Preview
DOONAN
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Document Scanning Lead Sheet
Mar-22-2013 12:29 pm
Case Number: CUD-13-644474
Filing Date: Mar-22-2013 12:28
Filed by: RONNIE OTERO
Juke Box: 001 Image: 03990326
ANSWER
NASIR PATEL VS. MARK THOMAS EDWARDS
001603990326
Instructions:
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.UD-105
TTC “Y OF TY WITHOU" ‘OF YY SEPP FO IT USE ONLY
ae Mark Thomas ‘Edwards Sr. state BaRNO:XXXX COU 3 us of COURT
FIRM NAME: XXXX
aooress: 2048 Polk Street #303 2013 KAI
ey. San Francisco state. CA zip cone: 94109
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optonay: Professional4hire@yahoo.com reuepHone no. 415.240-0191C LER A
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Pro Se - Litigant FAX NO. (Optionay: XXXX BY
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, couNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
streer aooress: 400 McAllister Street
matin aooress: 400 McAllister Street #106
omy ano zie cove: San Francisco, CA 94102
aranc name: Civil - Small Claims
PLAINTIFF: NASIR PATEL, ET SEQ.
DEFENDANT: MARK THOMAS EDWARDS SR.
‘CASE NUMBER:
ANSWER—UNLAWFUL DETAINER CUD-13-644474
4, Defendant (each defendant for whom this answer is filed must be named and must sign this answer unless his or her attorney
signs): Mark Thomas Edwards Sr.
answers the complaint as follows:
2. Check ONLY ONE of the next two boxes:
a. [v] Defendant generally denies each statement of the complaint. (Do not check this box if the complaint demands more
than $1,000.)
b. Defendant admits that all of the statements of the complaint are true EXCEPT:
(1) Defendant claims the following statements of the complaint are false (state paragraph numbers from the complaint
or explain below or on form MC-025): ¥] Explanation is on MC-025, titled as Attachment 2b(1)
[See Attachment 2b(1)]
(2) Defendant has no information or belief that the following statements of the complaint are true, so defendant denies
them (state paragraph numbers from the complaint or explain below or on form MC-025):
¥) Explanation is on MC-025, titled as Attachment 2b(2).
[See Attachment 2b(2)]}
3. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES (NOTE: For each box checked, you must state brief facts to support it in item 3k (top of page 2).)
a. [YJ (nonpayment of rent only) Plaintiff has breached the warranty to provide habitable premises.
b. (nonpayment of rent only) Defendant made needed repairs and properly deducted the cost from the rent, and plaintiff did
not give proper credit.
c. (nonpayment of rent only) On (date): before the notice to pay or quit expired, defendant
offered the rent due but plaintiff would not accept it.
d. [¥] Plaintiff waived, changed, or canceled the notice to quit.
e. Plaintiff served defendant with the notice to quit or filed the complaint to retaliate against defendant.
f. [v] By serving defendant with the notice to quit or filing the complaint, plaintiff is arbitrarily discriminating against the
defendant in violation of the Constitution or the laws of the United States or California.
g. CZ] Plaintiffs demand for possession violates the local rent control or eviction control ordinance of (city or county, title of
ordinance, and date of passage):
(Also, briefly state in item 3k the facts showing violation of the ordinance., )
h. Plaintiff accepted rent from defendant to cover a period of time after the date the notice to quit expired.
i. Plaintiff seeks to evict defendant based on acts against defendant or a member of defendant's household that constitute
domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. (A temporary restraining order, protective order, or police report not more
than 180 days old is required naming you or your household member as the protected party or a victim of these crimes.)
j. £Z) Other affirmative defenses are stated in item 3k.
Page 1 of 2
Form Approved for Optional Use Gil Code, § 1940 et seq:
‘Judicial Council of California ANSWER—UNLAWFUL DETAINER Code of Civil Procedure, § 425.12, § 1161 et seq
UD-105 [Rev. January 1, 2012] www.courts.ca govUD-105
‘CASE NUMBER:
CUD-13-644474
3. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES (cont'd)
k. Facts supporting affirmative defenses checked above (identify facts for each item by its letter from page 1 below or
on form MC-0285):
v Description of facts is on MC-025, titled as Attachment 3k.
[See Attachment 3k]
4. OTHER STATEMENTS
a. Defendant vacated the premises on (date):
b. [a] The fair rental value of the premises alleged in the complaint is excessive (explain below or on form MC-026):
v_| Explanation is on MC-025, titled as Attachment 4b.
