42 U.S. Code § 1437f - Low-income housing assistance

Events in the order in which they occurred, evidences by

Feliks Kubin and Alena Gavrilenko.

Abode Services agency is a “non-profit”, and it is contractor of San Mateo County. This agency using federal funds, provided through CalWORKs, for housing support program(HSP) for low income families in the County. We are on this 12 months partially subsidized program. Agreement between the County of San Mateo and Abode Services for CalWORKs HSP, and own Abode services manual, targeted percentage of households served, who exiting to permanent housing is 80%. Permanently housed households mean those, who stayed in apartment after 12 months, when the subsidy is over (See att page 23, 24), and below is a picture from Abode manual:

Currently, we are living in the apartment at 924 Hill Street, Belmont, CA, 94002. This unit was proposed by Sherry Galahan, housing specialist from Abode Services. She rejects to visit two other properties we found on Craigslist for rent. She said she know what we really need. In spite of our multiple complaints, Abode still trying to push us where they want us to stay. When we move in, Sherry said she found the unit on Craigslist, Glenn Wong (landlord) said that someone introduced Sherry to him. They trying to pretend in front of us, they never meet before, when Glenn told Sherry he has a lot of other apartment buildings for rent, and Sherry excitingly screaming: “I will help you rent them all”. We understand that they know each other before, based on this: Glenn said that he wants the lease for 13 months because he doesn’t like when people move out at the edge Christmas and New Year, when Glenn and Sherry separately suppose us to: “find money under the table, for relocate to a better, bigger apartment with better subsidized program”, get guaranteed that nobody in CalWORKs will be informed of we can get money “under the table”, both of them avoid the answer of how many square feet in apartment, and later Glenn change his version of “how they meet” a few times.

On December 21^st– 22, 2017

We signed projected rental calculations (See att page 14), other papers and lease. Sherry took everything with her, promised she will give us copies later, and to Glenn also. But seems, she gave lease to Glenn right away after this meeting. Sherry didn’t provide us copies of lease, till time we demand it from her, (otherwise we will go to Sheriff’s office), and only when we tell her so, she sent us a few papers, it happened one month later.

Sherry and Glenn asked us to sign the lease agreement starting 12/22/17 and ending 1/31/19. We said that we will stay only 12 subsidized months, because the unit is overpriced, and we don’t want to stay 13^th not subsidized month. First, they both became confused and trying to protest this correction, especially Glenn was, but we didn't accept their arguments and insisted to leave end date 12. 31. 2018.. Sherry corrected 1/31/19 in both places of the lease to 12/31/18 and we signed the lease for 12 months (see att page 12, 13). We asked about square feet of the apartment in that day and after, Glenn Wong said he doesn’t know, Sherry said that square feet is normal, fit for 3 people by any state and federal standards, but she was silent or answered that she cannot say exactly how many square feet, because she has been transferred (See sf fraud att pages 21, 22, 25).

Middle of January 2018

In a first couple week of January, we get correspondence with attorney´ s office in San Francisco police department, Peter Huynh, about help with relocation money. Glenn Wong promise to send lease there. Than Peter Huynh says he still have no lease and ask us to send him a lease. (see att. 28) It means, Glenn was frightened to show lease for any officials. We also became aware we still have no lease and start trying to get lease from Glenn and from Sherry.

We still didn’t have the lease and FT2 amount for our unit from Sherry, that’s why we emailed her at 8: 30 a. m., that we will go to complain at Sheriff’s office and suggest her to bring the lease there, and she answered that there is “another copy of your lease”.

Sherry emailed us the scans of first page of the lease starting 12/22/17 and ending 12/31/18 without our signatures (black-white), not signed projected rental calculations(black-white), permission for photo and video recording(black-white) and not signed projected rental calculations (colorful), all 4 pages as one PDF document.

On the top of all 4 scanned pages is the sign of the printer defects (stripes).

Please, take attention, that colored page 4 from her email have no signatures of any of us. She sent us a blank copy of a document, we already signed with her.

This page is a same, as she probably provides for other Abode workers. It happened, in my guess, because she already gets aware of facing the court and investigation, and don’t intend to pay lawyer alone and be responsible alone too. And it is how she make Katie doing mistake, for became in a same level.

