Report: #1446373

Complaint Review: Damien Anthony Porter - San Francisco CA

  • Submitted:
  • Updated:
  • Reported By: Tina — San Luis Obispo CALIFORNIA United States
  • Damien Anthony Porter Baker Street San Francisco, CA United States

Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...

Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Click here now..

Our child support case was opened in 2009 and Damien has failed to pay his court-ordered child support obligations -- subsequently, his arrears balance currently sits at $71,296.45 as of June 6, 2018.  Damien makes six-figures, lives in a mansion in San Francisco, frequents bars in Sann Francisco, pays cash for luxury cars and vacations all around the world. This is not a case where he is struggling financially, this is a case where he is willfully evading the California child support system. 

For nine years, I have tried to work with the California Division of Child Support Services but he is very skilled at evading the system. 

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 06/06/2018 05:53 PM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/damien-anthony-porter/san-francisco-ca-94123/damien-anthony-porter-child-support-debt-7129645-san-francisco-ca-california-1446373. 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. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Search for additional reports

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

Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Updates & Rebuttals


#1 REBUTTAL Individual responds

Tina Marie Swithin had received $220,681.60 in child support and assets from Damien Porter and failed to pay hundreds of families money she collected

AUTHOR: Damien - (United States)

POSTED: Tuesday, August 18, 2020

Swithin is falsely stating she has not received child support when in fact she received $220,681.60 in cash and assets over 10 years as the pictures attached indicate from State of California -Health and Human Services Agency.

Tina Swithin, writer of www.OneMomsBattle.com is the author of a fictional narrative based on gaslighting her X husband, his Mother and Father and his family to profit from retreats for women, counseling and divorce process life-coaching.  

Damien finally decided to give his daughter up for adoption in 2018 to move on in his life and escape the vexatious litigation and assaults on his character to new friends, employers, acquaintances and his fiance’s family (living 2200 miles away from San Luis that Swithin slandered and libeled Damien to).  Swithin did not win in California family Court; rather she used her daughters as pawns to increase her income, create a business teaching women how to get full custody through staging false events, gaslighting a good father and continuous parental alienation syndrome.  Damien chose to not subject his daughters to supervised visits; he chose to keep the happy memories in their little minds of days at Avila Beach, learning to swim in the backyard pool and Avila Bay Club and fun times crawling up Dad like a tree to perch on his shoulders, happy and smiling.

Swithin’s false claims under penalty of perjury by the laws of the State of California including but not limited to:

  1. A) Her claim of having been abused in any way by Damien ( Damien has 0 Police reports ever, 0 restraining orders, 0 misdemeanor or felonies related to her marriage to Damien or time during 55+ court hearings from 2009-2019).
  2. B) Swithin’s claim of having Multiple Sclerosis under oath under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California after an acclaimed neurologist Dr. Filipi diagnosed her with Lupus was stated by Swithin was made to prevent having to drive and meet Damien half-way between San Francisco and San Luis Obispo. Damien drove 416 miles every weekend visitation was allowed beginning every weekend in August 2009 when he filed for divorce and decreasing as vexatious litigation continued by Swithin, who forced Damien to attend over 50 court hearings back in San Luis Obispo on Wednesday mornings in the middle of his work week (thus adding another 416 miles and a loss day of work which Swithin knew created tremendous hardship for Damien).
  3. C) Swithin's FL-155 declaration of income of only $2100.00 per month while working for Mental Marketing as an account executive is exceedingly low based on salary.com figures.  Swithin likely perjured herself oath under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California. Her exaggeratedly false low income monthly claim and increased time with the minor daughters was a constant manipulation of California DISSOMASTER system to get more money from Damien's payroll. Less time Damien had with his daughter, the more money she could receiv e from his bi-monthly paychecks. Even after being married again three years after the divorce was requested by Damien, Swithin continued to file 10+ court motions per year against Damien.

