DISCLAIMER: The statements on this website reflect the personal experience and opinions of the author in connection with pending litigation. Center Street Lending VIII SPE, LLC has not yet been found liable by any court of law. All parties are presumed innocent until proven otherwise.
Case No. 25-CA-004167 · Hillsborough County, Florida
They Picked the
Wrong Person
How Center Street Lending exploited a disabled senior citizen on a fixed income through predatory loan stacking, fraud in the inducement, and economic coercion — and why the law demands they pay treble.
SCROLL TO REVIEW THE EVIDENCE
The Borrower
Shannon Johnson is a permanently disabled senior citizen living on a fixed income of $2,250 per month. At age 49, she was in a serious car accident that left her with seven herniated discs — from her neck down through her lower lumbar. Her career, which required her to physically carry Verizon Yellow Pages directories to sell advertising, ended that day.
Due to insurance limitations, her treatments were cut short and she never made a full recovery. A judge, recognizing the severity of her condition, made a bench decision to place her on permanent disability with retroactive pay. She has been on disability ever since.
Then, at age 63 — while Center Street Lending was already pursuing foreclosure — Ms. Johnson experienced multiple seizures for the first time in her life while driving on City Avenue. Knowing she needed to get off the road, she checked her right lane, saw it was clear, put on her blinker, pressed the gas — and lost consciousness behind the wheel. By what she can only describe as divine intervention, her car steered into a miraculously open driveway on City Ave — a road where open driveways simply don't exist — and came to rest against a tree. The car was totaled. The airbags didn't even deploy. Not a scratch on her face. No one else was hurt.
She was delivered to Lankenau Hospital, where she was immediately intubated due to multiple ongoing seizures — still unconscious. She was then airlifted to Jefferson Hospital, a neurology specialty center, and admitted to the ICU. She didn't wake up until two days later, when medical staff were removing EEG leads from her head. She spent five days in the ICU, followed by one day in a step-down unit, and was released on the sixth day.
This hospitalization caused her to miss critical deadlines in the foreclosure case. Center Street Lending is pursuing foreclosure against a woman who was literally in a coma.
THE NUMBERS THAT MATTER
MONTHLY DISABILITY INCOME
$2,250
at time of loans
TOTAL LOANS STACKED
$1,000,000+
across four properties
No responsible lender would approve even one loan for a borrower with $2,250/month in disability income. Center Street Lending approved four. This is textbook asset-based lending — a recognized predatory practice where the lender relies on seizing the collateral rather than the borrower's ability to repay.
She formed House Beautiful Keeping LLC to invest in real estate — specifically to protect her personal assets through the limited liability protections guaranteed by Florida Statute §605.0304. Under Florida law, an LLC member is not personally liable for the debts of the company. That is the entire purpose of the LLC structure.
Center Street Lending knew this. They promised to honor it. Then they systematically destroyed it.
They told her she would not have to sign personally guaranteeing any of the loans. At the last minute, they forced her to personally guarantee three of the four.
THE INHERITANCE — GONE
Ms. Johnson inherited $1.5 million — $1 million from her mother and $500,000 from her father — two parents who worked their entire lives to earn and preserve that money. It was meant to sustain her through retirement on $2,250 a month.
A portion went to responsible uses: $250,000 to pay off her primary residence mortgage, and modest investments in entrepreneurial opportunities. Much of the remainder was invested and earning 12% interest income — income that supplemented her $2,250 disability check and provided a measure of financial security. She withdrew those funds to make the down payments Center Street Lending demanded, sacrificing both the principal and the income stream it was generating — to fund 6-month bridge loans at 10.5% interest that were structurally designed to fail. The bulk was consumed by down payments, interest, fees, and carrying costs on the four Center Street Lending properties — loans she was told she would never have to personally guarantee.
The cascading financial damage has been so severe that Ms. Johnson is now forced to take out a reverse mortgage on her own primary residence — the home she had paid off free and clear — just to cover the debts created by Center Street Lending's predatory practices. They didn't just take her inheritance. They are taking her home.
The Scheme
Step 1: The Promise
Center Street Lending verbally promised that Ms. Johnson would not be personally liable for any of the loans. The loans were to the LLC. Her personal assets would be protected. This was the inducement — the reason she agreed to proceed.
Step 2: The Trap
At the last minute — after she was committed, after the deals were in motion — they forced personal guarantees on 3 of 4 loans. Sign or lose everything. Classic economic duress. A disabled senior on a fixed income, cornered into signing away her inheritance.
