• Report: #1014553

Complaint Review: riverside county child protective services

Thank You

Read how Ripoff Report saves consumers millions.

  • Submitted: Thu, February 14, 2013
  • Updated: Fri, February 15, 2013

  • Reported By: lynnette weaver — riverside United States of America
riverside county child protective services
riverwalk pkwy riverside ca riverside, California United States of America

riverside county child protective services C.p.s atoorney deposition riverside, California

*General Comment: Riverside County Child Protective Services

*Author of original report: response to stacey

*Consumer Comment: question

What's this?
What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

Well I filed a lawsuit against riverside county c.p.s in pro per I've been back and forth to court and on the 7th of this month went to a deposition. The attorney was asking questions pertaining to my visitation when the c.p.s cade was open,etc. Then on the 13th went to civil court I heard things being said about custody. I didn't quite understand then,the c.p.s attorney explained to me that,they had filed a 820 motion with juvenile court and haven't heard anything. He also explained that he could not ask questions pertaining to the juvenile case without the 820 motion. I'm suing in pro per and would like advicw as to what to do. I am ready for trial and they are not. The next court date is set for july. Please give me some advice by filing a response thanks!

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 02/14/2013 08:17 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/riverside-county-child-protective-services/riverside-California-92507/riverside-county-child-protective-services-Cps-atoorney-deposition-riverside-California-1014553. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on riverside county child protective services

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
1Author 2Consumer 0Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 General Comment

Riverside County Child Protective Services

AUTHOR: zvegrandma - ()

Lynnette, my family has been gravely wronged by Riverside County CPS (Hemet office) from caseworker to Regional Managers. I wonder how many others have suffered such injustice from this agency. It is clear that at least in the Southwest Jurisdiction (Murrietta) it is very difficult to win a CPS case as it would seem "the department", county counsel and judge all tend to support each other. Caseworkers and supervisors buddy up with the county attorneys and often times interject their own views and prejudices by way of providing a biased report and failing to provide the level of services to the parents and family as set forth in the Manual of Policy and Procedures. 
 
The first mandate is a case plan directed at family reunification and family preservation whenever possible. The problem is that that "whenever possible" is a subjective statement and if the caseworker determines in their own thinking that the parent is unworthy, they can "doctor" their report to reflect a parent who is unwilling and/or uncooperative to work their case plan within the time frame set forth in the Welfare and Institutions Codes. (WIC) The department is also required to provide a concurrent "permanency Plan" in the event reunification fails, which of course it surely will by design.

Because of the failures on their part to do a thorough FSRNA (Family Services Risk and Needs Assessment) they are unable to develop a case plan designed to address the problem that created the need to remove the children from the parent's custody. Then they come to the courtroom before a judge that has only their scathing and twisted report on which to base his judgement. The department simply continues their smear campaign until the clock runs out and the court is compelled to order the child/children be placed for adoption. It would be very enlightening to learn how many infants and toddlers are ordered for adoption compared to the number of older or special needs children. Perhaps another investigation by the Grand Jury is in order. Maybe it is time we come together with such a request.

The 820 motion is likely JV 820 (Juvenile Code) which you should be able to Google to read it for yourself. If you don't find it there, it might be listed under "Civil Codes" but more likely it will be under Juvenile Codes.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Author of original report

response to stacey

AUTHOR: lynnette w - (United States of America)

Violation of civil rights! I did not post this for u to respond as u have left a lot of scarcastic comments. I am asking for advice not,for scarcastic comments! I would appreciate honest responses! Not just asking nosey questions always focusing on my reports!
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Consumer Comment

question

AUTHOR: Stacey - (U.S.A.)

What is the reason you are suing???
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.



Ripoff Report Legal Directory