Damien's income often exceeded $100,000 per year but varied through several job search periods.  The $2331.25 assigned to him accumulated until his next well-paying job afforded direct deposit to the Department of Child Support Services department again. Often the payments were 1/3rd of Damien’s reduced income but the total monthly due continued to accumulate.  In between jobs Damien allowed the $2331.25 to accrue a balance but did not file a court hearing of reduced income so one day his daughters could receive all balances owed.  The balance jetted up $11,000 extra dollars when Damien was assigned to pay 37% of his commissions earned  and then again another $10,000 as commissions accrued, in addition to the $3100+ Swithin was already receiving for spousal support and child support every month, Damien accepts responsibility for falling behind on total amount accruing.

  1. D) Swithin does not have a 4-year college degree and has zero training, certification or accreditation in psychology, or counseling...she appears to be the narcissist with her business and retreats falsely claiming she was abused.  Swithin lived without earning any income in Damien Porter's 1st home at 6895 Avila Valley Drive in San Luis Obispo that he owned as single man which sold for $2.295,000 recently. Swithin further lived a wealthy, relaxed life in the second home Damien bought for $1,275,000 at 2295 Battering Rock Road in a prestigious gated community in Templeton. Swithin had a full-time nanny, weekly professional house cleaning service, and did not work and lived a charmed stress-free life to do whatever she wanted day-to-day.  That's when she began blogging full time.

Tina Swithin received a total of $220,681 in Child Support from 2009-2019 and refused to repay local families in San Luis Obispo County what they paid for in advance.  The only time Swithin made money and contributed to the family bills was when she opened SLO County Sitters. From money she collected from families paying her advance sitting services payments, she made payments on a new model ML-350 Mercedes Benz she drove, that Damien owned, and a new Volkswagon Beetle she purchased on her own to advertise SLO County Sitters with a advertising wrap.

The recent closure of SLO County Sitters, a service that matched baby sitters with families, was so sudden its sitters were not paid for their last two weeks of work and families who paid up front, as the company required, complain they are out thousands of dollars.

After little more than a year in business, Manager Tina Porter announced she was dissolving the company in an e-mail sent to families and sitters on March 3. In the e-mail to sitters she also let them know that there was not enough money to cover the last pay period. That announcement came only two days before payday.

“Crap, I have a car payment to make and we’re not getting paid?” Nicole Torres said of her reaction to the sudden notice. “I kind of freaked out.”

Torres and about 45 other “contractors” still have not been paid. Several who spoke to New Times said they had about 40 hours of unpaid work. The sitters were given contact information for families and encouraged by Porter to continue working independently of the company, but were told there was not enough cash on the books to cover their final weeks.

Porter sent another e-mail to sitters about a week later telling them that she is working to bring the company back from the dead by selling it, and if the deal goes through they would be retroactively paid.

Alycia Bohnhoff, who started work in June, said the latest e-mail was a “complete 180” from the earlier notice she received.

“She was just avoiding all questions on repaying anyone last week,” Bohnhoff said.

Because of the company’s structure, families who used the service lost even more money than sitters. SLO County Sitters clients had to pay up front. A 200-hour package, for example, cost $2,500. But no one with unused hours has seen a refund.

Aaron Wolf, a teacher with a 3-year-old, paid $2,500 to the company in January. After the closure announcement was e-mailed to clients, Wolf responded to see if he was getting his money back. He was told he wasn’t, and his best bet was to file a claim with his credit card company. Other clients were encouraged to do the same, Porter said in her response to Wolf.

“And we’re broke,” Wolf said. “We put down all the money we had to set our childcare straight for the next five or six months.”

The Wolf family is not the only one in such a situation. Dianne DeTurris, mother of a 2-year-old, also put down $2,500 this year.

“I had a good experience with the company; they were running a very good operation up until the day that they weren’t operating,” she said.

Wolf and DeTurris have continued to employ the same sitters, but are paying them directly, as Porter has recommended to all families and sitters. DeTurris said she is also paying her sitters for the hours SLO County Sitters did not cover.

After the initial e-mails to clients, Porter sent another announcement stating she was working to give them their money back if the company is sold, or by some other saving grace.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.

What do hackers,
questionable attorneys and
fake court orders have in common?
...Dishonest Reputation Management Investigates Reputation Repair
Free speech rights compromised

Segment Now