FAIR HOUSING and CIVIL RIGHT lawsuit, Jackson versus Walker, et al., 5:13 -c-v- 02247 (Shreveport Western District Court posted below illustrates elements of disaster fraud. As shown in this lawsuit, disaster fraud occurs as a result of deplorable lack of oversight by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) faulty execution of the Disaster Housing Assistance Program (DHAP), Katrina Disaster Housing Assistance Program (KDHAP), and the Housing Choice Voucher Program (also known as “Section 8” vouchers). Allegations contained in the plaintiff’s lawsuit explain what is DHAP, as well as discuss the frauds that the defendants committed. Various selected paragraphs shown below, of the Amended Complaint are provided.
MOTION FOR AN ex parte EMERGENCY TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION
For reasons herein set forth, Plaintiff Barbara Jackson, respectfully appears before the Honorable Court to move for an Emergency Temporary Restraining Order and Permanent Injunction. Jackson has filed an Original and Amended Complaint against the defendants for Fair Housing discrimination and Civil Rights violations. Without requiring the giving of notice to the defendants or their attorneys, Plaintiff would move, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 65(b), for an ex parte Emergency Order and Injunction:
1) Permanently enjoining defendant, Rev. Dennis R. Everett, Sr., from “unauthorized practice of law” regarding his October 17, 2013 three (3) day eviction demand to Jackson from Everett for “Lake Community Development Corporation” (LCDC). A copy of that eviction is attached as Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion Exhibit #1. On May 14, 2013, defendant Everett filed in Eviction Petition for LCDC, but no one appeared to prosecute Everett’s eviction. Jackson did appear on May 28, 2013, and that eviction was dismissed. Also, Everett habitually issues to Jackson various correspondences for LCDC and eviction demands that omit an arrears amount –despite that an arrears is a requirement for eviction court.
a. Jackson especially beseeches this Court to permanently enjoin defendant Everett from initiating –and enjoin Everett from causing to be initiated, any eviction proceedings against the plaintiff, Barbara Jackson, by means of Lake Community Development Corporation (LCDC). Since Rev. Everett is not licensed to practice law, he is proscribed from legally advising or representing LCDC. Also, Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion Exhibit #2 is a copy of the Louisiana Secretary of State Corporation status for LCDC. Defendant Everett is neither an officer, nor a member of LCDC. However, as shown in LCDC’s eviction demand, Everett holds himself out as the LCDC president. Also, all rental leases for Jackson’s dwelling contain LCDC, with Everett’s signature.
b. The sole reason that, in September 2008, Jackson (a Hurricane Katrina evacuee) began residing at the $600 per month dwelling, is because, using religion as a lure, Rev. Everett pretended to hire Jackson. Afterward, Everett induced Jackson to reside at this very Mattie residence on the same day that Jackson went to the Lake Bethlehem church in search of a job. It was Everett who told Jackson about the houses, when he coerced Jackson to move in to her Mattie Street dwelling.
c. Since the filing of Jackson’s amended complaint, Jackson has become educated about fantastic tax benefits for property owners and syndicators of “Low Income Housing Tax Credit” (LIHTC) –42 U.S.C. 8621 et seq. Available information and belief makes it now apparent to Jackson that LIHTC was among the various motives for astonishing housing frauds and disparate treatment of Jackson, in connection with Jackson’s dwelling. It appears to be why Everett and Walker went to such lengths to acquire Jackson as one of the Mattie houses tenants. Subsequently, after the defendants have, inter alia, demolished Jackson’s economic opportunities –all as a result of the deceptive and false employment that Everett led Jackson to believe she had, the defendants aim to discard Jackson after destroying her life –and after, for years, stealing from her. Further, due to the nature of LIHTC, Jackson’s privacy has been mercilessly violated without any notice to Jackson, as Jackson’s personal records and documents are disseminated everywhere and anywhere.
