1105. (.ender^ tub poBcyfimU $375,000.00 1108. Owner's Utb polby itorll IIOT.AgenfspofUon of tttetotollllb Insurance premium (oTBIeSBSConrpany $ 110B. UnderwrReib portion of the total tUla insurance premium 1109. Payoff Handling 1110. endorsemaMfeo to Tlite365 Company llli.courlarbe to Tltle365 Company *

1 867.09

$

1

163.00 0.00

$ $ $

1112. notary/signing fee to AM6'As8Bls,lno

75.00 25.00 200.00

1

1

1

1

rt2ookbjlKmrao'h&Jlwri)giriflifwi)lsrxWlfldC.hfll:BMitoafi^^ 1201. (3ovemmenl reconfbd diaroas to TtOeSBS'Company t202.Deed$' ; .Mortgage) 93.00; Releases) . 1203.TransfeMaxw. 1204.Clty/Couhtyta)(/6tafipB Deed) Mortgags) 1205.St&tatax/stamps. : OesdS • ; Mortgage)

(frorh 6FE97)

1301. Reoulred services that you can shoo for l3b2.1st'l/22013-20t4tbTaxCcll9c(or 1303.1 who to berrower*Afnnliy Escfow.ServIe66 to aRinity escrow sen

(from GFE 5B)

•131)4,

1305.

.

.

..

...V ' •

••

83.00

i

(frornGFEW)

1,318.3 1 218.730.6JI

i'v

-

.

-

|l4DO.TolalSeUl5mentCtiargos(enleronllnBs-103,SectIonJandS02,ScctionK)! ■ ■ -

248.5524 3

Certifled to ba a true and correct copy of the signed original, TiIIb365 Company BY;

Previous ediDorts are obsoteta

P(M«d en lOneaOia «1 13«S8PM

340-ia9«S17«KMm HUO-lPaatl

HAG/ALU/001296


41^ Firith Eatlmato

HUD-I

# 801

9,375.00

9.376.00

Your oedlt or charge (points)for the spesffic Interest rate chosen # 802 Your adjusted origination charges # 803

9,376.00

9.375.00

Chargos That'Cannof fncrdaee

. ^|p

HUD«i Line Number

Our ortglnallon charge

Transfertaxas

#1203

ChB'rg8pThat1nTo.tarCpn'not Increase MordiTharripYp " •

'Good Falth'Bstlmate

.

vHUD-1

Credit report

# 605

50.00

50.00

Tax service

# 606

98.00

98.00

Government recording charges

# 1201

93.00

83X)0

241.00

241.00

Total

Increase botwoon OFE and HUD'1 Charges $ Charges That Can-Change

Dally Intorest charges

# 901 $95.79452/day

Homeowner's Insurance intltal deposit for your escrow account

# 903 # 1001

0.00

0.00

or

%

Good Faith Eetimate

HUDrl

1,539.55 1,458.00

1,639.65 1,458.00

Loan Terms Youf-tnltia)loan amount Is

$ 376,000.00.

Yxrur loan term Is . .

Youflnldreslrateijs ■ ,* *

:

' ;•* ' •.

3.00 yaara

\

•Your inlUal-mbnthly*amount ow^d for prtnolpal, interest and * 'any mortgage iiuurance is

9.99000%

9 3,121.88

tnciudes

□ Principal mtntoresl

D Mortgage Insurance Can your Interest rale rise?'

li] No □ Yes, II can rise to a maximum of

%. The first

change wilt be and can change again ovary after Every change date, your Interest rate can increase or decrease by Ve. Over the life of the loan, your interest rate is guaranteed to never be lower than

% or higher than

Even if you-make payments-on time, can your loan b^ance rise?

E] No D Yes, II can rise to a maximum of $

Even lfyQU.makb payments on time.-can your monthly •

d] No □ Yes. lha first increase can be on

amount owed Tor principal, Iritbfest, and mortga'ge Insurance rise?

%

and the monthly amount owed can rise to $ The maximum It can ever rise to la $

^ Does your loan have a prepayment penally? Does your loan have a baSoon payment?

□ No d} Yes, your maximum prepayment penalty Is $ 14,985.02 . □ No m Yes. you have a balloon payment off 378,121.89 due In

Total monthly amount ovred lndudlng escrowaccdunt payments

3

years on

jx] You do not have a monthly escrow payment for Items, euch as

property taxes and homeowners Insurance. You must pay those items directly yourself. □ You have an additional monlhty escrow payment of f that results In a total Initial monthly amount owed of f

This Includes prlncipat, tnterest, any mortgage Insurance and any items checked below:

CertiHed to be a true and correct cop/ of the signed original. Tltle365 Compan/ BY:

Note: U you have any questions about the SeltlBmenl ChargoB and Loan Terms listed on this form, please contact your lender. Previous ediliohs are obsolole

lanwaw i »4:S9p«

HAG/ALU/001297


Borrowen S B 32Nd Street Apartments Lie

Seller:

4167 Kansas St

San Diego, CA 92104 Lender: Alliance Portfolio

Settlement Agent: Tltle365 Company 9494753959 Place ofSettlement* 5000 Birch Street Suite 300 .

Newport Beach,CA 92650 Settlement Date: October 18,2013 Disbursement Date: October 18,2013 Property Location: 4167 Kansas St San Diego, CA 92104 San Diego County, Cailfomla Title Services and Lender's Title Insurance

Payee/Description

Disclosure

Tltle365 Company Settlement or closing fee TIIIb365 Company Loan Policy Premium Title365 Company

Borrower

460.00

1,020.00 75.00

endorsement fee

Tltle365 Company

25.00

courier fee

AMG Assets, Ino

200.00

notary/signing fee Total Title Services and Lender's Title Insurance

1,770.00

Certified to be a true and correct copy of the signed original Tilia355 Company BY;

24e-1304517-KM/32

Prinled on 10/16/2013 ot 1:34:S9PM by tparkison PSQV 1 of 1

HAG/ALLU001298


EXHIBIT 19


1B50 Hclel Circle North,Sulle 110 San DIogo, CA G2108

AFFINITY SCROW

Phone: (619)260-1200 Fax: (619)260-1250

SBRVICQS

BUYER'S FINAL SETTLEMENT STATEMENT PROPERTY;

BUYER;

1125 Savoy Street San Diego, OA 92107

DATE;

October21.2013

Oclobor18,2013

J. Scoffeld Hags and Bonnie Grace

CLOSING DATE; ESCROW NO.;

Q0M69.JZ

Hago, Co-Trustees of the J. Scofield

end Bonnie Grace Hage Family Trust dated October 6,2002

DEBITS

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION Total Consideration

CREDITS

1,295,000.00

Deposit from J. ScoBeld Kage and Bonnie Grace Hags Depositfrom J.Scofield Hage and Bonnie Grace Hage. Co-

35,000.00 204.000.00

Trustees

Depositfrom Titlc366 a/c J. Scofield Hage and Bonnie Giace Hage New 1sl Trust Deed - Alliance Portfolio, Private Equity Finance, Ino. LOAN INFORMATION - Alllanco Portfoflo,Private Equity Finance,Inc. [Charges $52,096.60] Origination Charge to Alliance Portfolio, Private Equity Finance,Inc. Loan Origlnetilon to Got Mortgage Wire Transfer Fee to Alllancs Portfolio, Private Equity Finance, Inc. Tax Sendee Fee to CoreLoglo Tax Senrlco Document Fee to Alliance Portfolio, Private Equity Finance, Ina Processing Fee to Alliance Portfolio, Private Equity Finance, Inc.

UndeAvritlhg Fee to Alliance Portfolio, Private ^ulty Finance,Ino, Intorest at$246.328B/day from 10/16/2013 to 11/01/2013 to Alllanco Portfolio Loan Servicing Tiust

218,730.62 900,000.00

22.500.00

22,500.00 200.00 148.00 900.00 900.00

1,500.00 3,448.60

PR0RATI0NS/ADJUSTMENT3

Taxes 8l$6283.B6/semI-annuaIIy from 10/18/2013 to 01/01/2014

2,548.45

OTHER DEBlTS/CREDrrS

Hrth Avenue Insurance Sorvlces for Homeownor's Insurance

Rdelity National Home Warrantyfor Home Warranty Policy TITLETTAXES/RECORDING CHARGES - Uv/ycra Tttio Owners Title PoUcy Seller Paid Adjustment Owners Title Policy ALTALoan Policy Policy Endorsements Messenger Fee Sub Escrow Fee

Loan Sign Up Fee to David Baronbrugge Recording /^wlgnment of TD

Average Recording Fees Documentary Transfer Tax Seller Paid Adjustment Docajmentary Transfer Tax

2,288.00 40.00

2,758.00 2,758.00

1,103.00 625.00 30.00 75.00 175.00 105.00 120.00

1,424.50

1,424.50

ESCROW CHARGES - Affinity Escrow Sorvlcca 2,073.00

Escrow Fee • Loan Tie-In Fee

Doc Prep/Email Loan Docs Messenger Fee/Ovemlght Fee Total Refund TOTAL

95.00 100.00 70.00

1.288.57

$ 1,301,913.12 5 1,351.913,12

SAVE THIS STATEMENT FOR INCOME TAX PURPOSES

Casa"'

PSP


EXHIBIT 20


OMa Apprfivai No.2l>03-p265

I

^ *'

atement(HUD-1)

A.Settletnenl

FINAL

x5/

1RHS 3. Conv.Untns, Caw.tns.

6. RieNumban

7. Loan Numbor.

240.1400292.KM

201412

a. Mortgaga Insurance Case Number.

C. Nole: Thisform kfumJsfmd io glva you b elsfomenf of ocft/e/ esfttemsnl cosls. Amotr/tfs paid to and by iho selflomani agent am aboivn.

Aems moifced fp-o-o^* weng paid outside the olosJoff:thoy an shorn hon for/nfoimetfonafpu/posos'end ere not Msluded In t/ie fofa/s. (340-l4003n4(MraS E Name and Address of Se^r:

0. NameaDdAddrDSftofBarrowen

F. Name and Address of Lender; AlSance Poitfotb

SB 32nd Slreel Apadmenlsj LLC 4167m71Kwsaia

120 Vontts suite 515

A1IsoVIo)o,CA926S6

Son Diego, CA 92104

H. SolUemenlAgBn!; Tnis365 Ccmpany. ' 8494753959 1, Sttttmront Date: 5000 Birch StreeL Suite 300 Newport Bcaoh,OA 92550

0. Proper^ LocsUort 41S7.4171 Kanaai Street

SanDk>go,CA92104 Son Diego County,CaHfornlB

Reecrdlng Date:

Place ofSetUemanb

LOTS 7 & B BLK154 TR LPOOOBPQ

SOOOBIrcltSlroot Suite 300

February 11.20f4

Newport Beach,CA 92669

February 11,2014

Dlibunoment Dale:

J.Summary oJ Borrower^ Transaction Ml.Corilfata^lwprtce'^*"..

1 K. SummaiyofSeller'aTransaclIon

...

yz^ip&soriaftJrdwHv...'

401. Conlract sales price

"'. V"

!* .

'lOS.'^SetUsmbnlxhBmBcfKbbrYower(llite 1400)

402;Personal croaeitt' .

'

11.016.19

'1

.*

't- /v•1

403r.

••...-'j

104>Payoff ofIflxtmorieBoe loan*.

4DSr. .-iL. .

105.Pa^ffofbbdohll-mditostiatban.. . .' ' Adjb)ilm)fn^ rorltoms'iidid bV^bltofIp'Btiv/ahce * '" •t .IDSJ'GHy/TdwnnMeaVr-^ 107: CdOntvnaxey- *'

i • !

- :w

.:v

409. •... 410. ...

^

< •

11,016.10

v.

203;E)astlit8l6an(6l.takfiiisubjeclto.«. : ...*

205: '*. 207/V. 208: •

. •

••

•* .. .

109.000.00

-

.

214:

216.

'420. Gross dmount dub tg 84j'tlj»r.''^^'iv.-:% .nU:^ "'.Vj

.:

tv. -

'

.

..

r

'

515.

-v-uNK ' v. :"•

". ••• • >.•-

:^)jlCol^p&1dl^orBoifavUor'x .

519.

..

100,009.00

3Dti'QrossBmoanlduB:frdthBo'froW&rfLlne-120)<-' • *

MiiicsAs^jp BoiwcnvER'*^^^^

• '

-

11.016.19

(

* 100,000.00) B8,9S3A1

.:

d •

'I/?*-! '-U'.'

j;j

_

.

•••

. '

.

t; --':!

-"'i'.'. ... •

'..'.r-* v'J

••

t. . •

• r .T.!

•% '

'517: MB,'.

- r '

392..CedS8tnoun(*P8{d>b'y/f<^BorfdiverfUns220) .' .

.

eili'.Oounlvthrees ' • ' • 513.'

514;^

r

■'*1

:.

Bl2.*ABBosBmontff • '

i ;

.J.

1 ' •

510.Cllv/Towntaxes

'

1

r.

.

508.

.

....

AdJustrnenU" forllbmo*unpaid ^ splloi:

. ..

♦ .."s

:';V .

'is.

j

BOE SeUtemonl charoetfId SBilw (Bne.1400).: *. •• "rl

SOB;

2ir.-Count7tajtBr.''.j. t 212.,Asse8inhenli (ir.**. 213.' . .. .. .

, • .• • *• % -v.. . ^\

504.'Payoff "of first morlaanB loan i.' ' n 5v* ''iX'-. 605. Povcffof cecond'moileafle loan.''';j •, 506. . • • •

•{ V'''*. ifr .r • L-. ■•1* .

210.ClWffowntakes

.-.

d

216. . . 217,.., 218. 219.5-..

'-.t* *-'.TTv •

507."

209.' •. I"."*/.. .. .1.*. •

--V-iV-sra • ..'tK: "Vi 'V^ '-t

503, Existinu loarifa)iokeneublecl to-: ♦ •,. "i.

. .

Adjustnienl6Tdr.!.ts1hfdhpaIH'By.so!lBf:'V '

*

'

504.

TOin-*:-

*.

.'I '-I

.V'-'f.- V|

S01..EXC865 dBDOsii(see in^dlan^l _• i!-

'•• • .•

2021. PflnfiDal-anfeunljofjiBWfioenfsV • '*

.

41Z '.

42Q.Gte^amounKdupfroinBorrovicer • ..j-v:-*.: 201*.Ococ$8dcoB#n45lihohey* |

1*.V.' T7

4ii. •

V.-r-d

• "r. '.:. • "•'x:'' :•*"«.-T'

'408. Assea'wnenld.

-.n!

m,'.: ; . •ill. .' =;• .• 112.' ; --v vsy,;'. .--.-n-.-

- • >.

405. CHVlTxAmlaxes. '407fCounty taxc5> -e' r •••

.108' AsseianenlSL."

"-'S

AdjUslmoiils for IBms>ald.bysaUorifl!4dvanpB-.'^X..j|i:^^^^ .! "'b»»r5:.:'

. . i-'t-' .

.

O20;-Tdtal reducUoK aniouni.du^p&ller; 6017Gross'bmounl dUB.lo SoJIor-fLlne 420)

■802.'*LbssredootJo'ns'due*S8lle.'f(LJriel5ao)l..

• V.V.^'l •vs

•%

^ (

)

603,CASritQ/FftqMBEaER' . *. -,; •• .' Thi Ptfcis Ropalhg Bunf sa lor Ihfi caSaetjon of InlofnwUon Is eslbnaltU al 36 inlnultft par lespsnst for coSocBng, nvlowinp, and rapoitho 0» data, ThU agonsy n»y

coS^ IWs

tnloTnuUan, and you ato nolroqulred lo eomptela (hit form, untaai II dUplayt a cuiron^ valid 0M3 control nuiRbBr. No cDnTidanDalliy Is ossurad; Ihli disciosute is maneatoiy. Tnls ts dtslpnad to povUg ihg paribs to • RE8PA oovorod Irontaclbn wlUi Infomnabn during Iho loiUomonl pracess.

Certined to bo a true and correct copy of the signed original. T111b365 Company

BY: /tmi

Prevleus ediOons ore obsolete

Prbtltd M TliMim al 2.-t3;fi6PM

240-14002S8.iCMr35

KUD-1,pog>1

HAG/ALU/001890


. . ......

MSXkiavnisilBirpBU'Bt»dlOomaRt^

•jwr * \ r

n■

^

' i*

«

/•. 'i. .;...'r.v.

..k/' "* .. v- ••

.; -

'•••..

10Z.^Ji9^teiasr^(p8&l&)«!a)9L4pArao Ulf9sit<rBttfvi)0»&iL..i,..n. .

!>W.l^U}ralsUftf<«i *.'*"4.

V

•i.otom 6Fe«Al"

'tol«&8dlLiwWtoAliIaftl»P«te&i

A

.

.\Bo&Taici8ivle&to^B&n$aIsn]iSetvlM ,V esm^DdcMiiaeaanf •::^>v\? ;B]»3fBoe8ibtfb6J9^8fiA'P6iUaRo''. :adantomt«MiaKiHrfwto-ASlaim ' ^0.tt«t8iwii&tfli$a'(»AiaEfa9rpottM!o ^' .* rd11«ConsiM«rBi6nUtoAIB8Dbb.Peitffitl9.V:.'

.

28.66 8&00

^ • ./t

. (&Bm.OFEW"> .

• . .* ' •:.• ■"

*toDmXffE03)'.M

... • .n * • .

'

.'..t-r*-

ffronkCFEfiS):

../

3.000.00

•...

.({{iBnWIffE«3)

-V.;. .

30OS0 ssaoo

- «.»»••

..

