Marin County Review

The caseworker and her supervisor at the department filed a petition claiming that I violated the case plan and that I was placing my child in substantiated harm or danger because I was “residing” in a three-day detox facility which day advise I go to as a mandated prerequisite of a residential treatment program I’d already completed and was an alumni of, whereby if I complied with their recommendation would guarantee continue custody of my daughter because she could be placed with me there and would resolve the matter out of court. | Their initial petition filed on September 27th 2017 states that I was properly notified of the hearing schedule for September 28th 2017. Not only was I not notified at all– I happened to call their Department on the 27th 2 confirm that I would be entering into the program for the 45-day extension I agree to with the agency at our team meeting. By the way, the previous foster parents of my daughter were invited to the team meeting which is a direct violation of my rights and my daughter’s rights. The petition also declared that and icwa 010 form was included and that my child is not an Indian Child. However this proves that icwa Federal codes and laws were violated on the onset because the county who’d handle my case initially provided me paperwork in December 2016 verifying that my daughter was icwa eligible. | I carefully reviewed all petitions and orders after my appointed attorney Julia Ten Eyck was unable or unwilling to properly advocate for me or represent me and discovered backdating fraudulent claims and other discrepancies within the reports and orders. Additionally all of my request 2 dismiss the petition and or extend visitation allocation with my daughter were denied by the department and the judge or ignored by my appointed attorney. | On December 14th a jurisdictional hearing was held where by my appointed attorney offered to waive my right to trial without even discussing it with me and misled me, stating that I was agreeing to particular items on the petition that would not require the need for trial and that my agreement would essentially just be both parties agreed to “settle”. I was absolutely NOT informed that what I was agreeing upon was an agreement that my daughter should continue to be a jurisdictional ward of the Court while we await icwa findings for Marin County. | Judge wood, the caseworker the supervisor and the attorneys were all chuckling once this was ordered and before confirmation of the next hearing date was uttered judge Beverly wood began to have a casual conversation with the Department’s Council about the weather and about another client’s case right in front of me as though I was not even present. I asked for my appointed attorney to file a JV 180 immediately. She dismissed me. | I filed it on my own on December 22nd and did not receive a reply until January 12th which was a denial of my petition to change the order; judge wood-sided that I had provided no new information to support my request. The original request was requesting a hearing to have my argument heard so that the court could consider reversing the order. | Since Judge would deny me however I filed a subsequent JV 180 order on January 23rd highlighting all of the discrepancies that the case worker submitted in her petitions and all of the orders that judge wood co-signed which plainly reflect unsubstantiated claims unfounded claims lack of proper investigation by the case worker lack of proper notification of intended motions to either myself or to my daughter’s biological father. | further my mother was not contacted and the court did not take into consideration the fact that my daughter has already bonded with myself and my other children from a previous marriage. Nor was it considered that I not only did not violate the case plan or the safety plan which the department caseworker claims but I have never missed or tested positive for urine test or missed a visit with my child, Wildey department and the judge were unwilling to increase visits 2 allow unsupervised visits or to allow my child to come home upon request when not one shred of evidence was provided supporting their claim that I would subject my child to risk her harm by having her home. | It is my understanding that the caseworker is not even a licensed worker that she is just ate graduate intern and that judge Beverly wood has a history of poor judicial conduct it was terminated from family court and essentially demoted to juvenile court where she is continuing her fraudulent practices and apparently supporting the misconduct of Marin County CFS workers.

—–

  • Name: Marin County
  • Country: United States
  • State: California
  • City: San Rafael
  • Address: 3501 Civic Ctr Dr , Room 113, 3250 Kerner Blvd
  • Phone:
  • Website: www.marincounty.org/
Share Review:
Yes it is. Based on the user review published on MeraReview.com, it is strongly advised to avoid Marin County Review in any dealing and transaction.
Not really. In spite of the review published here, there has been no response from Marin County Review. Lack of accountability is a major factor in determining trust.
Because unlike MeraReview.com, other websites get paid to remove negative reviews and replace them with fake positive ones.
Marin County Review is rated 1 out of 5 based on the complaints submitted by our users and is marked as POOR.
Never trust websites which offer a shady ‘advocacy package’ to businesses. Search for relevant reviews on Ripoff Report and Pissed Consumer to see more unbiased reviews.
The above complaints and comments against Marin County Review were submitted by MeraReview.com user(s) and have been published as-is. MeraReview.com does not edit, alter or remove content published by it’s users. There’s no amount of money a business can pay to manipulate their reviews and MeraReview.com will NOT entertain any request to remove the review on Marin County Review at any cost whatsoever.
>