d. Regarding Jackson’s residency and LIHTC, as it pertains IRS law, 26 U.S.C.§ 42, the manner that Jackson’s tenancy was established, it does not appear lawfully possible for either Everett or LCDC or syndicators to receive LIHTC as a result of Jackson becoming a tenant in the Mattie Street house. It is no small coincidence how Everett’s deception about employment was the means for steering Jackson to move, to Jackson’s detriment, in to the Mattie house –without any proof of income, or the requisite tax credit law “documentation.” In light of what Jackson has discovered, Everett’s purpose for Jackson included using Jackson for benefit tax credit partners. LIHTC strictly prohibits Fair Housing violations.
2) Restraining defendants Lake Community Development Corporation, as well as each of the above-named defendants in this lawsuit, individually, from eviction proceedings against plaintiff, Barbara Jackson, because Jackson should not pay what she does not owe. As more fully stated in Jackson’s Complaint, available information and belief causes Jackson to be convinced that, without Jackson’s knowledge or consent, the defendants unlawfully acquired federal subsidized rent payments. The extent of time that the payments were received has never been disclosed to Jackson, nor the amounts. After July 2012, Jackson has repeatedly requested that information in writing, from the defendants, but Jackson never received a response. Jackson feels certain that subsidy rent payments as far back as the time frame of the “Katrina Disaster Housing Assistance Program” (KDHAP), and later extended to “Housing Choice Vouchers” (“Section 8″), all without Jackson’s knowledge, is the reason why eviction of Jackson excludes arrearage amounts. The defendants need to reveal who are the persons who fraudulently obtained subsidy payments, and other grants, especially while –due to religious animus– withholding from Jackson information about federal provisions available to Jackson, such as provisions for relocation away from Shreveport, and economic enhancements.
a. A restraining order is needed pending disclosures of certain other facts and information that the defendants fraudulently concealed regarding federal and state funds that they possibly unlawfully acquired for Jackson’s domicile –funds that could possibly include Jackson’s daughter and mother. Also, according to information and belief, fraudulently concealed information involves other matter related to the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency and Jackson’s dwelling, all of which resulted in causing profound damages to Jackson.
b. Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion Exhibit #3 is a copy of an Internet article from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that Jackson found after defendant Everett’s July 23, 2012 text message led Jackson to come to terms with the likelihood that Everett and defendant Pittre Walker, whom Jackson had blindly trusted, might have defrauded Jackson. The highlighted section shows that, inter alia, Lake Community Development Corporation (LCDC), rather than personal individual, was awarded $400, 000 in HUD grants. Further manifest from the HUD article and the Secretary of State report on nonprofit LCDC, the only appropriate people to act on behalf of LCDC would be defendants Herman Washington and Derrick Thomas. Both of them are reverends. Thomas has obtained a different church in Arkansas, but he appears to yet reside in Shreveport. In light of the HUD article and what is found on the Louisiana corporation database, it would appear that Jackson’s rental lease should have been between Jackson and either Washington or Thomas. Those issues are to be determined at some other time; but it clearly seems to show who should be acting on behalf of LCDC.
c. On a different note, the HUD article shows that nonprofit, Lake Community Development Corporation received a total award of $560, 000 for the four Mattie houses, because the purported LCDC purpose was “rent-to-own” houses for hurricane evacuees. Based on that HUD article, clearly, the brand new 3-bedroom house that Jackson moved in to in September 2008, was not for purposes of renting to own when Everett did not even require proof of income from Jackson. Jackson was not asked for documents until some time in year 2009. Further, as repeatedly stated in Jackson’s Complaint, Jackson and Everett were not acquainted prior to Jackson going to the Lake Bethlehem Church with Jackson’s proposal to seek employment.
d. An additional riddle about the $560k that was awarded to LCDC, is the fact that it was Walker and Everett who submitted the IRS tax return for the 560k. This is the link from Foundation Center Org.,which shows the tax return with Walker and Everett’s names (instead of Washington and Thomas). http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/550/550890805/550890805_200812_990EO.pdf Page five of their tax return, states the purpose is “TO PROVIDE AFFORABLE (sic) HOUSING TO THE DISAVANAGED (sic).”