^

;

450.00 245.00

•*«

80S0

'•6Ya{^toK^5i{Blo8aohf&e'to-Cslm68^eteto^^

'• ./.•*;"

3.000SO

'f"*

E^ltoUtomlniirktati^^

rmh'Avwib^surenceto ffcniitGI^OII)

1

541S7

t"9CdrMsiMlHPni1l2d1/tH to'D3n)1^<l(0 ASandPMttarQ $ SOClOSSS/day^ (1IS dayifi 10.08000%) : IVUsrnJSP^m • tfrbwBFBia) . :• — '.I .. -1 E902jywi88ae'tesuiatib#WsniWtt .y.'. **

1 29S0|

i'\

1

1

mmmmm : .:. ffroAGFEflffl

JMi:tt{BiMlsMAfaiy»ir8saroi)y8e6bimt'^^^^ .i 400tH^nNSaid^lnntBiM-. >.^-11: pm/IwHA-' SOOS^MotosaaBBiiraneB *;•• " *. moftttttgra tor^ROAtli.'

iixUiriffiJ^inotjiih'

f006i:i *.

'}«!.

*■*.•'

'

i*,.. .*

•-.. f\u-.

nermMili* ' 'psr r^dsUi* **

1 tiiiigEgg»WHFiMBiiii>ii 1

* ,'

f102:eiail8tTiStote'deslnnfBftjAmsfi&CkRa8m

: •%<

>•

'

S

11Qa>l>nibWiIfelRBUBheb^ ^ 1f04il:esn<Ktl6i^^teniIumto^368GaA5<m

Vnre.t».

' „

• ' J'l-"'**

* .*'

.. .••

•i.-.i '

. (frtmrePBS*).

U1t«wWflft«WfwtoTO8aB5Cto^^

,.400170'

«.45aa..' •• ' •»aQo

- I--.

* * S *

.

••

mjaoi'

^

»

•aw '!• . .

t v

.

lltoCi^iVBnntBnijBfiBvB^ chs{^ IbTOoSes OftnoiitP * > .12a2.TiQ84l*.H %M'•* Mgiisasap

•.

aod

• .. ::•

...

iil4ia?tir!frTOnfl'8BTiitH MTTB^^'OOTnpOTy « • * * .s^'i..

^

. S . 72S05 • - ' '*9. M.V

%"•

.

' .ry •

'

..v.-x'-'• ■•••" • - . .f

1

u^u-:

USlrA{|6riraf)ei0D(ietQi0 tbUU^fRBOmnibwemluMtolllUSSS (tona^ .

lll«9 Ri(l.n0^hmfMifirdiffA<aJ»sSI

1.31426! ' '

w..

482J)0»^. •.«

.

iMtLtJAhhiM'h.miiB&liaaia^

,^7 ^

..a

1108niidi3iWitt8itt>pctttB{rorth9io!BtUU«1n^^ f I'icg.jiAdfHaiaaft' v. -v v \ ... •. • •

iata.WirlBKAi

•*' '-i '^^vi

•; *. '

tu. , -

•400S0*.

i'*

a*.

imwwwmmumrnsEammm^

liOf.^ratedsNldft snd-bndsi^iifio biiffr6nto4o1lSe8B6X}6fliP8Ry "'

niHa.u&*rff<faAfi^: v:.

.

.I«355fr"

'.montttteEl ' inonto®'f

. •

.

. r :

••gromOFEST)'

iH •«!IV

.

'

93.D(}

\

Rfimatoss*.

-o.. *• , '

1204.<3thiirBotaifirtaxbUnbi*.«' 'S>*'"::Q8aiCS»..i •' (^'>;uoffgaB8S

*

•' ■••

'

...'"'f

/A.

9

-

v<

. r

I5-«S5?;T3ei2^35ilE3ls?®S itSM.IlMMmd*t8ivte8ittud^eanvBh6lrfar'

'• ••*

49dlS(dlVA20ta&2Qi4tiSMloTareoB8crtf^

/••:

^.hv.

isod^Ti-i.-

;• *

•*".

0SO&: Ci"'' ' / * ..*% •*5*'

*' !. ■ "* ' • •.

".

•'"

*it.i .•'.•' **

.1^! •• • • .

■' ••(tiwnOTBSffl.

:•-••••■«Ji

■•• ■\i ••■

1

13102A

K.

'.•

...... .

.

. tr,*

H l-IOO.Total SclUcinsnl Cliargcs (enter on Jincs 103. Section J antl 502, S eclionK)

1

ii.oiai 8

CerfiBod to be a <me and eorraet copy of |hd signed original THIbSSS Comp&n/

PftaMcQtfiuttHrteiwM za-uaatauam

KUD.1«PiO*l

HAG/ALUm01891


'M(fJ>ldtfi£3U4S^S Our ort^naOoa Charge

# B01

Yoiircredllcirch8rgQ(poime)torthe8pedScinlfirBstratecltoafin # 602 Youradjusted origination dmaa 0 803 Transfer taxaa

• 3,000^

3.000.00

3.00Q.00

3,000.00

#1203

.

Credtrapoit

0 605

26.86

Tocaeivtea

# 806

06.00

26.66 08.00

Oovemmantrecoidlng ohorgaa

# lail

03.00

•93.00

217.66

Total

fneraase balwesn OFE and HUD*1 Chargee $

1

OdIO

217.65

or

0.00

%

r fTi DaOytnleraslchBioaB

# 001 83ai09se/day

Homsovmei'sInsurance

# 903

29.00 1

inlQel daposh for your eserow account

§ 1001

1

.

641.07

841.07

2aoo

Loan Terms

I tOO,OOOiS9 •.r'

« ..

•• -K-*

2*50 yean 10.98000>V

$-9tJ^.,B3-' incfudes □ Prindpal [S fntered □ fytertw^lnsutanoe. E} No □ Yea, It can rise to a maximum of dwigawSl be and can Ghai^ again eveiy

jf ^ ** *^:ti *.*^\

^tilliotiFBl attar *

Evwy change date, your bilfi^ rate can iRcreaaeor dacrease by

%. Over (he Ofe of the loan, your Interest rate la guamnleed to nevei

betowerthsn

% orl^haTthao

%

Q No □ Yes, it can rtse to amaxtmum cf$ El No □ Yea, the Mtnoreaae can been

Ae^risoT

n-fimokcwydwlhwi^ ».

and the monthty amount owed can rtseio$ Thammdroumttcanevgritftetotsl □ No

••f

'-l:''

□ No El Yea, you hove a balloon payment of 'duetn

yaarten

Q You do not have a nwntWy eaonw payment for Items, such aa

. '^15.'sj-VT-

-

SemadlrecayyourBBtr,

□ You have an additional monthly oacrow payment of $ teat resuBste a total inOtel momhiy amount owed of 9

TWa incudes prindpal Interest, any mortgege Insurance and any hems checked below;

CeitlilBd to be a true and ooirectocpy of the ^ned odginaL TSld385 Qcmpany BY:

Note; if ycubave any miestfena Bboullhe SetflementCharBea and Loan Terms Dsted on this form, please contBol your tender,

PiT;vlinifffrfWff?*r<^«^Wf

pifabooaaiwourt mmoti HAG/ALLI/0D1882


Borrowen SB 32nd Sfreef ApaftmsntB, LlC

Seller:

4167-4171 Kansas St San Diego,CA 92104 Unden Alliance Portlbilo

SefQemant Agent; TIQeSBS Company 6404763850

Place of Settlement; 6000 Blroh Street Suite 300

Newport Beach,CA 92660 SeiftementDate; FetuiJaiy 11,2014

OleburaementDate; Pebiiiaiy 11,2014 Property Loeatiom 4167-4171 Kansas Street San Diego.CA 92104 San Dtego County,Callfbmla LOTS7& a BUC154TR I4>000BPQ TIQe Servleea and Lendei^ Title Insurance

PayeelDeaertotlon

Dlsctosure

Borrower

460.00

THIedBS Company

482.00

LoanPoSoyPremliim Tttle365 Company

45.3

courier tto 75.00

endosement^ AO JeoObs

26aoo

notaiyfe^nlngfee 12.00

recording senrice Total TIfie Services and Lender^ TWe Insurance

1,3143

Certified b be e true end corred copy ofthe signed original TRler

BYt ,

Pilatetfon2ni/2014Bt siarSKWjby^oittls^

Z40-i«iom«M7u Pagslitfl

HAGfALUnOISSS


EXHIBIT 21


e & Address of Employer

•BlSelf Employed

..dCOFIELD HAGE IS SAVOY ST

oan Diego,CA 92107

Yrs. on this Job Name & Address of Employer 7 yr(s)1 mth(s) BONNIE a HAGE Yrs. employed in this 1125 SAVOY ST line of woiwprofesslon San Diego, CA 92107

B)Self Employed Yrs.on this Job 7 yr(s)1 mth(5) Yrs. employed In this

line ofworlvprofession

Posltlon/nUe/Type ofSusiness

Business Phone (Incl. area code) PosItlon/TIUe/Type of Business

Business Phone (Incl, area code)

REAL ESTATE INVESTOR

619-865-8672

679-865-8672

REAL ESTATE INVESTOR

Dates(from-to)

Positlon/ritlefType of Business

Name & Address of Employer

QSelf Employed

Monthly Income

Monthly Income $

Name & Address of Employer

Dates(from-to)

□ Self Employed

Dates (lirom-to) Monthly Income $

Positlon/ntle/Type of Business

Business Phone (Incl. area code)

Name & Address of Employer

Dates (from-to)

self Employed Dates (ffom-to)

Monthly Income

Monthly Income

5

$

Posltionfritle/Type of Business

Name & Address of Employer

Dates (from-to)

Business Phone (incl. area code)

□ Self Employed Dates (from-to)

Monthly Income

Monthly Income

$

$

PosItlorVnUe/Type of Business

Business Phone (Incl. area code)

Combined Monthly

Gross

Monthly Income Base Empl. Income* *

Borrower

Co-Borrower

$

Total

$

Housing Expense Rent

Bonuses

First Mortgage (P&l) Other Rnanclng (P&l)

Commissions

Hazard Insurance

Dividends/Interest

Real Estate-Taxes

Overtime

Net Rental Income Other(bsfors compleUno,

3.672.00

3.672.00

Mortgage Insurance

4,090.38

Other:

3,453.38

$

975.00

®

8S.00

112.00

112.00

637,00

7.125.38

$

4.917.96

Notica: Alimony, child support, or separate maintenance Income need not be revealed If the

. .

Borrower (B) or Co-Borrower (C) does not choose to have It considered for repaying this loan. Monthly Amount

f

SOCIAL SECURITY .

4.720.96

85.00

Total $ 637.00 5 7,762,38 $ 1.172.00 Self Employed Borrowor(s) may be required to provide additional documentation such as tax returns and financiai statemonts.

Describe Other Income

Proposed

Present

$

Homeowner Assn. Dues

see (he noOco In Msseribo

other income.'below) Total

□ self Employed

Monthly Income

Business Phone (Incl. area code)

Posltlonnitle/Type of-Business

Business Phone (incl. area code)

$

Business Phone (Incl. area code)

ItlonfTltlerrype of Business

Dates(from-to)

$

Business Phone (incl. area code)

□ self Employed

Name & Address of Employer

[H SelfEmployed

Business Phone (Incl. area code) Position/Title/Type of Business

PositlonHltle/Type of Business

Name & Address of Employer

Name & Address of Employer

J

PENSION

c

SOCIAL SECURITY

$

2.453.00 1.000.38 637.00

Borrower

Uniform ReslddRtlat Loan Application f roddia Mac Form 65 7i05 (rev. 6/05)

Co-Borrower

Page 2 of 6

Fannto Mao Form 1003 7/06 (rov. B/09)

SCO/VELO/001551


EXHIBIT 22


Print Images

Page 1 of 1

U.Si Bank Confidential Comniunication Requested by: Racheile Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential Information. If you print this image,,please store it In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of Oiis information. Increased security awareness when discarding or desijoying this document is recommended. Item #1 Account No.:

Check No.: 4685502704

Sequence No.: 004193152143

Amount: $4500.00

Routing No.; 12223582

Date: 08/05/2013

Front:

^

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4685502704 BATES

AUGUST 01.20W

FOURTIIOCS.NJTO nVEUUJCDREO DOLLARS AKO 00 CENTS

$

4.500.00

TO THE

ORoeR OF:

JAMES OSBORN

PURPOSEnHEMITTERj1SCanELO ILXGE Locniion: 46S5LQma portal ■ .. « j-.*

MmtoRian sicsutvre

u*i,Eias5QS7a*,n' •:122 23sa H!.«:

, 500 _ OO

s Sf"? 3

S

i ffegssfa

liffi

?

I

fS;Ti

■S Xs 7 2*

If ^

-m

fei

R

mu S - 3£ >

r

"

, ,

S J.

l&S. "

»123e«2»«8C5»Q .EB23siff flssnnrM 7376BZ2Z2i

Courts Ex.

littps://iiriage.us.baDk-diis.corQyiiiiage/JSP/Repo2lXLjsp?ImageNo=l

10/15/2015


^4^

G

o

Print Images

Page 1 of

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested*by: Rachelle Tubongbanua *

.

.

.

This check Image contains confidfentlarinfiDrmation. If you drint this image, please store itin a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding on destroying this document is recommended.

ttem #1 Check No,: 4584507B52 Routing No.: 122235S2

Account No.: Ajnount; $2500.00

H

Front

Sequence No.: 004195379823

Date;08/15/2013

ic.

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684507852

as-is*}

• ItZZ

OATb

i

1

AUGUST \A. 3013

I PAY

TWOTIIOUSA.'V'O FIVCIIUNDRCD DOLLARS A.SO 00CCKTS

&

S z.soo.cyo TO The

ORDER OF:

JAhiES OSIJORN

PURPOSS/KEMITTER: s

LocaUon:

I

FOLST LOMA OS? Ov 11 M

a•ItBa^50?fl 5 2n'

■»

i; I 2 2 H 3 SB 2 I«:

HJtunfl'ito

to

^2,SOO.OO

Back:

I 9l"iS

1

S *3?

Ii

'if

»£•

r ii: 1 5l:

•s? -

r . o

-,-r

a


0

. n

Print Tma.oes

Page 1 of 1

U.S, Bank Confldentiaf Communtcation Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua ■

This check Image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please store ic in a seojre place to avoid

unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased seajrity awareness when discarding oe destroying this document is

recommended. Item #1

Sequence No.: 004194841345

Check No.t 4584507889 Routing No.! 12223582

Account No.:; Amount;- A2100.00

Pate: 08/23/2013

Front!

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684507889 im

0AT6>

PAY

august 22. 2013

TWO I'KOUSA.NT)ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ANO 00 CENTS

$ 2.100.00 TO THE

OBDER OF;

JAMES OSBORN

PURPOSEmEMnTER;J SCOFlQJS llAOE Location: <6s* point lo.sia

POgSaT 05443 oooa g?/53/2fli3

USBCKB

r

B'I.tat, 50788'Ju*

use

L

t

S3

1&2 , 100,00

I 2 E S45a 2 li:

Back:

.

i

3

% Tf5-S ^ ^jo: ss ■ 4 ci,tt g » 4s a 5 S';

T ;4 * • f!

-1^

■i ?-i

s?-fi rstiifii i -ss s!?!! m

111 ^ l« r

flo

11 • s

.-ifl P

ill p|l si T-

-I

... , -i,

.. >

CJ* >

-7

•:.■

-

/ •

3. T

1

I

/•

/T r^rrv

rr>

»t r i

nr


C?

n

Print Images

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by; Rachelle Tubongbanua •

'

'

This check Image contains confidential informatlon. If.you print this Image, please store lil in a secure place to avoid unauaigrized usage of mis Information. Inaeased security awareness when discarding or.destroying this document is recommended. Item #t Account No.: Amount: $3000.00

Sequence No.: 004193538123

Check No.; 4684507911 Routing No.: 12223582

Date; 09/03/2013

Front:

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684507911 IJ3J

Dfl-TBI

PAV

AUGUST 29. 3013

TltaSSTHOUSAND DOLLARS AND 00 CSHTS

$ 3,000.00 TO TK£

ORDER OF:

JAMES OSBORN

PURPOSE/nSMfTTER:J.SComELD 11ACE Locmion: <gs4 jointloma

5JOT

it^a

.uitMonna siCwAn^

Jf2

H

J

^3 > OOO .. OO

u-k&ai«5D7Rl IIP t:i2 2235B2lr: Back:

?!

f'i kU

I min i mi •>=£r * "•

its

".-ir-

»—•

Tf

^: .

4.... L».

u

J.--

/:

/rnr* /r» _

i :_ .nr.

-v t


o

o

Print Images

Rage 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by; Radielle Tubongbanua •

;

■ffiis check image contains confidential information. If you. print this Image, pl^se store ItfJn a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of tliis informabon. Increased security av/areness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #1

Sequence No.; 004197622999

Check Mo.: 4684507950 Routing No.; 12223582

Accoiint No.: Amount: $2500.00

Date: 09/04/2013

M >■ X X. X .sc.

Front:

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684507950 lixt

□ATb

PAY

SSPTEKnUiR 0}. 3013

TWO TltOUS^SD FIVE HUMORED DOLU,RS AMD 00 CEMTS

&

5 2.500.00 TO THE

ORDER OF;

JAMES OSBDRN

PURPOSE/REX.flirTEH; J SConutD HaCE Locotton:

*os4 pouvt lo«a

^ M

i>'u&auso?ssaa*

U tt . M.

us

_ y !-■

S".^r^'T0023 •? S3 !p2 , SOO - OO

i;iSBg35a2iiC

Back: ??Trv t :

i. ?§.• ^3 J *1* *

i; 3^5,. cl .3

I I

' s^

sS' I

Ja; *.2 v.

