Does Character Matter?, Part 1 of 2

Under a Microscope

You may have noticed that some of our earliest posts are being republished. The reason for this is because we've initiated a review to primarily correct formatting issues that occurred when we changed publishing platforms in 2013. At no fault of our own, some of the posts could not be simply updated and required being republished. 

Our review provided an opportunity to reread information we published over the past six years. One unexpected result is having re-discovered incidents that we'd forgotten about and realizing the accuracy of some of our earliest warnings about what might happen if Priority One Credit Union's President, Charles R. Wiggington, Sr.'s behaviors and abuses were not reined in. 

We've also re-discovered that from the date he became President on January 1, 2007, Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. chose to intentionally neglect security protocols designed to protect credit union and member assets. It is this disdain for protocol that we believe culminated in a series of vault thefts of cash at the Los Angeles branch during the years of 2010 through 2012, which totaled more than $1 million

Having spent days and many hours rereading our posts left us even more perplexed as to why the Board of Directors and actually, it's Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, has fought so fervently to ensure Charles R. Wiggington. Sr. remains President and CEO. What is also evident is that the theft of $1 million in cash would never have occurred had the Supervisory Committee under leadership of its Chair, Cornelia Simmons, chosen to carryout their assigned responsibilities.  The thefts were avoidable and though CUMIS, the insurance carrier, has filed a lawsuit accusing the external auditor, Turner, Warren, Hwang and Conrad of negligent auditing practices that they allege, caused the thefts to go unnoticed, the fact is, if Priority One Credit Union had ensured all security protocols were being performed, the thefts would have been discovered early on. 

What CUMIS and Priority One hope a court will believe is that Turner, Warren, Hwang and Conrad, who were contracted to perform annual audits, failed to discover that thefts were being perpetrated, allegedly, by a single AVP. What they hope to avoid is the responsibility the credit union had to ensure all security protocols were in place and being performed; and draw attention away from the fact that the Supervisory Committee, the Board of Directors, the President, two former COO's, the CFO, and the Accounting Department never noticed a discrepancy between the Los Angeles branch's vault records the Accounting Department's records. 

The credit union has remained unusually quiet about the AVP, who allegedly absconded with $1 million in cash. If security measures were being practiced, then how could one woman enter the vault each week over a 24-month period, and abscond with more than $1 million. We're certain other credit unions would like to know how this was done so that they can implement measures that would deter this from occurring at their organizations. 

THE ALLEGED THIEF

And what has happened with the case against Pearl Lynnette Fortson, the AVP, who allegedly and single-handedly perpetrated the theft of more than $1 million without being observed by any of the tellers, FSR's or receptionist assigned to the Los Angeles branch.

A search of the Superior Court's records show that her bankruptcy filings continues under review. We've yet to find anything indicated that she's being prosecuted or that she was ever arrested. CUMIS has clearly not demonstrated the level of aggressiveness shown against the external auditor, Turner, Warren, Hwang and Conrad who they hold responsible for the thefts despite the conspicuous fact that the external auditor was not involved in the perpetration of any of the thefts that occurred during the years of 2010 through 2012; nor was the external auditor responsible for ensuring security protocols were being maintained. At present, the former AVP is scheduled to attend a status conference regarding her bankruptcy filing. The conference will take place on January 28, 2016, at 8:30 a.m. in department 58 at the Superior Court of Los Angeles, California to 

EMBEZZLEMENT 

According to the credit union and CUMIS' statement to a reporter, the thefts were carefully camouflaged by Ms. Fortson who allegedly altered the vault's ledger. So does Priority One accept in faith the accuracy of everything that is entered into vault ledgers without conducting verification procedures? 

In reviewing past posts, we've rediscovered that during the May 2009 Annual Meeting, the President stated that he was reducing spending, "streamling", and "working smarter." His chronic failures and a series of large thefts occurring at the Los Angeles branch suggest that he knows nothing about "working smarter" and his alleged expense reductions have come at a cost to the workforce who continue to be subjected to a more than five-year wage freeze and who are rarely promoted while the President's so-called efforts are designed not to affect the salaries and benefits paid to credit union executives. Currently, the President continues to receive more than $150,000 per year plus annual bonuses. At Priority One Credit Union, the incompetent Board of Directors rewards incompetency and dishonesty and has gone out of its way to ensure that the man who was found guilty of sexual harassment in 2008, remains President and CEO.

PERSECUTION

Our recent review of past posts has rediscovered a large amount of information regarding past incidents occurring in the years since Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. was appointed President. Some of the incidents relate directly to Priority One Credit Union's security protocols and reveal that since January 1, 2007, President Wiggington has often refused to abide to credit union policies created to ensure the safety of assets and other incidents reveal the abuses perpetrated against employees who discovered that some of the credit union's officers had not adhered to required state and federal protocols and standards. 

The following account occurred at Priority One Credit Union's Van Nuys branch in 2007, the same year Charles R. Wiggington. Sr. began his appointment as President. 

The account consists of several incidents involving a new hired Branch Manager who was to oversee management of the Van Nuys branch. 

At the time the Branch Manager was hired, AVP, Rodger Smock, who is also the Director of Human Resources, issued fliers to all employees announcing the hiring of the new Branch Manager and descried him as a highly experienced and knowledgeable officer who would contribute to the success of the Van Nuys branch. 

Unfortunately, the highly competent manager would soon become a victim of President Wiggington's treacherous political system. What the following account reveals is that President Wiggington does not tolerate anyone who discovers that he and his staff have violated the credit union's own policies and state and federal laws laws. What the account also shows is that at Priority One Credit Union, dishonesty and incompetence are awarded and even protected as we witnessed in 2008, when evidence that the President sexually harassed a former employee, was squashed by the Board of Directors and the President's employment, retained. Here is the account: 

The Spider's Lair, Part 1, February 25, 2009

PUNISHING COMPETENCY

 Slander and Harassment 

In February 2007, Priority One Credit Union hired D. Centeno to replace former Van Nuys Branch Manager, Sylvia Perez, who had been promoted to Assistant Vice President ("AVP") and transferred to the Burbank branch. 

Director of Human Resources, AVP, Rodger Smock, produced and distributed fliers to all branches announcing the hiring of Mr. Centeno who according to Mr. Smock, possessed extensive banking experience and qualities which the credit union believed would contribute to increasing new business throughout the San Fernando Valley. Those who came to know Mr. Centeno described him as the consummate professional, possessing tremendous knowledge of banking procedures.

Under Priority One's procedures and policies, all new managers and before they can begin working at their assigned branch, must attend classes conducted at the main branch in South Pasadena. The classes orientate managers to the credit union's philosophy, mission, policies and procedures. Because of training, Mr. Centeno did not report to work at the Van Nuys branch for approximately 2 weeks. 

When Mr. Centeno did finally report to the Van Nuys branch, he almost immediately experienced difficulties with the branches two most senior employees, Neelam Verma, the Assistant Branch Manager, and Lillian Valladares, an FSR. 

The relationship between Mr. Centeno and the two employees grew strained when he discovered they were not following state mandated banking procedures and violating state law. What's more, they were leaving the credit union vulnerable to potential losses. 

Mr. Centeno also discovered that Mrs. Valladares was arbitrarily reversing NSF fees without first obtaining authorization from her supervisor. He also discovered that Mrs. Valladares had frequently failed to review mandated ATM and NSF reports. 

The two employees contacted Mrs. Perez who they had worked under for several years, and accused Mr. Centeno of being unduly difficult. Mrs. Perez grew irate because the issues Mr. Centeno discovered were all attributable to her. While serving as Branch Manager, she never taught her staff proper, state-mandated procedures. What's more,  she had allowed them to violate credit union banking policies. 

