Lawsuit: Union Hotel deal not what was
promised
The
case has been reassigned to Santa Barbara County Superior Court.
According
to court records, the deed of trust on the Union Hotel went into default in
February, 2007. Hotel owner Williams was approached by defendants Dana and
Terry Klaft, who represented themselves as being able
to save properties from foreclosure using the services of defendant Kathleen
Johnson, who held herself out to be experienced in setting up and using trusts
to minimize the adverse effect of debt. The defendants claimed to have
approximately 37 residential properties they had “saved from the ravages of
debt for the benefits of the owners.”
Using
the services of First American Title Insurance Company, with Beverly Stickler
as the escrow officer, a preliminary title report was prepared to facilitate
the transactions that were going to “save” Williams’ property. The Klafts also used the services of Andy Baker, an attorney,
who agreed to assure that the documents reflected the deal Williams’ was
promised. The Klafts reportedly agreed to bring the
existing mortgage current and keep it current, provide Williams with an
additional $250,000 plus a share of future proceeds, and she would be entitled
to continue to live in the hotel as her home residence.
But
in June 2007, when Williams went to sign the closing paperwork, things were not
as agreed — she was not made beneficiary of the trust, the amount of money she
was to receive had been changed, as had her right to share in future proceeds,
and the guarantee that she could continue living at the hotel had disappeared.
She informed that defendants that she was not agreeing to the changed terms of
the deal and did not sign the remaining documents.
Williams
claims that she has not signed any document setting up a trust into which to
transfer ownership of the hotel, nor “has she ever found any document that
purports to create such a trust.” Furthermore, no record of any legal entity
registered as the Union Hotel Trust, nor 814 Properties, LLC, has been found to
exist in either California or Nevada.
When
Williams discovered that the defendants did not intend to honor the deal,
Williams asked First American Title and Stickler to follow through with the
agreed documents, whereupon the title company and Stickler attempted to
repudiate their role as escrow officer and instead said that Klafts only used the title company’s services for notary
purposes — not for escrow — and that they had only transferred documents under
the Klaft’s direction.
When
reached for comment, attorney Torjesen said a new
case number has been assigned in the Santa Maria courthouse, and he will be
filing an amended complaint.
The
matter is scheduled to return to court June 3, in Department 2, at 8:30 a.m.,
in the Superior Courthouse in Santa Maria.
When
reached for comment, Tina Esralian, attorney for
First American, questioned who gave the Valley Journal authority to write a
story about the suit, then she added that she would ask her partner, and would
comment if “we think it is a good idea.”