HI H i111 [ft'

ill

I

S3 5S

-O

I

I is-

.C

3 C

s

c-?:

C

c s

9 5^

" S-

its ifc»

g| S?

hi |§

*!* -4• '

* »

Ra

i2 1? '

1*^ I

"5^1 8g| a B

tJ230€®«w&csn '•E J2S7 JQ W5PET«1

^.jTzmatraE.

,;./

.

j i

55. U

r/TO O /JTN


d

o

PriDt Images

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This cSieck Imefge contains confidential information. If you print this Image, please store itf In a secure place to avoidIS unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or-tiestroying this document recommended. Item #1 Account No.: • AmounU $860.00

Check No.i 4685502780

Sequence No.; OD41975D9O09

Routing No.; 12223582

Date: 09/20/2013

Front;'

C^isank

'■ CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4685502780 DATE:

PAY

SEPTEMBER 18. 2013

EKarr HUNDRED SIXTY OOLUVSISAKOWCEKTS

S

$

860.00

Q ■£ t 1

TO THE

OHOER OP:

JAMES OSBORN

PURPCSE/BcMITTeR: J SCOFtEtD IIACB Location:

<ass loxia poxTAi.

o B«u&a5 5Deyaon-

U3

;

CK trVTMOAfaOOONMUltf^^

1 Ft.-R^T S-36aO . OO

t:ieeaasa?it:

Back:

Z3;c=i5

»123^22S^e«0jS

£ saif JO 055 nrr oi 75MC193?

u< Uju-._.//i

t

J-

J

/TOrim _

-..x-t./-1

*.-._ot—

_xt

i

1

1

/r\

^

r-


O

C:

Print Images

Page I of

U.S. Bank Conffdential Communication

ReQuested by: Rschelle Tubongbanua

.

This check image contains confidential inrormaaon. If you print this image, please store fb In a secure place to avoid unauUiorized usage of.this information. Increased security awareness when discarding ot. destroying this document is recommended. Item rti

Sequence No.: 00439085S194

Check No.; 4684508045 Routinq No.; 12223582

Account No.; Amount; $850.00 *. Front;

Date: 09/23/2013

Kw.irir-rTrTurnn

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684508045 1222

t>A-nt PAY

SEFTEKtBEB.21.2&t3

EKBfT UUWDSED FIFTY OOLLASS AND 00 CENTS

$ 850.00 TO THE

ORDER OFJ

JAMES OSBORM

puRPOSc/naviiTrER: Location:

scofielo uacg

kekt LOi'tA

nna<it

V*liAStilwil Atiedsaoe UmngtifTi. U>t»4»

n

iJSii X .1

«QSO-OO

«*i,&a»iSoaoi.S'«* »:4 2asasaei«; Back:

- r .» .X

i^QS- S ^ •

? -13t

.

i :?l|/ l%\u.i; 13 is

• t.j- i 37 c

v7f' *4 s

.is\

tV ^S

p|«15 n ■

A

r

a-ui i'

V4l V a|i \ 42'

I» f?.J

V .'U2»S4®<«2a20i3 S

sSv

I lif

'•

•C"'" ..T

.C' •-

•'t .';)

.

'

1.


o

o

Print Images

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please store it'in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #1 Account No.: Amount: S7900.U0 Front:

Sequence No.: 004190301226 Date: 10/01/2013

Check No.: 4584508079 Routing Wo.: 12223582 wM ••

n i« W.JC IT, f T tr <r

CASHIER'S CHECK

Mo. 4684508079 . I3U

P&TSi

S1i!>TE).10ER 30, 20(3

SEVEN -njOUSAKiJ KIKE HONORED DOLLARS A.NT3 00 CENTS

PAY

5 7.900.00 TO THE

^.

onDsn OFs

JAlilBS OSBORN

PUBPOSE/nSWllTTER::SCOFXELD llACE LoonUon; 40S4 poIbi Lomn

a-ttrts-tiSB

UJ.tt»at Kuwot Mlln-wJil.

I/SB CK e. rt.iWi r>i 1H

JG-ae. «r a£ac

Tscs4-1

^7,"900-00

ipi.&ac50ao7^»» i:i2 2Z35a2it: Back:

-err

iitk l(H

i'lft ffliiimfi ^ Hia iiili g» SB

11?•# .

4

S??I: Q - C q .58io' 5

f'*jls

\S' s>

^' i. ■■ C

O V'

ajfl

r-'4 z "r?

.-a..

Is

5«S r> a)

.>:^i22^ias "■ ■ hr-4^ CP

U'Ifj 2 sSl hi "r

C

V

flJlfilgn sdl

'

: O

I

^

1-^ B":

,C .

.

-•


^

d

o

Print linages

Page I of

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

:

This check Image contains confidentiaf information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended.

Itetfi #1 Check No.; 4684508080 Routing No.; 12223582

Account No,: Amount: $7900 Front;

CASHIER'S CHECK

Sequence No.: 004190608629 Pate; 10/01/2013

No. 4684508080 DATCi

PAY

SEPTEMBUR 30.3013

seven thousand H1N£ IIUNDJiaO POUAM AND C» CENTS

$ -7,900.00 TO THE

ORDER OF:

JAMES OSBORN

PUHPOSE/HEMlTTEH:i SCOFIELDIIACE Location;

Ptiim LsnCi US SAHi:

*

4 X 0023V3-3-

o'kBfit* soaoaon* i;iE 2 23Sa2l«

II

?! iMl

jikr*'

. V<x-- jF- v®' dO ;T$V.

f ..

//•

1

1

^


o

o

Print Images

Page 1 of I

U.S- Bank Confidentfal Communication Requested by: Rachelie Tubbngbariua

This check image contains conndential information. If you print this Image, please store Ur>^ecure place to avoid unauthorized 4jsage of this-information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended.

-

Item #1 Account No.;

Amount; S3800.00

Check No.: 2597511503

Sequence No.: 004193625297

Routing No.; 0929Q038

Date; 10/11/2013

f T? ***** ** ** •

Front:

CASHiER'S CHECK

No. 2597511508 «*

OJkTt;

OCTOBER. 10. 2013

TIKEETHOUSAHD EIGtIT HUNDRED DOLLARS AND 00 CENTS

PAY

$ 3,SOO.OO TO THE

OPDcR OF;

JAMES OSBORN

PURPOSefflSMITTES: J SCOFIEUJ IIACE iS£lLU!2L5flJiSB

Location: TSfl Bituaon U J.a»A

US VH

JUi«lMle

,

. , ,n

r-.

u xin

"-

sSVOOSOZS31 ^3,SOO-OO

n* 2Sq 7 5 I I soau' »:042RDD3fl 3»I Back:

llHIlilill

^■'r In IsSslfal'F'ls 12 I 9f S.? if

f '

-

,

~

ililhsri; a, . r. .-..,35 i-?-- si If rlf S iS i 32-K n >7^ oo f 5 Srv ; If i gsr? f H 5 la ^ _ . -■Z- mm IlllflSsgli ||t?| -h/s.

|f|l|i i IllPl I

•>^ \ O"

ust?; S' «S S|V""^- r •

ii

.Op-.

^ ■

.^1r- "X.-'lr.v 1

isi «^l

/o.


ri

O

Print Images

Page I of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by. Rachelie Tubongbanua

j

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this Image, please store it fo a secure plare to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security axvareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommen ded. Item #1 Account No.:

Check No.: 5137505132

Sequence Nq^: 004196000503

Amount; $4500

Routing Ho.: 09290038

Date: 10/15/2013

Front:

■ CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 5137505132 DAm

OCTOBER 11, 2013

FOUR THOUSAKO nvs HUKDRED OQLLARS AKO oa CENTS

PAY

s4.500.00 TO THE OROER OF:

JANtES OSBORN

PURPOSE/RastTTER: J SCORELD BAGS

tocaUon: J1S7 Won SdJ Sd si

10/1^013 t2i36 USB

o

MJL, BukNawl AsaseU* MK AUSa

SBU1URC

fi|iQBOg3S172: ,&00.oo

B*5i3 7 50StaEs* i:oqaROD3a3»: Back:

Z-41? i-53

.c

liliiiffll

i f 111 pill

\ 11]11 mi I I If i £ Ipli f i Si j

Plle-

mil

IIKl'i/.oilif o *• -"o E —.5 [st »

n J

s' -.7

A.

r'

- rft

i' v.* :

w'(n • -

\ .V

- «23««28a<ai^B p63«42^1^1?

-y. - c

. r-

2 ^

t;


o

o

Print Images

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested byr Rachelle Tubongbanua

^

Tbis check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, plrase store itIn a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of-thls information. Increased security awareness vifhen discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #1 Account No.;

Check No.: 4684508171

Routing No.: 12223582

Amount: ^19000.00 .M w » H. Front:

P( 'K M ni, r.ii w '°-i

^

Sequence No.: 004198429111 Pate: 10/25/2013

"r T

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684508171 mi

DATSJ

3 * «

3

OCTOBER »,2015

1 a

nineteen thousand OOIXASS A!*0 » CENTS

PAY

$ 19,000.00

i 5 M

;

TO the

I

ORDER OF; JAMES M OSBORN

I

PURPOSEATECulITTER; KHHJTI 05224HjjLB

{.ocalion: <6S« Po5« Lorn* Uj.BuxHtaaait amotmi

:33 USB

ssuMtiBt

:«r:-!ir-»:-»tr»cT>t-ieatS3^1'OC«2iyS>33 .

OOO,00

tputaw5DS171«' »:12 2 23sa21*; Back:

b ti-.f

III

11

\9-


o

o

Print Images

Page 1 of I

U.S. Bank Confidential Commumcation Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

{

This ched< image contains confidential information. If you print this image,- please store ifin a secure place to avoid •unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awarfeness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended.

—==

Item #1 Account No.;

Check No.: 4684508184

Amount: $7200.00

Routing No.; 12223582

Sequence No.; 004197017830 Date; 10/Z4/2013

Front;

CASHiER'S check

No. 4684508184

52527 ISO

ofcTb

PAY

SEVEN THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED IXJliAHS AND 00 CENTS

$ ORDER Oft

OCTOBER 22, 2D 13

7.200.00

i

James m. osborn

PURPOSE/REMITTER: Locsnlont

h-a iifsn iisB

i^ioc

IjjTHoiczs sauoURl

Ujl^ lUAKiiiMalAittea*#

I oc>2ar*5'3'3' •

J

S'T'-SOO.OO

ijia2 2a5a2i«:

Back;

58a?*i55.'

Illflll' .

<■' Ul 'rik is ililj 3:i rjf

rihl la? IS

* ft 2 as I 3-25 2'^5 f

I I 'l| lirsif j s ■

'Z

T.-

r-,

o

5! bI

«!!rttfSj'o_-o .r - sS

'-V TO

r>>-1- -T 11'-*'^-

-S-

13


o

o

Print Images

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rschelle Tubongfaanua

"

^

This check image contains confidential Information. If you print tliis image, please store It in a secure place to avoid

unauthorized usage of this infonmation. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended.

rteiii #1 Account No.; Amount; $7500.00 mum i rtFront;

Sequence No.: 004195852100 Date; 11/18/2013

Check No.: 4684508293

Routing No.; 12223582 r* WM M X X.X.S6U36-JLja».

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684508293

«•»« US

DATE:

PAY

NOVEXOQER 15, 2DI3

SEVEN THOUSAND FrVE HUNDRED DOIXABS AND ttJ CENTS

$ 7,500.00 TO THE

ORDER OF!

_

JAJ»IES OSBORJN

PURPOEE/RETAmrEfl:

i

yTiTr»n t 19.

LDCStlon: <65* Pol"* Lot"

"jj'ji

USS SK H Atn^isnian iuskatum. =ire3-4Tr<3t5!3i3''?*5Cr

tUL dLnA Nxtair AuMute

> SOO-OO

soa 21311" »: I 2 2 2358 H I'S .

.r,n

?'-C

§ I i? Sgi!

st'-t qli

8

Ifl

IS

si

Pal l-2oasi J8»55-S/ fum

1 111fitIII

sal llpl

-s

i4


Print Images

Page 1 of 1

o

o U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by. Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidentiai information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure plare to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Inaeased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended.

Item #1

Sequence No.: 004193311798

Check No.: 4684508565 Routing No.: 12223582

Account No.: Amount:$1200.00 a n o»

X

Date; 01/07/2014

x.'k a JC.J

Front

^bank

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684508565

S05$B an

QATEi

3 s s

JANUARY 06.2014

s

2

PAY

-Q

ONE TliOUSASD TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS AND00 CENTS

$ 1.200.00 TO THE

ORDER OF:

JAMES OSBORN

PURPOSE/REMITTER: rur? US?

LOCSfiBn: 46B4 Pcnm lono. r»'.auTKonzm SI3MTUKC

a se- ie-'=r^

1 «19 200-OO

i;i 2 2 2358 21*: iv

^

"ly "li

Back: ow

1

B

X J S ssg f

iff mlt

I ?S-

S<A

si ==-32, *

https://image.us.bank-dns.coni/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp7IinageNo—1

n oMo

10/15/2015


Print Mages

Page 1 of 1

O

oU.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unautiiorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #1-

Check Noj 4684508644 Routing No^; 12223582

Account No.; Amount:$8105.00 ^ SB

Sequence No.: 004195850631 Date; 01/28/2014

m as

Front;

^bank

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684508644

DATE. xInUARY 27.2014

xm

s

PAY

HGHTTHOUSAND QKEKUNDSEB FIVEDOLLWIS AKD CO CENTS

$

8.I0S.00

is

i

TO THE

OROEA OR

JAMES OSBOHN

I

PURPOSE/REMnTER:J.SCOHBJ)RAGE

Location: 4684 poitnLoBU

fHagT |l»

05

fr'f■**■ f*——' .fiT-..."

u-U&BitHOa&i.i.n"

SQNATURS

f

^Q, JLOS-OO

i;].2S£35B21i:

- •v

siy

^

Back:

*JV. ■

sgis'.ia?

iiiiiitfir ioS| is.esuSf S M M ^

i iffilli-r. ; 5a* 9t«fi

.-I.® .ly llslSbS. '

Ssfo^gS

Q r*

sei &&.sSsiS...

i .as II IIS®

/

•»

S

Sf? S-y? .?|i

i" •?. i

Ht S 3.^

3«':?--s=5 i®

im

4>>

^ rip < isnilt? •i'-ca?. 11 f Islllil I r i I Wllfli i 5- . -.i*

: iSc;:* •

lie https :/yTmage.us.bank-dris.com/image/JSP/ReportXl j sp?ImageNo-1

10/15/2015


d

o

Print Images

Page I' of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communtcatlon Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information, if you print this image, please store it'in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information, increased security awareness when discarding or-destroying this document is recommended. Item

Check No.: 46B4508S77 Routing No.; 12223582

Account No.;

Amount: ^2500.00

Sequence No.; 004194531547 Date; 02/04/2014

Front:

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684508677 oatEj

PAY

FEBRUARY 03. 2014

yvK)THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLXAR5 AND 00 CENTS

$ 2,500.00 TO THE

ORDER OF: ^JAMES OSBORN PORPOSE/RaWTTER:

LoCBllori; 4£S4 P«tni Lom

no*.'

BmI MkIuMI AauSiiV*

USB CX H

WTHOKSID SISriAiTUKC

n

^

i!*t,&ai.soa&7 7'2* «:i2223sa214

^2,500.OO

p, 'ziiJ iV

^-5 > » 0% SX

p.Illlli

ga! -5 "I'B' »

^ idfl23W22$gaffiM< s ?.a s-

)7. 1

I

T


Page 1 of 1

PmtImages

o

o U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Radielle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential information. If you print this Image^ please store ft in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information.Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is rec]ommended. Item #1

Sequence No.: 004195470839

Check No.: 4684508697 ing Nc No.: 12223582 Routing

Account No.:

Amoui^ $6343^00

Date: 02/13/2014

sssaz^fsass

Front:

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684508697

saiSL mi

DA-m

PAY ^

FEBBUAS.Y 11,20X4

SIXTYimEETHOUSAND FOUa HUNDRED TWELVE DOUJkBS AND 00CENTS $ 63,412.00

«

S

3

\

TO THE

OROEEOF: 'JAMES OSBOBN PURf^SSKEftHTTBI:gB 32WD STRESTARARXMEWIS UC *

.Loeadom 4684 Pobalaaa [

1BABii*»3faii1»TnirfiiVn HWr»tnBi.lWgatt

I

*

**

;*

OSS

WBPIP

c"' '

.-

E 6323 m ew HSW

US BWiftK =OUWI 11.

1 1.

n*t<&a^5oaBS?ii° i:£2SE35aEii: »

V,-'

t?

Back:

-U

§|SfSga Qn«< ^

£ 5 SS I S 3

S S 551 B.s a

S s fi sf»

§ Q

1'g ■ iQ

5

«

o *7

cS • Jj afY S3 CO .

pg: ifttf„

2?

lz

ii,

S- §=l

gs' o ir ,

^

S V SfiS I

if Ilii

.'v

k t| llllli?' fislllss ? f

t

EaSBlSsJ I 3=

SI

# 55 ^

o

5a

I1 I slim f gI-i

11 i|p| fi do??! 0M13 0009 d&S3/^||fs5'^

'

I f aFsSf I sS;

. %-

c

-

SB 5ii\ SS p

SS trp* o 1

U8

an H i S34;

«ys3

V

2

https://image.us.baiik-dns.coin^mage/JSP/ReporfXl.jsp?]m^eNo-l

10/15/2015


Page 1 of 1 Printlinages

o

o

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

recommended. Item #1

Sequence No.; 004192078194

Check No.: 4684508725

Account No.:

Rouong

Amount:

Date; 02/19/2014

No.: 12223582

Fronft

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684508725 date:

: PAY

FEBKCrAB.Y18.20K

FoORTHOuiu^NDFIVEHONiaiEDDOtLAaSAHDOOCEMTS « 4,500.00

TO THE

ORDBi OFt JAMES OSBORN auisg

Locadpn: 46Bt Pubi Losn

u«i,Eia>«50fl7 2Sn'> iS I E E E3SB 2 l*: v.r-5jr^-Kngr

II ICsliS

"s \ u.

gs

• ■

si

:p

SS

im li o

l

3=i' iSpl '.o

llllilll

n.

h1tps://image.us.baiik-dns.com/iinage/JSP/ReportXl.jsp?]IinageNo-l

10/15/2015


Print Images

Page 1 of 1

o

o U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requestied by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential Information. If you print tills image, please store It In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying tills document Is recommended. Item #1

Account No.i

Check No.: 4685503034

Sequence No.: 004192470275

Amount: ^60000.00

Routing No.: 17223582

Date: 03/17/2014

^bahk

No. 4685503034

CASHIER'S CHECK

DATE:

MARCII12.2014

SIXTK THOUSAND ttOLLAXS AKD DO CENTS

$ 60,000.00 TO THE

OFtDER OF:

JAMES OSBORN

PUBPOSeReVUTTBl; Locdoon! 4685 LonaPom

a.S341.10023SS3 i:ieeE35Bsi> Back:

it liiHsii Mm

||l|i '.(> t.iisal

6r _

.5 En

2

...

