Mathew Yu Attorney Torrance CA http://www.matthewyulaw.com/aboutus.html Rip Off Attorney Torrance, California
Myself and my 6 other Siblings are battling against the Unfair Practices of My one sister Mary Hagins Lynskey and Her Attorney Mathew Yu who Practices Law out of Torrance Calif. His number is 1-310-891-0016 X-102. We agreed with my sister at a meeting at our original Trust Attorney's office ( Ted Hanasono Esq) on June 20, 2011 regarding Our Family Trust before two eye witness lawyers as well as documents signed that prove the validity of the meeting. My sister - who is the only trustee - is incompetent and her "New" attorney that she hired without our permission knows it ,..and he has billed her $30,000 to our trust that he expects "Me' and others to pay - THIS IS UNFAIR AND WRONG !!
-CLARK HAGINS (((ROR redacted)))
THE NEW ATTORNEY MATHEW YU 'KNOWS' THAT WE AGREED WITH MY SISTER !WE CANNOT SUE IN COURT OVER THIS AS IT IS NOT REALLY A CIVIL MATTER - IT IS SIMPLE THEFT ! The Torrance Police won't help us ! - Please help us !!Nor can we afford 15,000 $ for an attorney !! (((ROR redacted)))
CLICK here to see why Rip-off Report, as a matter of policy, deleted either a phone number, link or e-mail address from this Report.
2 Updates & Rebuttals
Clark
Vista,California,
THIS REPORT IS EXACTLY ACCURATE ! ATTORNEY MATHEW YU SHOULD HAVE TOLD MY SISTER MARY TO RETURN TO ATTORNEY TED HANASONO ,..AND SAVE OUR FAMILY MISERY !
#3Author of original report
Sat, December 06, 2014
HELLO FROM CLARK HAGINS !!
MY RIP OFF REPORT IS EXACTLY ACCURATE HERE. TORRANCE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY MATHEW YU ACTED UNETHICALLY !! HE KNEW THAT WE ALREADY AGREED WITH MARY HAGINS-LYNSKEY TRUSTEE.
THIS SO-CALLED "ATTORNEY" MATHEW YU SHOULD HAVE TOLD MY SISTER MARY THAT SHE "ALREADY AGREED" WITH THE HAGINS FAMILY SIBLINGS AND 'ORIGINAL' HAGINS FAMILY TRUST ATTORNEY THEODORE HANASONO !! HE SHOULD HAVE SHOWN HER THE DOOR AND NOT ACCEPTED HER AND HER SITUATION INTO HIS LAW OFFICE IN TORRANCE CALIFORNIA IN JUNE 2011 !!
OUR ENTIRE FAMILY OF BENEFICIARIES MET AT ATTORNEY TED HANASONO'S OFFICE IN EARLY JUNE OF 2011 AND WE ALL AGREED IN FINAL. MARY HAGINS LYNSKEY AGREED TO PAY DOUG HAGINS 95,000 $ AND THEN 'AFTER' THE AGREEMENT, SHE HAD A SUDDEN CASE OF BUYERS REMORSE ,... AND SHE DECIDED TO TAKE IT UPON HERSELF TO GO TO HER OWN NEW ATTORNEY ,..WHICH WAS ILLEGAL SINCE SHE ALREADY AGREED WITH ALL OF US !! TO BE FAIR, ATTY TED HANASONO SHOULD HAVE ADVISED HER !