After Mrs. Valladares and Mrs. Verma complained to Mrs. Perez, the AVP drove to the Van Nuys office and during her meeting with Mr. Centeno, informed him that "the knowledge your brought from your former corporate environment will not be tolerated." 

Fueled by anger and we suspect, a fear that the credit union would discover that she failed to implement to provide her staff with the proper training and knowledge needed to carryout their assigned responsibilities. Mrs. Perez next launched a scathing attack against Mr. Centeno, fabricating accusations which disparaged his abilities and which AVP, Rodger Smock, allowed her to use in sealing Mr. Centeno's ouster. 

Mrs. Perez has established a well-earned reputation for having little self-control. She is known to be hyper, nervous, emotionally volatile, aggressive, impatient and highly vindictive. She also likes to declare that she is highly religious bit her alleged religiosity is not attested to by her behaviors. 

 BAMBOOZLED 

Despite the irrational response by Mrs. Valladares and Mrs. Verman, Mr. Centeno tried to resolve the differences with the two women but they refused, remaining uncooperative with their new supervisor. 

Mr. Centeno contacted Mrs. Perez and asked if she could schedule to meet with him, Mrs. Valladares, and Mrs. Verma in what he described as an effort to resolve the personnel problems he was experiencing. He also asked if the President and Mr. Smock could be present. Mrs. Perez told him she would contact the President and Mr. Smock and would call him back with a date and time when they could all meet. 

The following day, Mrs. Perez called Mr. Centeno and advised him that the meeting he requested would take place at the main branch in South Pasadena on June 18, 2007.

On June 18, 2007, Mr. Centeno arrived at the South  Pasadena branch and asked to go to the office of Rodger Smock. When he arrived in Mr. Smock's office, only Sylvia Perez was present. Mr. Centeno was informed that the President, Mrs. Valladares and Mrs. Verma were unable to attend. Mr. Centeno was informed by Mr. Smock that it had been decided by President Wiggington to end his employment immediately. He was handed a Warning Notice containing a list of allegations lodged against him by the credit union. This included an accusation that he failed to issue a performance evaluation in a timely manner for an employee named Lourdes. The notice, written by Mrs. Perez, stated that the evaluation was submitted 4 weeks late. On May 12, 2007, Mr. Perez allegedly ordered Mr. Centeno to produce a performance evaluation. The evaluation was completed on June 5, 2007, which is less than 4 weeks and thus not late. 

What's more, Mr. Centeno had been employed by the credit union for more than 90-days and under the credit union's procedures, he was to have received a performance evaluation no later than the 90th day of his employment. Obviously, Mrs. Perez was late and violated the same policy she was enforcing. What's more, Rodger Smock allowed Mrs. Perez to document allegations that were clearly untrue and failed to address Mrs. Perez's own violation. In a memorandum dated, January 8, 2008, issued by Vice President of Operations, Rodger Smock, and issued to "All Members of management and Staff", he stated: 

All performance reviews must be completed within a reasonable time frame following the end of the review period. Reasonable time frame is defined as 1-2 pay periods following the end of the review date. Completed is defined as performance review has been discussed, signed and original sent to Human Resources (copy should be given to respective employee).

Mr. Centeno did not violate the credit union's policy though Mrs. Perez clearly failed to complete her evaluation of Mr. Centeno in a timely manner. Furthermore, the credit union's own records prove that many managers issue performance evaluations long after the 4-week timeframe has passed.  Records show that often, evaluations are completed six to twelve months after they are due. 

Mrs. Perez's Warning Notice also accused Mr. Centeno of failing to respond in a timely manner to a complaint filed by a member who alleged her $200 deposit had never been credited to her checking account. 

The complaint was filed immediately after Mr. Centeno was hired and while he was in training in South Pasadena. He could not have been aware of the member's complaint. What's more, the complaint should have been responded to by either the Assistant Branch Manager, Neelam Verma, or AVP, Sylvia Perez. 

Mrs. Perez purposely alleged a violation of policy that Mr. Centeno never committed. What's more, Mr. Smock chose not to address the apparent distortions of facts presented by Mrs. Perez and suggesting that he was involved in a plot to terminate Mr. Centeno. 

This is not the first time the President and his cronies have conducted a sham meeting to persecute employees. The plot forged against Mr. Centeno is typical of President Wiggington's mode of administration which resorts to the use of unscrupulous and unethical tactics intended to disparage and wound employee reputations. 

President Wiggington has stripped away the dignity that once characterized the credit union and has transformed its former business environment into a soap opera saturated with intrigue and far flung backstabbing. 

MORE TROUBLE

Following Mr. Centeno's departure, an audit of the Van Nuys branch disclosed that Assistant Branch Manager, Neelam Verma approved five loans, all of which became delinquent and were referred to collections and some which were eventually, charged-off. The total amount of losses incurred from the bad loans approved by Mrs. Verma, approximated $45,000. 

Its important to remember that Mrs. Verma had been trained by AVP, Sylvia Perez, in the years while Mrs. Perez served as Branch Manager of the Van Nuys office. 

Mrs. Verma was assigned high loan limits by then Vice President of Operations, Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. It was Mr. Wiggington who never ordered training to Mrs. Verma so that she could understand the principles governing loan processing. Not only was she not trained to process loans, there was nothing in her experience or training that qualified her to serve as a Loan Officer.  The loans she approved were not properly screened to determine risk factors for each loan applicant. Furthermore, Mrs. Verma failed to perform federally-mandated processes as required under the Patriot Act.

When the problems with the loans approved by Mrs. Verma were discovered, President Wiggington and AVP, Aaron Cavazos, drove to the Van Nuys branch.

Though the mistake was Mrs. Verma's, the President found a scapegoat in a temporary employee named A. Gant. Mrs. Verma reviewed the loan applications and then ordered A. Gant to fund the loans. Because he was a temporary employee, his experience in loan funding was extremely limited. 

Nonetheless, President Wiggington informed A. Gant that he was being terminated for funding "bad loans." Mrs. Verma was stripped of her title but retained her employment without a reduction in pay. What is also peculiar is that A. Gant was not an employee of the credit union. He was employed by Stivers Staffing whose offices are located in Pasadena, California and temporarily assigned to Priority One Credit Union. Subsequently, he was not employed by Priority One, yet President Wiggington informed him that he was being terminated when the correct procedure would have been to inform Mr. Gant's actual employers- Stivers Staffing, that his assignment was being ended immediately.

A CHIP  OFF THE OLD BLOCK

THE FORMER BURBANK BRANCH MANAGER

Not surprisingly, Mrs. Verma wasn't the only officer of the credit union who despite little or no training in loan processing, was assigned exorbitant approval rights by Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. Like the incident involving Mrs. Verma, the following incident involves a series of approved loans which quickly became delinquent and were all eventually,charged-off.

In 2009, then Burbank Branch Manager, Linda Nisely, approved 4 automobile loans. Within a few months, the loans were deferred to Credit Resolutions. The department failed to procure the delinquent payments, forcing the credit union to charge-off the unpaid loans. 

The loans were issued to a man who visited the the Burbank branch and informed Mrs. Nisely that he was the owner of a San Fernando Valley dealership and wanted to obtain loan funding for some automobiles. Mrs. Nisely may have seen a wonderful opportunity to clinch a fast sale that would probably impress President Wiggington and so, she approved the loans. 