Step 3: The Squeeze
On the $525,000 AirBnB jumbo loan, the agreed down payment was $92,509.67. After she was committed, they demanded an additional $100,000 — put it up or lose the opportunity altogether. The down payment more than doubled to $192,509.67.
Step 4: The Stack
Four loans. Stacked. Without bringing the totality of the debt to the fore. Each one compounding the risk. Each one designed to extract maximum fees and interest from someone who could never repay from a fixed income. This is textbook predatory lending.
Step 5: The Phantom Inspections
Ms. Johnson was charged about $450 per house for an inspection that never happened. What Ms. Johnson found out was that only a real estate agent was asked to do a walkthrough — not a licensed inspector, just a free walkthrough — a service that cost Center Street Lending nothing.
For the Tampa property (5005 Puritan Rd), Center Street Lending claimed they hired an actual appraiser. Yet no appraisal report was ever provided to Ms. Johnson — no photographs, no comparable sales analysis, no written findings. Under federal lending regulations, borrowers are entitled to receive a copy of the appraisal. If the appraisal existed, where is the report? If it doesn't exist, she was charged for a service never performed.
How fraudulent were these "inspections"? Not a single property had the correct 200-amp electrical service required to bring them to sellable condition. Every property needed costly electrical upgrades before they could be sold. The 1623 Canterbury Dr N property was infested with termites — a condition any legitimate inspector would have flagged immediately. A real inspection would have caught these defects. They would have been reasons not to buy. But there was no real inspection. Just a walkthrough and an approximately $450 charge.
Charged for services never rendered. Material defects missed. Pure profit extraction.
The Properties
Four loans stacked on a disabled senior citizen living on a fixed income.
1623 Canterbury Dr N
St. Petersburg, FL 33710
Purchase Price
TERMITE INFESTED — Not caught by "inspection"
206 SE 15th Ave
Cape Coral, FL 33990
Purchase Price
1425 SE 25th Ln
Cape Coral, FL 33904
Purchase Price
5005 Puritan Rd
Tampa, FL 33617
Purchase Price · 10.5% Rate · 6-Month Bridge Loan
Down payment coerced from $92,509.67 → $192,509.67
TOTAL EXPOSURE STACKED ON A FIXED-INCOME SENIOR
The Violations
Fraud in the Inducement
Center Street Lending made false statements of material fact — verbally promising no personal liability — with the intent to induce Ms. Johnson to enter the transactions. She justifiably relied on these representations. Under Florida law, this constitutes fraud in the inducement, an independent tort that survives even written contracts.
Florida common law; Hillcrest Pac. Corp. v. Yamamura, 727 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)
Economic Duress
"Put up an additional $100,000 or lose the opportunity altogether." After Ms. Johnson was already committed to the $525,000 purchase, Center Street Lending coerced her into more than doubling her down payment. She had no reasonable alternative. This renders the agreement voidable under Florida law.
Riedel v. NCNB Nat'l Bank of Fla., Inc., 591 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
Exploitation of an Elderly/Disabled Person
Florida Statute §825.103 makes it a felony to knowingly obtain or use the funds of an elderly or disabled adult through a business relationship with intent to deprive them. Center Street Lending, as the lender, established that relationship — then systematically stripped Ms. Johnson of her inheritance.
Fla. Stat. §825.103 — Exploitation of an elderly person or disabled adult
Predatory Loan Stacking
Four separate loans issued without bringing the totality of debt to the fore. Each additional loan increased the likelihood of default. This is a recognized hallmark of predatory lending — demonstrating complete disregard for the borrower's ability to repay and clear intent to strip equity.
Center for Responsible Lending — "8 Signs of Predatory Mortgage Lending"
The Bridge Loan Trap
All four loans were 6-month bridge loans at 10.5% interest. A 6-month bridge loan for an AirBnB property is structurally designed to fail — no AirBnB can be furnished, listed, build reviews, and generate enough income to pay off a $525,000 loan in six months. When Ms. Johnson could not pay off the loan at maturity, the rate jumped to 18% default interest — accruing $175.39 per day. By the time of the payoff notice, $87,352.21 in interest had accumulated on top of the $350,784.57 principal. The total payoff demanded: $454,164.07.
This is the hallmark of a loan designed to fail: issue a short-term bridge loan for a purpose that cannot possibly be accomplished in the loan term, then collect the property through foreclosure when the borrower inevitably defaults.