e. A further riddle is a shown in the 2-page Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion Exhibit # 4, which also comes courtesy of googling “Lake Community Development Corporation” on the Internet. Exhibit #4 shows a “Manta” listing that reports Dennis R Everett as the executive directive (not the president) of LCDC. Further, this Internet information misstates that LCDC pertains to elder care and assisted living –not “affordable housing,” and it gives a false impression about Everett’s role with LCDC. The Secretary of State for Louisiana, and LCDC’s nonprofit status probably does not include such issues.
f. Moreover, LCDC’s location in the impoverished MLK community, would require LCDC to function to “develop” the “community” where it is situated. Additionally, Louisiana Revised Statutes require that a “community development” corporation should contain board members that are comprised of residents of the community, and other requirements involving that community. Although both defendants Thomas and Washington lists their addresses as 2842 Martin Luther King Drive, they do not reside no where near the MLK neighborhood. It appears that Washington still resides in Keithville, Louisiana.. Even further, the second page printed from the Internet shows Everett’s LCDC business has 15 employees and its annual estimated revenue is $880, 000. [Among the free labor tasks that Lake Bethlehem members like Jackson performed involved nursing homes, but Jackson never knew about, nor associated her labor with Everett’s nursing home business, which seems to be operating under LCDC. Further google searches will bring up Everett and LCDC associated with Walker’s multi-million nonprofit enterprises, that all link to CADDO Parish School Board children, along with Everett’s wife, Walker’s sister, and Thomas’ wife –and extend to their enterprises in Mississippi.]
3) The point of the foregoing, is to show Everett’s use of LCDC for various purposes, including evicting Jackson, although it seems evident that Everett lacks standing. The additional point is to show that the defendants operate in questionable business practices, primarily by use of religion. Aside from the defendants’ titles as preachers and reverends, Jackson’s ministry proposal consisted of social ministry to less fortunate persons. Jackson was oblivious that LCDC actually existed for such reasons, but failed to do what it became incorporated for. As it will be further evidenced and proven, Jackson’s religion outreach included the grounds by which disparate treatment that she received from the defendants occurred, in violation of her Fair Housing rights.
4) On the other hand, Barbara Jackson is more than desirous to remove herself from the dwelling because, inter alia, it is a hostile environment, her safety is threatened, and for other reasons. But Jackson cannot afford moving expenses, nor afford a new place to stay –especially in light of the defendants’ unjustified and unlawful eviction filing in court on May 14, 2013, and then did not bother to appear! Also, had the defendants not withheld and deprived Jackson of provisions to which were available, and Jackson was entitled, Jackson would have been gone long ago! Those provisions would have included moving expenses, storage, relocation assistance –and in certain instances, legal assistance. Therefore, in light of the fact that it is the defendants’ own conduct, beginning in September 2008 with the false deception of employment, and in light of the defendants’ annihilating Jackson’s economic opportunities, and seriously damaging Jackson in multiple ways, as well as disseminating Jackson’s personal, private vital records without any lawful right to do so, it is absurd to expect Jackson to go away with her ruined life.
I, Barbara Jackson respectfully aver that, due to the severe time constraints imposed upon me by the October 17, 2013 demand to vacate in three (3) days, there was no time to notify the defendants prior to submitting my Motion to this Honorable Court, to permit them an opportunity to respond to this entreat for Emergency Restraining and Injunction. As far as I understand Rev. Everett’s eviction dictate to me, an eviction petition could be filed on Monday, October 21, 2013, or in the immediate future.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully asks that this Honorable Court grant her MOTION FOR AN ex parte EMERGENCY TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION, ex parte.
Dated: October 21, 2013
BARBARA JACKSON, Plaintiff