••0 -'vv , r;"' r\

;

-

yt> ]ittps://image.us.ba3ik-diis.cora/image/JSP/ReportXLjsp?ImageNo=l

10/15/2015


Page 1 of 1

Print Images

o

o. U.S. Bank Confidential CDmmunic..tion Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please ^ore it in a secure place to avoid

unauthorized usage of this informatjon. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #1

Account No

Check No.: 4685503047

Amount:$1000.00

Routing No.; 12223582 w-THlS DOCUUC'JlT CCHTAl'iS ATnUC

Front:

Sequence No.: 004197204204 Pate; 03/21/2014 '• HOLD TO t-lQHT 70 VtCW'

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4685503047 DAXEt

PAT

MAROI20.2014

ONETHOUSAND DOLLARS AND 00 CEKTS

«

1,000.00

TO THE

OBDEH Of=:

lAMES OSBORN

PURPOSE/BEMnTER: [jDCatlon: 468SLonaPattid

UULiJU—6En

UiiVu ■!»

USB CK K

D'<.ga55a3QW7Q*

i:LB2235fi21(:

Back:

*-'i I • «T 2" 4 si 3

11^-

•• OS SS ffl

s^ng'i

.■

littps:/ytaiage.us.baiik-diis.com/iinage/JSP/ReporfXl.jsp?ImageNo-l

10/15/2015


Page 1 of 1

Print Images

o

o

bank

U.S. Bank: Confidential Communication Requested by*. Rachelle Tubongbanua

Th]<; check Imaoe contains confidentiai Information. If you print this Image, please store It in a se<^re p a<^ to avoid

omS taS^Hon.Increased secuVa«areness when dtecertlng or destioying this documente

recommended. Item #1

Check No.: 4684508922 Routinq No.: 12223582

Account No.:

Amount:$8240.00 Front:

.... f. ta' n w.n A K A

Sequence No.: 004193794025 Date; 04/04/2014

w i

CASHIER'S CHECK

trpb^k

No. 4684508922 ^ OATE : AFRB.03.2014

I. PAY

a

^ _HCin"njOOSAND TWO KDNDREDFORTirDOLUMtSAHD 00CENTS $ 8,240.00

.TO THE

.

!ORDER OFj* JAMES OSBORN puRPosEmasnTER: : *

Location: ' 4GS4 PeSoi Unta

^-;tLS.t)^8.^dAaaddfcB

*

masT

uajH

UBB CX K

nwn««w»»o»««w a IZA-a

iPt.6aWSQaR 2 En" iS 1 S 2 2353 2 Back:

9-^ https://image.us-bank-dns.coni/mage/JSP/ReportXLjsp?ImageNo 1

10/15/2015


Print Images

Page 1 of 1

o

o

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print tills image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #1 Account No.:

Check No.: 4684508935

Sequence No.: 004197835040

Amount;$1250.00

Routing No.; 12223582

Date: 04/08/2014

a

Front:

PC

a.w jT.a ax*

aiik

^CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684508935 .

]_PA.Y

OKTSt

AFSIL07.2014

■ ^oNBTHOUSAUDTWoHONCHEDHFTYDOlJ.ABSAKBOOCanS $

1^0.00

"Tfo THE -• V **. :G^oei Qpr JAMES OSBORN

[j.PURPpSBPEMn'TEni^ l-r"';' 1 Ljocation;'kfiSIPoiaLaaa ''ttT n.iiVSl.u«MiaA«aHldm

•KllgigjllJWiW,

> Hfl

tiy.n* Iiga

..

1 ~.

ifi^EiSt.SDa'iasii'' i:i.E3E3 5a2i<i: Back:

\z> fil «a3

Iff! if ||„

till fl ■fts| li fiSi IHol afsf Sf lags

5 liiii

m

shHil I |i^ 'Ipim i e » 7 o I*

M

2

riu|i|| h| ' liflil I

1

s

^3 litfps://image.us.baDk-diis.coin/image/JSP/RepoitXl.jsp?ImageNo-l

10/15/2015


Print Images

Page 1 of 1

o

O

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested byt Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential Information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #1

Account No.: Amount: $425.00 Front:

Check No.: 4684508972

Sequence No.: 004198633988

Routing Wo.; 12223582

Date;04/17/2014

SA FT JA M-9A n

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684508972 DATEt

PAY

APRIL 15.2014

&

four inB!DREDTWEKTYHVEDOLl.AHS AND CO CENTS

-I

$ 425.00

1

TO THE

ORDER OF:' JAMES OSBORN

.PIJRPOSE/BEMITTEft^ . "f • • f***L5cation:

Po&a tona / mifraiin

> ,

MTrry«it.MM3W

1

1.

«>■=»-. tar K-tar ir ii-sr

iFii.BaW50a9 7 20° i: I 2 2 235a El*: Back:

•»>' aiaf aci

•ill Mi'?!I h Ijil |||{i:||r rsg H a^r

I

^2* If

D

C\

ill fills^ ..2i

T

^

>

o

S

r

OS

D

O ^2

O o

^

11

15

OJ5 T30

5,^ -•

I ^s&5S.

I fillllll i 'si-fS^li

o. —• —H?* />

Sf.

Sif %tl I fi

^

ill r

■V O, ? -::s. O .

':V *Y. JT

. >....

....vV ..r:^ •..

^4https;//image.us.bank.-clns.com/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp?IniageNo—1

10/15/2015


o

,o

Print Images

Page l of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Radielle Tubongbanua

^

This check Image contains confidential information. If you print this Image, please store itr in a secure place to avoid

unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or-oestroymg this document is

recommended. Item #1

Sequence No.:004197557714

Check No.: 4684509009 Roirtinq No.: 12223582

Account No.: Amount: S3000.00 yr ir.V^.K *• m

Front:

.

Date: 04/25/2014

> .1* a ffit..

A K A

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684509009

i

wsvt

M

na

DA7&

s

A?RIL:!3.2014

1 o

PAY

TUSaEETKDUSAKO DOLLARS AND 00 CESlTS

$

3,000.00

"•'oRDcn OF: JAMES 0SJ30RN

.waPOsajKMiTT^ . '^'l^bcafiOfU..'M>BVrobBLon»

/ '. '

n/ffo

w/yi/?nia i^.si i»p

OS BftHK Ci: .ffs.-wrtf-tsrtc.sfif «'f334'1'dffiSS

OXeKXWkvlAKWWe

'

ffi3,OOO-OO

50S0D91P it I E 2 B 3 SB Back:

nflflrirTfcoi^^ v-'i

i •|| s| i

.«• V' Hl§

s-;tli^s.-r7. -Q'

•c

i

"

It -*


Print Images

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: RachelleTubongbanua

This check image contains confidentiai information. If you print this image, pl^ease store ® ^ ursuthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this dooiment is recommended. Item #1 Account No.:

Check No.: 4684509070

Sequence No.: 004195530314

Amount! S5222.16

Routing No.; 12223582

Date; 05/12/2014

'■ R- w.T g-

^

-CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684509070 OA-res

MA.y 10.2014

|j_PAY ■- pivE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED TWafTV TWO DDUARS AND 16 CENTS $ TOTHE

-•

. 'ORD® Ofe

.

-

-

-

JAMES OSBORN

I puRPosBpB«irrfe_ i^'Cocatiqn: '.'4^4 Point £«»" „ I

5,222.16

. MIiRcBKi. W jW_

•_

1

.-.g.O/WC

n3A

US BW« c< i^nHORsasWATOitt ■

0'».6a».5O«ia?Ou' i: I 2 2235fl E I.*

lifetiUllliiii iflir /F Uisl 111 lulls, s

s

S3^

ht1ps://iinage.us.baiik-dns.com/image/JSP/ReportXLjsp?ImageNo 1

10/15/2015


Print Images

o

o

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: RachelleTubongbanua

This check image contains confidential Infbrmadon. If you print this Image, please store it in a se^re place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #1

Sequence No.: 004197141930

Check No.: 3033500938 Routing No.: 12223582

Account No Amount; A3530.00

Date; 06/09/2014

Front;

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 3033500938 JUNE OS.2014

■niREETHOUSAND HVE UUKDRHD-niUCTlf DOLLARS AND 00 CENTS

$

3.530.00

TO THE

ORDER OFi

JAMHS OSBOJRN

PUHPOSE/BEMTrTER: J SCOHELO IIAGE

Location:

3033 PJUVCUENT RES SAN Dltco

•^CuTvtsntzcd

U3 BAiSC CK n -J. S.3^1

o IFaaaisQORifio"

°sg?iS2 |P

Back:

I IS fa 5 If-a

"iL

EiZEBJflWfKroa

:X75?77733Z7, .

..

https;//iin.age.'us.baDk=-diis.coin/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp?IniageNo 1

10/15/2015


Page 1 of 1

Print Images

bank

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this informatjon. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #1

Check No.: 4584509167 Routjnq No.: 12223582

Account Na.{ : Amount; 42800.00

- ^CASHIER'S CHECK

Sequence No.; 004190678023 Date: 06/11/2014

No. 4684509167 BATS>

JUKE 09.2014

?„ PAY' " -TWOTHOlISANDEK!IirHUNDBEDI)Oll.AaSArac»CENTS $ 2,800-00

i . TDTHE • . . i !bRDEH ofT JAMES OSBQRN

S \pUBro's5pbiin'i^_

.

A'-••7--

Locadoni .46MbHatliia»

.

US SkS''. 7 <un«OBa£D sojttTuae }

m—

-1

jc Sff-.a-a-ar ar-ai^grs >Cf i

^2,SOO.OO

n«W6a>a5DT I67ti« i: i g 2 23 SB 2 ii:

[Iff 11 11.

^5.s'i al Sisg

it im

|l ^1 liSi lltffW I lipii

I

"ii pllli

rtiitiiitfiii fiiiil^^ss® liiHlif I li npi

iililffl s iihli I g ii gii■ tit!

littps://iiQage.us.bank-dns.corD/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp?IinageNc>-l

|i

T


PrintImages

Page 1 of 1

o

o

bank

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidentia! mfbrmadon.ff you print this image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this informaSon. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #1

Amount;$2552.00 Front:

•s ts S

Sequence No.: 004190678021

Check No.:4684509168 Routing No.! 12223582

Account No.

Pate: 06/11/2014

B ai'BS SB SC.CUC:

-;-:CASHIER'jS CHECK

No. 4684509168 ^ DATE:

JUNE09.2014

THOXJSAND HVEKOTTORED HFTTTWO OOLLABS;iAMD 00 CENTS

.$ 2,552.00 V

u*.

-'4

.TO THE

;.'iaRDmoFi * lAMK OSaORN

\TOiu>osEmBMn"t^\ .i LocaSon:"'iSBA'ptratVona

^1 _'r, '_

.sz-nia

*

V-

yg

SS2-00

t£"i.E,awsoqi&au» i:iE5Z35a2V*s 'jJ

ue&

Cit |AVTK0IUZCDfi8NACrUlte

"■■i' -"s"-—:- r-

m

M

4

=if illsf III I. lliuMl

ht(j)s://iinage.us.bank-diis.com/unage/JSP/R^ortXl.jsp?IniageNo—1

10/15/2015


o

o

Print Images

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This -check"image cdntain& confidential ihforrhation. If you print this image, please store it in a se<^re piacs to avoid

unauthorized- usage of thls information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #1

Check No.: 4684509193 Routing No.; 12223582

Account No.; Amount:

Sequence No.; 0041S6058908 Date; 06/17/2014

Front

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684509193 ^ bAits

'.pay

JUKB IS, 201<

one TBOUi«JOTJCaEEliyW>REO fifty dollars AKD 00 cents $ 1.350.00

TO THE

; oaOEH OFi* ■ JAMES OSBORN . puHPOSE/BEMnT

Lbcaiioru ««wVoiMiJom» HSIUSDS

ii*q&flU509

«: i 2 2 S3sa E

fgtl-!

^ S I l-fifrei

iiH'Z

.-T

MR-

IlilPitu 1 I -rilnil I I

3d


Print Images

Page 1 of 1

o

o

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by; Rachelle Tubongbanua

t

ij

This dieck imaae contains confidential information. If you print this image, piease store it in a sei^re p are to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended.

i

Itein#l

Account No.:

Check No.: 4684509232

Sequence No.; 004195403154

Amount;$1250

Routing No.; 12223582

Date: 06/27/2014

Front;

CASHIER'S CHECK

No.

4684509232

BATE.-

_ PAY

JUNE 26,2014

■ fOHETnoaSAND TWO HUNDRED FBTY DOLLARS AND 00 CENTS

$ 1.250-00

ORoa^oi?'"JAMES OSBQBN

^BPOSE/REMiriT^ I AJ LoCBdorie

4684 IHtoLoxsa

t?-v: i«ct>

*

USB a «

te-M-a. «■

r' uXBtikltadgoflAsaediidda

ftmtomaawMvm

l'<y<5!23*PS3

a»i«&a*.50R H3 2a° "S 12 2 2358 2!"'Bade

S»l ssl

ff S (>•«>#>■•

^

»

-

• t

r- _

' O- '2^ 'O- -- —" C*-

»0

.* s

S2 ? ^ g lit 4?

|it|

jfl III -s-s

Jh

htlj)s://image.tis.bank-dns.coni/image/JSP/ReporfXl.jsp?IiiiageNo 1

10/15/2015


o

o

Print Images

page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Reauested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

t

-j

recommended. Item #1 Account No.:

Check No.: 4684509289 Routing No.: 12223582

Amount; $900

Sequence No.; 004195171627 Date: 07/14/2014

•Ti'.ni.WTiT ~*?f n-n T.~ y *<

Front:

-CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684509289

«i-«n

DATE; "jULY 11,2014

^ pay' V-TaNE HUHD2ED IXILLAR^AND 00 CEN^ $ 900.00

VORDER OPC '^AMES OSBOWJ ■,e^RPOSE/HEMrrfER;_ ■'"(J5c9tlor\;/.4JW>oittLona . j _UA.|uA.HKlBul^uaet.<»

SajlAJiiSUiSB

I

atoST"

? r

J.

' ,oo

B"t«sai.sD'isasn" «:iHsaasssm Back:

112

FllliflSsii siiif r -n ffhllil s

feP

3^


o

o

Print Images

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: RachelleTubongbaniia

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure gara to avoid

unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is

recommended. nem #1

Sequence No.; 004194535784

Check No,: 4685503227 Routing No.; 12223582

Account No.: Amount; 3:5912.19

Date; 07/28/2014

Front;

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4685503227 tzu.

datej

pay'^

roi.Y25,20H

mm THOUSAWD NINE HUNDRED'nVBLVB DOLLARS AND 19 CENTS S

5.912.19

^foti^ '1.

/•ORoSiQFj. '.'JAMES OSpOItN

■ '*

I^RPOSE/RgMnTER: """bOcnUon:. ■tSsSLontit'pnal"

.. 1 -

/

p/jnij

OffClfll .fl

USS CK M •

r*'

ii.M nea

5'3-»il'0'0"23'5^53'"

''

1'^

"■1,60 550 3 2 27"' >! I 2 22358 2 I'l

• ^

Back: Lssff

5si

5 B

at f = 2Sl

il!

■11 11 fllflf

Hill

_

'•» 5 « a sSrslS!

Is Hsilg

|i

■■.?f'feillsllsflif|giss. ii|l§ 1 i

'•'•■"' '.I • m", ."A"! W

•:C.: "V.

lii lis!r|f?'''7 ■

54r,f|

w lib'

. - •..I

S'- o '5 -gg

«5 i||u ssI stf5 PS s 5&s5 |i;

iii| II

- >o33- ^t3

g 5.^1 ^2

*} iPi '

33. ^

*

4

!<■* rs *4


Print Images

Page 1 of 1

o

o

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requeued by: Radielle Tubonglbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure

^ avoid

unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is

recommended. Item #1 Account No.;' Amount!$750.00

Check No.: 4684509346 Routinq No.: 12223582

Sequence No.: 004195628758 Date; 07/29/2014

Front:

tipbank

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684509346 DATCt

.. PAY

W-3BO

JULY 28. 2014

SEVEN HUKDBEORFTYDOLXAXS AND 00 CENTS

$ 750.00 TO THE

ORDER OF:

JAMES OSBORN

.PURPOSE/REMITtEB: Ldcatioru 4$S4

Lom USB CK H

<:1 2 Z 2.3 5fi Z It: Back:

'ii 11 ■'81 'ilfl'f s=sll sl li

illlii

I'll? I? li Ssl f iS-S §H li tS 1*8 ®

its© S5S

§§! Ifgrtli'

Sa3M22mzm4^

iHilitl f

lEBfiS 10«5FKr«l

JWlfflZW

V

I |ul|l 3 ♦

If 1

.o

34. https://iiiiage.us.baiik-dns.com/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp7IiiiageNo—1

10/15/2015


Page 1 of 1

Print Images

(

U.S, Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential informatjon. If you print this image, please store it In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this infbrmalion. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended.

