arrow left
arrow right
  • BUSH STREET APARTMENT GROUP, LLC VS. 1010 BUSH RESIDENCE, LLC ET AL UNLAWFUL DETAINER - COMMERCIAL document preview
  • BUSH STREET APARTMENT GROUP, LLC VS. 1010 BUSH RESIDENCE, LLC ET AL UNLAWFUL DETAINER - COMMERCIAL document preview
  • BUSH STREET APARTMENT GROUP, LLC VS. 1010 BUSH RESIDENCE, LLC ET AL UNLAWFUL DETAINER - COMMERCIAL document preview
  • BUSH STREET APARTMENT GROUP, LLC VS. 1010 BUSH RESIDENCE, LLC ET AL UNLAWFUL DETAINER - COMMERCIAL document preview
  • BUSH STREET APARTMENT GROUP, LLC VS. 1010 BUSH RESIDENCE, LLC ET AL UNLAWFUL DETAINER - COMMERCIAL document preview
  • BUSH STREET APARTMENT GROUP, LLC VS. 1010 BUSH RESIDENCE, LLC ET AL UNLAWFUL DETAINER - COMMERCIAL document preview
  • BUSH STREET APARTMENT GROUP, LLC VS. 1010 BUSH RESIDENCE, LLC ET AL UNLAWFUL DETAINER - COMMERCIAL document preview
  • BUSH STREET APARTMENT GROUP, LLC VS. 1010 BUSH RESIDENCE, LLC ET AL UNLAWFUL DETAINER - COMMERCIAL document preview
						
                                

Preview

a7 28 Ashley E. Klein, Esq. (S.B. #291586) Laura L. Campbell, Esq. (S.B. #314836) Lauren E. Jones, Esq. (S.B. #291460) KAUFMAN DOLOWICH & VOLUCK, LLP 425 California Street, Suite 2100 San Francisco, California 94.104 Telephone: (415) 926-7600 Facsimile: (415) 926-7601 klein@kdvlaw.com Icampbell@kdvlaw.com Email: jones@kdvlaw.com Web: www.kdvlaw.com ELECTRONICALLY FILED Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco 05/15/2020 Clerk of the Court BY: ERNALYN BURA Deputy Clerk Attorneys for Plaintiff BUSH STREET APARMENT GROUP, LLC SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION BUSH STREET APARMENT GROUP, LLC Case No. CUD-20-666735 Plaintiff, DECLARATION OF JEFF JUROW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF BUSH STREET APARTMENT GROUP, LLC’S EX PARTE APPLICATION AND/OR IN THE v. 1010 BUSH RESIDENCE, LLC; TONY ALTERNATIVE TEMPORARY BRETTKELLY, an individual; and Does 1-10, PROTECTIVE ORDER \4 Defendants. Date: May TS, 2020 Time: 9:00 AM Dept: 501 I, Jeff Jurow, declare: 1. Iam the principle for Plaintiff BUSH STREET APARTMENT GROUP, LLC, (“Plaintiff”). The following statements are within my personal knowledge and, if sworn as a witness, I can testify competently thereto. 2. Plaintiff has a mortgage (the “Mortgage’) for the property located at 1000-1010 Bush Street, San Francisco, California, 94109 (the “Property”) through Argentic Real Estate L. DECLARATIONFinance, LLC. The principals of Bush Street Apartment Group, LLC, have over sixty years of combined experience in the real estate industry among themselves, and they and have been party to at least sixty different loans with more than a dozen lenders. This background and experience, including specific conversations with other individuals in the San Francisco real estate lending market, is how they are familiar with bank lending practices, and specifically the consequences of foreclosure proceedings being initiated against borrowers like them. . Pursuant to the terms of the Mortgage, mortgage payments are due the 6th of each month. The penalty for failing to pay timely is 5% above the loan interest rate, which is currently 5.45%, or the maximum permitted by law, whichever is less. Interest is compounded monthly, which would result in a late fee charge of approximately $5,000 per month. This is based on a mortgage payment of $48,631.88. (Plaintiff's mortgage payment fluctuates between approximately $47,000 and $49,000 per month depending on the number of days in the month and impound adjustments.) Failure to pay even one payment may result in immediate issuance of a Notice of Default. . Plaintiff missed the mortgage payment due to the bank on May 6 because Defendant elected not to pay any rent to Plaintiff. Plaintiff has still not paid, and will continue to be unable to pay so long as Defendant fails to pay rent. Without the benefit of May rent from Defendant, Plaintiff does not have sufficient funds to pay the Mortgage and fund its own business operations. As of the date of this statement, Plaintiff has still not paid its Mortgage and will continue to be unable to pay so long as Defendant fails to pay rent. This is the first time that Plaintiff, or I (in my individual capacity), have ever missed a mortgage payment of any kind in my entire life. . Once a lender issues a borrower a Notice of Default, the borrower is often permanently “blacklisted” by certain lenders and cannot again obtain future financing from those certain conventional lenders. This results in a much smaller pool of available lenders to a borrower and in almost all cases results in more onerous loan terms. The damage that will 2. DECLARATION10. I. 12. 13. 14, be caused to Plaintiffs (and its principal’s) reputation is irreparable with at least one specific lender that the Plaintiff currently works with in a business-lending and personal- lending capacity. Plaintiff has tried contacting the Lender’s Special Servicer, Rialto Capital Management, LLC, multiple times by phone, multiple times by email, fax and registered return-receipt mail to discuss the Plaintiff's inability to continue mortgage payments. Plaintiff has received no response as of today’s date. The Plaintiff's loan is what is commonly referred to as a “CMBS” (“Commercial Mortgage Backed Security”) loan. This makes communication more difficult than what would normally be the case if the lender were a local bank. In any event, the Plaintiff continues to try and open dialogue with its Lender. If the tenants pay their rent directly to Plaintiff, Plaintiff will be able to pay for all utilities, services, maintenance, and repairs the tenants are entitled to under their leases and the law. Defendants’ rent became due for the month of May, but they have not yet paid it. On May 13, 2020. Plaintiff executed a wire transfer to a surety insurer, with instructions that said surety insurer file with this Court the undertaking. By way of the application, attachment is sought to secure recovery on a claim upon which attachment may issue under Code of Civil Procedure section 483.010. The amount to be secured by attachment is the full amount deposited into the Defendant’s accounts receivable for the Property. Attachment is not sought for a purpose other than the recovery on a claim upon which the attachment is based. Plaintiff has no information or belief that the claim is discharged or the prosecution of the action is stayed under a title 11 of the United States Code (Bankruptcy). The property to be attached under the writ of attachment is Defendants’ accounts receivables of the property at 1000-1010 Bush Street, San Francisco, California, 94109. I am informed and believe that this property is subject to attachment. 3. DECLARATIONI declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 15 day of May at San Francisco, California. 4. DECLARATION