[ See Attachment 4b]
c. [7] Other (specify below or on form MC-025 in attachment):
¥_| Other statements are on MC-025, titled as Attachment 4c.
[ See Attachment 4c]
5. DEFENDANT REQUESTS
a. that plaintiff take nothing requested in the complaint.
b. costs incurred in this proceeding.
c. [¥] reasonable attorney fees.
d [¥ that plaintiff be ordered to (1) make repairs and correct the conditions that constitute a breach of the warranty to provide
habitable premises and (2) reduce the monthly rent to a reasonable rental value until the conditions are corrected.
e. [7] Other (specify below or on form MC-025):
Y_] Allother requests are stated on MC-025, titled as Attachment Se.
[See Attachment Se]
6. Number of pages attached: an
UNLAWFUL DETAINER ASSISTANT (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 6400—6415)
7. (Must be completed in all cases.) An unlawful detainer assistant did not did for compensation give advice or
assistance with this form. (If defendant has received any help or advice for pay from an unlawful detainer assistant, state:
a. Assistant's name: b. Telephone No.:
c. Street address, city, and zip code:
d. County of registration: e. Registration No.: f. Expires on (date):
(Each defendant for whom this answer is filed must be named in item 1 and must sign this answer unless his or her attorney signs.)
Mark Thomas Edwards Sr. > CELE Zee
—
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) {SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OR ATTORNEY)
»
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) {SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OR ATTORNEY)
VERIFICATION
(Use a different verification form if the verification is by an attorney or for a corporation or partnership.)
lam the defendant in this proceeding and have read this answer. | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
California that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: 3/1/13
Mark Thomas Edwards »
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT)
{UD-105 [Rev. January 1, 2012] ANSWER—UNLAWFUL DETAINER Page 2 of 227
28
Attachment 3.j
CASE NAME: NASIR PATEL VS. MARK THOMAS EDWARDS
CASE NO.: CUD 13-644474
2.a Defendant denies all set forth allegations presented upon face
of complaint as being invalid of presenting true statements of facts.
2.b(2) Defendant is without tangible instruments or belief as to the
set for claims of complaint are actually truth, therefore he denies
each set forth statements. Therefore movant for “Stay Motion” be
ordered pending investigation as Follows:
(1) Issuance of Subpoena (Duces Tecum) for Personal Appearance and
Production of Broadway Hotel, general Client Records, and all
custodians maintaining records since defendants residency.
(2) Plaintiff is current under both a Federal Housing Complaint
investigation for multiple civil rights violations and further
under on going city and county investigation for health code and
building code violations still continuing by plaintiff.
(3) Further Plaintiff is still currently under San Francisco Rent
Stabilization and Arbitration Dispute since Nov. 2012 and
hearing Pre-Arbitration Hearing held January 15, 2013 pending
further Settlement Dispute. (Record are obtainable as to this
matter).
3.e Plaintiff served Defendant with the notice to quit and complaint
filed within the means of retaliatory reprisal for utilizing his right
Challenging constructive breach of “implied warranty” is not limited
to:
(1) That plaintiff remain reluctant in providing defendant l-entitled
copy of signed and written contract 08/29/12, which never receive even
upon request after signing application.
(2) DEFENDANT WAS NEVER PROVIDED PRIOR WARNING/OR GIVEN ACKNOWLEDGE-
MENT EXPOSURE PRIOR TO SIGNING A WRITTEN LEASE AND RENTING about the
major existence of “Bed Bug, Rodent and Roaches” infestation thru out
entire building until after his incurred premise injuries from 8/30/12
thru 2/10/13. pursuant 529 U.S. 89, 109 (2001).
(3) Non-Habitability existing conditions prior to renting (No heater
No phone Jack, No weather stripping, No adequate restrooms, No
adequate showers and no adequate Cooking Facility)
(4)Non-Sanity Conditions thru out the entire building
(5) That he would be charged an extra $1000.00 deposit fee on top of
his 08/29/12 three weeks later on September 18, 2012 and paid on
September 20,2012 or quit residence.
As of results defendant exercise his federal and state rights to
government agencies against “slumlord” practice and onsite tenant
right advocate for other tenants retaliatory actions continues that
still under investigation to found existing violations by plaintiff
and his agents which defendant exposed.
CIVIL COMPLAINT ANSWER PLEADING FOR DAMAGES, DECLARATORY AWARDS & INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1.27
28
Attachment 3.j
CASE NAME: NASIR PATEL VS. MARK THOMAS EDWARDS, et al.