'

Item #1 Account No.:

Check No.: 4684509347

Sequence No.: 004195628757

Amount: $750.00

Routing No.; 12223582

Date: 07/29/2014

so a cs JB

Front:

s Sb

m,ffL

agi y

T 9f

CASHIER'S CHECK

bank

No. 4684509347 13ZI

DATEI PAY

JULY 28.2014

gcvpw miVPaED IflFTY Dflt 1 ARS AMD DO CENTS

$ 750.00 TO THE

ORDB? OF: JAMES OSBORN .PUFtPOSE/REMITfER: * LbcaUon: 4fiS4 Poim laaa ' •tL$.BekZt*4aBilAiieeuae»

USB O ^ m. ^ m s

10023«753 ^VSO-OO

»»i.&a<«SD13W7«" i:ii22235aHl»; Back:

c/

-rr-'

u

assS-Sgs'

Ullsli,

r i2o 4 ■ iSlfSI.'

o p ' - sS

° E! §1

iSllli

EiS'

^

^K

o

"S.rj

_

O 2

llfl 11

S|r..:o - f.. 3IS —

IJ is: Kaj

^ z ^P ^

.

jc- ^

3r.

]ittpsL//image.us.baiik-diis.com/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp?ImageNo-l

10/15/2015


Print Images

Page 1 of 1

U.5. Bank Confidential Communication

Danic.

Requeued by: Nodia Daluz

This ^edc Image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #1

Account No.: 165600478821

Checit No.s 2964

Sequence No.; G04192656220

Amounfa $1684.00 Front:

Routinq No.; 12223582

Pate;08/07/2014

JSCOFIELDHAGE BONNIE GRACE HAGB

G(>-35d2/l£2?

2964

^ 14iaCARLBTpNSQ.

I , SAN-DIEGO.CA 9210^2013 I

PCTH

So

EAanOTHasORDJSROf:

00031

AllaJt5Ssen4ngyou»'

CKH

KlEMO

USB

H ^

^ X {,

i:125235a2ii: ie,saoot.? '"I'

''"'iri' ifnt )iwi" I'll Iiri ;

. oo i||i > ii'ii r imr ,11 iiimiH tjniij _|

Back:

• tJ

https://image.us.bank-diis.com/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp?Image... 10/13/2016


nrmt images

c U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

o

AUGUST 07, 2014

i;20o.oo

a

5

8

m

i

Page 1 of 1

Sequence No.: 004193713415

DATE:

s

-* Cui3-533

0033'FS;3

^ 2. , 200 - OO

=-S^S>5

•-■s s

-I

£

'I

"

lO/lsmT;

sillfelf

.a

information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is

Image contains confidential InfiDnmadon. If you print this Image, please store It in a secure place to avoid

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This

Check No.: 4684509400

Item #1

Account No.:

* ■_

'' Z

^ 'S-' O ^

r~

No. 4684509400

Date:08/08/2014

■i.**

• ;CASHIER"S CHECK

Routing No.: 1222358?

Fronts

'

'"^.it^TTODSAND TWO KUNIHIEDDOUARS AND » CENTS

.WRPOSE/kEMrrfEft:

Locatlori: _ 4Ss4 hfiit

§ QS» I

u"t.&'a*.50'iW00n" •: 1 S 2 23 Sfl E i«:

*-v - r*

~ **. -

|. s ORDHt OFl 'IAMES OSBO^

TOTKE

.^bianlc

Amount: $1200.00

Bacic

'fsf if

io •

-O >.-D' Q

siI I |i°if c -■ ^ f i"=§l5 i?---" I I -is iBlilil j:- - •>. ,o iSi

ft

ssldISi I Ijlliln ;

hflps:/y1mage.us.baiik-dns.com/image/JSP/ReportXl,jsp?ImageNo=l


Frmt Images

Page 1 of 1

o

o U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Radielle Tubongbanua This check image contains confidential Information. If you print this image, please store it In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of tbis Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. £tem#l Check No.: 4684509401 Routing No.: 12223582

Account No.:

Amount: $484.00 Front:.

-IB.W m JS.K

Ss. =?

Sequence No.: 004193713413

Date: 08/08/2014

^

r"

[T^bjank

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 4684509401

,_PAY

sasB 1213

OA7&

AUGUST 07.2014

'-.' fourHUHDSED EIGHTY FOUR OOLLASS AND00 CENTS

a

$ 484.00 ;

TOTHg

..

.

7 ORDER oi%'JAMES OSPORN. ; '.WRPdsBBEWflTTHU 'LScation: 4S84^oIatU>Bia

r-J

S34'1'0023*?S3 -OO

ti*l«&Bi«5Q'3<,Q]|iP i;i2 2235aS&r:. •"'V" jrrv-

Back: W?S

BSSg Og

sltissi

a p r/i ii

-13 a sSaP-™

Q ^ li

ilf

W

a

aif siiS *.8

-

i-'.sa

I'

•i*

*

•«

ra O

:E5g» p flgPKTgl ^£> ^57S52f5 .a* XT*

1?^ ill

3^ htfps://image.us.barik-dns.com/kQage/JSP/RepoitXl.isp?]niageNo=l

10/15/2015


o

o

Print linages

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidentiaf Communication

recommended. Item #1

Sequence No.; 004194-135498

Check No.: 468450945B

Account No

Date: 08/27/2014

Routing No.: 12223582

Amount: S310.00 K jC ^

Front:

J*,A.it S* ,1

Xii *t I » >», ,Tt tc JS

CASHIER'S CHECK

Nb. 4684509458 ^ j OATts

PAY

AUGUST 25.2014

",_TBBES BUrnWUiD TEK DOUARS and 00 CENTS $ 310.00

:OBOER OF:"'JAMES OSBOKN PURPOSE/PEMITTER; Mil? USB

"L5cation: <St* Poan Lena

OS fAW. d

tiJ-aad-KoBil Awcud*

m.

M ur ttf-ar «-sp

iPt,Ea*.5D9*«Sa«' c 12 2 235B 2l«: Back:

II fest&v 31..N;

.V

"

111

fli I III I ii

K'X H?41

3^


rmiL images

Page 1 of 1

o

o

bank.

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Racheile Tubongbanua

This dieck image contains confldendai information. If you print this Image, please store It In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying tills document Is recommended. Item #1

Account No.; Amount; ^3623.06

Check No.: 4684509495

Sequence No.: 004190393036

Routinq No.: i7-?7^582

Date;09/03/2014

Front;

^d^bsink i!"■'

.'It'-.'* r-

CASHIER'S CHECK ** "V

'

'

*

No. 4684509495 OATCi

SEPTEMBER 02.2014

-^^ThBEETBOUSAND see HUNDSED TWENTTTHHEE DOLLARS AND 05 CENTS S

3,623.06

,TOTHE

; idRom df^- 'JAMES OSBORN

J. puRPosE/R^rrtEH: '.'"'tjOcatIctU..46S<VcnmLoBB • r: - i -

B"i,Erat.5a<ii«'i5«"

t;zi sB£35a2ii:

Back;

l®'Hi iiH y

*"s

II II

m

M

4^. https://miage.iis.baiik-dns.com/image/JSP/ReportXLjsp?ImageNo=l

10/15/2015


o

C)

Print Images

Page-1 of I

U.S. Bank ConfidentfaJ Communication Requested byi Rachelle Tutx)ngbanua

This check Image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please ^re it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is ■

recommended, Item #1

Check No.; 3033500955 Routing No.; 12223582

Account No.; Amount;

Sequence No.: 004193352988 Date; 09/29/2014

Front

CASHIER'S CHECK

No. 3033500965

w-?w im

DATCi

SlilTCMHUR 16.1014

TftX)"ntOCSAND HIVK liC.N'ORCU DOUUAKS AXD Oa CUNTS

$ 2,500.00 TO THS

oRDErt OP.*

^

a I

,

MMliS OSUORN

PUfU»OS£mcMITTEn:i SCOnlnJMlACU Location: JOJJ I'RlVCUliNT RliS SAN ouso

CSj34

o ii»3a3 3500R6Sw i:i 2 2 235B El«:

w.1 mi' uCujT J?. Ct.

USMW

i 3'3j4.3.002.^'?S3 ._j s SOO - OO

Back;

5 - c:»9 ^. 5 ■; b fc, ii

5 ►* } 5 ...

j - -I « < -«

E £272 ID 4S5 PKT «1 7371^53

41


PrintImages

Page 1 of 1

o bank.

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by; RachelleTubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential information. If you print this Image, please store in a se^re place to

unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended,

=^===^^

Item #1

Sequence No.: 004192241874

Check No.: 4584509733 Routing No.: 12223582

Account No.:

Amount; ^23800.00

Date: 10/20/2014

Front;

rrp^bainlt'^^.X.V• ■. . i.,PAY

wo. 4684509733

^*V' ' '

r

xtiEmYTHREBTBOlBANDEKSHTHaNeBEDDOLLAKSANDOOte^

TO THE

• ' .

.

.•g

OATO - GCraaHEC 15,2014 .. r."'

T OROSi OFif^iAMES OSBOSN •: ..PURPOSEmSvirrTER; .:?«#•}.> .

I

"

V. v_.

V riTu--.

L.Ocation;../6B4 Potet laaa

5QR7 3 3U" i: I S E E3 SB H l»; Back:

sif-v'/-, S3, .a;

m if fililhiT sililni

>'er5tse>

4p-< littps;//image.us.bank-diis.coin/image/JSP/RfiportXl.jsp?Im^eNo-l

10/15/2015


Print images

o

CI

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Radielie Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential information. If you print ttils Image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unautiiorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discaniing or destroying this document Is recommended. rtem #1

Account No.;

Amount; ^23800.00

Sequence No.: 004190704977

Check No.;6 Routing Wo.t 12223582

Pate: 10/15/2014

Front; ^ lOOOS

J.SCORELD & BONNIE G.MAGE 35)0 ELUOTT SmEET SAN D£Ga.CA S210G.1355

90-3SH2-Jl?77

JWTD TKCORDB^ OP

TDOU-ARS

a 00028 04£B4 OOOB

10/1^.^14 11;31 USB

USB CK H

"OQD6 ^sSaiQ00.,00 Back:

^ m

hS "> t. ja

r« >1

43. Mjps;//%n2ge.us.bank-dnB.coin/image/JSP/ReporfXl.jsp?IiniigeNo=l

10/13/2015


^

PriBt Images

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential ComitiBiiioatioi} Rficjuested by; Noelfa Dalui;

Item #t-

Accoant No^ 165600472821 Amotmti $11550.00 Front:

Check No.: 45

Seqaence No.: 009091590823

RouHnq Na.i 1

Datei 11/13/2014

J.SCOnEU> a BONMIE G.HAGE

X0045

Keltic

SANaSIIOBJjOTTSTAST UIEQO, CA 92iO&5355

90.3$SZ-12Z3

—gtoll/n/a014

Oebm J. GaUaiadci

J 2p*11,550.00

Elev^ Thousand Rtfe l-lundpeclf%y Onhi******

.DOLLARS a S

tr i a 2035a 2 jii: ai&5BiOaw7aa0.i,ii«iarai,g Back:

«« is 3.31^1.

5;4TQ3?5i^4-sj4o

<<•< r*

O"

■ X

* VI-

n

tJTU

f4. irttps:/ytaiage.us.baiik-dns.com/iniage/JSP/RepoitXI.jsp?Image... 10/13/2016


Print Images

Page 1 of 1

U,s. Bank Conndential Comtnunrcation-

bank.

Requested by: Noglia pahjz

^usage contains ff you print this Image, please storeoritdestroying in a securethis place to avoidis unauthorized of this confidential information.information, Increased security awarfeness-when discarding document tccornrn6iiQ6u•

Item #1

Account No.r 165500478821

Check Nopj 46 Roodho No.^ 12223582

Amount:$11550JO Frbnfci

o>

Sequence No.: 00309158t0822

Date: 11^13/2014

J.SCOHELD a BONNIE G.HAGE

titbsnk

SAimesa CA.^a9&.1355

9C>.3SS2.1222'

1O046

Debta J.Gallardo Eleven Thousand Frve Hundred FHtv Onhr******

1,650.00 .DOtLARS

B

I

>: 1 s£sasa2lit

v&s&DaiiVaaaidi"

Back:

3 '.a

>s-

JF?ior-g^F>Crr>acT«S3rt5c S.5.^^J^S. T.4.1S

.tjr

IXS „

I-

lit^s://image.us.baiik-dns.coin/image/JSP/RepoitXl.jsp?Image... 10/13/2016


Print Images

Page 1 of 1

bank

U.S. Bank Confidential Conununication Requested by: Noeila Daluz

This c^eck image canlalns confidenHal informatioTu If you print this image, please store It In a secure ptace to avoid

unauthorized usage ofthis Information. Increased Security awareness when discarding or destroying ii^ls document is recommended-

Item#! Account No.; 165600478821 Amount:$2350.00

Check No.: 47

Sequence No.: 009093444048

Routing No.; 12223582

Pate:11/14/2014

Fronts

10047"!

J.SCOFpUD^^BOj^g^HABE 90-3Ba2.12Z2

fWVTb IHEQIWiiR OF

Pebna J. Gaitardp

TWO"TTiousand Three Hundred FOhr OnlV**»^

fsi 5 s 235a ELt:

^ei1/ia2014 ^*2,350.00 .OOtiABS

]|&^&Q□^?aa2 Lil

Back:

htl5>s://image.us.bank-dns.com/image/JSP/ReportXl ,jsp?Image...

10/13/2016


PrintImag^

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential CoiTimunlcation

ank.

Requested by: Noelfe DaJuz

This cbe^Impge contains confldential Information. If you print this Imaae ntease storf h- in a conifo niara

rSSded"^®^®

^

Jnftrmatlon. Increased security av«areness when discarding or destroying this documeriis

Item#l

Account No.fr 165600478821

Check ND.fr 51

Amounfc $2000J0

Seq.uem:e No.i 009095622686

Routfno Njo.fr 12223582

Date; 11/24/2014

Front:

,

SPOFIELO & BDNNJE p.HAGE SAM

'■

Hftvip

■meofineB

OP

ioosi

usbma

9CK3Sa2.1222

tola 11^15/2014

. ... ..

D^bro .1 (Sallapdo

•^^a.OO®;QO

Two Thousand Qjthi^

I

.DOLLAGS I &

i:IHa235aHi«5

i&5€,oo*<7aa2a,ii«

Back;

s- .?PHc?-Kto3aTSSTra®erfeem}t i ISM-a. 4

^ o

, €

https://image.us.baiLlc-diis.com/image/JSP/ReportXl .jsp?Image... 10/13/2016


Print Images

Page 7 of9

o

a

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential information. If you print this lmage, please store It in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #7

Chedc No.: 56

Account No.: Amou nt; $4600.00 Front:

Routing Wo.; 12223582

Sequence No.: 008352749946 Date: 11/25/2014 10056

J.SCOFIELD & BOMNIE G.HAGE 3510 EUJOTT STREET

SAN DIEGO, CA SZIOS-ISSS

90.3SBZ-1ZZ2

11/24/2014

J

Sarah^Smlth.

»P-4.600.00

Four Thousand Six Hundred

.DOLLARS

Si

Sarah Smith

i: i H 2 H3sa H n: Back:

9E9V6T:S002.00

E600-Z600

ZZ

TZ9S-SSZ-EOZ. OBTZZ VA VNN3XA_,'3nO 033 A

TTTE-b- VT/SZ/TT t>"t'A6-b-AO«95Z<—

- AltSlO^oiISOct3a ^^

*

li1tDs://imaae.us.baiik-diia.ooiii/i[iiae;e/JSP/ReporfXl.isp

O

10/13/2015


Print Images

Page 6 of9

o

o

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check Image contelns confidential Information. If you print this Image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #6 Account No.:;

Check No.: 59

Sequence No.: 009251441120

Amount: $4600.00

Routing No.! 12223582

Pats: 11/28/2014

Front:

10059

J.SCOFIELD & BONNIE G.HAGE 35iD ELLIOTT STREET

SAN DIEGO, CA.B2i06-2355

S0-3S82-1222

11/25Z2014

WkVTO

$♦4,600.00

THSCWOER

Sarah Smith

-DOUARS I

Four Thousand Six Hundred Only

D

i: 2. E e

5B E 2.1:

Back:

r. 31 n

- -t

„ o

FOR DEPOSIT ONLY —* "navy fed CU

->25B07-43V4<- 1^/23/14 4

VIENNA VA 221BD 703-25S-BB23.

:OOOOD070DB1S4B3B

22

^

OI37-

at

C

https;//iiiiage.us.bai3k-diuj.coin/image/JSP/ReporlXl.isp

10/13/2015


Print Images

O

Cr

Page 18 of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua This check image contains confidential information. If you print this Image^ please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #18 Check No.: 186 Routjnq No.: 12223582

Account No.:

Amount:$4500.00.