Sherry named her email as a “Lease” (See att pages 1-9).

At 11: 53 a. m. she has sent email that she will not be working with us because she has been transferred (See att page 10).

We start to demand the lease from landlord Glenn Wong, because Sherry didn’t send us the full lease. It was not so easy, few times Glenn promised but postponed; but on January 19th, 2018 he gave us copy of two pages of the real lease we signed starting 12/22/17 and ending 12/31/18, and the copy of real projected rental calculations we signed. All copies were black/white without stripes printer defect on the top of the pages (See att pages 12, 13, 14). He said he is giving us everything received from Abode staff.

On January 26^th, 2016

Sherry came on the 924 Hill Street for “inspection”, after our complaints, with a paper from a doctor, that Feliks and baby have allergy. Sherry was doing video recording of water vacuum cleaner and accusing our family of intentionally produces allergic mold grow. Sherry reject to make notes about fungus/termite signs in apartment. Alena asked her why she sent not complete lease and didn’t tell FT2 amount. Sherry answered that she could send complete lease and that she will not give an answer about FT2, because she is not working in Abode anymore. Than Sherry asked Alena to give her our court claim for lease termination. When Alena tried to give her papers for small claims court and started to video record her too, Sherry became very scared and nervous and run away, screaming: “you did harass me”. Later inspection proves, that causes of allergy were dry rot, termites and fungus. (att 29)

Special note about corruption of environmental health department. We called inspection from them and one guy, his name Stephen Low came and say: “I talked with Glenn Wong and everything good, you have no termites no fungus”. Than we complained to his supervisor, Waymond Wong, and he also says that nothing wrong with a Glenn Wong’s apartment building. Later, this person, Waymond Wong clearly shows us that he involved in the same side with Human Resources supervisor Jennifer Rogers.

On February 2^nd, 2018

Katie Fantin, Sherry´ s supervisor in the office of Abode Services (643 Bair Island Road, suite 209, Redwood City, CA 94063), provide us projected rental calculations in a black-white color, with forged in blue color on the printer signatures of Rebekah Dennison (Abode staff) and Alena Gavrilenko.

Person, who forged signatures, put the wrong first signature, because the client of the program is Feliks Kubin, and he must to sign all the docs with Abode. Alena is not in the case, but she is the member of the family and her signature might be only with signature of Feliks Kubin together.

Felon who make her signature, miss it with signature of a Felix Kubin. On the top of the page was stripes printer defect (See att page 15). We are not sure if signature of Rebecca Dennison is forged too, because Katie or other staff can ask her to sign it again, if only she still works in Abode and not afraid of investigation, but she must know that Felix Kubin signature looks different, and probably she can say that didn’t sign this document.

Same day, Katie gave us the copy of lease agreement with forged in blue color on the printer signatures of Alena and Feliks, with the same printer defect as in papers Sherry sent in emails, and all the other papers were forged by Abode. Original forged lease we file to a District court.

Dates of lease on the first page of Katie’s version starting 12/22/17 and ending 12/31/18 (true dates). On the second page with our forged signatures, it’s starting 12/22/17 and ending 1/31/19, with no sign of correction. We never get unsigned lease with this date before. If we already get unsigned copy of lease, we can sign it and sent to Peter Huynh, to demand money for relocation.

We never signed the lease with the date 1/31/19. On the top of both pages was stripes printer defect (See att page 16, 17). It is hard to say, why Katie Fantin provide us these two pages with a forged signature. One logical explanation is she did them different intentionally. Most probably, in spite of the lease signed for 12 months, Abode will report to government it was signed for 13 months. If they broke their own statistics, they probably can get difficulties with financing, and lost a huge amount of money, they expect every year. But in case if investigator or somebody point at the different dates, it is possible say it was a mistake. If the same mistake repeated two times, it cannot be counted as a mistake at all. For different occasion Abode can use/show one or another end date. But same time they did one forged signature under the rent calculations, and it was not necessary at all, except for show they get a complete set of a paperwork. And here can be another explanation. Sherry feels unsafe and have no warranties that she will be protected in court by good lawyer. So, when get papers signed, she didn't bring them to the office and keep for herself, informed Katie that we sign lease with no date correction. Katie can take first page from the email, because it was a Sherry's working email, and didn't noticed there is a correction on a first page, and then Katie can take the unsigned draft of the lease and place at the second page our forged signatures, taken from the other document. Hope, expertise can show it easy to notice signature of a Feliks Kubin looks a bit chopped around edges. Here is a copy of original paper from a court case, it is easy to see the same stripes, printer defect, but black in white, original in court is color, forged signatures are blue:

We made conclusions that Abode Services PROVIDES OVERPRICED APARTMENTS ALWAYS. Abode reporting larger amount of FT2 in every apartment they provide and report better conditions. Their reports to grunt giving funds and to government are all fake. Once, Abode pushing us to the basement in Daly City with less than 300 FT2, and rental price $2400 monthly (see att page 27). Reading review on Yelp- voucher holder get “help” from Abode Services, submarket awful apartment, and “The rent is inflated” (see att page 26). More squarer footage reported-the larger amount of money received from government and from clients. It happened on a constant basis. Extra money might be divided between landlord and Abode workers. Landlord allow to report larger FT2 amount than real, than extra money divided between them and Abode Services staff in San Mateo County, who prepare and submit forged and fraudulent documentation. Landlords could help to make a contract for more than 12 months, and probably commit a lot more other fraud, because any time they can point to Abode workers and say: “they prepare the paperwork”. Abode Services staff forge leases without landlord’s permission for statistic improvement purposes. In our case, when we start to say how much we dissatisfied, Abode start to say: “this lease is between you and Glenn, address him all your concerns”.

When Sherry, Glenn and Katie understood that we will demand investigation, they became every person on his own side.

Glenn gave us copies of docks received from Sherry but didn’t gave them to Katie and refused to tell her how these docks looks like. Also, he didn’t tell Katie that he provided us the lease.

Later Glenn said that he doesn’t know sf amount of his unit and that he didn’t say to Sherry 585 FT2 amount.

Profit of a forged signatures was to show for us and for government, they get all properly filed papers, but based on everything we analyzed, they probably intentionally let be a mistake in a corrected date, different in first and second page of the lease. They can say correction in one place is mistake, depending on a situation. If correction will be done in both pages, Abode workers never can say it just mistake.

Or, probably, they report to a government they get lease for 13 months, and first page will be replaced with uncorrected one. Reading Abode Rules and procedures, it allowed to provide families more than one-year subsidies, so, probably they request money for additional month. Or, it was critically important, to show statistics of 80% families, who continued to stay in apartments rented by Abode mediation (Most of apartments Abode deal with, belong to landlords who involved in their dirty schemes and know about everything. They all submarket and hardly can be found habitable by standard definitions)..

We asked Katie why the real amount of FT2 is 421, but Sherry reported to government 585 FT2, and condition is “Great”, this way Abode demand from a government to pay more than a real market price (See att 21, 22, 25). Katie answered that Glenn said to Sherry that in his unit is 585 FT2. We said that most of apartment provided by Abode is overpriced, Katie said that they not too much overpriced, and nobody from Abode never did violations or wrong statistics and she always check lease agreements, everything good and clear.

We explained to Katie, for Jennifer and for others, that 42 U. S. code §1437f says:

42 U. S. Code § 1437f - Low-income housing assistance

“The maximum monthly rent shall not exceed by more than 10 per centum the fair market rental established by the Secretary periodically but not less than annually for existing or newly constructed rental dwelling units of various sizes and types in the market area suitable for occupancy by persons assisted under this section, except that the maximum monthly rent may exceed the fair market rental (A) by more than 10 but not more than 20 per centum where the Secretary determines that special circumstances warrant such higher maximum rent or that such higher rent is necessary to the implementation of a housing strategy as defined in section 12705 of this title, or (B) by such higher amount as may be requested by a tenant and approved by the public housing agency in accordance with paragraph (3)(B). ”

“Each fair market rental in effect under this subsection shall be adjusted to be effective on October 1 of each year to reflect changes, based on the most recent available data trended so the rentals will be current for the year to which they apply, of rents for existing or newly constructed rental dwelling units, as the case may be, of various sizes and types in the market area suitable for occupancy by persons assisted under this section. ”