CASE NO.: CUD 13-644474
3£. Plaintiff is arbitrarily discriminating on basis that a disable
“Whistle Blower” filed government and city actions against unlawful
Rental of leasing Non-cohabit conditions, Safety violations and
illegal practices, by obstructing evidence [“The Written Contract”].
1. Plaintiff is practicing fraud in the daily operation of his Hotel
Services within means of California Business and Profession Code
§17200 and Civil Code § 1709, in violation of rental
“Habitability”.
2. Plaintiff has by means of “intentional tort” acted within the
means violation of California Government Code § 12955.8 and the
URCH Law of Civil Code §51 toward diligence practices under the
rights of ADA Person 1990 Civil Rights to “Fair Housing Act” of
42 U.S.C.§12101, 3601, 8013.
3. Plaintiff has/and is arbitrarily abusing the process system with
intent to further discriminatory practices, thru fraudulent means
of deceit and manipulations of the process.
3.g If the policies enacted by San Francisco Residential Rent
Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance applies and remain active,
plaintiff has failed to comply with all standards set forth within the
content of City and County Municipal Code Regulations. That such
failure to comply with ways that includes and not limited to the
following: a) services have been decreased without a corresponding
decrease in rent, b) Alternative Dispute Arbitration - Petitioned by
defendant from continuing “adverse effects” is entitled to appropriate
out come whereas parties in dispute Fair Housing Practice Interest
questions incurred premises injuries affecting decrease of services.
3i. Other
(1) Plaintiff has not performed his obligations sufficiently under
written rental agreement in ways that includes and not limited
to as follows:
I. Breach of warranty of habitability of inadequate repairs and
non-repairs under State, City and County standards of
required Habitability Uniform Code: Defective weather
striping door frame mounting, No window weather stripping,
defective extreme low heating, No phone jack, lose unit floor
panels peeling up from “poor application of mounting”,
Roaches, “bed bugs”, Rodents, Non-community functioning
Cooking facility, Poor Community Facility Contaminating
Conditions Imposed, Non-hygienic Community Shower Facility,
Non-Hygienic Community Restroom, General filth of entire
facility.
CIVIL COMPLAINT ANSWER PLEADING FOR DAMAGES, DECLARATORY AWARDS & INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1.27
28
Attachment 3.j
CASE NAME: NASIR PATEL VS. MARK THOMAS EDWARS, et al.
CASE NO.: CUD 13 644474
II. Plaintiff Filed “False Claim” in his pleading which fail to
allege sufficient facts as effort for alluding his pending State and
Federal investigations regarding “Habitability” violations of “Implied
Habitability Warranty” as intentional breach of rental agreement.
TII. Plaintiff Misrepresentation to the commission of fraud both
in Unlawful Practices of his family trust operations under business
title of Nassir and Nasreem Patel Family Trust and not the real party
of interest to file claim but Angela Foo’s Development Condominium
Project
IV. Plaintiff lack jurisdictional grounds his regarding
Administrative Exhausting Remedies Clause of Due Process which he is
currently attempting circumvent the procedural process in reference
Consumer Protection Act violation of Pre-contractual Disclosure Right
and “Non-Substantial Compliance to “Habitability of ADA Person”.
v. Plaintiff is barred from seeking Possession due to the
Doctrine Laches.
VI. Plaintiff is “estopped” by conduct and/or Statement from
Seeking Possession by means of tortious interference with contract.
VII. Plaintiff has waived his right of eviction set forth under
Arbitration and pending FAIR HOUSING ACT OF ADA PERSON 1990 was means
to further alluded settlement owed to defendant from multiple premises
liability injuries in means of retaliatory reprisal.
VIII. Plaintiff has failed to provide reasonable accommodate
defendants and other tenants with disabilities as non-compliance with
constitutional Uniform Code of residential buildings.
IX. Plaintiff and real parties of interest are under breach of
San Francisco Municipal Codes to residential Mail Boxes, requiring key
and secure lock box of permanent residence. Defendant suffered
frequent incidents of mail theft of both identity and confidential
correspondence restricting and breach consumer laws adversely.
IX. Plaintiff and all real parties is liable for constructive
breach violations that resulted in defendant denial of due process/
equal protection rights of ADA Person w/Disability under the clauses
of consumer law to Intentional tort/ negligence and Premises Liability
Attachment 3___
The defendant is entitled to compensation and
declaratory relief plus injunctive relief reference to federal and
state violations, and further binding to “In the interest of justice.”
