.
Feedback

Riverside County to Charge More for Real Estate Document Filings

The fees are imposed whenever an individual or business records a deed of trust, notice of default, notice of trustee sale, affidavit, lien, lease or quitclaim deed, as well as other documents filed with the Office of the Assessor-Clerk-Recorder.

Despite one board member's questions about its justification, Riverside County supervisors Tuesday approved doubling the fee charged for filing a variety of real estate documents to raise revenue for anti- fraud investigations and prosecutions.

In a 3-1 vote, with Supervisor John Tavaglione absent, the board hiked the Real Estate Prosecution Trust Fund fee from $3 to $6 per document. The change takes effect in 30 days.

The fees are imposed whenever an individual or business records a deed of trust, notice of default, notice of trustee sale, affidavit, lien, lease or quitclaim deed, as well as other documents filed with the Office of the Assessor-Clerk-Recorder.

Revenue generated from the fees is placed into an account from which the District Attorney's Office withdraws funds as needed but which are restricted for investigations and prosecutions of mortgage and foreclosure-related scams, according to county officials.

The assessor's office receives a relatively small portion of the money to cover costs associated with mailing "courtesy notices" that alert homeowners whenever a document has been filed that impacts his or her property.

Assessor Larry Ward and District Attorney Paul Zellerbach initially proposed that the board hike the fee from $3 to $10, citing state legislation that permits an increase to that amount. But Supervisors John Benoit and Kevin Jeffries objected to what would represent a more than 200 percent jump in document filing charges.

Jeffries also disliked what he described as vague language in the resolution calling for the fee increase, noting that too many unanswered questions made him uncomfortable backing it.

"I went through this proposal backward and forward, and all it says is there's money going into a fund, not how it's going to be spent," Jeffries said. "It's like we're writing a blank check, and I can't sign off on that."

Zellerbach told the board that without the increased funding from higher fees, his office would continue to lack the necessary staff to get ahead in ferreting out and prosecuting fraud.

The D.A. pointed out that in fiscal year 2010-11, the agency received well over 900 complaints from the public regarding potential scams, but only 60 investigations could be conducted -- followed by a dozen criminal prosecutions - - because of limited resources.

A staff of eight people make up the D.A.'s Real Estate Fraud Unit, which often has to plow through tens of thousands of pages of documents to uncover fraud and abuse, Zellerbach said.

He told the board that he's in dire need of a full-time forensic accountant.

"I don't know how much it would cost to hire one," he said. "We need one to help expedite these investigations."

The $10 filing fee would generate an estimated $5 million a year, according to Ward.

Both Gene Wunderlich of the Southwest Riverside County Association of Realtors and Paul Herrera of the Inland Valley Association of Realtors expressed support for the fee hike.

"This fertile real estate market has been a draw for fraudsters and scam artists," Wunderlich said. "They're starting to see that Riverside County is no longer easy pickings. This is a war we can win together."

Supervisors Marion Ashley and Jeff Stone favored the $10 fee, but seeing the opposition, compromised and sought approval of a $6 fee, leaving open the possibility of assessing the larger charge at a later time.

"I'm a strong anti-tax advocate," Stone said. "But this fee is going to generate money that will be fully utilized to protect the public."

Benoit agreed there was a compelling argument to at least double the fee and joined Ashley and Stone in supporting it, while Jeffries opposed.

