DATE: August 25, 2026
TO: Board of Supervisors
SUBMITTED BY: Lisa Smittcamp, District Attorney
SUBJECT: Annual Report of the Real Estate Fraud Prosecution Program
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
TITLE
Receive and file annual report of the Real Estate Fraud Prosecution program pursuant to California Government Code Section 27388.
REPORT
This report will summarize the activities of the Office of the District Attorney’s Real Estate Fraud Prosecution program from July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026. This item is countywide.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S):
There are no viable options available.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no increase in Net County Cost associated with this action. The Real Estate Fraud Prosecution program is funded with recording fees, which fund 100% of the direct costs as well as a portion of indirect cost associated with this program. During FY 2025-26, the Unit expended a total of $715,160.39 which included personnel cost, operating expenses and overhead allocations. Revenue in the amount of $626,243.06 was collected from the filing fees and interest earned, all of which was placed in the Unit’s Special Revenue Fund which had a FY 2025-26 year-end balance of $1,013,884.92 after the final accounting.
DISCUSSION:
This report is prepared for the purposes of compliance with Government Code Section 27388 (d). This report will summarize the activities of the Office of the District Attorney’s Real Estate Fraud Prosecution program from July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026.
The monies collected pursuant to Government Code Section 27388 fund the District Attorney’s Real Estate Fraud Prosecution Unit which is comprised of four positions for FY 2025-26: one Deputy District Attorney, two Senior DA Investigators and one Paralegal. These personnel are fully funded by the recording fees for the investigation and prosecution of real estate fraud crimes.
For FY 2025-26, the Real Estate Fraud Unit received 33 cases for review from members of the community, local businesses, and other agencies regarding possible real estate fraud. Cases for review include referral forms received from the public, reports from governmental agencies as well as cases submitted for criminal filings by law enforcement agencies. The DA Real Estate Fraud investigators are currently conducting 74 active investigations. This number included new and continuing investigations from prior years as well as new and pending court cases.
Criminal charges were filed in one new case, resulting in a current total of 17 active court cases including court cases from prior years. In FY 2025-26, nine cases were closed.
Serious criminal schemes detected and investigated during FY 2025-26 included the following:
• Forgery
• Identity theft
• Grand theft
• Filing forged or false documents
• Altered documents
• Foreclosure/loan modification scheme
• Elder Abuse
General Overview of Real Estate Fraud
Typically, real estate fraud cases involve extensive investigations and the gathering of numerous documents from various sources. These complex investigations can take anywhere from three months to three years or more to investigate and prosecute to conclusion. Investigations require interviewing victims, witnesses, mortgage, and title/escrow companies, and more. Most investigations require search warrants for documents and/or bank records.
An example of a Real Estate Fraud scenario is:
Victim 1 was a 77-year-old bedridden woman in a nursing home. Before being placed in the nursing home, she lived at home with her elderly friend who was a joint tenant on the Deed. The elderly friend had Power of Attorney when victim 1 moved to a nursing home. The elderly friend became a client of IHSS and her caregiver, who was not an official IHSS employee, lived together in victim 1’s house.
In 2024, Defendant 1 (the elderly friend) used a fraudulent ID with her picture and victim 1’s information to sell the house and purchase a mobile home. The realtor used for these transactions was also the buyer of victim 1’s home. He was initially contacted by Defendant 2 (caregiver), who recruited others to sign a notary journal as witnesses confirming the identity of Defendant 1 as being victim 1. Victim 2 (the realtor) purchased the home for $235,000 which Defendant 1 used to purchase a mobile home and pay off victim 1’s home loans.
The criminal conduct by the defendants resulted in a financial loss to the realtor/buyer, the title insurance company for the sale of the victim 1’s home, and purchase of the mobile home. The total restitution ordered was $272,384. The realtor was awarded $20,854 for out-of-pocket expenses for repairs to victim 1’s home. The title insurance company was awarded $235,000 for the rescission of the sale of victim 1’s home. The mobile home park was awarded $16,530 for eviction costs and unpaid space rent and utilities.
CAO ANALYST:
Fine Nai