In the weeks that passed, neither Mrs. Nisely, the Loan Department and eventually, Credit Resolutions, experienced any success in reaching the member at the telephone numbers he provided when he funded the loans. 

Exasperated, Mrs. Nisely drove to the dealership but to her shock and dismay, discovered that the business address the member provided was to a business renting postal mail boxes. 

As in the case of Mrs. Verma, it was President Wiggington who authorized Mrs. Nisely loan limits. He never verified if she was qualified to make loan decisions but nonetheless, provided her with limits that should never have been given to her. His failure to train her, to test her abilities and knowledge and any other measures needed to ensure she was fully qualified to review and approve loan applications contributed to the incidence to even more losses to a credit union that since 2007, has lost millions of dollars in Net Income and lost more than 50% of its branches. 

On a side note, Mrs. Nisely was terminated in 2010, allegedly because the credit union was being forced to reduce spending. 

In October 2010, Mrs. Nisely filed a lawsuit against the credit union in which she alleged she had been subjected to age and race discrimination. She was one of the few White employees at Priority One. At the time, the credit union's attorneys of Richardson, Harman and Ober, informed their client that Mrs. Nisely's case had no merit. The attorneys and credit union began amassing a list of employees who would testify in court that Mrs. Nisely was a racist who hated Latins and who had been insubordinate and refused to participate in business development efforts. 

The case which allegedly had no merit was settled soon after Mrs. Nisely provided a copy of a letter written to Priority One's Human Resources Department by the former Valencia Branch Manager and described in detail that she had been victimized by then COO, Beatrice Walker, who created a hostile work environment, harassed and sexually harassed the Branch Manager and had even stalked her. 

What the letter proved is that the entire Board of Directors, President Wiggington, and AVP, Rodger Smock, and Human Resources "clerk", Esmeralda Sandoval, not only failed to investigate the Branch Manager's allegations but allowed a scathing campaign to ensue which eventually forced the Branch Manager's resignation. As a result of the letter, Mrs. Nisely's case was settled and a monetary settlement paid. Mrs. Nisely never called and thanked the Branch Manager for the letter which enabled her victory. 

To be continued........

. 

Lawsuits and Settlements

VICTIMIZATION

In August, we reported that a former member of the credit union filed a lawsuit alleging Priority One Credit Union violated the Privacy Act when one of it's officers intentionally and maliciously, published confidential information about the member's Priority One automobile loan and about her person, which had been published on the Internet. According to the President and Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, the person who published the comments and identifies themselves as "Priority MC", published the highly confidential information without permission of the President. Furthermore, they now insist Priority MC is not an officer of the credit union. They're lying. 

The member's delinquent loan was not only the subject of collection proceedings but the member had been named a defendant along with Priority One Credit Union, in a lawsuit filed by her automobile insurance carrier. At the credit union, the only persons who would be privy to accounts that are subject to collection proceedings and that are subject to lawsuits are President Wiggington; the Director of Project Management, Yvonne Boutte; and Credit Collections Supervisor, Miss Alex Suarez. So which of the three intentionally violated the Privacy Act when they willingly intentionally published information about the member's automobile loan and person on the Internet? 

Despite that the member's information was likely published by a member of the management team, the President recently ordered termination of his Administrative Assistant, allegedly for violating confidentiality. According to the President his assistant allegedly discussed his cancer with employees of the credit union, however, if true, this is not a violation of confidential information as he habitually and frequently, publicly talks about what he describes as his "ball cancer" and goes into tremendous detail divulging the treatments he is allegedly undergoing. Coincidentally, the termination occurred just after the member complained that her confidential information had been made public by the credit union.  

We think the President used his assistant as a scapegoat and blamed her for the violation of confidentiality. This is not the first time he's done so. In 2007, told the Board that it was the IT Supervisor who mistakenly provided the credit union's printing company with member account and social security numbers that were erroneously printed on the exterior, front-side of envelopes containing ballots mailed to member residences. The error was actually caused when the President refused to abide to established security protocols. Prior to mailing the disc containing member information to the printer, the President refused to adhere to the credit union's protocols stating that as President, he did not have to do so. 

INCOMPETENCE, HYPOCRISY and LIES

Priority One recently responded to the complaint filed by the member whose confidential account information was intentionally published on the Internet by an employee(s) of the credit union. 

The response was prepared by Bruce P. Needleman, the credit union's collection and bankruptcy attorney. Mr. Needleman is the same attorney who litigated the lawsuit filed years earlier by the credit union against Henry Justice, the personal friend of President Wiggington and owner of the now defunct, Just Auto Sales. So why would a collections and bankruptcy specialist be appointed the responsibility of responding to a complaint alleging violation of the Privacy Act? It's clearly not his field of expertise. 

On July 31st, Mr. Needleman, told the court that he never received a copy of the Plaintiff's amended complaint even though the former member had proof the complaint had been mailed and received by Mr. Needleman's office. A copy was also mailed to State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Inc., the member's former insurance carrier and who confirmed they received the copy. 

The dishonesty found amongst the credit union's officers including it's Directors is obviously one also found in it's attorneys. To put it layman terms, we think the nature of the complaint falls far outside of Mr. Needleman's field of expertise. 

The latest allegations filed against the credit union are easily remedied. The credit union needs to admit that one of it's employees, likely an officer, purposely violated the Privacy Act. After doing so, they should voluntarily enter into a settlement agreement and pay the member monetary costs for the attack leveled against her person and character. However, Priority One's President and Board Chair are not people who respect rules or laws or for that fact, members, so don't expect any admittance of wrong doing by members of this criminal band of officers. 

As we've witnessed with lawsuits filed over the past two years, the credit union's overpaid attorney's use the following three steps in responding to complaints:

• Deny wrongdoing
• Suppress evidence
• Vilify the grievant or Plaintiff

Expect the credit union to again follow the same predictable pattern in contending with this latest complaint. 

Mr. Needleman was also provided with a statement by President Wiggington as to who in the credit union violated the Privacy Act and purposely published the member's confidential information on the Internet. According to the President, the perpetrator is "a disgruntled employee" who uses the handle, "Priority MC." So are we to believe that a disgruntled employee victimized a member in his or her effort to undermine the credit union? What a simplistic and inane excuse. How did the alleged and unnamed disgruntled employee obtain access to highly confidential information that was only accessible to the President, the Director of Project Management, the Credit Collection Supervisor and may we add, Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks? 

The credit union has already voluntarily entered into a settlement agreement with the member's Farmer's Automobile Insurance but has now refused to surrender the "pink slip" for the member's automobile. We've recently learned that President Wiggington, Board Chair Harris-Brooks, and Director Yvonne Boutte, and incensed with the member and have, according to Mrs. Boutte, decided to take their time in surrendering the title for the automobile. Members and prospective members should taken note of the credit union's behavior in this matter and understand that this is a reflection of the character of the President and how he chooses to contend with problems created by himself and his executive staff. 

The President's refusal to act appropriately has forced the member to file a Motion to Compel Discovery which asks the court to preside over issues caused by the credit union's legal counsel, Mr. Needleman. The credit union, actually the President and Board Chair, often play opossum when required to respond to complaints alleging violations of state and federal law. Their evasive and childish tactics usually play out to their detriment. Don't be surprised if Mr. Needleman fumbles again and unwittingly exacerbates the credit union's mounting legal problems. 

Litigation aside, what does the member's lawsuit reveal about the credit union and it's intentional refusal to abide to the Privacy Act? Clearly, guarding confidential information is inconsequential to a President whose agenda is to satisfy his whims and urges and who has no tolerance for structure. 