MARY HAGINS LYNSKEY AND REAL ESTATE AGENT AARON KLAPPER ALSO 'CHANGED' THE ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS AFTER THE FACT OF OUR AGREEMENT WHICH SAID THAT DOUG HAGINS WOULD BE PAID HIS 40,000 $ FOR WORK ON THE HAGINS FAMILY HOME AT 251 PASEO DE GRACIA , REDONDO BEACH CALIFORNIA AND ALSO HIS 55,000 $ AS AGREED ,..AND THAT A BILL WITHERS ( MY DAD GARY B. HAGINS FRIEND ) WOULD BE PAID BACK MONIES THAT HE LOANED TO MARY HAGINS LYNSKEY ,... PER OUR AGREEMENT WITH HANASONO, DOUG HAGINS LIFTED A CONTRACTORS LIEN AGAINST MY PARENT'S PROPERTY ,..AND MARY AGREED TO THIS TOO !! WE ALSO SPOKE OF RACHEL HAGINS TRAILER HOME IN TORRANCE AND WORKED OUT AGREEMENTS, ETC,... MARY HAGINS LYNSKEY AGREED TO PAY BACK MR. WITHERS OUT OF HER OWN POCKET WHICH WAS FAIR ,...IT WAS AGREED IT WAS NOT FOR US TO PAY HIM BACK SINCE IT WAS 'HER' WHO SPENT HIS LOANED MOINIES ALONE !!
WHAT ATTORNEY MATHEW YU DID WAS 'ENABLE' MARY HAGINS LYNSKEY TO 'GET OUT' OF THE AGREEMENT THAT WE ALL DID WITH ATTORNEY TED HANASONO ,... WHICH WAS WRONG, ILLEGAL, IMMORAL, AND UNETHICAL ,... HE TOLD US THAT WE WOULD BE PAID OUR INHERITANCES BY DECEMBER 2011 BUT I NEVER GOT MINE UNTIL DECEMBER OF 2012 !! ATTORNEY MATHEW YU HELD UP OUR MONIES BECAUSE 'HE COULD' AND HE KNEW THAT NONE OF US COULD AFFORD AN ATTORNEY TO FIGHT WITH HIM AND MARY !! HE ALSO CAREFULLY RAN OUT THE CLOCK ON THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS TO KEEP DOUG HAGINS AND BILL WITHERS FROM BEING ABLE TO GET THEIR MONIES ,..WITHOUT SUING !!
VERY LOW DOWN UNETHICAL THERE !!
I EVEN WENT TO THE TORRANCE POLICE REGARDING THIS AND THEY TOLD ME THAT THEY COULD DO NOTHING !
THIS IS BASICALLY WHAT HAPPENED HERE !! PLAIN AND SIMPLE - MATHEW YU KNEW WE DIDN'T HAVE THE MONEY TO SUE HIM AND MARY !! ( WE SHOULD HAVE SUED HANASONO TOO !! )
IT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING BARACK OBAMA AND DEMOCRATS WOULD DO TO PEOPLE !!
I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET AN ATTORNEY FOR YEARS !!!!,.... TO SUE MATHEW YU AND MARY HAGINS LYNSKEY FOR YEARS ,...BUT NONE WILL TAKE MY CASE,.. I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO SUE TED HANASONO WHO AGREED WITH ALL OF US AND HE 'KNOWS' HE DID !! TED HANASONO BROKE THE BOND WITH MY FAMILY AND HE SCREWED MY MOTHER AND FATHER !! NONE OF THIS IS WHAT MY PARENTS WANTED !! THEY PASSED AWAY AND THOUGHT EVERYTHING WOULD BE TAKEN CARE OF FAIRLY AND IT WASN'T !!
NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF MR. HANASONO HAD HONORED OUR AGREEMENT WITH HIM PROPERLY AS BY LAW !!
AN ATTORNEY NAMED SID CROFT ALSO WITNESSED OUR FAMILY AGREEMENT WITH MARY AND TED HANASONO AT MR. HANASONO'S TORRANCE CALIF OFFICE JUNE 2011 !!
MY SISTER MARY HAGINS LYNSKEY ALSO CONTINUED TO CASH MY LATE FATHER'S PALOS VERDES HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER PENSION CHECKS LONG AFTER HIS DEATH WHICH WAS ILLEGAL !! MATHEW YU HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THIS BY ME ( AND OTHERS ) MANY TIMES AND HAS DONE NOTHING !! MY SISTER MARY HAGINS LYNSKEY ALSO FAILS TO PAY HER FEDERAL IRS TAXES PROPERLY ,... I HAVE ADVISED ATTORNEY-MATHEW YU OF THIS TOO AND HE HAS DONE NOTHING !! THE STRESS OF ALL OF THIS CONTRIBUTED TO THE DEATH OF MY BROTHER PAUL HAGINS WHO DIED NOVEMBER 3, 2011 !!
