- Report: #548208
Complaint Review: Art Sanchez - Fontana California
Reported By:
Ana -
Walnut, California, United States of America
Submitted:
Updated:
-
Author Not Confirmed
Why?
Art Sanchez
18048 Foothill Blvd Fontana, California, United States of America
Phone:
909-429-2103
Web:
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
Art Sanchez Sanchez Realty Investments Fraudlent judgment obtained using process service associated with John Bouzane Fontana, California
Discovered that Art Sanchez obtained an erroneous judgment against me facilitated by using the process services associated with John Bouzane. Upon applying for credit I informed I was denied due to credit. As I had pristine credit I figured this must have been in error. When I obtained my credit reports I noted a judgment obtained against me in the San Bernardino court in July 2009. Upon going to the court I obtained the records. Art Sanchez had provided a phony address, that does not even exist in the tax assessors database, to use in filing the claim. The process server, Rick Medina (with a number of 909-889-5151, of which when I googled came back with a ripoff report and other complaints associated with it) had submitted a proof of service that he had served me at the address of 1733 Walnut Leaf Dr., Walnut, CA 91789. That address does not exist. The court had received the notification of judgment returned to them noting no such address.
Art Sanchez had elected to commit fraud to obtain commission that his own written statement verified that he had filed to provide the confirmation that if the loan documents were ordered on a rush that the file could close within the contract period. After the closing I had tried to mediate the matter with Art Sanchez. I even spoke with his attorney John Bouzane, to no avail. I had planned on filing a small claims action to force the release of the commission that was being held in escrow. However Art Sanchez took it upon himself to pursue a fraudulent judgment to get that money awarded to him. If it had not been for me applying for a Airline credit card (for which I was denied and subsequently did not get awarded the two free airline tickets) I would not have known of his actions until outside of the time frame for me to request a less expensive set-aside.
3 Updates & Rebuttals
Ana
Walnut,California,
USA
Paid
#2Author of original report
Fri, February 11, 2011
It took seven months and seven days after Art told me "good luck with getting your money" that he paid the judgment.
He appeared at the court for the Debtor's exam. He let me know, before we had to go before the Judge, that he was there to pay the judgment. He was apolegetic and stated that he would not be using the services of Attorney John Bouzane any more. He also told me that others had apprised him of my complaint against him on RipOff Reports. Long story short a combination of a Debtor's Examination request and complaint filing with RipOff Reports was effective in me getting my judgment against Art paid.
Ana
Walnut,California,
United States of America
Art is still being deceitful
#3Author of original report
Thu, March 25, 2010
Art is continuing to confirm that he is deceitful and a liar. He knew at the time of his writing the rebuttal that his judgment had been vacated and a judgment had been entered against him. At the hearing in February the original judgment that Art obtained against me was vacated. The reason for the vacating was that proof of service was provided on a non-existent address. Art even brought in another form from John Bouzane's office which indicated that the process server went to the address (that Art is now referring to as a typo) and was given the correct address and then served me. The vacating of the judgement confirmed that the court concurred with the county records that the address submitted to for the filing of the case as my address never existed as the mail was also returned as no such address. Therefore it would have been impossible for someone to have gone to that address and got the "correct" address.
A hearing was held on the same day about the commission matter and I received a judgement against Art Sanchez. The court found that he contributed to the file not being able to close in time and therefore awarded me 1/2 of the money I sought. Art now has to pay me. The judgment he obtained against me was vacated. That means it is no longer valid. I am just awaiting the credit agencies to update my report with the court documentation of the vacating of judgement.
It is Art Sanchez, who appeared, who now has a valid judgment against him. The fact that he would come on this site after he was notified of the court action and post more lies is truly reflective of his deceitfulness.
ANONYMOUS
SAN BERNARDINO,California,
United States of America
FRAUDULENT JUDGMENT REBUTTAL
#4UPDATE Employee
Tue, March 23, 2010
The judgment was not fraudulent, you owed the money and a small claims case was brought up against you. There was a typo on the proof of service, which was corrected legally through the court system. The judge signed the declaration of typo and also signed the judgment that you now have entered against you. Pay the judgment and an acknowledgment of satisfaction will be filed with the court. You will then be moving forward to getting your 'pristine' credit back.