Civil COMPLAINT ANSWER PLEADING FOR DAMAGES, DECLARATORY AWARDS & INJUNCTION RELIEF-1.Defendant Demands Compensation Due Entitlement (s):
California Code Civil Procedure - Section 425.10. (2)
Defendant Edwards is jurisdictionally entitled of receiving
compensation in this cause, by plaintiff, his agents and real parties
of interest in reference of sustain premises liability by means of
intentional acts as tort pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section
397.5.
Defendant Edwards is entitled to the sum amount of $20,000.00
per sustain injury incurred as being multiple.
And additional defendant Edwards is entitled sum amount for
non-reimbursement for incurred “out of pocket” economic hardships
expenses and incurred personal property damages by plaintiff and his
agents in the sum amount of $2500.00.
Defendant Demands for Declaratory Relief Awards:
Defendant Edwards is further entitled to incurred hard-
ship expense: legal process expenses within the scope of regular
administrative process, agency, general expenses incurred
regarding both the pleading and defendant cause of interest.
In The request sum amount of $1500.00.
Defendant Demands for Punitive Damages Relief:
Defendant Edwards is entitled to punitive constructive
constitutional violations with reference to his deprived rights
as follows:
1. Fair Housing Act - 42 U.S.C. §1360, 12101, pursuant to
Civil Code §51. and Government Code §12955.1, 129557. (f£)
and 12955.8 in the sum amount of $2500.00 per violation.
2. ADA Person w/Disability Act violation in the sum of
$10,000.00 for intentional negligence.
3. Premises Liability - in Violated of Codes: Building,
Residential, Health & Safety, California OSHA Law in the
sum amount of $2500.00 per violation by constructive Breach
Civil COMPLAINT ANSWER PLEADING FOR DAMAGES, DECLARATORY AWARDS & INJUNCTION RELIEF-2.4. Fraud and Misrepresentation of a California Business
Commercial Business in violation of Consumers Protection
Act - pursuant Bus. & Prof. Code §12700, Civil Code §1709.
In the sum amount of $2500.00 per incurred violation
sustain under constructive breach of agreement contract.
DEFENDANT SEEK DEMAND THAT THIS COURT DIRECT A ORDER
GRANTING HIM REMEDY RELIEF AGAINST PLAINTIFF ACTION
IN THE FURTHERANCE OF JUSTICE CLAUSE
Date hereof March 22, 2012
Eke
MARK THOAMS EDWARD:
PRO SE LITIGAN'
Civil COMPLAINT ANSWER PLEADING FOR DAMAGES, DECLARATORY AWARDS & INJUNCTION RELIEF-3.POS-030
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address): ‘FOR COURT USE ONLY
Mark T. Edwards
2048 Polk Street, #303
San Francisco, CA 94109
TELEPHONE NO. FAX NO. (Optional):
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optiona})
ATTORNEY FOR (Name) Defendant in propria persona
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF San Francisco
street aporess:400 McAllister Street
MAILING ADDRESS:
city ano zip cove:San Francisco 94102
arancH name: Civic Center
PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: Nasir Patel
RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: Mark Thomas Edwards
‘CASE NUMBER:
PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST-CLASS MAIL—CIVIL CUD-13-644474
(Do not use this Proof of Service to show service of a Summons and Complaint.)
4. lam over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. | am a resident of or employed in the county where the mailing
took place.
2. My residence or business address is:
»CA .
3. On (date);March 29-7013 I mailed from (city and state): San Francisco, CA
the following documents (specify):
Answer to Summons & Complaint plus Declaration of Mark Edwards in Support Answer to Complaint,
attached Exhibits; Proof of Service
The documents are listed in the Attachment to Proof of Service by First-Class Mait—Civil (Documents Served)
(form POS-030(D)).
4, | served the documents by enclosing them in an envelope and (check one):
a. [2] depositing the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service with the postage fully prepaid.
b. placing the envelope for collection and mailing following our ordinary business practices. | am readily familiar with this
business's practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is
placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service in
a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid.