“If units assisted under this section are exempt from local rent control while they are so assisted or otherwise, the maximum monthly rent for such units shall be reasonable in comparison with other units in the market area that are exempt from local rent control. ”

“The Secretary shall establish such modified annual adjustment factor on the basis of the results of a study conducted by the Secretary of the rents charged, and any change in such rents over the previous year, for assisted units and unassisted units of similar quality, type, and age in the smaller market area. “

“Where the Secretary determines that such modified annual adjustment factor cannot be established or that such factor when applied to a particular project would result in material differences between the rents charged for assisted units and unassisted units of similar quality, type, and age in the same market area, the Secretary may apply an alternative methodology for conducting comparability studies in order to establish rents that are not materially different from rents charged for comparable unassisted units. ”

Person, who spoke as advocate for Katie Fantin, she is Human Services manager of San Mateo, Jennifer Rogers, says that 585 FT2 is a very much approximate to 421 FT2. In spite of her job title and highest level of salary, she ignores mathematical rule of " approximation", which says 585 approximate to 590 or by hundreds to 600, and 421 is approximate to 420 or for 400. Later, Jennifer suggest us a bribe in exchange of we stop court claims and contacting investigators, police etc. Bribe means we get a move-to-work program with no honest lottery. She told me: “I can put you in move-to-work program (section 8) and waiting list for your family will be a very short. ” We were pretty much wonder when we realize that Katie and Jennifer on the same board. But much more I became surprised, when at the next morning after our second talk with Jennifer, I get some proof, that police officer and environmental health supervisor involved in a conspiracy with Jennifer Rogers, who are Human Resources supervisor, and whose salary is 17000$/month. After we get second talk with Jennifer and I asked her if it serious she suggested us voucher for section 8, she said that I need to be more collaborative. So, next morning I get two same messages from police officer and from environmental health supervisor, short message of both headline says: " talk to Glenn". Than we meet director of Anode and she said: " communicate through mediator “. Of course, this is not a direct proof of corruption, but those two people send me a message at a same time, in a hint: “talk to Glenn”, right after my phone conversation with Jennifer about settlement. And a few days later, in a meeting with Katie Fantin, she clearly says: “Let’s do settlement by mediator. ” It is easy to understand, all of them point to Glenn.

Here are rental calculations without our signatures

from Sherry’s email. All forged docs get the same two lines at the top, it means wear of the printer shaft, and probably the same printer still in their office.

Could be guessed that people don’t want to stay in small and expensive properties when the subsidy is over because don’t like size, condition and prices of units and sign leases for 12 subsidized months only. Abode Services staff forge leases for 13 months because they need proofs that families stay in properties after subsidized period is over. Than report 80% of clients are permanently housed.

Sherry knew that Abode Services regularly does square footage frauds and leases forgery and didn’t want to be responsible for our case alone. She preferred to involve in our case all the office. If Abode Services will be sued as a company, Sherry can get a lawyer, paid by Abode. She emailed us scans of only first page of the lease without signatures and colored projected rent calculations with printer stripes defects on the top of pages, because she knew that the printer used by Abode for forgeries has this defect.

Another version why Katie print lease with a forged signature: Sherry didn’t give to Katie originals, signed by us, and was lying to her that we signed the lease agreement with dates correction only on the first page, and that on the second page with signatures dates remained by mistake not corrected. Katie prepared forged lease agreement accordingly to wrongful instructions of Sherry on the printer which produces pages with stripes defects on the top of the pages. Sherry printed papers scans of which she emailed us and named “Lease” on the same printer because defects were the same.

To get more details about this case and request original documents received from Glenn and Katie you can request our case from Oakland Federal Building courthouse, district court, case 4: 18-cv-00658-PJH.

We know two other families who ready to tell about their experience with Abode. There is a few more victims, but not all of them ready to share because they afraid, feel unsafe or just not ready. Below are description of words of other witnesses:

Thalia Alcantar (650)-6305313, by phone and by person told us: " I was moved to Sacramento by Abode Services agency. Abode gave me a copy of the lease agreement saying that is the copy of one l signed. But it was different one, not what l signed. Lease had my and landlords signature. Landlord said that the lease he signed was different one"

Thalia is busy and upset with her kids and housing problems and cannot find a time for legal issues, but if serious investigation will be started, she is ready to cooperate.