Ron Moon February 5, 2013 at 09:48 pm
Riverside County Supervisor John Benoit 760-863-8211, supports anything that will allow him to provide Programs such as the one giving "affordable" housing to Non-Citzens. This is a Man who is a Classic Double Dipper! CHP Pension on top of his Salary and benefits afforded to him as a County Supervisor. Maybe it's Guilt that makes him so generous with Taxpayer's Money.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Banning-Beaumont Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Lloyd White June 17, 2013 at 10:41 am
I find it interesting the RG was all over the State of the City luncheon but not interested inRead More printing the questions and issues raised by the Mayor's unsubstantiated claims. We should stop paying any attention to the RG if they aren't interested in what's really happening in Beaumont. I don't subscribe to the RG but it is still delivered to my house every week. Does anyone know how to stop the delivery? I could just pick it up each week and throw it in the trash but then their circulation won't be accurately represented to their advertisers. I'm going to start asking local business to stop advertising in the RG.
Ken June 17, 2013 at 11:47 am
Great idea Lloyd..They dont deliver to the old neighborhoods I guess. I generally pay the 50 centsRead More to see what they DIDNT print.
Washy June 18, 2013 at 04:37 am
Have you tried calling them and asking them to not throw trash in your driveway each Friday.
Tracy Salinas June 18, 2013 at 11:25 am
UPDATE on CV (nickname)...a tumor protruding from his right eye was removed yesterday - he now canRead More close the eye completely which, coupled with a fly mask, will keep the flies from laying eggs in his eye (a very nasty thing indeed). He has settled in with a gentle geriatric horse for a companion and is eating well (his weight was not an issue before - he obviously was fed decently). His club hoof causes him quite a lot of discomfort, but he manages to hobble around. A visit from the farrier is nextin line, to see if his discomfort can be aleviated. I don't believe he will ever be a riding horse, but he casts a nice shadow and is gentle and kind to be around. There is a peacefulness that eminates from his very being...
Ellen Carr June 18, 2013 at 11:45 am
Okay, this isn't funny. I just posted a comment and it's gone. My first post was edited now myRead More second post disappears. What's going on?????
Ellen Carr June 18, 2013 at 10:48 pm
Good news. My post from 6/17 has reappeared but my post from this morning (6/18) hasn't surfacedRead More yet. I don't have a clue as to what is going on!
Aubreey we Love You!!!
Gina Tenorio (Editor) June 13, 2013 at 02:55 pm
Beautiful! Now this is great news! Thank you both so much for sharing the news of your blessing withRead More the rest of us.
Renee Schiavone (Editor) June 18, 2013 at 02:41 pm
Congrats!
Kathleen Mccrary June 10, 2013 at 03:50 pm
THIS ADD WAS WRITTEN WRONG SORRY.LOL THE ONE ABOVE IT IS THE CORRECT ADD.
Courtesy of the U.S. Forest Service.
Renee Schiavone (Editor) June 10, 2013 at 10:59 am
Great photo, Julie... thanks for sharing!
Ben June 11, 2013 at 02:04 pm
Niki- yes the plans have been updated to allow Banning and Yucaipa to share in the use of the newRead More ponds. It is an inter-agency plan that is beneficial to everyone. Why you consider having other entities share this project, which bonds us all together: they are paying to help build the new area so we, as ratepayers aren't hit with the whole bill, and we are going to finally get some recycled water into use from Yucaipa, Banning gets new wells, and no matter what- we have ultimate control over the use at all times- how that is a horror story I can't figure out. These plans were in the works for years, it was no secret. Its now being finalized by the board- as the details are now ironed out. The only horror story I see happening is how Beaumont refuses to make an agreement with the district to utilize their recycled water- and its not all the water district's fault like you think. Beaumont can't build unless they find some new sources of water. One of the reasons they pulled out is once they update their wastewater facility- they don't plan on wasting that recycled water just on landscaping . They are going to dump it into the basin itself for the water credit. Beaumont residents have no clue that their drinking water will eventually be more wastewater than water coming down the mountain. Sorry- but I think Fraser is doing a great job. If he hadn't got in there, the district would belong to Beaumont, who would take all the water they want regardless of impact studies, and siphon off all the money for their own uses. Guess you missed their lawsuit in the courts- the courts laughed them out. Beaumont is broke. The water district is financially sound.
Niki Magee June 13, 2013 at 01:54 pm
Ben, it is unfortunate you are the victim of such serious misinformation. I thought I knew everyoneRead More at last night's BCVWD meeting. Who were you?
Claire Frémont June 15, 2013 at 09:59 am
I'm curious, Niki, what misinformation are you speaking of concerning Ben's comment? He appears toRead More be stating information that I've read about also. Beaumont did sue to try and take over the water district, they did get a cease and desist order to stop dumping their wastewater into the aquifer, and have pulled out of all negotiations with the district to supply them with recycled water. The district has made the arrangements instead with Yucaipa to take their water, with the hopes that someday Beaumont will come around. All these things are in agendas and downloads available to the public, which part are you disputing?