Complaint Review: New Century Lending and Real Estate

There is very little, if anything stated in the rebuttal that holds merit.  Nothing was done illegally or with false pretense.  One year has gone by and no judicial or agency actions have concluded any wrong doing by Stuart. His record of nearly 40 yrs in the business is virtually unblemished.   All agents for this company are not at fault yet we feel the agent and broker involved in the transaction at discussion here, badly represented their duty. Greed seems a real deterant to good quality service.  An ounce of caution is worth a pound of prevention.  The truth remains.     

According to Stuart Mark: “Mrs. Argusa was not a court appointed realtor and failed in her duty as a court appointed negotiator even though she is a realtor.  She was successful, with the help of a vindictive ex-spouse to sway the judge and lender to over-rule what was a “bad deal.” According to Stuart Mark

This statement contradicts itself.  First Mr. Mark states I was not a court appointed Realtor® then calls me court appointed negotiator and a Realtor®.  The Superior Court does not appoint people to be Realtors® but does appoint negotiators as Mr. Mark as a Broker knows.  So the issue is whether I was appointed by the court to handle the transaction or not, which Mr. Mark says I am and am not.  Here are the facts that are public record which Stuart Mark himself signed on 1/10/2014 in a Stipulation and Order:

”1. Mariella Agrusa will present the parties herein a short sale COUNTEROFFER by the parties to the Kristine Taylor Philanthropies.”  One who is designated to present such a counteroffer as an agent must be licensed by the Bureau of Real Estate.  Obviously, I was the court appointed short sale negotiator and Realtor®. (Attachment A)

According to Stuart Mark: “In my opinion, one must be very careful of a smooth, polished professional who will use the court system to manipulate a transaction.  Justice will prevail.”

Mr. Mark was present in court to present his case as did Barbara Mark who also requested I testify on her behalf.  There’s nothing manipulative to a 2-minute testimony and a written deposition concerning facts and expressing my beliefs concerning them. (Attachment B)  It is what the courts do.  But if anyone had opportunity to be the smooth, polished professional who can use words to manipulate, he did as Respondent.  Just because Judge Silbar sided with Barbara Mark instead of Stuart Mark does not make me a dangerous manipulator of the courts.  In the opinion of parties not connected with Stuart Mark, justice did prevail.  It was just not the “justice” Stuart Mark had in mind.  “Smooth”, “polished”, and “professional” are actually positive attributes in the real estate business, are no cause for complaint, and are not unethical.

What would have been “justice” to him was for him to draw money against the sale of the property.  Monica Hockaday-Seaton of Ocwen Loan Servicing stated 4/15/2014 in a reprimand: “It has been brought to our attention, based on the below correspondence, that Mr. Stuart Marks (sic) is attempting to acquire further funds from the short sale transaction without prior approval from Ocwen Loan Servicing. This is a short sale transaction and no funds ($0.00) should be paid to the seller(s) or additional third parties without prior approval from Ocwen. This particular transaction was approved based on $0.00 Relocation assistance toward Mr. Marks or the tenants.” (Attachment C) This document, as well as the correspondence to which Ms. Hockaday-Seaton refers, is available for inspection by any official.

What would have been “justice” to him was to live freely and indefinitely in the property facing foreclosure.  How did he do this?  By successive filings and dismissals of bankruptcies.  A lender is compelled to postpone a trustee sale when the owner files for bankruptcy.  According to public records, Stuart Mark filed Chapter 13 on 8/15/2012 and dismissed it, Chapter 7 on 10/5/2012 which was discharged.  He then filed Chapter 13 again on 6/6/2013 and dismissed it, Chapter 13 on 10/16/2013 and dismissed it, and finally Chapter 13 on 12/1/2013 (Attachment D), all before the court overruled Stuart Mark in the sale of the property through court stamps to sell to the Kristine Taylor Philanthropies.  Stuart Mark’s actions prompted his tenant, Faisuly Reynolds to file a Fraud Complaint to the U.S. Justice Department against him on 1/3/2014. (Attachment E)

Why did the property need to be sold to the Kristine Taylor Philanthropies?

This property was owned by both Stuart and Barbara Mark as joint tenants with a mortgage contracted as an “income property,” also called, “non-owner-occupied.” This property was leased to 2 parties, one in the main house, the other in a back section partitioned from the main house.  Stuart Mark began to occupy the back house with his girlfriend contrary to the terms of the mortgage, which resulted in a loss to the income of that property, falling short of the monthly payment.  The property went into default.

In August, 2013, Stuart Mark advertised a 3-5 year “lease-buy back agreement” for 2068 S. Della Lane, Anaheim, by which he could personally buy back that property from a private investor at a future date and without any need to benefit Barbara Mark by such a buy back.  This is called a “arms length transaction.” (Attachment F) Ocwen Loan Servicing requires an affidavit to be signed by all parties acknowledging non-arms length transactions. (Attachment G) Arms length transactions are illegal for short sales.  However, it is legal if purchased by a non-profit philanthropic organization such as the Kristine Taylor Philanthropies and Ocwen accepted this.  The Kristine Taylor Philanthropies is a non-profit organization that buys properties in such a way that those threatened with foreclosure could remain in their homes.  Neither Stuart Mark nor Barbara Mark would face legal indictment by pursuing this route.  In fact it was Stuart Mark himself who responded to an ad of mine promoting this program.