Marci (650)-5217923, by phone: " l have an apartment from Abode.

l am a housing voucher holder and my rent is inflated, but apartment conditions are not healthy. My 1-bedroom apartment is much smaller than yours, it will be 300 or 350 sf. The rent is $2200/ monthly. Much larger units, even 2 bedrooms in the same place in San Bruno accepting the same voucher. Abode Services placed me in the small unit with not reasonable rent, termites and not fixed windows l always have a cold. I requested from Abode Services my rent reasonableness and sf information for my unit, they told that they are not obliged to give me that". Marci is ready to cooperate, but she needs warranties that serious investigation will be started, and Abode will be powerless to make provocations and unlawful incrimination against her. She is scared that Abode can do that, because she encountered unjust incrimination because of corruption in her life.

Sandra (510)-4678005 by person: " I was in the shelter with 3 kids and signed the lease agreement with Abode. Abode staff said they received money from government and gave to landlord $4000 deposit. I was exited from the shelter because they said l have a lease and apartment to stay. And l was placed on the streets by Abode. I contacted Abode staff and landlord, asked for my lease and for information where is a deposit and my apartment. Abode said they exited me from the program, but didn't explain why, didn’t gave me program termination notice, my lease and explanations where my deposit disappeared.

Right on the next day Abode person, who worked with me, bought a new car. "

Sandra is ready to cooperate. She tried to proceed legal actions, but she doesn't have proofs because Abode is not giving her papers. She has only papers that she was enrolled in program.

All 3 witnesses were working with Abode Services Director Katie Fantin and staff under her supervision. I visited the main Abode Services office in Fremont and asked to control forgery and frauds committed by Katie Fantin. They said they cannot help me and l must work only with Katie.

We are not satisfied with actions of the Belmont police department regarding our case, because:

1) We didn’t get an answer who forged the lease agreement, it is document provided by Abode to government as money request. No any documents inspections were done. Abode Services attempted to submit or submitted forged lease agreement for 13 months to government with targets to improve statistics, show that program works and get more funds or in the last moment when we will be ready to move out after 12 months tell us that exists 13th month in the lease, make us not able to pay and divide deposit $5000 between landlord and Abode staff.

2) We have got an answer that in San Mateo county is no rent control. Troy Adams from police of Belmont, says following: “we got explanations that here is no rent control, and landlord who has a property with $1200/month market price, can charge the government $3000/month, because landlord, for example, don’t like low income tenants and can request $1800 monthly additionally for difficulties related to governmental payments and additional paperwork. This is not true, because, accordingly to federal law, Abode Services “in regions, exempted from rent control, must provide assisted units with the same rent as for unassisted of the same FT2 size, age, conditions in the same area. “

3) Forgery crime is related to stealing of governmental money and it happens in Abode Services agency on the regular basis (ask witnesses). So big amount of misused money and of forged papers will be discovered during investigation. Especially printed on the colorful printer with stripes defects because these defects appeared when printer is in use for a long time.

Probably we would ask for witness protection program. Large amount of people involved in this case, some of them governmental workers, police, environmental health inspector, Human Services supervisor etc., our lives can be in danger. Sherry Galahan in a black glove already tried to put something in our belongings making video recording and avoiding presence of her fingerprints. She can put large number of drugs, illegal gun, false money or something else and make unjust incrimination and arrest of us..

Glenn Wong (landlord) threatened us, he said: " instead of research FT2 difference, better take care of your health", " my handyman who knew about carpet and termites repair, died and cannot talk to you". Once Glenn Wong parked his car in front of our window, opened back of the car and demonstrated us the box looks like the box for gun. No doubt he did it in a manner of hinted at the threat.

We can hope that he just pretends to be a dangerous person, but not so dangerous in real life. I rather say, yes, in a situation when other governmental agencies informed about the situation, he will not do any harm for our family.

But thinking of how many governmental workers involved in this corrupted scheme, I can’t say for sure, if our family can feel safe. I doubt if situation perfectly safe for our family.

⇐ Предыдущая 12