Gasio v. Tran et al.
A documented record of conduct surrounding a residential tenancy at 19235 Brynn Court, Huntington Beach, California — May 2022 through August 2024.
What this site is
This site presents primary documents and a neutral chronology relating to a tenancy that began on May 1, 2022 and ended on August 5, 2024 with the plaintiffs vacating under an unlawful detainer judgment.
It is not an advocacy site. It does not assert legal conclusions. It organizes the source documents — contracts, emails, text messages, USPS tracking records, bank records, court filings, and agency correspondence — in a sequence that allows counsel to evaluate the matter in approximately thirty minutes.
Each statement on this site is anchored to a primary document available in Section 8.
Case file contents
Parties of record
Arithmetic note on the Move-Out Clearance Report
After the tenants vacated voluntarily on August 5, 2024, a Move-Out Clearance Report was submitted claiming damages. The damage charges on that report match the security deposit held to the penny — producing a specific non-round net balance. The probability of independently derived actual repair costs arriving at that exact figure by coincidence is vanishingly small.
The same report double-charges two months of rent already documented as received in the landlord’s own written admissions. The April 19 wire transfer and the May 30 cashier’s check — both confirmed received and acknowledged in writing — were charged again as unpaid on the same document. The source documents establishing these facts are organized in the sections that follow.
Items the documentary record raises
The following items appear on the face of the source documents. Each is anchored to a primary exhibit and to a statutory provision that governs the underlying conduct. No legal conclusion is asserted; the documents are presented for counsel's independent evaluation.
- Three-Day Notice without signature The Three-Day Notice to Pay Rent or Quit served on June 21, 2024 bears the typed name “PHAT L.K. TRAN” but contains no handwritten signature, electronic signature notation, or attorney signature block. Governing provision: Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1161 · See Section 3
- Payment account in notice differs from payment account in lease The executed lease (April 26, 2024) directs rent to Wells Fargo account #3312943297 in the name of Hanson Le. The Three-Day Notice (June 21, 2024) directs payment to Wells Fargo account #1005959166. The two accounts are not the same. Governing provisions: Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1161; Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 10145 · See Sections 3 and 5
- Tendered cashier’s check not credited A cashier’s check for $4,338.48 was sent via USPS Certified Mail to Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices on May 28, 2024 (tracking #9534914882764149935944), delivered May 30, 2024, signed for by “H H.” The Court’s March 27, 2025 minute order acknowledges the tender. The funds were not credited to the rent account. Governing provisions: 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1708 · See Section 4
- Rent directed to broker’s personal account, not broker trust account The 2024 lease names Hanson Le as broker/property manager and routes rent to a Wells Fargo account in his personal name. California regulation requires real estate brokers to handle client funds through designated trust accounts. Governing provision: Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 10145 · See Section 5
- Forty-eight-hour pre-move-in modification of executed lease terms (2022) A Residential Lease (Document A, DocuSign Envelope E1408B26) was executed on April 21, 2022. One day later, the listing agent of record sent the plaintiff a text message stating “there’s no dog addendum, landlord prefers tenants without dogs, we left it out to make it easy for you.” The next morning, the same licensee emailed a proposed “revised lease contract” restoring the omitted pet addendum, adding a $1,000 pet deposit, and directing rent to Wells Fargo account ending …9166 — the same account named in the June 21, 2024 Three-Day Notice twenty-six months later. A second lease (Document B, Envelope 5D80110C) was executed that morning before the tenancy commenced. The April 22 text is attributed to the listing agent by reverse public-records directory lookups corroborated by her California DRE license record and publicly declared business contact email. Governing provisions: Cal. Civ. Code § 1572 (actual fraud); Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 10176 · See Section 5
- Documented inducement to remain followed by restructured lease terms (2024) On April 2, 2024, the owner wrote: “please do not think we’re looking new lessee.” This followed a March 20 phone call in which the plaintiffs communicated intent to vacate at the end of April. Twenty-four days after the email, a new thirteen-month lease was executed at $5,350/month (an increase from the prior $5,000), with rent routed to the broker’s personal account. Governing provisions: Cal. Civ. Code § 1572 (actual fraud); Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 10176 · See Sections 2 and 5
- Repair-and-deduct exercised; notice ignored the deduction After the owner failed to repair a broken dishwasher reported March 5, 2024 (despite written assurance from the owner on April 2 that he would address property issues), the plaintiffs purchased a replacement dishwasher from The Home Depot on May 15, 2024 for $1,011.52. The May 28 cashier’s check tendered the lawful net rent ($5,350 less the deduction). The June 21 Three-Day Notice demanded the gross amount as if no deduction had occurred. Governing provision: Cal. Civ. Code § 1942 · See Sections 2 and 4
- Move-out document executed by individual whose authority had terminated The Move Out Clearance Report (DocuSign Envelope F5D247C2-A1A9-4991-B91F-6A333347A87D) bears Anna Ly’s electronic signature. Documented texts establish her management role had previously terminated. Governing provisions: Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 10130; Cal. Civ. Code § 1950.5 · See Section 5
- Pre-existing habitability defects — not disclosed at listing A photograph taken at 11:39 AM on May 1, 2022 — move-in day — documents established black mold colonies in the under-sink kitchen cabinet, consistent with months or years of moisture accumulation from an unpermitted drain relocation approximately ten years prior. The listing agent acknowledged the kitchen electrical defect as a construction issue in a text message on May 6, 2022, six days after move-in. No disclosure of mold, electrical defects, roof leak, or rotten subfloor was made at listing. The move-out clearance report was executed by an agent who had stated in writing seventeen months earlier that she no longer worked for the owner. Governing provisions: Cal. Civ. Code § 1941.1 (landlord habitability duty) · Cal. H&S Code § 17920.3 (mold, dampness, defective electrical) · Cal. Civ. Code § 1102 (material disclosure) · Cal. Civ. Code § 1942 (repair and deduct) · See Section 8
- Move-out was voluntary with rent current through the last day; payments routed electronically to owner beneficiary across the tenancy The tenants vacated voluntarily on August 5, 2024. No sheriff lockout was executed; rent was current through the last day of occupancy. Wells Fargo wire transfer records spanning the tenancy show rent was routed electronically with beneficiary designation in the owner’s personal name rather than to a designated real estate trust account. The sole non-electronic payment across the tenancy was the May 28, 2024 USPS Certified Mail cashier’s check to Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices addressed in item 3 above. Governing provisions: Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 10145 (trust account); Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1161 (basis for unlawful detainer) · See Sections 2, 3, 4, and 5
What counsel review is being requested
The plaintiffs are seeking limited-scope or full representation by counsel with experience in:
— California real estate fraud and unlawful business practices (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 10145, 10176, 17200);
— Civil claims for wrongful eviction and breach of the implied covenant of quiet enjoyment;
— Coordination with active agency proceedings (see Section 7); and
— Where appropriate, criminal-referral support to relevant federal and state authorities.
Begin with the chronology
The most efficient way to evaluate this matter is to read Section 2 (Chronology), then Section 3 (The Notice), then Section 4 (Cure Tender). Together these three sections present the core fact pattern in approximately fifteen minutes of reading.