According to Stuart Mark in his original report against me and my broker: “The deal here is to entice the homeowner with a short sale combined with a sale/leaseback to get the homeowner believing these people want to help you.  The only thing they want is a listing and they bully and push their way to make a sale and a commission.  The sale / lease-back is just a bait and switch to get the poor consumer to give a long term listing agreement then force a sale.”

Given the evidence that he was advertising that 3-5 year “lease-buy back agreement” to private investors (Attachment F) and that he attempted to gain funds not entitled to him in a short sale (Attachment C), it was Stuart Mark who was doing the things he accuses me, the Kristine Taylor Philanthropies, Adam Preston, and New Century of doing.  What he was attempting to do was clearly illegal and the judge saw through his behavior.  He did not receive a bait and switch.  He received the standard legally recognized listing agreement any agent would provide for a short sale.  To “force a sale” was not anything that happened on my account, but through a judicial action by the Superior Court through the use of court stamps requested by Barbara Mark, not me, the Kristine Taylor Philanthropies, and not Adam Preston or New Century.

The Superior Court ordered those court stamps at the request of Barbara Mark pursuant to facts found in court proceedings, precisely because Stuart Mark insisted on not cooperating with the sale with a breathtaking list of multiple obstructions on page 4 of the Request for Order dated 4/15/2014 under “Facts In Support.” (Attachment H) 

Stuart Mark said,” It should seem strange that a (sic) owner who is a state licensed real estate broker would complain about their 'listing agent' for a short sale where there is little if any financial gain.”

Yes, it would.  It is especially strange that an owner complains when he doesn’t get the financial gain on a short sale he is not entitled to receive as confirmed in Monica Hockaday-Seaton’s communiqué on 4/15/2014, (Attachment C).

Stuart Mark, a real estate mortgage broker for over 30 years, and whose track record for loan origination exceeds his experience in real estate sales per sé, knows very well the rules pertaining to mortgages, how they are to be honored, and the processes pertaining to default and foreclosure.  Coupled with additional training in law, he also knows many details of manipulating debt situations to one’s advantage far more than I do.  These incidents cited are not the result of one who is ignorant.  The fact that someone with that much background in a court of law tells much of what the truth really is.

Stuart Mark said, “…please check the Cal Bre (sic) records in the next 3-6 months to check her record.”

Yes.  Please do.  It’s now over a year since the court ordered the sale of the property in question and to date there are no BRE disciplinary actions against me.  However, the BRE did order Stuart Mark to remove the website ADynamicTrio.com (Attachment I) early this year because it improperly used the address and phone number of United California Financial Corporation while ADynamicTrio.com is registered to Sandra Verdugo of First Team SNS by the Orange County Recorder as a DBA (Attachment J).  Even so, ADynamicTrio.com continues to operate through Facebook (facebook.com/stuartnsandra.sns), LinkedIn (linkedin.com/in/adynamictrio), and Twitter (twitter.com/adynamictrio) in much the same way at the time of this writing.

So who is the slimy person here, the one who acted to benefit all parties as I did?  The evidence speaks for itself.  Does Barbara Mark have cause for what Stuart Mark labeled as “vindictive”?  Any thinking reader could judge for himself what is true in this Ripoff report and see that I am not the one who was out to rip people off.

This is a classic case where the pot calls the kettle black. What I stated above is all truth. Should anyone want further evidence, I would be glad to show you. The truth has certainly prevailed Mr. Mark. Cold hard evidence has spoken. What do you have as evidence to your claims? Absolutely Nothing.  

Stuart Mark, the recipient of multiple law suits for mortgage lending fraud and IRS problems,  is currently under investigation for real estate fraud. 

One might ask why anyone would want to do business with a real estate broker who brags about the duration of his business for so many years yet files multiple bad faith  bankruptcies and loses the home he lives In. 

Vindictiveness is irrelevant.  I divorced Stuart Mark for adultery. The facts speak Louder than his opinions. I suggest he wash his hands before he points his finger.

 The representations made by Barbara Mark are somewhat correct but my assessment of Mrs. Argusa is only my opinion.  Proven facts and determination of allegations are yet to be resolved.  I'm a licensed real estate broker by the California Beaure of Real Estate, licensed as a agent and broker since 1976.  I understand good business ethics and professional conduct.  I also understand how real estate professionals can manipulate a transaction to their advantage.

Mrs. Argusa was not a court appointed realtor and failed in her duty as a court appointed negotiator even though she is a realtor.  She was successful, with the help of a vindictive ex-spouse to sway the judge and lender to over-rule what was a bad deal.  Please call Mrs. Argusa since she will plead innocence and say her sellers were at 'odds' but please check the Cal Bre records in the next 3-6 months to check her record. 

In my opinion, one must be very careful of a smooth, polished professional who will use the court system to manipulate a transaction.  Justice will prevail. Good luck with your real estate agent or broker. Ask for referals and check their record.

It should seem strange that a owner who is a state licensed real estate broker would complain about their 'listing agent' for a short sale where there is little if any financial gain.