5. The envelope was addressed and mailed as follows:
a. Name of person served: Nasir Patel
b. Address of person served:
2048 Polk Street
San Francisco, CA 94109
The name and address of each person to whom | mailed the documents is listed in the Attachment to Proof of Service
by First-Class Mail—Civil (Persons Served) (POS-030(P)).
| declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the f
Date: March 2f-,2013 ,
ARDENM. ULEAD >
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF PERSON COMPLETING THIS FORM)
Ton Approved fey Optonal Use PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST-CLASS MAIL—CIVIL Gide of Cv Proeaure, 9 015, 10138
Judicial Council of California
POS-030 [New January 1, 2005] (Proof of Service)
(SIGNATURE OF PERSON COMPLETING THIS FORM)
Preview
DOONAN SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Mar-22-2013 12:29 pm Case Number: CUD-13-644474 Filing Date: Mar-22-2013 12:28 Filed by: RONNIE OTERO Juke Box: 001 Image: 03990326 ANSWER NASIR PATEL VS. MARK THOMAS EDWARDS 001603990326 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.UD-105 TTC “Y OF TY WITHOU" ‘OF YY SEPP FO IT USE ONLY ae Mark Thomas ‘Edwards Sr. state BaRNO:XXXX COU 3 us of COURT FIRM NAME: XXXX aooress: 2048 Polk Street #303 2013 KAI ey. San Francisco state. CA zip cone: 94109 E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optonay: Professional4hire@yahoo.com reuepHone no. 415.240-0191C LER A ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Pro Se - Litigant FAX NO. (Optionay: XXXX BY SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, couNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO streer aooress: 400 McAllister Street matin aooress: 400 McAllister Street #106 omy ano zie cove: San Francisco, CA 94102 aranc name: Civil - Small Claims PLAINTIFF: NASIR PATEL, ET SEQ. DEFENDANT: MARK THOMAS EDWARDS SR. ‘CASE NUMBER: ANSWER—UNLAWFUL DETAINER CUD-13-644474 4, Defendant (each defendant for whom this answer is filed must be named and must sign this answer unless his or her attorney signs): Mark Thomas Edwards Sr. answers the complaint as follows: 2. Check ONLY ONE of the next two boxes: a. [v] Defendant generally denies each statement of the complaint. (Do not check this box if the complaint demands more than $1,000.) b. Defendant admits that all of the statements of the complaint are true EXCEPT: (1) Defendant claims the following statements of the complaint are false (state paragraph numbers from the complaint or explain below or on form MC-025): ¥] Explanation is on MC-025, titled as Attachment 2b(1) [See Attachment 2b(1)] (2) Defendant has no information or belief that the following statements of the complaint are true, so defendant denies them (state paragraph numbers from the complaint or explain below or on form MC-025): ¥) Explanation is on MC-025, titled as Attachment 2b(2). [See Attachment 2b(2)]} 3. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES (NOTE: For each box checked, you must state brief facts to support it in item 3k (top of page 2).) a. [YJ (nonpayment of rent only) Plaintiff has breached the warranty to provide habitable premises. b. (nonpayment of rent only) Defendant made needed repairs and properly deducted the cost from the rent, and plaintiff did not give proper credit. c. (nonpayment of rent only) On (date): before the notice to pay or quit expired, defendant offered the rent due but plaintiff would not accept it. d. [¥] Plaintiff waived, changed, or canceled the notice to quit. e. Plaintiff served defendant with the notice to quit or filed the complaint to retaliate against defendant. f. [v] By serving defendant with the notice to quit or filing the complaint, plaintiff is arbitrarily discriminating against the defendant in violation of the Constitution or the laws of the United States or California. g. CZ] Plaintiffs demand for possession violates the local rent control or eviction control ordinance of (city or county, title of ordinance, and date of passage): (Also, briefly state in item 3k the facts showing violation of the ordinance., ) h. Plaintiff accepted rent from defendant to cover a period of time after the date the notice to quit expired. i. Plaintiff seeks to evict defendant based on acts against defendant or a member of defendant's household that constitute domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. (A temporary restraining order, protective order, or police report not more than 180 days old is required naming you or your household member as the protected party or a victim of these crimes.) j. £Z) Other affirmative defenses are stated in item 3k. Page 1 of 2 Form Approved for Optional Use Gil Code, § 1940 et seq: ‘Judicial Council of California ANSWER—UNLAWFUL DETAINER Code of Civil Procedure, § 425.12, § 1161 et seq UD-105 [Rev. January 1, 2012] www.courts.ca govUD-105 ‘CASE NUMBER: CUD-13-644474 3. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES (cont'd) k. Facts supporting affirmative defenses checked above (identify facts for each item by its letter from page 1 below or on form MC-0285): v Description of facts is on MC-025, titled as Attachment 3k. [See Attachment 3k] 4. OTHER STATEMENTS a. Defendant vacated the premises on (date): b. [a] The fair rental value of the premises alleged in the complaint is excessive (explain below or on form MC-026): v_| Explanation is on MC-025, titled as Attachment 4b. [ See Attachment 4b] c. [7] Other (specify below or on form MC-025 in attachment): ¥_| Other statements are on MC-025, titled as Attachment 4c. [ See Attachment 4c] 5. DEFENDANT REQUESTS a. that plaintiff take nothing requested in the complaint. b. costs incurred in this proceeding. c. [¥] reasonable attorney fees. d [¥ that plaintiff be ordered to (1) make repairs and correct the conditions that constitute a breach of the warranty to provide habitable premises and (2) reduce the monthly rent to a reasonable rental value until the conditions are corrected. e. [7] Other (specify below or on form MC-025): Y_] Allother requests are stated on MC-025, titled as Attachment Se. [See Attachment Se] 6. Number of pages attached: an UNLAWFUL DETAINER ASSISTANT (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 6400—6415) 7. (Must be completed in all cases.) An unlawful detainer assistant did not did for compensation give advice or assistance with this form. (If defendant has received any help or advice for pay from an unlawful detainer assistant, state: a. Assistant's name: b. Telephone No.: c. Street address, city, and zip code: d. County of registration: e. Registration No.: f. Expires on (date): (Each defendant for whom this answer is filed must be named in item 1 and must sign this answer unless his or her attorney signs.) Mark Thomas Edwards Sr. > CELE Zee — (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) {SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OR ATTORNEY) » (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) {SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT OR ATTORNEY) VERIFICATION (Use a different verification form if the verification is by an attorney or for a corporation or partnership.) lam the defendant in this proceeding and have read this answer. | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: 3/1/13 Mark Thomas Edwards » (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF DEFENDANT) {UD-105 [Rev. January 1, 2012] ANSWER—UNLAWFUL DETAINER Page 2 of 227 28 Attachment 3.j CASE NAME: NASIR PATEL VS. MARK THOMAS EDWARDS CASE NO.: CUD 13-644474 2.a Defendant denies all set forth allegations presented upon face of complaint as being invalid of presenting true statements of facts. 2.b(2) Defendant is without tangible instruments or belief as to the set for claims of complaint are actually truth, therefore he denies each set forth statements. Therefore movant for “Stay Motion” be ordered pending investigation as Follows: (1) Issuance of Subpoena (Duces Tecum) for Personal Appearance and Production of Broadway Hotel, general Client Records, and all custodians maintaining records since defendants residency. (2) Plaintiff is current under both a Federal Housing Complaint investigation for multiple civil rights violations and further under on going city and county investigation for health code and building code violations still continuing by plaintiff. (3) Further Plaintiff is still currently under San Francisco Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Dispute since Nov. 2012 and hearing Pre-Arbitration Hearing held January 15, 2013 pending further Settlement Dispute. (Record are obtainable as to this matter). 3.e Plaintiff served Defendant with the notice to quit and complaint filed within the means of retaliatory reprisal for utilizing his right Challenging constructive breach of “implied warranty” is not limited to: (1) That plaintiff remain reluctant in providing defendant l-entitled copy of signed and written contract 08/29/12, which never receive even upon request after signing application. (2) DEFENDANT WAS NEVER PROVIDED PRIOR WARNING/OR GIVEN ACKNOWLEDGE- MENT EXPOSURE PRIOR TO SIGNING A WRITTEN LEASE AND RENTING about the major existence of “Bed Bug, Rodent and Roaches” infestation thru out entire building until after his incurred premise injuries from 8/30/12 thru 2/10/13. pursuant 529 U.S. 89, 109 (2001). (3) Non-Habitability existing conditions prior to renting (No heater No phone Jack, No weather stripping, No adequate restrooms, No adequate showers and no adequate Cooking Facility) (4)Non-Sanity Conditions thru out the entire building (5) That he would be charged an extra $1000.00 deposit fee on top of his 08/29/12 three weeks later on September 18, 2012 and paid on September 20,2012 or quit residence. As of results defendant exercise his federal and state rights to government agencies against “slumlord” practice and onsite tenant right advocate for other tenants retaliatory actions continues that still under investigation to found existing violations by plaintiff and his agents which defendant exposed. CIVIL COMPLAINT ANSWER PLEADING FOR DAMAGES, DECLARATORY AWARDS & INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1.27 28 Attachment 3.j CASE NAME: NASIR PATEL VS. MARK THOMAS EDWARDS, et al. CASE NO.: CUD 13-644474 3£. Plaintiff is arbitrarily discriminating on basis that a disable “Whistle Blower” filed government and city actions against unlawful Rental of leasing Non-cohabit conditions, Safety violations and illegal practices, by obstructing evidence [“The Written Contract”]. 