Have you heard of THIS Nanny from hell?

VIDEO HERE

Ralph and Marcella Bracamonte's California home has become their personal hell.

They fired their live-in nanny this month, but the woman -- Diane Stretton -- has refused to move out, and the couple has little legal recourse to evict her.

"I fired her June 6 and she refused to leave, saying she had rights and I needed to evict her," Marcella Bracamonte told CNN on Friday. "She quit working about a month before I ever fired her -- she would just stay in her room."

How bad did it get?

"She threatened to sue me after I didn't turn the air conditioner on," Bracamonte said, adding that Stretton "wrote me this long letter with all her terms and what she wanted -- she wanted my family out of our home for certain hours everyday -- it was crazy."

CNN has left repeated messages at the cell phone number that Bracamonte provided for Stretton but received no reply so far.

According to the Bracamontes, Stretton started out fine when they hired her March 4 after running a background check. In exchange for room and board, Stretton was expected to help out with household chores and child care at their home in Upland, about 35 miles east of Los Angeles.

But once she gained the family's trust, they said, Stretton stopped working and stayed in her room.

They sought help from law enforcement and were told that Stretton was legally permitted to stay in the home.

Sgt. Don Dodt with the Upland Police Department told CNN that in general, once someone has established a residency in a home, the landlord or owner of the property must go to court to get the person evicted.

Typically, the police department can only take a keep-the-peace type of role in such a case because it is a civil dispute. The sheriff's department would carry out a forceful eviction if ordered by the court.

The family is working its way through the legal eviction process, but why not change the locks and refuse to allow Stretton in the home in the meantime? The nanny threatened to sue, and California tenant laws are in her favor so she would likely win.

Bracamonte tells CNN her family has too much to lose.

While their case moves through the courts, the family has turned to the media for help.

"Don't worry -- I will ruin her publicly! But she will NOT take a dime from us!" Marcella Bracamonte wrote on her Facebook page.

She accused Stretton of filing frivolous lawsuits before. CNN confirmed that Stretton is on the California Courts' Vexatious Litigant List, a list of people who continually bring legal action, regardless of merit, against others with the sole intention of harassment. CNN found dozens of lawsuits filed by Stretton in California over the years.

The family has been interviewed on TV and Bracamonte says she wants a constant barrage of family and friends at the house to pressure Stretton to vacate.

"I need help! I need A TON OF FRIENDS TO COME STAY AND HANG WITH ME AT MY HOUSE! Sleep in the living room all spread out to annoy her!" Bracamonte wrote on Facebook.

Perhaps it's working. Friday, Bracamonte said Stretton "hasn't come back to the home since yesterday morning around 5 a.m."

I would never have live in help.

Oh she's leaving my house, if I have to hire security to oust her, she's gone. Imagine someone like Duch taking that lying down? I don't think so. It falls under the category of "Don't Fuck With Me".

Send all the family away, turn off the power and wait the skank out if she won't leave.
Have her part of the house burglerized.
More than one way to get her out

I'm incredulous that once someone establishes residence in your home you can't make them leave! Get the fuck out. I'd want to annihilate that cow.

I knew you would. There is no fucking way. You wanna see my psycho side bitch. I will fuck you up if you fuck with me, Nanny! I am kindhearted and loving, but if you try and screw me you are going to fucking lose.

Some people, like these people, are probably very polite and haven't been round the block and don't know how to deal with her. There are ways. I wouldn't even care if it was legal, if she was creepy or a threat to my family I would go to jail to kick the bitch out. She's gone.

The parents didn't fill out the eviction forms right. They've since re-filled and re-filed.

Three day's notice is all that's required before the eviction is legal. Nanny's gone by Monday or Tuesday.

Don't sign agreements regarding live-in employment without covering your bases. Don't entrust your kids to someone you acquired through Craigslist. That's the moral of the story...IMO.

However, I would have entrusted any of my kids to Fran, the door-to-door cosmetics sales-woman turned nanny any old day. I liked her (and her Yetta, too!).



(HOTD: fixed image)

(06-29-2014, 06:47 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: Don't entrust your kids to someone you acquired through Craigslist.

That was very surprising to me. With everything we read about the dangers of Craigslist to see that they actually got a nanny from there sorta bordered on mindblowing.

(06-29-2014, 06:18 AM)aussiefriend Wrote: I knew you would. There is no fucking way. You wanna see my psycho side bitch. I will fuck you up if you fuck with me, Nanny! I am kindhearted and loving, but if you try and screw me you are going to fucking lose.

Some people, like these people, are probably very polite and haven't been round the block and don't know how to deal with her. There are ways. I wouldn't even care if it was legal, if she was creepy or a threat to my family I would go to jail to kick the bitch out. She's gone.

^^^That!^^^

The crazy bitch would be out of my house, one way or another...legal or not.

The mom was on Good Morning America this morning. Did not see it, but it sounds like they are well on their way of getting the fat ass out of there. What killed me was reading in another article how SHE would dictate how she wanted THEM (the parents, I think, maybe kids too) out of the house M-F from 8 AM til 8PM. A couple other demands too.
I agree with the Craigslist thing I would not buy an animal off Craigslist, much less someone to care for my children.

SHE IS LEAVING...WE THINK.


California family's nanny nightmare may be nearing an end.

More than three weeks ago the Bracamonte family fired Diane Stretton, 64, but she refused to leave their home. Police told the family they couldn't force Stretton out of their Upland, California, home without an eviction notice.

A judge even ruled in Stretton's favor, deciding the Bracamonte's did not terminate Stretton's employment in a legal manner. The family said Stretton then threatened to sue them if they tried to force her out.

