Consumers and victims press Professional Fiduciaries Bureau on enforcement; Bureau outlines complaint process

Public commenters at the Sept. 11 meeting of the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau Advisory Committee accused some licensed fiduciaries of serious misconduct and urged the Bureau to hire more investigators, while Bureau staff described how complaints are processed and what enforcement options exist.

At the start of public comment, Jody Sussman said she had “a complaint with you that has been ignored for a couple of years now” and alleged that a group in Southern California “lied to the courts,” used predatory loans and forced sales of wards’ property. Sussman added that gag orders and attorney conduct had silenced victims and that some complaints implicated “the most vulnerable people, the elderly and special needs children.” Farnaz Rahimi, another WebEx commenter, said she was a victim of a licensed fiduciary and that subpoenas and prior complaints were ignored.

The committee did not respond to individual case details during public comment (legal counsel reminded speakers that the committee does not answer questions in this forum). Program Manager Terri MacLean later described the Bureau’s standard complaint workflow: intake and jurisdictional screening, preliminary analysis, an investigation by an analyst, and a determination that can lead to a citation (with or without a fine) or, in cases judged egregious, to revocation. MacLean said anyone receiving a citation may request an informal conference with Bureau leadership and then has 30 days to request a formal hearing with the Attorney General’s Office.

MacLean also provided enforcement statistics for fiscal year 2023–24: the Bureau received 196 complaints, closed 175 complaints last fiscal year, and had 98 complaints pending at the time of the meeting. The average days to close a complaint was reported as roughly 150 days. The Bureau issued 35 citations last fiscal year and initiated 3 cases with the Attorney General’s Office. MacLean said the Bureau recently hired a new enforcement analyst (started July 2024) and that cross-training and additional staff support are priorities to improve timeliness.

Committee members asked for clearer explanations of escalation (for example, whether multiple citations trigger revocation). MacLean said there is no fixed numerical threshold of citations that automatically triggers license revocation; the decision depends on the severity and egregiousness of allegations. The committee noted public frustration that some individual complaints have remained open for multiple years and requested clearer public-facing information about process timelines and next steps.

The meeting record shows the Bureau plans outreach and operational changes — including reminder notifications and website updates — intended to reduce renewal-related citations and to educate licensees and consumers about reporting and compliance. Members recorded a request to place a future agenda item on specific outreach strategies the Bureau will use to increase the number of licensed fiduciaries and improve public awareness.

The Bureau and Department of Consumer Affairs legal counsel reiterated limits on public comment (no discussion of pending cases) but listened to the accusations and agreed to continue improving enforcement capacity and public communication. The advisory committee did not take formal disciplinary action during the meeting; complaints remain under investigation or pending further legal process.