TO THIS DAY, MY PARENTS REMAIN UNBURIED ,..I BLAME MARY HAGINS LYNSKEY FOR THIS !! BUT IN A WAY,..I ALSO BLAME MATHEW YU !!
ATTORNEY MATHEW YU SHOULD ALSO HAVE SEEN AND KNOWN THAT MARY HAGINS WAS NOT A SANE CLIENT IN HER RIGHT MIND IN JUNE 2011 !! SHE AND ATTY HANASONO HAD MY SICK MOTHER ( WHO WAS ALSO HEAVILY ON DRUGS ) SIGN OVER THE TRUST INTO MARY'S AUTHORITY IN SEPTEMBER 2009 FROM A BED AT THE TORRANCE TRANSITIONAL CARE CENTER SENIOR FACILITY ,..WHICH I FEEL WAS DONE IN SECRET AND WAS ILLEGAL ,... AND ONE DAY, I WILL SEEK LEGAL ACTION AGAINST THIS HOSPITAL TOO !! MY MOTHER SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO SIGN THAT !! SHE WAS TOO SICK AND NOT IN HER RIGHT MIND !! NOR WAS I ( OR OTHERS ) EVER NOTIFIED !! I TOLD NATHEW YU OF THIS WITH PROOF AND HE DID NOT CARE !!
THE 'WAY' THAT MARY HAGINS BECAME THE TRUSTEE WAS ILLEGAL IN THE FIRST PLACE !!!!!!!!!! MY MOTHER WAS EXTREMELY SICK AND MEDICATED WHEN SHE SIGNED THAT B.S. "SECOND AMENDMENT" THAT MR. HANSONO ILLEGALLY DRAFTED WITHOUT TELLING ME !!
MATHEW YU WAS NEVER HIRED BY US OR OUR PARENTS !! MR. HANASONO WAS !! MARY HAGINS HAD NO AUTHORITY TO BREAK OUR AGREEMENT AND HIRE SOME NEW ATTORNEY !!
-CLARK HAGINS
Matthew
Torrance,California,
This "report" is inaccurate
#3REBUTTAL Owner of company
Fri, December 05, 2014
This report is inaccurate. The Law Office of Matthew Yu is a law firm which has represented both Trustees and Beneficiaries of Trusts to ensure that California Laws are followed and the rights of the Trustees and Beneficiaries are preserved.
The allegations from this poster is a prime example of the reason why the Law Office of Matthew Yu's experience was ABSOLUTELY necessary to protect the rights of the Trustee and Beneficiaries. Often times, beneficiaries make unfounded, baseless claims believing that their sole agenda is the only thing that matters. They ignore the fact that the decedent(s) may have owed debts or been otherwise obligated and that those debts and obligations must be addressed before any distributions were to be made.
This report is also a prime example of a party reasoning backward. This poster claims that the Trustee of a Trust is not authorized to hire the counsel of their choosing and must hire the drafting attorney. Because they didn't like the new attorney. Here, the drafting attorney didn't want anything to do with this family. People can choose to hire the drafting attorney to adminster a trust, but the law doesn't require it. A Trustee can hire any attorney they choose to represent them.
The poster also claims that there was an excess of fees billed to the Trust. In actuality, the costs of administration are directly related to either the complexity of the assets, complexity of the distribution, or the difficulties in dealing with beneficiaries. In this case it was the difficulties in dealing with beneficiaries. Their lack of ability to think logically and rationally resulted additional costs to the Trust. The Trustee was forced to apply to the Court for approval of the accounting and distribution of the Trust.