PARANOIA

The disturbing behaviors demonstrated by Beatrice Walker can be traced in great part back to President Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. who believes that an invisible group of jealous employees seek to displace him. Months preceding her arrival, the President conferred with Ms. Walker on numerous occasions, providing her the names of the employees he knew for a fact were the blogger, bloggers and their confederates. 

Also, months before Ms. Walker's arrival, the President used credit union money to hire Reggie Ellis., the owner of Sepia Consultants and Investigations.. On a Friday in February 2009, the consultant arrived at the credit union at about 5 p.m. At approximately 5:30 p.m. the President closed the door to his office and shut the blinds and Mr. Ellis began a search for surveillance equipment the President insisted was in his office. The President's desk, file cabinets, telephone, and lamps were all scanned and after twenty minutes, Mr. Ellis announced that there was no electronic equipment in the office. Mr. Ellis' services were paid for using credit union funds. 

Eight days later, Mr. Ellis met returned to the South Pasadena branch on a Saturday morning where the two spent approximately 3 to 4 hours scanning the computers assigned to employees the President believed were leaking confidential information about his illegal activities on to the Internet. The consultant found absolutely nothing. 

The scan of employee computers caused network problems which persisted for almost six months before finally be resolved.  

The searches for surveillance equipment having failed, the President informed Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, that he knew for a fact that there were employees who intended to harm him and he believed would even attempt to shoot him. Again, there was no evidence for his beliefs other than his unfettered imagination. Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, approved the purchase of several cameras which were installed outside his office and in the halls leading the wing where his office is located. After the cameras had been installed, the President told staff, “Now I’ll be able to see if someone is coming to my office with a gun.”

A few weeks before the May 2009 annual meeting was scheduled to take place, the President easily convinced the ignorant Board that a “band of employees” was going to disrupt and possibly even resort to violence. The ignorant and poorly educated Directors embraced the President's fears and hired two armed guards and paid for three representatives from the law firm of Styskal, Weise & Melchione, LLP to attend the meeting including attorney, William Adler. Also, all the Directors and Supervisors were present. The meeting lasted 32 minutes from start to finish without incidence of a shootout, riot, or burning down of the branch. 

Apparently, former COO, Beatrice Walker, and President Wiggington not only suffer with a gross inability to create new business but they suffer from the same delusions which cause them to lash out against staff in an effort to strike down some invisible group of non-existent and ingenious ninjas. 

The Story of Beatrice Walker, Part 1

SHE'S BACK BUT NOT 

ON HER OWN VOLITION

Following her undignified ouster from Priority One Credit Union on July 8, 2011, former COO, Beatrice Walker has returned though in the capacity of defendant in the lawsuit filed by the former Valencia Branch Manager. The lawsuit also names President Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. and the organization as defendants and accuses each of egregious violations of state and federal laws. 

Ironically, the credit union that terminated Ms. Walker must now rely in part, upon her testimony in an effort to raise a defense that supports the President's chronic contentions that he never violated any laws. We beg to differ. 

Because the allegations leveled against Ms. Walker while she served as COO of the credit union, Priority One will have to pay for her defense. One would have thought that the days which she abused spending ended when she was fired. Apparently not. 

Ms. Walker may have arrived quietly at the South Pasadena branch on June 1, 2009, but over the next 25 months which transpired, she would create havoc, perpetrate abuses and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on wasted efforts to allegedly attract new business. Inarguably, she and the President are cut from the same piece of mud. 

PROCLIVITIES

Beatrice Walker, like President Wiggington, shared the same predilection for divulging confidential information about employees, about her plots, and about her aspirations to one day become President and CEO of Priority One Credit Union.

The hiring of Ms. Walker was completely orchestrated by President Charles R. Wiggington, Sr., who at the time was both her friend and a long time associate of hers. The decision to hire Ms. Walker was authorized by Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks. There were three reasons for hiring Ms. Walker. These were:

• The President insisted he needed someone to assist him who could process the projects he was too busy to attend to. 

• He needed someone who was a marketing and business development expert who would help resolving the issues which were impeding the credit union from attracting sufficient levels of new business.

• He required someone who would help drive out his enemies. 

In business, Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. is both inept and slovenly. From the day he began his appointment to President, he chose to "play" instead of work. For example, in January 2007, he implemented the expensive and unnecessary sector of AVP's. At the time, he said, "They're going to be responsible for bringing in the business and all I have to do is sit back and watch." He sat back but they all failed to bring in the business because none possessed the ability to do so.

He hired Beatrice Walker because he really believed she possessed the competency to create new business but time proved that she was as inept and limited in her understanding of marketing and business development as he was.

Ms. Walker proved quite pliable in the hands of the President and shortly after her arrival, began implementing scathing efforts to trap, persecute and oust employees the President identified as his enemy. 

The fact that she's been subpoenaed to again provide testimony, can be attributed in great part to the President and Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks. After all, it was the President who provided her with a mandate to go after his imagined enemies. The two broke state and federal laws to carryout their scurrilous campaigns and found solace in the fact that Senior Vice President, Rodger Smock, who is also Director of Human Resources, would ensure the department did not interrupt their often illegal plots. 

Ms. Waker and President Wiggington are Defendants in the lawsuit filed by the last Valencia Branch Manager. They actually have little choice but to support one another and provide whatever testimony is necessary to extricate them from the legal predicament they created. At time of Ms. Walker's termination, their alleged friendship had ended, with Ms. Walker becoming an avid and vocal critic of both the President and the entire Board of Directors. 

THE ROAD TO HELL

IS PAVED WITH GOOD INTENTS

During her approximate two-year stay, Ms. Walker introduced products and services which she claimed would serve to create new sources of income for the struggling credit union. Though she spent tens of thousands of dollars in "developing" new products and services, almost all failed to attain the level of success she promised would be achieved. 

Ms. Walker's products and services were not so much her creation but entirely plagiarized. During her first three-months of employment, she would call associates in the industry asking for suggestions which she could introduce as her ideas. One of the first products she said she created which cost the credit union $30,000 to develop, was "Skip-a-Pay." The product received a lukewarm response from members and clearly, was not deemed a success. 

Another of her creations was Priority Pay, the credit union's version of a pay-day styled loan like those obtained from store front vendors. The reasoning behind Priority Pay is that it allows a person to borrow up to $700 without being victimized financially by the exorbitant charges and fees levied by predatory lenders. Unfortunately, the terms of the loan were not quite as wonderful as described by Ms. Walker and the actual loan was being provided by a third-party lender who was not the credit union. Members rejected the offer, making this one of Ms. Walker's first failures. 

She also introduced Courtesy Pay, the credit union's overdraft protection program. Under the law, the credit union had to ask members if they wished to enroll in Courtesy Pay but Ms. Walker stated that this was too tedious a process and ordered that all member accounts be coded for Courtesy Pay.  President Wiggington and Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks allowed it seeing Ms. Walker's decision as one that would benefit the credit union in collecting a large amount of fees and charges and thus helping to ameliorate the cycle of losses caused by President Wiggington's detrimental business decisions.

Ms. Walker's decision to code every member's records for Courtesy Pay (overdraft protection). forced increased numbers of members into collections. Ms. Walker also learned that she would have to issue letters to all members inviting them to enroll in Courtesy Pay, though the letter was sent after the fact and it is probable that many employees were unaware they had been enrolled in overdraft protection. 

Ms. Walker also obtained authorization from the Board of Directors to build a more than $70,000 call center which she dubbed "a one-stop call center" and which she said would resolve the credit union's member service-related issues. Not only didn't it fail to achieve it's intended purpose but it actually exacerbated Priority One's service problems. 