Now Stretton has offered to move out, according to ABC News, but under her conditions. Stretton called the family's attorney late Saturday night "and said she could be out by July 4," Marcella Bracamonte said on "Good Morning America" Sunday. But Bracamonte said that won't work for her family because they plan to be out of town.

So it's still unclear at this point if, in fact, the nanny will leave of her own free will or whether the family will have to continue through with the eviction process, now underway, before they can call their home their own again.


"This is now by court, by law, this is her domain, " Ralph Bracamonte told ABC News.

The family's saga started in March when Marcella Bracamonte hired Stretton as a nanny, who was expected to help out with household chores. The family ran a background check on the woman before hiring her, too.

Bracamonte fired her on June 6.

"She quit working about a month before I ever fired her. She would just stay in her room," said Marcella Bracamonte.

CNN discovered that Stretton is on the California's Vexatious Litigant List, a list of people who continually bring legal action, regardless of merit, against others with the sole intention of harassment. CNN found dozens of lawsuits filed by Stretton in California over the years

My ex-gf sublet'd her apt at college to a couple who didn't pay rent and the company she signed a lease with said it was her responsibility to evict them, which takes like 3 weeks, and she still had to pay the rent. Even winning a court case couldn't like garnish their wages... it'd just be the court saying they owe her 2 months rent. Like an outstanding debt they could never pay.

I lived next door to these scumbags and I too wanted to oust them by non-legal means... or at least take one of their little kids out for ice cream while they weren't watching (Not to hurt the kid, just scare the parents that anything can happen when you're a douchebag). The gf talked me out of it because anything I did would have given the couple legal stance to sue her. This family is going the right way about this. Keep it legal. Shutting off power or even the AC (by California law iirc) would be considered a property manager not maintaining a residence of another person. Vexatious List or not, she'd have grounds to sue them. What an asshat nanny.

(06-29-2014, 10:20 AM)FAHQTOO Wrote:

(06-29-2014, 06:18 AM)aussiefriend Wrote: I knew you would. There is no fucking way. You wanna see my psycho side bitch. I will fuck you up if you fuck with me, Nanny! I am kindhearted and loving, but if you try and screw me you are going to fucking lose.

Some people, like these people, are probably very polite and haven't been round the block and don't know how to deal with her. There are ways. I wouldn't even care if it was legal, if she was creepy or a threat to my family I would go to jail to kick the bitch out. She's gone.

^^^That!^^^

The crazy bitch would be out of my house, one way or another...legal or not.

We are agreeing on a lot of things lately. It's a bit spooky.

^^The universe is off it's axis.

I'm pretty much horrified that homeowners have to go through red tape in order to get someone out of their home. Established residency my ass. Get the fuck out. Now. Goddamn that must be frustrating.

It would be horribly frustrating.

When the nanny allegedly stopped performing her job duties and broke the terms of the employment agreement (free room and board for helping with the kids and the house), the homeowners had grounds to legally evict her with only 3-days notice and she wouldn't have had grounds to sue them. They didn't cover their bases properly up front and they admit as much, saying that they want others to learn from their experience and that's why they went public (and to shame the nanny). The homeowners seem to be getting the eviction process done correctly at this point. And, maybe their shame campaign was successful?

The nanny seems to be a squatter and a real asshole, but she hasn't shared her side of the story -- I'd like to hear it. She's apparently left the home in light of all the publicity and is back to living in her car -- her friend says she was homeless for 9 years before she got the job. Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...tinue.html

This one seems like a plot in a movie. Hope the nanny just moves along at this point.

(06-30-2014, 10:23 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: The nanny seems to be a squatter and a real asshole, but she hasn't shared her side of the story -- I'd like to hear it. She's apparently left the home in light of all the publicity and is back to living in her car -- her friend says she was homeless for 9 years before she got the job. Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...tinue.html

This one seems like a plot in a movie. Hope the nanny just moves along at this point.

If I were the home owner & found this out after paying for a background check, I'd be suing the company that ran the background check.

I'm sure it's going to be a movie of the week on Lifetime soon.

(06-30-2014, 11:09 AM)cannongal Wrote: If I were the home owner & found this out after paying for a background check, I'd be suing the company that ran the background check.

I run a lot of background checks for business -- the nanny doesn't seem to have a criminal record, so her alleged previous lawsuits against others wouldn't have shown up on the report.

It doesn't seem that the homeowners asked for 3 professional references and 3 personal references whom they could call prior to hiring the nanny -- that's standard for us.

For a live-in, the homeowners should have also asked for her previous landlord's name and called. They would have discovered if others had problems with her as a tenant (and learned that she didn't have a previous address aside from the shelter, which I'm not saying should have necessarily disqualified her from getting the job).

The parents took unnecessary risks here and didn't use a lot of common sense, IMO.

(06-30-2014, 11:09 AM)cannongal Wrote: I'm sure it's going to be a movie of the week on Lifetime soon.

I wouldn't be surprised. I can see Kathy Bates as the rogue nanny.

(06-29-2014, 10:20 AM)FAHQTOO Wrote:

(06-29-2014, 06:18 AM)aussiefriend Wrote: I knew you would. There is no fucking way. You wanna see my psycho side bitch. I will fuck you up if you fuck with me, Nanny! I am kindhearted and loving, but if you try and screw me you are going to fucking lose.

Some people, like these people, are probably very polite and haven't been round the block and don't know how to deal with her. There are ways. I wouldn't even care if it was legal, if she was creepy or a threat to my family I would go to jail to kick the bitch out. She's gone.

^^^That!^^^

The crazy bitch would be out of my house, one way or another...legal or not.

I second the above. I would turn a whole new kind of crazy!

I'm making myself laugh thinking about my reaction to someone telling me no when I told them to get out of my house or them saying, make me, bitch.

I'd be a caricature of a cartoon. Probably Yosemite Sam like I used to accuse Dick of being. Hahaha!