1. Plaintiff is practicing fraud in the daily operation of his Hotel Services within means of California Business and Profession Code §17200 and Civil Code § 1709, in violation of rental “Habitability”. 2. Plaintiff has by means of “intentional tort” acted within the means violation of California Government Code § 12955.8 and the URCH Law of Civil Code §51 toward diligence practices under the rights of ADA Person 1990 Civil Rights to “Fair Housing Act” of 42 U.S.C.§12101, 3601, 8013. 3. Plaintiff has/and is arbitrarily abusing the process system with intent to further discriminatory practices, thru fraudulent means of deceit and manipulations of the process. 3.g If the policies enacted by San Francisco Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Ordinance applies and remain active, plaintiff has failed to comply with all standards set forth within the content of City and County Municipal Code Regulations. That such failure to comply with ways that includes and not limited to the following: a) services have been decreased without a corresponding decrease in rent, b) Alternative Dispute Arbitration - Petitioned by defendant from continuing “adverse effects” is entitled to appropriate out come whereas parties in dispute Fair Housing Practice Interest questions incurred premises injuries affecting decrease of services. 3i. Other (1) Plaintiff has not performed his obligations sufficiently under written rental agreement in ways that includes and not limited to as follows: I. Breach of warranty of habitability of inadequate repairs and non-repairs under State, City and County standards of required Habitability Uniform Code: Defective weather striping door frame mounting, No window weather stripping, defective extreme low heating, No phone jack, lose unit floor panels peeling up from “poor application of mounting”, Roaches, “bed bugs”, Rodents, Non-community functioning Cooking facility, Poor Community Facility Contaminating Conditions Imposed, Non-hygienic Community Shower Facility, Non-Hygienic Community Restroom, General filth of entire facility. CIVIL COMPLAINT ANSWER PLEADING FOR DAMAGES, DECLARATORY AWARDS & INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1.27 28 Attachment 3.j CASE NAME: NASIR PATEL VS. MARK THOMAS EDWARS, et al. CASE NO.: CUD 13 644474 II. Plaintiff Filed “False Claim” in his pleading which fail to allege sufficient facts as effort for alluding his pending State and Federal investigations regarding “Habitability” violations of “Implied Habitability Warranty” as intentional breach of rental agreement. TII. Plaintiff Misrepresentation to the commission of fraud both in Unlawful Practices of his family trust operations under business title of Nassir and Nasreem Patel Family Trust and not the real party of interest to file claim but Angela Foo’s Development Condominium Project IV. Plaintiff lack jurisdictional grounds his regarding Administrative Exhausting Remedies Clause of Due Process which he is currently attempting circumvent the procedural process in reference Consumer Protection Act violation of Pre-contractual Disclosure Right and “Non-Substantial Compliance to “Habitability of ADA Person”. v. Plaintiff is barred from seeking Possession due to the Doctrine Laches. VI. Plaintiff is “estopped” by conduct and/or Statement from Seeking Possession by means of tortious interference with contract. VII. Plaintiff has waived his right of eviction set forth under Arbitration and pending FAIR HOUSING ACT OF ADA PERSON 1990 was means to further alluded settlement owed to defendant from multiple premises liability injuries in means of retaliatory reprisal. VIII. Plaintiff has failed to provide reasonable accommodate defendants and other tenants with disabilities as non-compliance with constitutional Uniform Code of residential buildings. IX. Plaintiff and real parties of interest are under breach of San Francisco Municipal Codes to residential Mail Boxes, requiring key and secure lock box of permanent residence. Defendant suffered frequent incidents of mail theft of both identity and confidential correspondence restricting and breach consumer laws adversely. IX. Plaintiff and all real parties is liable for constructive breach violations that resulted in defendant denial of due process/ equal protection rights of ADA Person w/Disability under the clauses of consumer law to Intentional tort/ negligence and Premises Liability Attachment 3___ The defendant is entitled to compensation and declaratory relief plus injunctive relief reference to federal