This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Real Estate
Fraud
Real Estate Ponzi Scheme

Chalmers Keith Parker, Juanita Parker v. MAC Industries Inc., Michael Allen Cox, Nancy Ann Guerra, Christopher Gene Guerra

Published: Sep. 14, 2013 | Result Date: Mar. 22, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 37-2008-00103306-CU-OR-CTL Bench Decision –  $1,009,970

Court

San Diego Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jeffrey L. Hogue
(Hogue & Belong)


Defendant

David F. Candelaria


Facts

The plaintiffs were investors, who claimed they sold their property at the direction of real estate brokerage MAC Industries Inc., Mac's owner Michael Cox, and Christopher and Nancy Ann Guerra, and then invested in other properties.

The plaintiffs filed a suit against MAC, Cox, and the Guerras, alleging real estate fraud via a Ponzi scheme.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiffs alleged the Guerras conspired with Cox in a fraudulent real estate scheme, according to which Cox created "investor groups" who he directed to buy, sell, repurchase and resell properties. The price on each property continually increased, and investors were told they would earn a profit on each transaction. Plaintiffs also alleged that the Guerras helped Cox by arranging the financing for the schemes, fraudulently qualifying them for loans even though they were unqualified for them. In doing so, the Guerras received extra money for brokering the loans that each investor received in order to buy each property.

Plaintiffs contended that Cox and MAC convinced them to sell their home by creating a straw-man purchaser to stop any non-MAC investors from buying the property, so that MAC could represent both the buyer and the seller of the property, and ensuring that MAC would receive double the commission from the transaction.

Plaintiffs alleged that defendants convinced them to refinance another home they owned, so they could use cash to buy an additional investment to be chosen by Cox.

Result

Plaintiffs were awarded $1,009,969, which included $617,679 against Cox and MAC, and $392,290 against the Guerras.

Other Information

FILING DATE: Dec. 18, 2008.


#93816

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390