ERIC LAYTIN Brake Masters,SHALOM LAYTIN,MATAN SIMCHA OZER LAYTIN, MATAN LAYTIN, Warning, Run Away from these persons California

Read carefully the multiple case for fraud,

Case No. 77/16-22 / OAHNo.2016030421

bar.ca.gov/pdf/accusations/ard274417_2015_11_09_acc.pdf

bar.ca.gov/pdf/accusations/ard233690_2017_06_08_dec.pdf

plainsite.org/dockets/2rkdy634g/superior-court-of-california-county-of-los-angeles/sanda-nevada-llc-v-shalom-laytin/

PLEASE READ:

UNDERCOVER OPERATION
On or about July 15,2014, an undercover operator of the Bureau ("operator") took
the Bureau's 2003 Buick to Brake Masters # 132. The front brake pads on the Bureau-
documented vehicle were in need of replacement and the #5 cylinder spark plug was defective,
causing the engine to misfire. The operator told an unidentified male employee that she wanted
the brakes and illuminated check engine light inspected. The cmployee had the operator sign a
written estimate, but did not provide her with a copy. The operator left the facility.
At approximately 1212 hours that same day, the operator received a telephone call
from Respondent's employee, "Kenny". Kenny told the operator that the vehicle required new
front brake pads and resurfacing of the front brake rotors, and that the repairs would cost $176.40.
Kenn y also stated that it would cost $89 to diagnose the cause of the illuminated eheck engine
light. The operator authorized the repairs and diagnosis.
At approximatelY 1530 hours, Kenny calJed the operator and infOlmed her that the
check engine light was illuminated due to a diagnostic trouble code for a engine misfire and that

ACCUSAnON1 the spark plugs, spark plug wires and the #5 ignition coil needed to be replaced on the vehicle.
The operator told Kenny that she would call him back. At approximately 1534 hours, the
operator called the facility and authorized the additional repairs on the vehicle.
On or about July 16,2014, the operator returned to the facility to retrieve the vehicle,
paid $540 in cash for the repairs, and received a copy of the final invoice. That same day, the
Bureau inspected the vehicle and found, among other things, that the facility had performed
approximately $219.19 in unnecessary repairs.