Desist and Refrain Order

GREAT find by a friend – a short, but sweet read.  While this helps others in the future, is there any way this helps us today?



7 thoughts on “Desist and Refrain Order

  1. A BIG thank you to our friend.

    Two questions;

    1. The document isn’t signed. Was the order ever made official and served?

    2. With so many of us looking for documentation, why did it take five weeks to find?

    • If it hasn’t already been done, Equitatus or someone should get a copy of this document to the attorneys who have filed the class action. Let them determine if it was actually issued. If it was it should help them with their burden of proof.

  2. If you google for other desist and refrain orders online, it seems they all appear without the signature. That might be a security issue, or that it’s just easier to post those online from original doc, rather than scanning them after signature. It’s hosted on the state government’s website, so it seems unlikely they would post a lot of those if they were never served.

    I don’t know why this hasn’t come up sooner, but often we read that different government databases don’t communicate with one another. This looks to have been served well before our last get-together in Judge Efremsky’s courtroom, where he tried to ask questions about these businesses. I’m speculating that the judge might have appreciated somebody from the Ng’s table mentioning this. Judge’s usually get annoyed when people play games and waste their time.

  3. I’m absolutely with ‘Dillydarlin’ on this. As a matter of fact, I’d go a step or two farther.

    I hope that Mr. Brower, Mr. Brown, or any other attorney here who knows the ins and outs of the Courts gets a copy of this document to every judge in every case that the Ngs and Horwitz are involved in as well as the FBI and the SEC. Even the new Attorney General.

    And while you’re at it, would you please send along a copy of the documents transferring the Austin Val Verde property to Tagami and Epstein and the document provided in an earlier topic at

    How many ‘official’ documents like these is it going to take before some court or some agency finally realizes what we all already know about the B-4 Partners and what they did to us?

    • I believe the exclusion of Lend, Inc was only because Kelly started that so recently that it wasn’t included in the original complaint, and will be remedied soon. It does specifically name the individuals as well. But anyone here can file a complaint with the dept of corporations. Perhaps hearing from more than one person will help escalate:

      Since RE Loans is mentioned, does this have any bearing on Weissenborn’s trying to still work for RE Loans?

      It seems the meat of this complaint is that they did not disclose the earlier violations, this wording makes me wonder:

      “Pursuant to section 25532 of the Corporate Securities Law of 1968, R.E. Loans, LLC, B-4 Partners, LLC, Mortgage Fund ‘08, LLC, The Mortgage Fund, LLC, Bar K, LLC, Walter Ng, Bruce Horwitz, Kelly Ng, and Barney Ng are hereby ordered to desist and refrain from offering or selling or buying or offering to buy any security in the State of California including, but not limited to, membership interests in limited liability companies, and promissory notes by means of any written or oral communication which includes an untrue statement of a material fact or omits to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading.

      So if they slip that disclaimer in, then they can be back to buying and selling securities?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s