and state violations, and further binding to “In the interest of justice.” Civil COMPLAINT ANSWER PLEADING FOR DAMAGES, DECLARATORY AWARDS & INJUNCTION RELIEF-1.Defendant Demands Compensation Due Entitlement (s): California Code Civil Procedure - Section 425.10. (2) Defendant Edwards is jurisdictionally entitled of receiving compensation in this cause, by plaintiff, his agents and real parties of interest in reference of sustain premises liability by means of intentional acts as tort pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 397.5. Defendant Edwards is entitled to the sum amount of $20,000.00 per sustain injury incurred as being multiple. And additional defendant Edwards is entitled sum amount for non-reimbursement for incurred “out of pocket” economic hardships expenses and incurred personal property damages by plaintiff and his agents in the sum amount of $2500.00. Defendant Demands for Declaratory Relief Awards: Defendant Edwards is further entitled to incurred hard- ship expense: legal process expenses within the scope of regular administrative process, agency, general expenses incurred regarding both the pleading and defendant cause of interest. In The request sum amount of $1500.00. Defendant Demands for Punitive Damages Relief: Defendant Edwards is entitled to punitive constructive constitutional violations with reference to his deprived rights as follows: 1. Fair Housing Act - 42 U.S.C. §1360, 12101, pursuant to Civil Code §51. and Government Code §12955.1, 129557. (f£) and 12955.8 in the sum amount of $2500.00 per violation. 2. ADA Person w/Disability Act violation in the sum of $10,000.00 for intentional negligence. 3. Premises Liability - in Violated of Codes: Building, Residential, Health & Safety, California OSHA Law in the sum amount of $2500.00 per violation by constructive Breach Civil COMPLAINT ANSWER PLEADING FOR DAMAGES, DECLARATORY AWARDS & INJUNCTION RELIEF-2.4. Fraud and Misrepresentation of a California Business Commercial Business in violation of Consumers Protection Act - pursuant Bus. & Prof. Code §12700, Civil Code §1709. In the sum amount of $2500.00 per incurred violation sustain under constructive breach of agreement contract. DEFENDANT SEEK DEMAND THAT THIS COURT DIRECT A ORDER GRANTING HIM REMEDY RELIEF AGAINST PLAINTIFF ACTION IN THE FURTHERANCE OF JUSTICE CLAUSE Date hereof March 22, 2012 Eke MARK THOAMS EDWARD: PRO SE LITIGAN' Civil COMPLAINT ANSWER PLEADING FOR DAMAGES, DECLARATORY AWARDS & INJUNCTION RELIEF-3.POS-030 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address): ‘FOR COURT USE ONLY Mark T. Edwards 2048 Polk Street, #303 San Francisco, CA 94109 TELEPHONE NO. FAX NO. (Optional): E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optiona}) ATTORNEY FOR (Name) Defendant in propria persona SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF San Francisco street aporess:400 McAllister Street MAILING ADDRESS: city ano zip cove:San Francisco 94102 arancH name: Civic Center PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: Nasir Patel RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: Mark Thomas Edwards ‘CASE NUMBER: PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST-CLASS MAIL—CIVIL CUD-13-644474 (Do not use this Proof of Service to show service of a Summons and Complaint.) 4. lam over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. | am a resident of or employed in the county where the mailing took place. 2. My residence or business address is: »CA . 3. On (date);March 29-7013 I mailed from (city and state): San Francisco, CA the following documents (specify): Answer to Summons & Complaint plus Declaration of Mark Edwards in Support Answer to Complaint, attached Exhibits; Proof of Service The documents are listed in the Attachment to Proof of Service by First-Class Mait—Civil (Documents Served) (form POS-030(D)). 4, | served the documents by enclosing them in an envelope and (check one): a. [2] depositing the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service with the postage fully prepaid. b. placing the envelope for collection and mailing following our ordinary business practices. | am readily familiar with this business's practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. 5. The envelope was addressed and mailed as follows: a. Name of person served: Nasir Patel b. Address of person served: 2048 Polk Street San Francisco, CA 94109 The name and address of each person to whom | mailed the documents is listed in the Attachment to Proof of Service by First-Class Mail—Civil (Persons Served) (POS-030(P)). | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the f Date: March 2f-,2013 , ARDENM. ULEAD > (TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF PERSON COMPLETING THIS FORM) Ton Approved fey Optonal Use PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST-CLASS MAIL—CIVIL Gide of Cv Proeaure, 9 015, 10138 Judicial Council of California POS-030 [New January 1, 2005] (Proof of Service) (SIGNATURE OF PERSON COMPLETING THIS FORM)