Ms. Walker also obtained approved from the Board of Directors to remodel the entire main branch which included installation of wall-to-wall carpeting, painting, new window treatments, and ordering two customized large silver colored logos for the lobbies of the South Pasadena and Burbank branches. According to Ms. Walker, remodeling of the entire South Pasadena branch including the employee lounge room and employee patio; and remodeling of the Burbank branch's lobby would attract increased business. Her more than $150,000 spent on the superfluous missed it's mark and had absolutely no impact on eliciting member interest in the credit union's financial offerings. A year and five months after remodeling the lobby of the Burbank branch had been completed, the branch closed permanently. Clearly Ms. Walker's promises were never realized making this project a complete waste of money. 

A NOT SO SUPER WEAPON

Beatrice Walker arrived quietly at the main branch in South Pasadena on June 1, 2009. Her arrival was quiet and without fanfare but her 25-month stay would further unravel the organization resulting in internal strife amongst managers, lead to the rapid decay of employee morale and in the end, immerse the credit union in even more scandals. What's more, Ms. Walker's arrival would mark the start of a period defined by lawsuits. 

On her first day of employment, Ms. Walker was escorted through each department by Senior Vice President, Rodger Smock. The Senior Vice President merely introduced her as "This is Bea Walker. She'll be working with us." Ms. Walker was haughty and refused to respond to employees who extended their hands to welcome her or who welcomed her. In the weeks before her arrival, rumors swept through all branches which disclosed a COO had been hired and "she's a hatchet woman." The description would makes it's way to then Human Resources "clerk", Esmeralda Sandoval, who immediately informed Rodger Smock and the President about what was being said. The President became incensed, stating he was tired of the rumors and the lies festering amongst the non-exempt sector. He of course was not being forthright again and as employees would soon learn, Beatrice Walker was indeed President Wiggington's own, personal "hatchet woman." 

Several weeks after her arrival, Ms. Walker stood before employees during one of the credit union's quarterly all-staff meetings and for some reason, felt impelled to explain how she was hired. In her account, she stated that she answered an ad in a newspaper. She submitted her resume and received a telephone call inviting her to interview with the Board of Directors and afterwards, offered the job of COO. She also made tremendous effort to point out that prior to the date she started to work at the credit union, she had never met Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. Her tremendous emphasis on pointing out they'd never met prior to the date she started working at the credit union caused some employees to grow suspicious and to question why Ms. Walker felt it necessary to tell people she'd never met the President until the first day she began working at Priority One. Ms. Walker's "story" would eventually be exposed to be a lie. 

Source:  http://www.lillestrand.com/client-list

Within a month after being hired, Ms. Walker introduced her friend, Loren Lillestrand, the owner of Lillestrand and Associates,  to the credit union. Superficially, the reason for hiring Mr. Lillestrand was so that he could develop profiles of each employee which would provide the credit union with a record of a person's strengths and interests. The information would be used in staff development, placing employees in positions whose responsibilities were most suited to employee strengths and interest. 

However, secretly, the more important reason for hiring Mr. Lillestrand was so that he could use his expertise as a consultant to identify those employees who the President labeled "rebels" and "confederates" of this  blog. Mr. Lillestrand erred in allying with is long-time "friend" and associate.  

Though more than $30,000 were spent on the services provided by Mr. Lillestrand, the information provided to the credit union needed to develop a stronger, more knowledgeable staff, was never implemented only because the President and Ms. Walker's agenda was to ensnare employees they believed were conspiring against their regime. Ms. Walker could never have imagined that her ambitious and aggressively executed plots would in time, lead to the deterioration of her working relationships with other officers including Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks but which would eventually lead to her eventual expulsion. 

The pinnacle to Ms. Walker's amassing abuses occurred in mid-2010 when her efforts to enter into a friendship/relationship with the Valencia Branch Manager, failed. Ms. Walker's response was not only excessive, it was disturbing. Her reaction was like that of a scorned woman but how is that possible if all she was seeking a friendship? 

In August 2010, Ms. Walker launched a scathing campaign fueled by unbridled emotions. In her frenzy, she inducted the assistance of an AVP, Branch Managers, the Consumer Loan Manager and the staff assigned to the Valencia branch. She publicly disparaged the Branch Manager's abilities, mocked her Spanish accent, described her as "a disappointment" and ordered that officers not respond to any of Branch Manager's voicemails or emails requesting business-related assistance. 

Ms. Walker's efforts intentionally created a working environment that was nothing short of intolerable and she actually did succeed in convincing the attention starved and ethically pliable, AVP, Sylvia Perez, into distancing herself from the Branch Manager even though Mrs. Perez was the Valencia Branch Manager's supervisor. Ms. Walker also succeeded in getting the Van Nuys Branch Manager, Cecilia Pereyra, to refuse to respond to the Valencia Branch Manager's business-related calls and emails. The pandering and chronically inept Consumer Loan Manager, Joseph Garcia, also stopped speaking to the Branch Manager and the Branch Manager's own staff distanced themselves from her with some becoming belligerent and even insubordinate. 

What's more, Senior Vice President Rodger Smock, was well aware of the campaign and even called the Valencia Branch Manager and asked, "Why does she hate you so much?" Hardly the approach one might expect from a competent Director of Human Resources but then again, Rodger Smock is not a competent Director. 

Having grown weary of Ms. Walker's attacks, the Valencia Branch Manager visited the South Pasadena branch and lodged a complaint with Human Resources "clerk", Esmeralda Sandoval. Unfortunately, Ms. Sandoval is as ethical and compliant to policy is as President Wiggington to federal laws prohibiting sexual harassment. 

A pseudo-investigation was conducted during which the President and the Senior Vice President drove to the Valencia branch and met with the Valencia Branch Manager and the Business Development Representative assigned to the Santa Clarita Valley. During the meeting, the President stated that he planned on removing Ms. Walker's authority over Human Resources. A few weeks earlier, she took control of the department and relegated it's Director, Rodger Smock, to "assist the President with special projects." There were two key reasons why she took control over the department. The first was to have complete and easy access to all personnel files. The second was that she was involved in orchestrating the ouster of Mr. Smock who she concluded was "useless", "overpaid" and "unnecessary to the operation." 

Unfortunately, she over-played her hand when she chose to launch an offensive against the Valencia Branch Manager and one which would in the end cause her to lose her clout with the Board of Directors and lead to her complete unraveling. 

And so, 13-months after being terminated, Ms. Walker is being forced to answer questions regarding her ruthless and abhorrent personal campaign against the former Valencia Branch Manager which undermined the clout she once enjoyed with the Board and which in time., contributed to the reasons leading to her expulsion. 

. 

BANISHED

Though President Wiggington orchestrated the hiring of Beatrice Walker and though he had known her prior to her arrival to Priority One on June 1, 2009, following her termination, he moved quickly to eradicate all memory of her. 

It wasn't her business failures that had been the catalyst for her removal but rather, rumors about her sexuality which circulated through all branches. The complaint filed by Valencia Branch Manager had been insufficient for the President and Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks to conduct an in depth and impartial investigation of the allegations leveled against Ms. Walker. It's important to recall that in 2008, Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. was found guilty of sexual harassment and it was the Board Chair who not only ignored the evidence proving he victimized a former female employee but the dishonest and immoral chair, reduced the illegal act to nothing more than humorous repartee between the 50-some year old officer and a 35-year old female.  

