California Surveyors Forums

I have been battling with the Los Angeles County Assessor’s Office for some time over some irregularities associated with a case I am working on in Glendora. The case involves some assessor plats, tax assessments, and tax records. It is a bit complicated but in essence, it involves what I believe to be an improper alteration of assessment records that resulted in the severing of tax payment records for my client, eviscerating one of our primary components for application of the doctrine of adverse possession.

When I initially pursued this matter, I made arrangement with the assessor’s office to meet to discuss my observations and when I arrived at my scheduled time, I had to sit for more than an hour until they would meet with me. Everyone was “busy.â€￾ When I finally got to meet with a representative, he was incredibly smug and he refused to answer any of my questions. I asked him why the assessor had revised the tax records so as to favor my client’s adversary. He eventually informed me that the tax records had been changed pursuant to a “letterâ€￾ and a “requestâ€￾ by the adverse party, a party whose claim of fee ownership arose ostensibly from a leasehold interest. It did not make any sense.

I tried to review the books, maps and files and he refused to show me any of them. After submitting a Public Records Act request, the assessor refused to release anything to me based upon a claimed exemption under the Revenue and Taxation Code. I would add that the documents I wanted to see were these mysterious “lettersâ€￾ wherein the assessor agreed to change everything around and revise the records to remove my client from the assessment records even though he had paid the taxes. In other words, how could we prove adverse possession of the assessor removed the records? He repeatedly told me that he knew what he was doing and that I should not concern myself with the business of the assessor. In spite of his “offerâ€￾ to review the records, that proved futile for once I tried, I was told that everything I wanted to see was unavailable including the older assessor plats. In essence, he argued that if his office is not required to keep the material it is not a public record and that I was an annoyance.

I ended up referring all of this to my clients and their attorneys. It is an interesting story given the revelations about the County Assessor. When this all started to unfold in front of me earlier this year, I would have guessed something was amiss as nothing made any sense. Perhaps once this story is ferreted out, the truth about what motivated Mr. Noguez will come to the surface. Conduct and people like this sure makes it hard to do your job.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2 ... probe.html

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2 ... arges.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me ... 9709.story

This story about the LA County Assessor has been unfolding for the last year or two. I am not surprised at all at the proverbial stone wall you have encountered there. Hopefully they will get things cleaned up there, but the corruption probably runs pretty deep there.

When it comes to govt corruption and cronyism nothing surprises me anymore.

The LA times has some BS that only allows you to read x number of LA Times articles a month unless you subscribe. fk the LA Times. I guess I exceeded my limit.

On a related govt note where info was being withheld illegally.
My son's truck, parked on a residential street, was hit at 3am on a sunday. When he went outside after the cops arrived they had the driver about 4 houses away and when he requested the drivers info the officer gave him the report number and told him he could get all the info from the report.
He contacted the PD on Monday and was first told that he could not get any info until after the hearing, then she corrected herself and said "you can never see this report". On Tue I went to the PD and 2 females were in the front office. After telling "A" I need the insurance info from this report "B" looked it up on her computer. There was some discussion between them and all I heard clearly was "A" telling "B" "He is entitled to all the info on page one". More discussion then "A" says just a minute I need to check on something then comes back with a copy of page one. Had "B" been assisting me I probably would not have got the report. The driver was 17 and we think her was arrested for DUI.
A few years ago I had a incident with a bus and the bus supervisor stated that I was not entitled to any of the bus drivers info. The CHP informed him otherwise.
Too many govt and quasi govt employees think they are entitled to anonymity. They know all about us but we are not supposed to know anything about them or what they do.

land butcher wrote: The LA times has some BS that only allows you to read x number of LA Times articles a month unless you subscribe. fk the LA Times. I guess I exceeded my limit.

You OK with your clients not paying you?

Gary Schenk wrote:You OK with your clients not paying you?

It's on the internet, no problem reading any other media articles.

Newspaper paywalls are nothing new. They're also nothing very successful, at least not yet. The public is accustomed to getting information without paying "extra," and until that expectation changes, paywalls will be problematic.

If you get shut out by a paywall and don't want to subscribe, here's a trick that works with the NY Times, and might work with others: use your browser's Private Browsing feature. Paywalls usually depend on their ability to set cookies, but Private Browsing doesn't allow them, so the paywall has no way of knowing when you've exceeded the predetermined view limit.

.

I just clear cookies or use a different computer.

The CHP will give you a copy of their reports. My daughter was rear ended and the CHP officer took care of it for her, got her all of the information. The other driver was a 20-something young lady i-phoning in the BMW Daddy just bought her.

90% of the content on internet news sites comes from traditional newspapers. The problem they have is their traditional revenue sources are a lot less dollars these days. It is expensive gathering news.

If the LA times wants to operate that way I don't care I just don't open their article. Since other sources don't i don't have to like the LA Times.

As for the CHP my son's car was in my dwy and a driver backed into our dwy to turn around and hit my son's car. We took his info and turned out the address was for a home recently demod for the I5 widening. Filed a report with the CHP, I live in the county CHP jurisdiction, they said they would look into it. Returned a couple of months later to find out what they had done. Had to buy a report. They don't make change. The report had all the info on the other driver blacked out, info we gave them. When asked if they had updated info he was told that that report was all we were entitled to.

When dealing with govt of any kind it all depends on who and what phase of the moon that determines your results.

The City of Beverly Hills is demanding $100/hr for improvement plan research and coping. Still waiting on a response to a letter to them regarding fee amounts.

Sorry about the thread steal Mike.