Sequence No.: 009094595830

Date: 03/16/2015

Front:

'■

'■

:

J.SCORELD & BONNIE G. 3S1DEUJOTT STREET SAN OIEGO, CA 92106.3 S55

lo-is-s

90^8^32^ '

Franrfsco Giles

•i^.&tiie-'Th'ousand Five Hundn^

L DOLLARS I

'»V W7Z

E H 5 3i Sa 5 Sii; Back: if.o U5 -*

M 5."

r

*

'■•o >-30

">5 *-E

(5D

>

a

r^-

^0 https://image.iis.baiik-diis.uom/mage/JSP/ReportXl .isp

10/1^/901^


o

Print Images

Page 17 of20

0.5. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Radielle Tubongbanua This diedc image contains confidential information. If you print this Image, please store It in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #17 Check No.: 188 Routing No.: 17773582

Account No.:

Amount; ^500.00

Sequence No.: 009096402191

Date: 03/17/2015

Front:

J.SOOFIELD & BONNIE Q.KAOE

Dsbank

35J0 OUOTT STHgrr SAN 0IE60, CASZlDS-aSSa

90.3582.1222

10188 3/17/2015

PATTO

GHes

^4,500.00

Hundred .DOLLARS

fc a H 235S 2 Back:

C o

i', i' V

C/J fi

O .o

CO

ni ln++T^o*//imorrc* tio Kor^V'-.rl-ne

•i r\

^

r% m

#-


PrintImages

Page 16 of20

o

o

U.S. Bank ConfidentiaS Commuoiication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential Information. If you print this Image, please store it in a secure place to avoid

unauthorizeid usage of Itils Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is

recommended. Item #16 Account No.:

Check No.: 189

Sequence No.: 009090606402

Amount; ^4500.00

Routing No.: 12223582

Date; 03/23/2015

Front;

"m;

•1=0189

J.SCQPtSUO & BONNIE <3. HAGS'•. 3510 ELUOrrSTREET•-% . ■ - '"i SW DIESO,CA 92106^1355-

90.3532.1222

^te 3/16/2015

PKTTO

TKSOITDa^ OF

FranCTgco Giles'

) ^4,500.00

Four Thousand Five Hundred Only****—

-isi52235aais: Back:

4^

li n>

es

O

i

o o

•7^ h1tps://image.us.barik-dni5.co]n/image/JSP/ReportXl.isp

10/13/2015


PrintImages

o

U

Page 15 of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Radielle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidenOai Information. If you print this image, please store It in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of ttiis information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #15 Account No.:

Check No.: 191

Sequence No.; 008952680229

Amount; $4500.00

Routing No.; 12223582

Date: 03/26/2015

Front;

10191

SCOFtELD & BONWIE Q. WAGE 3510 ELUOTT STREET

SAN Dt£60. CA 9210S-135S PAY TO

WEORDER ppsxnCiSCO OHOS OP

— ~ p-^^,p-p.^iisand Five Hundred Onlv"**"^

90.358Z.1222

3/19/201S

J ^4.600.00 .DOLLARS fl S

I 2 H 235B E iff Back:

^3 https://image.us.bai±-dn5.oom/image/JSP/ReportXl.isT)

in/n/om4


Print Images

o

CJ^

Page 12 of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua This check image contains confidential Information. If you print this image, please store it In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is reojmmended. Item #12

Check No.: 192 Routing No.; 12223582

Account No.:

Amount: $4317.00

Sequence No.: 00909753139B

Date: 04/02/2015

Front: J.SCORELD & BONNIE 6.HAGE

iBbanIc

3S10 ajLtOTT STRBCT SAN DtE<50, CA 92306-15SS

90-3582.1222

10192

'.K

fWTO THtOFtOIrH

Francisco Giles

3/25/2015

S»4,317.00

Four Thousand Three Hundred Seventeen OnlV*"***

.DOLLARS I la

iBS

S 2 EB 5a H

Back:

~o

iO

-4

n https://image.iis.barJc-dn&.oom/image/JSP/ReportXl.isd

in/n/om^

4


o

Print Images

Page 13 of20

U.S. Bank Confidentia! Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print liils Image, please store It In a secure place to avoid

unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #13 Account No.:

Check No.: 197 Routing Ho.; 12223582

Amount;$1860.00

Sequence No.: 008952918583

Date: 04/02/2015

Front;

IOI97I

J.SC:OFIELD & BONNIE Q.HAGE _ 35IOEUJOTT STREET SAN OIEGO, CA 921oe-JSS5

90.35B2-1222

gte 3/26/2015

WWTO -MEOnOER

J ^,860.00

David B. Osbom

One Thousand Baht Hundred Sixty OnlV

I DOLLARS I 3

eSii 5 2 2353 2 2:1: Back:

;j.IJ i

n ~7 «-■

p iv

L^rilL;:?.HI] 11:21:-Jl-i:.

https://image.us.bank-diis.cotn/image/JSP/ReportXl.isD


Print Images

o

CP

Page 4 of20

U.S. Bank Confidentsai Communicatfoin

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check Image rontalns confidential information. If you print this image, please store It In a secure place to avoid

unauUiorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #4 Account No,

Check No.: 199 Routing No.; 12223582

Amount;$5200.00

Sequence No.; 009251781974

Pate: 04/10/2015

Front;

J.SCOFIELD & BONNIE O.KAOE

usbank

10193

3510 ELUOrr STREET

SAN OtESO. CA S2105.1355

-

S0.35SZ-1222

PAVTO TWEOROEn OF

FrancJsco Giles

Five Thousand Two Hundred Only'

Dgle3G6/20t5 ^5,200.00 -DOLLARS S a

SBSi5H23 5aHiiS Back:

r o

a

nip httpsP/image.us.bank-dns.coiD/imaee/JSP/RenortX1.isn

1 n/T3/om c


O

Print Im^es

Page 1 of20

U.S. Bank ConfidentiaB Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential Infoirnation. If you print this Image, please store it In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #1 Account No.:

Check No.: 205 Routing Mo.; 12223582

Amount; $5200.00

Sequence No.; 008653690301

Pate; 04/15/2015

Front:

J.SCOFIELD & BONNIE Q.HAOE

iBbsnk

,aSiOEUJOTTSTREET SAN DSCO,CA S210S.13BS PAYTO

10205

30.3582-1222

3/30/2015 Francisco Giles

Fhre Thousand Two Hundred Only******

J $^5,200.00

i DOLLARS

JSi 5 52353 2 2,12

qn https://image.iis.bank-diiis.uOiiiAmaee/JSP/ReDort>

1 n/1 d/om c


o

Print images

Page 14 of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua This chedc image contains confidential information. If you print this Image, please store it In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #14

Account No.:

Check No.: 207

Sequence No.: 008652750319

Amount:$3680.44

Routing No.; 12223582

Date: 04/01/2015

Front;

10207

J.SCORELO & BONNIE O.HAGE 3510 EUtOTT STREET SAN DIEGO. CA 9Z106.1355

90.35B2.12ZZ

^03/31/2015 3^,680.44

mv TO IIIUUnoiTR

OF

David B. Osbom

•ti

Three Thousand Sbc Hundred Eighty and 44/100' .dollars «

3

IS 2. E 2 23 5a 2 lb:

u»D

Back:

=$5=

7^ httDs://imase,us.bankrdns.corn/irnacrp/T.<5P/l?ennrfYi i«

1 n /I n /nm ^


Print Images

O

(T

Page 11 of20

U.S. Bank Conffdentisl Conrtmunlcation

RequestBd by: Radielle Tubongbanua

This dieck image contains confidential Information. If you print tills image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of tills Information. Inaeased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #11 Account No.:

Check No.: 210 Routing No.: 12223582

Amounfc $5200.00

Sequence No.: 009253222887

Date; 04/03/2015

Front:

1021D

J.SCOFIELD & BONNIE G.HAQE 3S10 EoiorrsTOEEr

SAN CUEGO. CA 9Z306.135S

SO.3582.1222

^^4/2/2015 J ^5,200.00

•PAY TO ntEonnm

David B. Osbom

Rve Thousand Two Hundred Only******

-DOLLARS

David B.Osbom

bS 2, 5 2E35a 2 Back:

I r*;

r^.turn Fi

i r,ni~=a

7^

https://iinage.-iis.bank-dn5.^oiQ/imaee/JSPyReDortXl .isn

1 n/i mni c


o

PrintImages

Page 10 of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidenb'al information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #10

Check No.: 215 Routing No.: 12223582

Account No.:

Amount!$5200.00

Sequence No.: 008052008009

Date; 04/06/2015

Front:

J.SCOFiELD & BONNIE G. HAGE

10215

usbonA

3510 ELuarr strect

SAN DIEGO,CA 92J0&<ia5S

30.3582.1822

Date 4^6/2015

S*'S,200.00 HtfB Thousand Two Hundred Only******

DOLLARS €

^ 2 5 5353 2 ht\ Back:

BS3»E!g

g-

<^6 https://image.us.banlc-dns.x..oin/imaee/JSP/ReDoifX1.i.sn

1 n/i^/oni


Page 5 of9

o

Print Images

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelie Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential Information. If you print this image, pipse store I^n^e(^re p a« to

unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is

recommended.

—^—-—:^—-================================^

Item #5 Account No.:

Amount; $4600.00

Check No.: 60

Sequence No.: 008352749947

Routing No.; 12223582

Date: 11/25/2014

Front:

J.SCORELD & BONNIE G. HAGE 3510 EIXIOTT STREET SAN DIEGO. CA 92)0S-1SS5

10060

ustwnk 90-3582-1222

Date 11/25/2014

PAVTQ

i>eoaot3t OP

Sarah Smith

1.600.00

Four Thousand Six Hundred

1 DOLLARS i a

Sarah Smitti

i; 1 H EH35a H Back:

O

oo"ODZ'6 9E9-ir6Taoo^opoooo ynd E60Q TTTE-b- VTSZTT iO JLSOd ZZ = ET VTSZTT J_0 SN

It e

SD -

httns;//iTnafle.Tis.bank-dno.vX)n}/i3iiaee/JSP/ReoortXl.isp

10/13/2015


Print Images

Page 4 of9

o

a-

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: RachelleTubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, pi^e ^re it in ^e^re plara to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #4 Account No.:

Check No.: 51

Amount:$4600.00

Routing No.: 12223582

Sequence No.: 009251441121 Date; 11/28/2014

Front:

10061

J.SCORELD & BONI4IE G. HAGE asio ELUOTT STBGET

SAN Df£GO.CA 92106'135S

S0-3582.1ZZ2

11/26/2014

PAV-TO

j S'4.600.00

1:?°^ Sarah Smith

.DOLLARS I

Four Thousand Sbc Hundred Only

i: liH 5 23153 HJtBJ Back:

L. «/>

"FOR DEPOSIT ONUY

i^NAVY FED CU

—>25BOT43T4<—

VIENNA VA 22180 703-25&-BB21

'0000007008134B3B

22

41

013T-d

.^

5-1. li1tDs://imaKe.iis.bai±-diiu...om/image/JSP/ReportXLjsp

10/13/2015


Print Images

O

Q-

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rschelle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential information. If you print this image> please store it In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #X Account No.:

Check No.: 10069

Sequence No.: 009098341494

Amount: $4800.00

Routing No.: 12223582

Date: 12/04/2014

Front:

J.SCORELO & BONNtE G.HAGE 3510 ELUOfTT STREET

- SAN OtEGO, CA S210&-13S5

S0-3582-3Z22

12/3/2014

FAYTO TKE ORDER OF

Francteco Giids

Four Thousand Bght Hundred Only*'

iSZi'2E235Be2i'i: Back:

ils V> rsi

O

6^

5"^ h.ttDs://iinaee.us.baiik-diio.corQ/iinaee/JSP/RepoitXl.isp?Imaf<eNo—1

10713/2015


Page 3 of9

O

Print Images

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential information. If you print tills Image^ please store It in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #3 Account No.: Amount: $4400.00

Sequence No.: 008056S88855 Date: 12/08/2014

Check No.: 72

Routing No.: 12223582

Front:

10072

J. SCOFtELD & BONNIE G.HAOE 3510ELUDTT STBEET SAN DiESO.CASZlO&iasS

S0-35S2-1Z22

12/4/2014

PKorio

3*4.400.00

iHeonsEn

OF

Frandsoo GBds Four Thousand Four Hundred Qnly*

.OOUARS

•^Sf..'•

ICv. 019^^-

''2Q:a 10:fl2 USB

a

Back:

o KO

_tn

t'tn

I 3

/y

^s:

fiZ s:3

o

JItn

o^r- 4'- C - •

- 5

>123§«2K<12&8»i4 E 5^ ID fl55 I«T ei '-55

(n

c s

5-5 https://image.\is.baiik-dni,.^om/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp

10/13/2015


Page 2 of9

O

Print Images

U.S. Bank Conridential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential Information, If you print this image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #2 Account

Check No

Sequence No.: 009096064400

Amount $860.00

Routinq No.: 17773582

Pate; 12/10/2014

Front

Back:

-3^

It

«H \

0

Sa: Zi

.:5 /n

■5x»

\/\ o

C

6^ On

5^ https://image.us .baiik-dni».v.orQ/image/JSP/ReportXl ,1 sp

10/13/2015


Print Images

Page 1 of9

o

a

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This chedc image contains confidential Information. If you print this image, please store It in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying tills document is recommended. Item #1

Account No.: Amount:$2500.00

Check No.:80

Sequence No.: 009096064402

Routing No.: 12223582

Date: 12/10/2014

Front: usbanh

J.SCOFieJO & BONNIE G.HAGE

1008.0

3510 EUJOTl 31 MEET SD-3582-12ZZ

BAN DIESO.CA SZlOS-3355

12/9/2014

PWTO

J 5-2.500.00

THE ORDER

Francisco dies

I

DOLLARS 3

Tvtfo Thousand Five Hundred Fernando Giles

sS

23 5a HH;

11" â–¡

Back:

5^httDs;//imaee.iis.bank-dn!....oiii/iniaRe/JSP/RBpoifXl.isp

10/13/2015


Print Images

o

V-s

c

)

Page 10 of 10

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requeued by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print tiiis Image, please store It In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying tills document Is recommended. Item #10

Account No.i Amount! $3250.00

Check No.: 82

Sequence No.: 009098411545

Routing No.: 12223582

Date; 12/11/2014

Front:

10082

J.SCOFIELD & BONNIE Q. HAGE 3SaO EUJCJTT STHSET

SAN DIEGO,CA 9230S.J3SS

S0-35BZ-1222

PA*TO

TH& ORDER

Francisco Giles Three Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Only"**"'

^012/11/2014 J ^3,250.00 .DOLLAFtS I B

Fernando Giles

Back:

'''v

httDs://imaee.Tis.barLk:-diis.wom/imaee/JSP/ReDortX 1 .isn

in/n/9ni^


Print Images

Page 9 of 10

o

a

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please store ft in a secure plare to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is rerammended. Item #9

Account No.: Amount: $2750.00

Check No.: 83

Sequence No.: 009091392641

Routing No.: 12223582

Pate; 12/15/2014

Front:

10083

J.SCOFIEL3atBONNIEGjHAQE ..'iJ 3510-aJJOTT STREET

SAN OtEGO,CA 92105-1355

.

.* .

' ■■

90-3582-1222

12/13/2014

PAY TO

-IHEOnOER OP

'S^750.00

Francasco Giles

.DOLLARS I

Two Thousand Seven-Hundred PHftv Only' Fernando GItee

3'IS i H 5 H35a H n:

Back:

•.'tc

si. IS.-

<

go

53S

|i .m—I

•ma:

- Y CO

~ ■>

^3

TTftnQ'//imaaR n.q hanV-Hri.,..'.nm/impip-p/TfsP/Rer)mlX1 .isn

10/13/2015


Print Images

Page 8 of 10

o

o

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure pl3*^ to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #8 Account No.

Check No.: 84

Sequence No.: 008953803213

Amoun^^3500.00

Rootinq No.; 12223582

Pate: 12/18/2014

Front:

li.^XIPEELO &90»SNS <2. HAOS 3510 ELUOfT Sl^CT SJtftt PQEOa.C*> SZX06-X3S3

Me

mrlQ

50014

j S^.SOO.OO

ThgeaThoaisandRwaHun:feedOt^v***°^

.OOUMrtS

FasnendoGSes

vsm)

B/2014 QlxSS USB

ISB CK a.

-BS&22a35aS Back:

IT

n

CZj C cn

9> go

V o

&

io ¥32so^$zmmts^u E 977)5 ID «5 PKT «

73768236^

^ \

Ky

litfns;//iTnape.us.banlc-dTiu.jom/iTnase/JSP/ReDortXl.ist)

10/13/2015


Print Images

Page 7 of 10

o

a

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: RachelleTubongbanua This check image contains confidential Information. If you print this image, please store it In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #7

Account No.:

■Check No.: 86

Sequence No.: 009096016206

Amount: $2500.00

Rouiang Wo.; 12223582

Date; 12/18/2014

Front: J. SCORELD & BONNIE Q. HAOE 3510 ELUOTTSTREET * »■;■..

SAM DiEGO. CA 32105-135S

.

PAVTO TKEffiUIEROF

Francisco Giles

^

_

.

10086

tstuink

V. 90.S58Z'1ZZ2

:

-" x

>12/17/2014

J 5-2,500.00 .

''

i

Two Thousand Rve -Hundred Only******--— Francasco GBes

OS L 2 2 E

I.

5S H

Back:

son

r I

2s

l.co

rs

O

CD •s-

u-»

5^1 https://iinage.us.bank-4Di...-om/iniage/JSP/ReportXl.isD

10/1^7.015


Page 6 of 10

o

PrintImages

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua This chedc image contains confidential information. If you print this Image, please store It in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #6 Account No.:

Check No.: 101

Sequence No.: 0D9D96066130

Amount;$3000.00

Routing No.: 12223582

Pate: 12/29/2014

Front: J.SCOREU)&BONNIE

10101

HAGE

3510 ELUOTT STREET

SAN DIE60.CA SZ106-1359

SO-3582-1232

WTO

TKEOTOEB OF

Francisco <3I]es

gte 12/24/2014. 5*3,000.00

Three Thousand

>:

H E E35a B

1

DOLLARS

ii

Back:

' :€

Ij V 9i^ 4* ^

op-- *3 K i.

