Text Message – Owner’s Demand for Private Payment Outside Contract

Summary

This message documents Phat Tran’s attempt to coerce the tenant into violating the signed Berkshire Hathaway lease by demanding payment into his private bank account, bypassing the contracted payment system. Tran instructs the tenant not to pay Berkshire Hathaway and to “keep paying me the new amount,” effectively requesting that rent be hidden from corporate accounting. In response, Michael Gasio refuses, citing that such a request would constitute bank fraud and a breach of written contract, stating: “I can not legally pay your private account like old times… Berkshire will not claim nonpayment.”

Evidence Findings

• The owner explicitly directs the tenant to withhold contractual payment to Berkshire Hathaway and instead send funds directly to him.
• Tenant response invokes legality and compliance, confirming awareness that diverting payments violates contract law and financial statutes.
• Owner acknowledges “both [Hanson and myself] are in a lot of trouble,” implying awareness of unlawful coordination.
• Public records showing Hanson Le listed as a resident of the same property add to the conflict of interest and collusion evidence.

Legal Analysis

• 18 U.S.C. §1343 – Wire Fraud: Attempted use of electronic communication to redirect contractually bound payments to a private account.
• 18 U.S.C. §1344 – Bank Fraud: Effort to defraud a federally insured institution (Wells Fargo) by manipulating deposit routing.
• California Penal Code §484 / §532: Theft and false pretenses—obtaining money or property by deceit.
• California Business & Professions Code §10176(a): Misconduct by licensed real-estate agent or affiliate through dishonest dealing.
• California Civil Code §1710: Fraudulent deceit through misrepresentation or concealment of a material fact.

Implications

This exhibit confirms that Phat Tran knowingly solicited fraudulent banking conduct to conceal transactions from Berkshire Hathaway. The tenant’s refusal to comply establishes clear good faith and legal awareness. The statement “I can not legally pay your private account” serves as contemporaneous written evidence that the tenant identified and rejected a criminal financial request. Together, this exchange demonstrates intent, knowledge, and overt act—the three elements required to substantiate attempted wire and bank fraud under federal law.