When the complaint was first filed against Ms. Walker, the President used the opportunity to to try and endear himself with the Board who had grown tired of his chronic failures and excuses trying to justify why business was in decline. Mrs. Harris-Brooks' reaction was predictable. She viewed the Branch Manager's complaint as a problem that could quickly develop into yet another issue for the credit union. She ordered that the President find a way of diffusing the allegations leveled against Ms. Walker. The President reluctantly agreed because this forced him to derive a solution to a problem he felt he was being forced to participate in. He, however, had not choice. After all, it was Mrs. Harris-Brooks who protected him when evidence proved he sexually harassed a former employee. For all intents and purposes, he was indebted to her. 

Before choosing to reduce the vile actions allegedly committed by Ms. Walker to a mere conflict of personalities, Mrs. Harris-Brooks and the Directors informed the President that they were concerned about rumors concerning Ms. Walker's sexual preference. Interesting that creation of hostile work environment, harassment, slander, same-sex sexual harassment, retaliation and even stalking were trumped by one woman's alleged sexual preference. 

Priority One's Directors are no small hypocrites. Before the start of the credit union's annual meetings, a Director always begins by praying to Jesus. Yet the same Directors who have the unmitigated gall to refer to Jesus in their prayers are the same group of tricksters who have used credit union monies to hide violations of state and federal laws perpetrated by Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. and it is some of this same group of bigots who admitted selecting Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. to serve as President because of his skin color. The Directors had absolutely no qualms with covering up sexual harassment committed by President Wiggington but they demonstrated an acute aversion to rumors and allegations that the COO might be a lesbian. 

Before the start of the annual meetings, a Director always prays to Jesus but it is this same group of tricksters who spent credit union monies to hide evidence proving violations of federal laws, and ensuring that the President who they chose because of skin color, remains well in place. They evidently have no problem with sexual harassment or immorality but they frown upon "rumors" and "allegations" that a female employee might be a lesbian. 

Within a few weeks following Ms. Walker's termination, the President severed ties with Auto Alliance, the automobile broker introduced to the credit union by Ms. Walker.  The COO had exerted tremendous effort to ensure Auto Alliance would in time, displace the credit union's long-time automobile broker, Universal Leasing and Auto Sales, but her termination brought an immediate end to her aspiration. 

Following filing of the Valencia Branch Manager's complaint, the Board began withdrawing much of their support of Ms. Walker and even issued a directive to Ms. Walker, advising her that she could no longer implement new products or service or issue letters to members without submitting mock-ups of her intended projects to the President or Senior Vice President, Rodger Smock. She became incensed. She couldn't refrain from telling some employees at the South Pasadena that she was deeply offended by the Board's order, stating that both President Wiggington and Vice President, Rodger Smock, were unqualified to review her work, describing each as "uneducated" and "incompetent." However, she also leveled criticisms against the Board, also describing the Directors as "uneducated" and :"inept." Her statements were reported to the President who immediately informed the Board Chair. 

On July 8, 2011, Ms. Walker was informed that her employment with the credit union was being terminated. Her employment was not severed because of the alleged violations of state and federal laws she committed against the former Valencia Branch Manager. Her removal occurred only after she disparaged the President, the Senior Vice President and the Board of Directors. 

In July 11, 2011, Mr. Smock posted a notice on the credit union’s Intranet, announcing that Ms. Walker was no longer employed by the credit union. 

EXAGGERATIONS

Beatrice Walker suffered from the same insatiable need to expound upon her above-average leadership abilities as does President Wiggington. And like the President, time proved she was devoid of competencies she boasted she possessed. 

A search on LinkedIn discovered several accounts all created by Ms. Walker. Some are inactive though a fourth provides an accurate record of her current biography.

BIOGRAPHY 1

The biography references “Priority One Credit Union” as her current employer where she serves in the capacity of its COO but fails to reference that her employment with the credit union ended on July 8, 2011. 

Biography 2

Biography 2, like Biography 1, references Ms. Walker’s current capacity as COO of Priority One Credit Union. This of course is incorrect.

LinkedIn Bio

BIOGRAPHY 3

Biography 3 like Biographies 1 and 2, states that Ms. Walker is COO of Priority One Credit Union. Does Beatrice Walker understand the definition of the word “current”? 

LinkedIn III

BIOGRAPHY 4

The fourth LinkedIn account we located contains a list of Ms. Walker's past employers which are Universal Studios City Credit Union, Pasadena Service Federal Credit Union, and Honda Federal Credit Union, but the record is intentionally incomplete. Why would this highly educated and based on her biographies and verbal statements, accomplished executive find it necessary to publish a partial history of her actual employment? Notably missing from her biography are:

• Priority One Credit Union 
• Electricore, Inc..
• Airco Federal Credit Union

Just prior to her arrival at Priority One, Ms. Walker was employed by Electricore, Inc. a company located in Valencia, California. On June 2, 2009, we called Electricore and were informed that she resigned suddenly on Friday, May 29, 2009, without providing the customary two-week notice.  While working for Electricore, Ms. Walker served in the capacity of a contracts specialist with alleged experience in Human Resources. 

She had also been employed by Airco Federal Credit Union, located in Glendale, California. We received an email from a former co-worker of Ms. Walker who informed us that while employed by Airco, Ms. Walker allegedly caused monetary losses which forced the credit union to file a claim with CUMIS, the company's insurance carrier. 

There's are good reasons why Ms. Walker has chosen to intentionally omit references to specific past employers from her online biographies. While at Priority One, the products and services she introduced failed to achieve their intended results. Ms. Walker was also instrumental in terminating the last Burbank Branch Manager and a former Business Development Representative, both of which have filed lawsuits against the credit union. She also launched and carried out a vicious campaign against the last Valencia Branch Manager who was allegedly was subjected to harassment, same-sex sexual harassment, retaliation, coercion and even stalked by Ms. Walker. Her performance during her 25-month stay at the credit union was disastrous and her personal behaviors, appalling. What is also clear is that the Board of Directors and specifically, it's Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, failed and possibly even refused. to conduct the necessary mandated background check of Ms. Walker's past employment and performance. 

As shown below, Ms. Walker's past employment record in LinkedIn, describes her as a "Financial Services Professional" who had once been employed by Universal City Studios Credit Union. We've been contacted by former employees of that credit union who informed us that Ms. Walker was also a polarizing presence while at that credit union and that she was allegedly terminated by it's President because of her failure to make sound business decisions. 

Source: Beatrice Walker/LinkedIn

Ms. Walker’s current bio also includes the following two recommendations written by associates and each praising her abilities and allegedly fine character.

Sylvia N. is a "Senior Consultant" at Lillestrand and Associates. In 2009, during a meeting with employees in South Pasadena, Loren Lillestrand described Beatrice Walker as a “close friend” who was allegedly “wonderful”, “highly intelligent”, "nice" and “charming.”  He was wrong. 

Sylvia N. describes Ms. Walker as "an amazing leader." The evidence of her leadership abilities while at Priority One prove that she is not amazing at anything she endeavors to do. And her termination on July 8, 2011 suggests that Board was not pleased with her "amazing" leadership skills. 

Sylvia N. also describes Ms. Walker as possessing "great intuitive sense" and "great caring spirit with her colleagues." No, she doesn't. She is neither intuitive or caring though she is conniving and brutal. Her business failures aside, her scurrilous persecution of the Valencia Branch Manager attests to her actual character which proved vicious and vindictive. 

With approval of Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, she also proved to be an undisciplined and wasteful spender adding to the losses begun by President Wiggington's deficient business decisions. She, like the President, proved to possess a disdain for policies and rules and it is her intentional violation of policies and laws which provoked the filing of lawsuits by three former employees. It was also she who ordered that every member's account be coded for Courtesy Pay (overdraft protection) though the law requires that the service FIRST be offered to members who can decide to accept or decline the offer.