"-ifi

So

6^

fi 25<-' I, O *

-

<iS »S5

bO ht(ps;/&iiage.us.baiik-diis.wom/image/JSP/ReporfXl.jsp

10/13/2015


Print Images

Page 5 of 10

O

u?■

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: RachelleTubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image; please store it In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness vrfien discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #5 Account No.:

Check No.: 105

Sequence No.: 009098003513

Amount: $3000.00

Routing No.: 12223582

Date: 12/30/2014

Front: J. SCOFiELD a BONNIE G. HAGE

mtisnlc

aSJOELUOTrSTRECr SAN DIEGO. CA 32105.1355

90-3582>1232

10105 Datei2G9/2014

7HSDROEH OF

000.00

Francisco Giles

Three Thousand Only' Francesco Giiee

JS2iHHS3 5aE3.n Back: So trv—1 m .e

ii

til

^

SO

o ^

CO m

•ss

^1

£50

o

Is r-

•-0

LO

(0

h1tps://image.us.baiilo-dn^.^om/image/JSP/ReporlXl .j sp

10/13/2015


Page 4 of 10

o

Printimages

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This diedc image contains confidential Infomiation. If you print this image^ please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #4

Account No.)

Check No.: 123

Sequence No.: 009096271751

Amounfc $^00.00

Roudng No.: 12223582

Date: 01/14/2015

Front:

-.mi

s-'fl-.-Ji' • -J-!S5V5V,S-. 1^*1J "**9!t'

Ha.3-£ra"5.Us:-;

1??

Back: O _z

aii

«nQ

I

in —>

m^

^IP

Ssj

:9l ^s

s>

V *!•?*?. S-

o'o

•C£2 ^•S

IS »

.9 <s

t

fc •*» 's -

***3? <<*£»>

https://iDiage.xis.bank-dnb.wOm/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp

10/13/2015


Print Images

Page 3 of 10

o

a

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by; E^chelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, plrase store It in a semre place to avoid unauthorized usage of this Infbmnatlon. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended.

'

Item #3 Account No.:

Check No.:125

Sequence No.; 009097353341

Amount!^3500

Routing No.: 12223582

Date â– u'w.umM.iyg

Front:

4,.,

-

-

..-.c- . . - ^

Back:

o

-ZS.

it

n "4

'z^ Bo

Qk

5

s

/V CD >> Hi

\r a.

BC?

o ,o

c

https ://image.us.bai3k-dik,. w^oni/image/J SP/ReportXl .j sp

10/13/2015


Print Images

Page 2 of 10

o

a'

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This diedc Image contains confidential information. If you print tills Image, please store it In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #2

Account No Amount: $3000. Front:

Check No.: 130

Sequence No.: 008953401871

Routing No.: 12223582

Pate: 01/15/2015

asio EUJOTT STREET SAN D1Q*0.CA 32306-1355 wsonsEn or

10130

T.^t»3T.V

JL SCOPIELD & BONNIE G. MAGE

■59.3582-1222

Cgte 1/15/2015

j $^,000.00

Fraorfsoo Gitea

.DOUARS

Three Thousand Only* Ftanrasco GQes

2D15 04300 USB US BAHK

rs 3, ooo « oo Back:

o o

■r ~i

•£■37

c

3?"

o

ri»

srS

o

LO

&

£■3 V3 -Co

v.a

£e?29 ID fisHcrei £r c.

u

"..S 2 » =rv- -r

"1=

(^4 https://image.us.baiik-dns.-oiD/miage/JSP/ReportXl.jsp

10/13/2015


Print Images

Page I of 10

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: RachelleTubongbanua

This check Image contains confldenHal information, if you print this Image, please store It In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #1

Account No.::

Check No.; 133

Sequence No.: 009090439143

Amount; $4500.00

Routing No.: 122235B2

Date: 01/16/2015

Front: 1 J.-SCOFIELD & BONNIE Q.KAOE 3510 ELUOTT STREET SAN DIEGO. CA 9ZZ06.1355

90-39B2-IZZZ

PAY TO TMEOnOER

1/16^015

Francisco Giles

Four Thousand Five Hundred On!

^4,500.00 DOLLARS

Francisco GOes

-O /o

https://image.us.baril<;-diis. ji/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp


PrintImages

Page 2 of2

o

o U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidendal information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #2 Account No.:

Check No.: 142

Sequence No.: 009092900891

Amount: $3000.00

Routing No.: 12223582

Date; 02/09/2015

Front: J.SCOHELD&BON^ZIBG.HAiGE' 35lOElUOTTSTHE£T*.' = ' - aAN.01EBO..CA.9210S.13S5. ..

islanV

BO-'&SBZ'iZSZ

2/6^2015

PAYTO

THEOROSt OF

Francisco Giles Three Thousand Only******

a**3.dD0.Q0 .DOLLARS

m--

Francisco Giles-

.9:'ji22235a2i.n Back:

s-S-

ill' ito ^

"1=^ St;

m

3 at

IT f

i'c

V* -o c

ir.;-

1 t

1

https://image.us.barLk;-diis.com/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp

10/13/2015


Print Images

o

o

Page 1 of2

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential Information. If you print this image, please sta'*e it in,.a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security av/areness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #1 Account No.:

Check No.: 144

Sequence No.: 009095143181

Amount: $3700.00

Routing No.: 12223-Sa2

Pate: 02/10/2035

Front:

SCOPtELX> & BOKHte G.ttAGE

tiSt»ank

10144

35IO EUIOrr STRfiCT

SAN DteCO. CA »2tC«>I3SS

SO-SbQZ'lZZS

2/10/2015

t€>

txEiyp'" crandsco Gfles Th^tisand Seven Hundred Oniv

J ■^^.700.00

prancisco Giles.

»;i25255fl 2i«; Back:

p^T) •O •

'

•V«

I/O 2

https://knage.us.bank-dns.corQ/image/J SP/ReportXl .jsp

i 0/13/2015


o

Print Images

Page 20 of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by; Rachelie Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidentlai information. If you print this image^ piease store it In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this informabon. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #20

Check No.: 179 Routing No.; 12223582

Account No.

Amount; $4500.00

Sequence No.: 009090496259 Date; 03/10/2015

Front:

10178

J,SCOFIELD &SONMIE G.HAGE" 35S0 ELLlOrrsmEET

SAN OtEGO, CA 9210S-2355

s6-3582>1222

wEoaoER Franciscan Giles

Four Thousand Five Hundred Only******

Dgte3/0/2015"

^4,500.00 .DOLLARS f,

-jBSiHasasasisi

https://image.us.baiik-dns-.com/image/JSP/ReDortXl.isD

in/i^/om ^


Print Images

o

a

Page 19 of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

Tbls check image contains confidential information,

you print this Image, please store it in a secure place to avoid

unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying tills document is recommended. Item #19

Check No.: 183 Routing No.: 12223582

Account No.:

Amount;^4500.00

Sequence NO.: 009092851569

Date: 03/12/2015

Front; J. SCOFtELD & BONNIE G. HAGS

usbftirk

10183

3SJ0 ELLIOTT STREET

SAN DIEGO. CA 9230S.1SS5

S0-358Z'1ZZ2

3/11/2015

PAYTO â– msonoER

OP

Ftanctsco Giles

Four Thousand Five Hundred Qniy**'*"*"

^4,50D.OO .DOLLARS

b; & 2 H EaSB E Back:

V

hltps://image.tis.bai]Jc-diu>-.wOin/image/JSP/ReDortXl .i sd

in/n/9m^


Print Images

o

c.^

Page 9 of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidenti'al information. If you print ttiis Image, please store It in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #9

Check No.: 216 Routing No.; 12223582

Account No.:

Amounc $5200.00

Sequence No.: 008354678301

Pate; 04/07/2015

Front: J.SCOFIELD & BONNIE G.KAC^E

ustionk

102X6

3510 EUUOTT STREET

SAN DIEGO. CA 92106'13S5

50.3582-1222

Date ^/2015

PAY TO

I>IEOre>ER OF

Da^dd B.Osbom Five Thousand Two Hundred Qnly****^

iS hEB 33,5BE

.00

.DOLXARS I

JfCJE

Back:

'=B4^

httpsV/image.us.baolc-dns.corQ/imaee/JSP/ReDOJlXl.isT)


o

Print Images

Page 7 of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: RachelleTubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure place to avoid

unauthorized usage of this Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying tiiis document Is recommended. Item #7

Account No.

Check No.; 217 Routing No.: 12223582

Amount; $4800.00

Sequence No.: 008653372737

Date: 04/08/2015

Front:

10217

J.SCORELD & BONNtE O.HAGE 3510 EUJOTT STREET

SAN OtEGO. CA SSIOS-IBSS

S0-3SB2.122Z

4/8/2015

^oBocn David B.Osbom

S*4,800.D0

Four Thousand Eight Hundred Only******

.DOLLARS

I Back:

03S'?uPCG.3u: * •*

>■

*. e:

r.cA

https://iinage.us.bank-dnb.oom/image/JSP/ReportXl.isr)

10/12/901


Page 6 of20

nC: Son^leCential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this Image, please store it In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased seojrity awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended.

Item #S Accourrt No.:

Check No.: 218

Sequence No.: 008952852852

Amount; $4800.00

Routing No.; 12223582

Date; 04/09/2015

Front:( .

^

i

10218

J.SC:OBELD & BONNIE G.HAGE 3530 ELUOrr STREET

SAN DIEQO. CA 32105-1355

90-35S2-1222

^flf FourThouBand Eight Hundred Only*****'

2, E e 23 55 E lis

-DOLLARS I


Print Images

Pages of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Comnrunlcatlon Requested by: RadielleTubongbanua

This check image contains cxinfidential information. If you print this image, pl^se store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #3 Account No.:

Check No.; 219

Sequence No.; 009253530619

Routing No.: 12223582

Date: 04/10/2015

10219

B SCOFIELO & SOMNie Q.HAGS 3510 EUJCTT STREET

SAN DI&GO. CA 9210&-i395

99.35S2-1ZZZ

4/9/2015

PAYTO

THE ORDER

S. OSDOm

S*5.200.00

Fivefhw5B?^° Hundred Onl>

I, 2 2 2 35a H LiJ

.DOLLARS S

"■CJB I

https://image.xis.barilc-diis.corD/image/JSP/Rer)ortXl.i.SD

in/iQ/om-Q


Print Images

o

Page 5 of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This

image contains ronfidential Information. If you print this image, please store it In a secure place to avoid

unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroyinq this document ic? recommended.

>-winciii. la

Item #5 Account No.:

Check No.; 221 Routing No.: 12223582

Amount; $4800.00

Sequence No.; 008952852853

Date; 04/09/2015

Front:

J.SCOFIELD & EMONNIE Q- HAGE

10221 !

tisbank

0 ajjorr sttoet

SAN DIEGO,CA 921DG.I35S PAVTO

DavldB,_Osborn

Four Thousand Eight Hundred Only*'

90-S582>1222

^04/9^2015 J ^4,800.00 â– DOLLARS S 3

David B.Osbom

a

ts L e E B 3^ sa B 2ib: Back;

iis jD'wr.i:.r;.g.4>5

4^ https://miage.'iis.baiik-diib-.corD/iinage/JSP/RepojrtXl.isp


Print Images

o

C_)

Page 8 of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

itTiage contains ronfidential information. If you print this image, please store ft in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of tiiis information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended.

^

^ wi.umiciil is

Item #8 Account No.:

Check No.: 220

Amount: $4300.00

Sequence No.; 008653372736

Routing No.; 12223582

Date; 04/08/2015

Front;

J.SCOFIELD & BONNIE G. HAGE

10220

usbank

„ 3510 ELUOTT STREET SAN DIEGO. CA 92106.13S5

90-3S82-1222

5^4/10/2015

David B. Osbom

f,800.00

Four Thousand Eight Hundred Oniv

-DOLLARS « o

m

>5 2i 5 5 BB5B 5 &ii«

IFO

Back:

7=" !3O-D'iSSi'iQ'aylP

Iittps://image.us.bank-diis.oom/iinage/7SP/ReportXl.isD


Print Images

e

c

Page 2 of20

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This

image contains confidenb'ai informabon. If you print this image, please store it In a secure olace to avniri

information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is Item #2 Account No.:

Check No.: 227

Amount; $3600.00

Sequence No.; 008056572959

Routing No.: 12223582

Date: 04/13/2015

Fi^nt:

J.SCOHELX)& ^NNIE Q. HAGE asio Euuarr ct^ieet

10227

ustwnk

SAN DIEGO,CA 92105.1355 9D-35S2>122Z PWTO

TKCOaOEB OP

Da>»d B. Osbom

Date 4/10^2015 j.eoo.oo

Three Thousand Six Hundred

dollars

i H B H35a e isg Back:

Li: = 2 V^

.n«5 *w

C

Iittps://image.us.baiik-dns.uom/image/JSP/Rq5ortXl.jsp

in/nrtni^


Print Images

O

Page 2 of4

U.S. Bank Confidential Conrsmunication Requested by; Rachelle Tubongbanua

This ^eck image contains confidential information. If you print this imaoe olea'^p chnrp ih in a

^

Item #2

Account No.:

Check No.: 228 Routing No.: 12223582

Amount; $3600.00

Sequence No.: 008056572950 Date: 04/i3/7ni

Front:

J.SCOFIELO & BONNIE G. MAGE isbank

STREET

SAN OIEQO. CA 32105-1355

10228

90.3SSZ-1222

^te4/-to/20'S5 J 3&»'3,600.00 t -DOULARS I

iHEonoEn

David B. Osbom

O

a

es a, B 2 H3 sa 2 ii:

II*»D

Back:

httpsV/image.us.baBlc-dnii.com/image/JSP/Repor£Xl.jsp

in/i^/oni<


Print Images

(

Page 3 of4

y

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains onfidenOa] inPormaaon. If you orint this Imanp nipaco

n- =

Item #3

Account No.; Amount:$4300.00

Check No.: 224 Routing No.; 122235B?

Front;

Sequence No.; 008952848924

Date; 04/09/2015

J,SCOHELO & BONNIE S.HAGS 3510 EU.I07T STREET

usbunl:

SAN OtESJ.(3l92a06.lW RflVTO

THEOnOER _

OF

10224

9a-3582*X222

. ,_

_ .

Davia B. Osbonrt

4713/2015

^4,300.00 .DOLLARS

a

sSiB2H35S5iiS

hf:^s;//image.us.baiilc-cin!i.com/kiiage/JSP/ReportXl.Isp

1 n/1 o /oni


o

Print Images

Page 4 of4

U.S. Bank Confidentia! Comnrtunication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

Tbis

image contains asnfidential information. If you print this Image, please store It In a secure olace to auniH When diseasing or

Item #4 Account No.:

Amount: $4700.00

Check No.: 226

Sequence No.; 008952848925

Routing No.: 12223582

Date; 04/Q9/2Q15

Front:

J,SCOFIELD & BONNIE G. HAGS

10226

tBtKinV

^3510 EOIOTTSTREET SAN DIEGO,CA SZI06.1^S

90-39S2-J2Z2

RnTTO

gt®4/13/2015

Dayjd B. Osbom

J

Four Thousand Seven Hundred Only******

flS 2rH5 535a 2is

w.roD.oo

□ 2H&

Back:

^0

ht(ps://image.us.baiik-dns.coni/image/JSP/RfiportXl. 1SD

1 A/TO /OA1 c


Print Images

O

L) •

Page 1 of4

Ui.S. Bank Confldentiai Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

recommended.

^awareness wnen discarding or destroying this document Is

Item #1

Account No.:

Check No.: 232

Amounfc $4800.00

Routing No.:

Front;

Sequence No.: 008354346358 Date; 04/14/201

J.SCOBELXJ & BONNIE O.KAGE asioEUJorr STREET SAN DIcGO, CA 92106>13S5 I -TKCOADER

I OP

usbmk

Sa-35B2-I222

. PAVTD

t-i ... ... .

^04^1472015

David B,Osbom

Four Thousand Eioht Hundred Oniv***""'

1 ^4.800.00

2. B a 5353 2. tBS

hi ]..1;n '

II

lit(ps://image.us.baiik-dns.com/image/JSP/ReportXl.is0

1 A /I o

f


Print linages

o

i

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by; Rachelle Tubongbanua

^^Image confalns ronfidential Informadon. If you print this Image, please store It in a secure place to avoid

rea^nmCT^"^^^^

information.Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is

Item #1

Account No.:

Check No.: 237 Routing No.; 12223582

Amount: $4500.00 Front:

J'SCOFIELD & BONNIE G.HftGE _ 3SlO£LUOrr STREET SAN OIEGO, CA.9eiOB-]355

Sequence No.: 009253751590 Date; 04/17/2015

10237

nsbsnk

S0.3582>t2Z2

Win

^tB4/ie/2015 J ^4,500.00

David B- Osbom Four Thousand Five Hundred Only**"***

.DOLLARS

Q

& E 5 e 35a s 2>i!:

'□£37

Back:

h1:^s://image.us.bank-<ins.com/im^e/JSP/ReportXl.isD?Ima?e>Jn=l

1 n/1 O /OA1 r


Print Images

o

Page 1 of2

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: RachelleTubongbanua

This dieck Image contains confidential infbrmadon. If you print this imaae oiease store it in a cs.ntn3 ni=r.o».

•j

-uV-.nass Item #1

Account No.; Amount; $4600.00

Check No.; 234

Sequence No.; 009253751591 Pate:04/17/2Q15

Routing No.; 12223582

Front;

J.SCOFIELD & BONNIE G.HAGE

10234

usbank

3S10 COIOTT STREET

SAN OlEGO.CA 9210B.13SS 90-358S>123»

PAY MI

UtLOSVU'R

4/18/2015

David B. Oabom

^4,600.00

Four Thousand Sbc Hundred OnJv****'^

.DOLLABS « s.

s I S

2i 2 E E35a a 2,i:

n®D

I Back;

l'Lj u.Dart k 04-^V-<B-.;—It-iffi^P'-yT-- j^gps^TSgng^-[ 1^7^—

13

]ittps://image.us.baiik-dns.comyimage/JSP/ReportXl.isp

1 n/lQ/nni c


Print Images

u

Page 2 of2

.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential infbrmation. If you orlnt this Imaae nlP3«:«a rfr.™ t«-

i

Wa^a^ness w^ei-'dSdtrcr

is

Item #2

Account No.: Amount:$4250.00

Check No.: 240 Routinq No.: 12223582

Front:

Sequence No.: 008354346359 Date; 04/14/2015

J.SCOFIELO & BONNIE G.51AGE

10240

. MlOELUOTTSTRErt*

SAN DIESO,CA S2106>33S5 90'3Sa2>1222

PAY to 'WEOROEfl

gate 4/22/2015 _J ^4,250.00

Dawd B. Osbom

Four Thousand Two Hundred Hfty Only******

.dollars s s

m

i 5 2 23 5a S &tt: Back:

Tn-t-CteJiii I uLi .Hi:.

i-yH', I 1 11,

1 1^

t iiIuDiIj~

4 https://image.us.bank-dni..v.oiD/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp

T n/T5/om c


Print Images

Page 17 of 17

L

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This ^eck image contains confidenbal infbrmation. If you print dils imaae oirase storp jr in a coz-uro

«.

ij

Item #17

Account'No.;

Check No.: 247

Amount; $9000.00

Sequence No.; 00895178319S

Routing No.; 1

Date; 04/23/201«?

Front;

J.SCOFIELD & BONNIE B,HAGE

10247

usbiink

3«0^iOTTstreet

SAN OlECO, CA 92aoS-t355 90-3582-1222

PAYTO

TKEORSER

^l8 4/22/201S J 3*9,000.00

Frandsco Giles

Nine Thousand Only**

A

s

.DOLLARS

Francisco Giles

I

a

IS tHaH35B2iiS Back: o

«Vl

sS

V' c> •am

litlps://image.us.baiik-dns'.com/image/JSP/ReportXl

ISD

1 r\ /I n /n

■» »-


Print Images

O

I

Page 2 of17

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidentjal Information, If you orint this imaoe dIphcp «rfnro ih in a

i

Item #2

Account No.:

Check No,: 241 Routing Wo-i

Amount:$4600.00

Sequence No.;008357144325 Date: 05/26/2015

Front;

J.SCOFtELD & BONNIE G.HAQE

10241

usbank

3S10 ELUOTT STREET

SAN DIEGO, CA 9210&13SS 90-3562.1222

wro

Date 4/24/2015

THEOROSI

Dafvtd B. Osb&m

I Four Thousand Six Hundrad Onfy******

J

600.00 -DOLLARS 3 S c»

©

BS & 2 2 H 3 SS 2 Back:

']Q?

ht(ps:/Aimage.us.bai±-dns.com/image/JSP/ReporfXl.

ISD

1 A /t n lr»,r\ -, r-


§ -E-B o xj

m .a

o c o —

^ TD F ot tc £ c c£ P

C o

^ E -P ^ ssz Q}

Dl W

5 oj ra

^ 5 ^ "D

^ fc "D O

Pli Ilii

vD

azsQ gfs W n m2

O&'POnSEHERE PAY TO THE ORDER OP CITIZENS BUSINESS BANK AflCADIA.CA 91007-3001 pen Dkl'fJSirONLY

men

TIksrcii;tffN,feil%i:rit•tail sit OOi I ffl,d *

><oo

I -•-» •H*iin

flH AH 1 ON

(O^omo

rn ^fwo

ffiy

NEWPORT WATCH S JEWELRY CENTER INC

,V,

isAotulis c I liocu/iicnl;^°N jS ;

.

.

1/3/,r ST,.'i'.tif hN.Hv'PI ANtfpJ j

- . „ (\J .il'r.l.d ►'..•lMi:"iat.ivO

Srcuiiiv FKiufMf

t .irOr/^Lf,)

.VO

S.^ii<f:ai-C-.vi.lD*-.r. 11r\i

'• vi' ."SiiU"■ .".CJ" •

.t. l.-f;S.x.n 1

i ffiDEnALnSSSHVOJOAriD OF COV£nHOnS flEC CC-


Print Images

o

Page 3 of 17

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: RachelleTubongbanua

This

Image contelns confldentlal information. If you print this Image, please store it in a secure place to avoid informadon. Increased security awareness when discarding or is

Item #3 Account No.:

Check No.: 256

Amourfe $6450.00

Sequence No.; 008355304174

Routing No.: 12223582

Date; 05/19/2015

Front:

J- SCORELO & BONNIE G.HAGE 3510 SLUOTr STREET

iisbDRk

1Q256

SAN DIEGO,CA 92106>13S5 90-3SB2.122S TKEORDEn OF

David B. Osbom

Six Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Only

>;Zc2 2 535iBS2ii Bacte

https://image.us.baiilc-drLi.com/iiTiafre/T.SP/T?Pnm-tYi i.

Dale 6/4/2015


Print Images

( )■

Page 15 of 17

U.S. Bank Confidentfal Communjcatlon Requested by: Rschelle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidentia! information. If vou orint this imsop niasco

jk,.,

—™

Item #15

Account No.; Amounfc

'•

_ .• -■>

Check No.: 257

Sequence No.: 008057269847

Routing No.;

Pate: 05/04/2015

J- SCORELD & BOMNtE Q, KAQE _ 3SI0 BUUOTT STREET SAN Ol£GO, CA 92JD^1SS5

tatiBik

90.358T.J22a PAY TO

THEOROEB

GflBS

Five T?"-" tsand Eight Hundred Ontv—**»*

5/4/2015

^^.800.00 dollars

-Frandsco Gii®s

bS i 2 5 3 3

* o o

S %

& B

^

"<

L/-«

■■s

^ 0

'rO 03

-a

ji

'ta

^ ■>

m

o

10 ^

' 5

a.

" ii>

C m

https;//iirLage.us.baiik;-dtio.coin/iraage/JSP/Rer)ortXLi.s

'


U.S. Bank Confidential CommLFnIcation Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

item #13

Account No.;

Check No.; 2982 RgMdng No.; 12223582

Amount; $38330.00 Frn

Sequence No.: 008953894934 Date; 05/07/2015

3

THE PRIVATE CLIEm- RESERVE

I ^

u" sqa 5

'

a? "5

59,196Q7

8^2075-05-0.7_:>1.222-:34 5 g S S = «> 5 o

°goSiKg 5z 3 w m I i ;T r i- ? BC UTewporfc Beach,

i

>12223Sl.aB<

r' 20X5-05-07

-. 1

Trace# 55X9507778 Batcsh# 2014-445

https://imaee,us.ban V-d;

^r»Tn /im o rrn /TOT5 m

i°s


rrint Images

Page 12 of 17 U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua a secure place to avoid

recommended.

^ awareness when discarding or destroying this document is

Item #12

Account No.:

Amount $8650.00

Front ^

Check No.: 2984

Routano No.: 12223582

Sequence No.: 008954834464 Date; 05/07/201^

j9j « Cli^NT R.^SER\

fe 22 235asi»

2^

■»- ■,

SS' ^ v-Jf

ik


Print Images

Page 10 of 17

L' U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Racheile Tubongbanua This ched< Image contains confidential information. If vou orlnt this imaop

c+om if

Item #10

Account No.:

Check No.; 2985

Amount; $9600.00

Sequence No.: 008057047874

Routing No.; 12223582

Date: 05/11/201

Front;

^

JSCOEEELDHAGE

'i I ll'iMi li I I II I I Mbiii liiUliI

GO-SSa2/l222

BON>nE GRACE HAGE

2985

1125SAVOYST.

SAN DIEGO,CA 92107-3914 PAY 7D THE ORDER OF.

'CIS

© ss=r

6 222358

g

z tiJH

Back:

S? iss-gs?

f

si

oSoes.&e.

t

E76S 2B ^ rer

16 9-

htfps;/rmage.us.baiik-di. eom/image/JSP/ReportXl.isn

1 A/1 9 /nm r


PaRe I of i

Print ImaRes

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Noeiia Daluz

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, piease store ft in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended.

Item #1

Account No.:

Check No.: 259

Sequence No.: 008053013557

Amount: S1920.0Q

Routing No.: 12223582

Date:06/01/2015

Front:

J.SCOFlELtJ& BONNIE O.HAGE

usbsnli

SSJOEUUOTTSTnEET SAN nlECD. CA9210C*13!>S

00-3582-1222

5/8/2015 David B. Osborn

One Thousand Mine Hundred Twor\tv Only

J ^1,&20.00 DOLLAFIS

tijcHeaasaHii: Back!

1^3


Print Images Page 8 of 17 U.S. Bank: Confidential Communication Requested by: RachelleTubongbanua

Item #8

Account No.:

Amount; $9600.00 ^ront:

Check No.; 2989

Sequence No.: 008054984208

Routing No.; 1222,'=i»^fl7

J SCOPIELD HAGE/

90-3582/1222 '

2389

BONNIE GItA.CE 1025 SAVOY ST.

SAN DIEGO,CA 92107-3914 PAY TO THE

OHDER QF. r^-£Li/\ii.

;THE- PRIVATE CLIET^RESERVE.

& H 5 EEsa-Hii:

=1"^ °K s S>: Si-J

^■a<a3

f d's: ^ ^ <S o si> i o" ~t CO ni.!^

i\ N>'2 O

> "1 w 2 ^ o

a ■-'ijg jl'

littps://image.us.bank-di -^om/image/JSP/ReportXl .j

^A ^ §

1 n/1 O /1A1 r


iTUQi images

Page 9 of 17 U.S. Bank Confidantial Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This ^edc image contains confidential information. If you print this imaoe olease <dnrjs a- \n =,

i

Item #9

Account No, Amount; $8760.00

Check No.: 2986

Sequence No.; 008057047875

Routing No.:

^e;05/11/2015

Fronti

iwwgiftTvawwuiiiijwi,

JSCOFIELPHAGE

k<,trw<giiSarwft,ia,L.

so-asszTizzz

2986

BONNIE GRA.CE HA.GE 1125SAVOYST.

SAN DIEGO,CA S2107-3914 *■> ^

a ^

the ,P|tiy^^E CLI^T i|ESEjS.\1£

0S I. 2 2 2353 2 Back:

i

ag.».s5fs .ij 'a .g'5»a

littps://image.us.bank-cL -com/image/JSP/ReporfXl .j sp

lonv^nT:


Page ll of 17

Print Images

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: RachelleTubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential Information. Tf you print tills image, please store it in a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document is recommended. Item #11

Sequence No.: 008054984209

Check No,: 2988

Account No.:

Amoun^^^^^O

Routing No.; 17?,p582

J SCOFIELTD H!AGE

^

•2988

BONNIE GRACE HAG^ 1125 SAVOY'ST. SAN DIEGO,CA 92107-3914

I

PAY TO THE

ORDER OF_i

THE PRIVATE CLIENT RESERVE

.

r

iS i. 2 2 23Ha 2 iii;

P

3

" J

H Ij 11' 1 ^ Q

E.:

•• siS

F

V

I

s-^ 1 8 5" '

CO 5=^.

^ CD!^ S£l ro CP

ro CO • ro o

if \

PV j

So > ^;no 2-a. CD o C

>i|g cn

3A^ o

-'3 Viik 4

\

" li-]

https://miage.iis.baQlc-di. .com/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp

10/13/2015


Page 6 of 17

Print Images

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua Tills check Image contains confidential information. If you print this Image, please store It In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of tills Information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Item #6

Sequence No.: 008954833212

Check No.; 276 Routinq No.: 12223582

Account No.: Amount: $6000.00

Date; 05/14/2015

Front: J.SCOFIELD & BONNIE G.HAGE

isbank

3510 EUJOTT STREET SAN DtEGO.CA 92I0&.13S5

90.358Z-IZZZ

10276

^105/12/2015' J S-6.000.00

WTO -nEOROER

GuiBermo Monteros SbcThousand Only******

OF

.DOLLARS

CuO.:£ 03^43 ClGi

01:i? ICZ*

JOi'

b: & 2 2 255aE Back:

5228 ID $55 PKT

10^ https://image.us.bardc-dixw.com/image/JSP/ReportXl.isd

in/iV9ni«:


Print Images

Page 7 of 17

"N

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication

Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua This check Image contains confidential Information. If you print tills Image, please store It In a secure place to avoid unauthorized usage of this information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is recommended. Xtem #7

Account No.:

Check No.: 277

Sequence No.: 008954833213

Amount; $7000.00

Routinq No.; 12223582

Pate: 05/14/2015

Front:

10277

J.SCORELO & BONNIE G- HAGE 3510 EUJOTT STUEET

SAN OlECO. CA 92106.1353 wer7o IHEOfBjei OS*

90.3S82.1Z22

gte5/12/2015 J 3?T,000.00

GttiHenno Monteros

Seven Thousand Only*

.DOIXARS

a OC-OLb US?

-asibsasasaaie;

OCCw

Lzf*

H

B"0

Back:

S-®

a '

£.9228

m Si

?^iP3sr sro

;rs

IDS' https://image.iis.bank-d^..^.com/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp

10/13/2015


Print Images

Page 1 of 17

U.S. Bsnk Confidential Communication Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This

image contains confidentiBi infoimab'on. If you print this image, please store it in a secure place to avoid

rS^rSSenSd"^^^

Infonmation. Increased security awareness when dis{3rTding or destroying this document i

Item #1 Account No,

Amount! $1300.00

Check No.: 270 Routing No.: 17?7'^582

Sequence No.; 009255243435

Date: 05/29/2015

Front:

X0270 ^^5/S3/2015'' ODUJS^

Back;

For Deposit Only - JPMCj^^ J

Id1 https://image,us.baiiIc-di...,coia/image/JSP/ReportXl.isT>

in/iQ/nm <


Print Images

Page 5 of 17

U.S. Bank Confidential Commun5cation Requested by: Rachelle Tubongbanua

This check image contains confidential information. If you print this image, please store it in a .:pri'ir» ni-rc. , -.4

InfcmaHon.Increased security awareness when dlscartlng or destroying this docum™t Is Item #5 Account No.

Check No.: 2991

Sequence No.: 009255549862

Amount; $5000.00

Date; 05/15/2015

Fronb

J SCOPIELD HAGE

^3532/1222

2891

BONNIE GRACE HAGE 1125SAVOYsr.

SAN EnSGO,CA 92KF-3914

OATS.

PAVTO ORDER OF.

DOU-ARS

£■!=''r ,

^t-rsoijO'P

BS2i2 2 235a5liS°

"•2S9 i

Back:

M

llO

ht±ps://toiage.us.baiilc-du..com/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp

10/13/2015


Print Images

Page 4 of 17

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: Radielle Tubongbanua

This check Image contains confidential InformaUon. If you print this Imaae oiease stom it in a

,ro

Item #4 Account No.:

Chedc No.: 2995

Amount: $5000.00 Front:

.. Routing No.; 12223582

Sequence No.: 009255549837 Date: 05/15/2015

jScoFIEiX> haGe"™ BONNIE GECACEHAGE

2935

1125SAVOY ST.

SAN DIEGO,CA 92107-3914

<^€JJ >■ ^

^/s

& a e E3 5S 2 Back:

5 0°

sjEs&s-a

ag3§§ffS .1b

/II

httpsV/image.us.bank-di^.com/iiiiage/JSP/ReportXl.jsp

10/13/2015


Page 1 of I

Print linages

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by: RBchelleTubongbanua

This check image contains confidential Information. If you print this Image, please store it In a secure place to avoid

unauthorized usage of this InformaHon. Increased security awareness when discarding or ^estroylng this document is

recommended.

-

Item #1

Account No. Amoorrt; $1300.00

Check No.; 272

Sequence No.: 008053013558

Routing No.; 12223562

Pate: 06/01/2015

Front;

J.SCOF1EU3 &BONNJE <5. HAGe 3S10 tuboTTsmar

tAli DieCD.Cfl,92JCIB.l3$3

XQZ72: l^ts 5/15/2015

I'ATTO

tiilotoeb

usbsnk 9>3SB2-1S22

Q Osbom

One Thousand Three Hundred Only**

$^1,300.00 â– DOLLARS

iSi 2 2 5358 an: Back:

~7^i y

u>

119-


Print Images

Page 1 of 1

U.S. Bank Confidential Communication Requested by; Rachelle Tubongbanua

information. If you print this image, please store it in a secure place to avoid

°

information. Increased security awareness when discarding or destroying this document Is

Item #1

Account No.:

Ch Check No.; 3020

Sequence No.: 008658550444

Routang No.: 19993582

Date: 09/09/2015

JSCOFIELI>HAGE

E0-3S8a/t22g

^

,

3020

BONNIE GRACE HAGE 1125 SAVOY ST.

SANDIEGC.CA 92207-3914 PAY TO THE

S'

ORDER OF—

-DOLLARS

JRESEin-K

-SS&BE23 53H

^SOO

|lB3: cs 83 !

b c 3S o 3 2.e >3 a

''5. i s.^ if -r

5- 1j

It siSs. I

H910§§4224 #9^15 ^ E 8154 B 411 FKT §i = 75r613«69 . Sc

I. If Itips 7

3

5.s ' 5

o

ht^s;//image.us.banIc-di_,com/image/JSP/ReportXl.jsp?IiK geNo=l

10/14/2015


HAGE - 016001


HAGE - 016002


HAGE - 016003


HAGE - 016004


HAGE - 016005


HAGE - 016006


HAGE - 016007


HAGE - 016008


HAGE - 016009


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.