Sylvia N's statements certainly don't hold true at Priority One Credit Union and certainly as COO, Beatrice Walker never demonstrated a "can-do attitude" towards anything she endeavored to do. . 

Sylvia N. is not the only person to publish a recommendation of Ms. Walker. Here is a second recommendation written by Dorothy M., an Interior Design Educator at the College of the Canyons:

Source: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/beatrice-walker-mba/42/351/b0b*

*Since publishing of our post on September 25, 2012, Ms. Walker has removed all recommendations under this account.

The credibility of his recommendation is undermined by the fact that Dorothy M. refers to Beatrice Walker as "Deatrice". Dorothy M. writes, "From a business perspective, Beatrice is smart....:" The recommendation was published on LinkedIn. Any business recommendation attesting to the competencies of an executive should always be written from a business perspective. We do have a question. How does Dorothy M. an instructor at College of the Canyons where Ms. Walker studied interior design, possess knowledge about Deatrice's/Beatrice's competencies in business?

As for the personality traits allegedly possessed by Ms. Walker, it would be impossible to find a single employee of the credit union who would ever describe her as "funny, pleasant, personable and someone you would like as a good friend."

In 2009, shortly after being hired, she developed a "friendship" with then Director of Credit Resolutions, Yvonne Boutte, and with then Assistant Branch Manager of the Redlands office, Joseph Garcia, but by November 2010, her friendships with both ended bitterly and Mrs. Boutte and Mr. Garcia began telling staff members at the South Pasadena branch that Ms. Walker was ruthless, dominating, and cruel. Ms. Walker was also terminated on July 8, 2011, because of insubordination. If she possessed any of the qualities described by Dorothy M., they were never attested to during her employment at the credit union. 

Ms. Walker also never possessed an an “Excellent grasp on [of] business practices”. Ms. Walker frequently submitted receipts requesting reimbursement of expenses and would often tear off the portion of the receipt containing the name of the business where she purchased products. Though credit union policy requires that executives who need a laptop submit a requisition form to the IT Department, Ms. Walker refused to abide to policy and in 2009, purchased a $5000 on a laptop and ordered the IT Supervisor to process documentation needed to process a reimbursement. The IT Supervisor refused and so she initiated a campaign which slandered his reputation. She also produced fraudulent evidence which she later used to order his termination. 

In spite of having been terminated, Ms. Walker continues to be deceptive, publishing distortions of the truth and conveying an image that she is professional, accomplished and personable when the fact is she is a failure in business and possesses a vindictive and is cruel and dishonest. We suggest she hire a pricey consultant who can taken her horrendous failures and try to spin them into a positive without having to completely distort her actual work history and omit the names of employers who terminated her. 

In the end, it isn't her egregious acts and failed business decisions which most standout. It is the Board's failure to conduct a proper background check of her prior employment. We believe that background checks were not performed because she came highly recommended by the President. Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, may have ordered that the usual and required checks not be initiated because Ms. Walker promised the Board she would identify and remove all of the President's enemies from the credit union. And of course, the corrupt and useless Rodger Smock, the Director of Human Resources willingly circumvented all protocols because as the years have proven, he is the President's personal amoral puppet.

ECHOES OF THE PAST

It's really inexplicable why sexual harassment is such a reoccurring issue at Priority One Credit Union. We can't fully comprehend why sex in general, is such a prevailing factor at what is a rapidly shrinking credit union. Certainly, this was not an issue which ever surfaced prior to January 1, 2007, the date Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. was named President and CEO of a then thriving credit union. 

Though prior to his appointment as President it was well-known that one now former executive used to spend a part of his day viewing pornographic sites while at work from his company-assigned credit union. The only reason many employees knew of this is because he openly discussed what he'd seen. 

Another person who violated policy was the Director of Human Resources, Rodger Smock. He openly entered into a relationship with a young male employee of the Member Services Department which was witnessed by both employees in the Member Services Department including it's then manager, Betty Hilliard, and by employees in the Loan Department. 

A third person who sexually harassed employees in the presence of Director, Rodger Smock, was Aaron Cavazos, the former Director of Lending who would often invite women to see his "anaconda.": 

However, actual sexual harassment charges were filed in 2008, when a former employee wrote to the credit union's attorney, William Adler, and informed him that she had been sexually harassed by the President for a number of years. An investigation was ordered and investigator, Scott Barer, of EXTTI, Inc. interviewed employees of the South Pasadena and Los Angeles branches and in the end provided evidence proving the President had indeed violated federal law. What's more, Mr. Barer recommended President Wiggington's termination. 

Like the President, Beatrice Walker is accused of same-sex sexual harassment which includes stalking the former Valencia Branch Manager. Coincidentally, while on vacation, the Valencia Branch Manager's two dogs were poisoned. We don't know who poisoned the dogs but it seems more than a little coincidental that this occurred while she was on vacation, a fact known about by the credit union. 

Here is a copy of the letter submitted in July of 2008 to attorney, William Adler: 

July 12, 2008


c/o William Adler, Esq.

Styskal, Wiese, & Melchione

550 N. Brand Blvd

Glendale, CA 91203

RE: Complaint Against Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. of Priority One Credit Union

Dear Mr. Adler:

I am a former employee of Priority One Credit Union, who was wrongfully accused and terminated for "kiting" in September 2007. Last week I received an anonymous letter filled with allegations regarding numerous slanderous statements made by Charles Wiggington, the current president and CEO of Priority One Credit Union, against current and former employees of the company.

I will begin by explaining the reason I am impelled to write. I was amazed by the fact that a person or persons, actually documented the many incidents of sexual harassment and verbal abuse I was subjected to while working at the credit union's South Pasadena office. I was also dismayed by the fact that I seem to be the only employee terminated for kiting, who was referred to CUNA. Liz Campo's kiting constituted numerous incidents yet she was not referred over to CUNA. I also read that Georgina Duenas and Gema Pleitez, circumvented banking procedures and did not place a hold issued by another financial institution which later resulted in an incident of non-sufficient funds. I called the company after receiving the letter and verified that not only does Georgina continue to be employed but she has also been promoted. I understand that she now oversees Credit Resolutions which is the company's contracted credit collection department, yet she has no experience in collections and as I remember, continually abused policy and procedures. I believe that the disparity in policy enforcement and preferential treatment shown some employees is defined as discrimination. Am I correct?

Of all the acts described in the letter, none is more insidious than that of restoring a business relationship with Henry Justice. At the time I called the office I was told that Charles had been informed that you also received a copy of the anonymous letter and that when informed by Diedra Harris-Brooks of its contents, he denied this newly resurrected business relationship with Mr. Justice. I was also told that upon conclusion of his conversation with Diedra, he immediately called Henry Justice and instructed him to deny any involvement with Priority One. I cannot fathom why I was terminated for one act of kiting while Georgina remains employed and was recently promoted and why the credit union has decided to go into business with Henry Justice, a person who literally absconded with thousands of dollars which belong both to the credit union and its valued Members.

In the weeks following my termination, employees of the company called my home and informed me that employees at the LAPDC and Aaron Cavazos and Georgina Duenas at the South Pasadena office, had been overheard speaking while in the Loan Department, about my termination. Rumors included that I approved and funded a loan for a man I was involved with; that I passed several bad checks; and that I misappropriated funds. I was mortified about the rumors and called Charles on his company cell phone. When I told him about the rumors, he rudely brushed me aside and in a condescending tone, replied that “only management” knew about the reasons why I was terminated. Based on Charles’ words, I concluded that the rumors were being spread by the credit union’s management sector.

My last 3 years of employment at the credit union were at times tormentuous. Every statement in the letter describing what Charles said and did to me is true. 

Though many of my co-workers witnessed many of these incidents, including Aaron Cavazos, Patti Loiacano, and Rodger Smock, none did anything to dissuade his harassment. I was also afraid to lose my job because I am a single parent raising a daughter. His statements humiliated and embarrassed me and demeaned my person. I have spent the last few days remembering the many things he said including the abuse termination meeting I was subjected to, as AVP, Lynnette Fortson interrogated me demanding an explanation why I had written a bad check. I now believe my termination, which was ordered by Charles, may have been an effort to quell me from disclosing the many acts he committed against me while I was employed. The duress and harassment and eventual termination, have left me emotionally injured and financially impaired. 

Why was Liz Campos not reported to CUNA? Why was Georgina Duenas not terminated for the check she deposited in 2007, which later bounced? Why were the required holds not placed on the check? Does Georgina Duenas or Gema Pleitez have the authority to circumvent banking procedures? Aren't policies to be enforced unilaterally?

Henry Justice robbed the credit union and escaped prosecution. He also filed bankruptcy and avoided having to pay back the money he took, yet Mr. Wiggington has allowed him to enter areas of the company which are usually off-limits to non-members and has decided to re-establish a business relationship with Mr. Justice. Can you please provide an explanation why resuming a business relationship with Mr. Justice is deemed right and why I was terminated?

The Human Resources Department at Priority One chose to ignore Charles' mocking, sexual innuendos, and slandering of my person. Why is that the company chose not to protect me, deprived me of my rights, and terminated me when Charles has done far worse to employees, the credit union, and evidently in the case of Danny Wafa, robbed at least one member of his automobile.

I am going to consult an attorney will file a complaint with the Equal Opportunity Comission and any other state or federal agency who will investigate and act upon my complaint. I will also begin efforts to contact other former employees who believe they were abused and mistreated by Charles. The Board of Directors has failed miserably in reining in Mr. Wiggington. Evidently tye years of complaints and rumors of wrong doing were not enough to get them to initiate an investigation. They are responsible for overseeing the credit union's sound operations but refused to intercede and bring an end to his [Charles R. Wiggington, Sr.] insidious regime.

It is interesting that in 2008, Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks, chose to ignore the evidence and the investigator's recommendation and with the help of Directors, O. Glen Saffold and Thomas Gathers and Supervisory Committee Chair, Cornelia Simmons,. voted for reinstatement of the President. Before the investigation was ever conducted, Mrs. Harris-Brooks knew she would fight for the President's reinstatement. Unlike all other employees who are suspended following allegations they have violated credit union policy, Mrs. Harris-Brooks placed Charles R. Wiggington, Sr. on suspension with pay. The gravity of the accusations leveled against him were inconsequential to the corrupt Board Chair. Mrs. Harris-Brooks also issued two letters- one to the victim and the other to the President in which she reduced the accusations against the President as mere humorous though inappropriate repartee encouraged by the victim. 

Three years later, Mrs. Harris-Brooks ordered that the President diffuse the Valencia Branch Manager's allegations against Ms. Walker and dismiss the entire matter to a mere conflict of personalities. Ms. Harris-Brooks' dishonest proclivities have again injured the credit union, leaving it open to yet another lawsuit.  

In 2010, Mr. Smock also received complaints from female employees alleging that a former Afro-American Business Development Representative and then Call Center Supervisor, Joseph Garcia, had inappropriately touched them. The two males were counseled by Mr. Smock who may only have chosen to issue warnings because of the 2008 complaint filed against the President.

In 2009 through 2010, the Board Chair had no qualms with the abusive tactics employed by Ms. Walker against employees and she purposely ignored the fact that Ms. Walker's so-called efforts to create profit, were all failing. Despite well documented failures by the COO, during the annual meeting which took place in May 2010, Mrs. Harris-Brooks told attendees that in her opinion and that of the Board, they believed the credit union finally had the "right management team in place." Fourteen months later, Mrs. Harris-Brooks ordered Ms. Walker's termination. 

Beatrice Walker's vendetta against certain employees was provoked by the President. Not only did she create greater divisiveness but she intentionally fostered discord amongst staff members and created an environment saturated by vicious gossip, strife and intrigue. The decision to finally terminate Ms. Walker was as much an indictment to her chronic failures and abhorrent behaviors as it was to the failures and corrupt nature of the entire Board of Directors and in particular, its Chair, Mrs. Harris-Brooks. 

SEXUAL HARASSMENT

Baby, I’ve been watching you

I want to know you better

I love the way you move and dress

And how you fill that sweater.

When you catch me staring, you always turn away

But I don’t plan on stopping cause I see you as my prey.

It’s time you change the way you think cause I plan to make you mine

You know that I can’t help myself, you’re always looking fine.

The law says its illegal and I will get in trouble

But no law is gonna stop me

Nor going to burst my bubble.

"When a worker complains about 

harassment, you take it seriously." 

Carol Thorpe

Automobile Club of Southern California

On May 15, 2012, poster and credit union insider, Priority MC wrote, "There is no lawsuit from Suzanna like you keep saying." She lied. Shown below is the summons ordered to be served on former COO, Beatrice Walker, in the lawsuit filed by the former Valencia Branch Manager. 

  

The summons also dispels verbalizations made by President Wiggington; Board Chair, Diedra Harris-Brooks; Director, O. Glen Saffold; and AVP, Yvonne Boutte, denying that a lawsuit has ever been or will ever be filed by the former Valencia Branch Manager.

The President has recently disclosed that the credit union's attorneys, Richardson Harmon Ober PC  have also promised they will defeat the latest lawsuit if it goes to trial. If they in fact said this, it's both inappropriate and unproven to be true. The attorneys are beginning to sound more and more, like bottom feeders. 

Based on the tactics resorted to during litigation of the first and second lawsuits, we expect the law firm to resort to once again employ mud slinging design to impugn the character of the Plaintiff. When attorney's lack intellect and are devoid of moral compass, then attacking Plaintiff characters is certainly appropriate. 

So how will they contend with the fact Beatrice Walker was terminated for insubordination? How will they handle the fact she openly and arrogantly violated policies, laws, and employees? 

 THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING

Linda Nisely vs. Priority One Credit Union

 

SETTLED AND PENDING CASES

Wrongful Termination (Unlimited) – Amended

Status: Pending

Filing Date: 6/18/2012

Location: Stanley Mosk

Plaintiff: Former Valencia Branch Manager

Other Employment Complaint

Status: Pending

Filing Date: 6/08/2012

Location: Stanley Mosk

Plaintiff: Former Branch Manager

Civil Complaint (Limited)

Status: Pending

Filing Date: 01/23/2012

Location: Pasadena Courthouse

Plaintiff: Member Cross-Complaint

Civil Comp. Other (Limited)

Status: Pending

Filing Date: 1/23/2012

Location” Pasadena Courthouse

Plaintiff: Farmers Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

Case Type: Wrongful Termination (Unlimited)

Status: Settled

Date Filed: 5/24/2011

Location: Stanley Mosk

Plaintiff: Former Business Development Rep.

Case Type: Wrongful Termination (Unlimited)

Status: Settled

Date Filed: 8/20/2010

Location: Pasadena Courthouse

Plaintiff: Former Burbank Branch Manager

To be continued.....