Center Street Lending Payoff Notice, Account #68858, dated 05/11/2026
The Audacity
JANUARY 2026 — PHONE CALL FROM CENTER STREET LENDING
Center Street Lending had the audacity to call Ms. Johnson in January 2026 and offer her $10,000 in a deed-in-lieu arrangement for the 5005 Puritan Road property — the same property where she put down $192,509.67.
They thought $10,000 was a deal. Walk away from a $192,000 loss. Accept pennies on the dollar for your stolen inheritance.
Meanwhile, they were willing to waive their own $87,352.21 in accrued interest to get the property. Why? Because the property is now pending closure at $495,000. They knew exactly what it was worth. They wanted to steal it.
OFFERED TO MS. JOHNSON
$10,000
MS. JOHNSON'S DOWN PAYMENT
$192,510
PENDING SALE PRICE
$495,000
SAME INSULT, DIFFERENT PROPERTY
And it wasn't just the Puritan Road property. Center Street Lending also offered the same insulting $10,000 deed-in-lieu on the 1425 SE 25th Lane, Cape Coral property. The same playbook. The same contempt.
The math speaks for itself: Center Street Lending was willing to walk away from $87,352.21 in interest to acquire a property now selling for $495,000. If they can waive $87,352.21 to enrich themselves, they can certainly pay it back as part of the treble damages they owe.
ABANDONED BY COUNSEL
Since May 2025, Ms. Johnson had been paying an attorney $200 per month per property — $400 per month total — to represent her in the foreclosure proceedings. On a disability income of $2,400 per month, that was nearly 17% of her entire income going to legal fees.
She paid it anyway. Because she is serious about fighting back.
But when the case grew complex — when she began pursuing treble damages and exposing the full scope of Center Street Lending's predatory behavior — her attorney dropped her. She is now representing herself pro se, seeking contingency-fee counsel who recognizes the value of this case.
FTC VIOLATION — SOLICITATION DURING FORECLOSURE
It gets worse. After sending pre-foreclosure documents on two properties, Center Street Lending called Ms. Johnson to solicit her for another loan. They wanted her to send them another deal and borrow even more money — while simultaneously trying to take her properties.
The left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing. Ms. Johnson told them: "Remove me from your list. Never call me again to solicit me for another loan."
They called again anyway. Ms. Johnson informed them they had violated the FTC's Do Not Call regulations. Only then did they stop.
Telemarketing Sales Rule, 16 C.F.R. §310.4(b)(1)(iii) — Calling a person who has previously stated they do not wish to receive calls
The Reckoning
Florida Statute §772.11 provides a civil remedy for exploitation of the elderly or disabled. The law is clear: threefold the actual damages sustained.
COERCED DOWN PAYMENT
ACCRUED INTEREST (18% DEFAULT)
TOTAL ACTUAL DAMAGES
TREBLE DAMAGES DEMANDED UNDER FLA. STAT. §772.11
Plus restitution of all interest, fees, and charges on all four stacked loans, plus attorney's fees and costs.
FOUR LOANS STACKED IN 100 DAYS — FEBRUARY TO MAY 2023
FEB 2023
Loan #1
Canterbury
MAR 2023
Loan #2
SE 15th Ave
APR 2023
Loan #3
SE 25th Ln
MAY 2023
Loan #4
Tampa (JUMBO)
Four 6-month bridge loans to a borrower earning $2,250/month — all originated within 100 days.
What Ms. Johnson Is Not Pursuing
Ms. Johnson is only seeking treble damages on the Tampa property. She has already absorbed the losses on the other three properties. Consider what she could demand — and what she is choosing not to.
Ms. Johnson has been defrauded on four properties but is only demanding restitution on one. This is not a shakedown. This is a measured, reasonable demand for what the law provides — from a woman who has already swallowed three losses in silence.
Applicable Statutes
"A member or manager is not personally liable, directly or indirectly, by way of contribution or otherwise, for a debt, obligation, or other liability of the company solely by reason of being or acting as a member or manager."
— Florida Statute §605.0304(1)
"Any person who proves by clear and convincing evidence that he or she has been injured in any fashion by reason of any violation of s. 812.012-812.037 or s. 825.103(1) has a cause of action for threefold the actual damages sustained and, in any such action, is entitled to minimum damages in the amount of $200, and reasonable attorney's fees and court costs."
— Florida Statute §772.11(1)
"'Exploitation of an elderly person or disabled adult' means... knowingly obtaining or using, or endeavoring to obtain or to use, an elderly person's or disabled adult's funds, assets, or property with the intent to temporarily or permanently deprive the elderly person or disabled adult of the use, benefit, or possession of the funds, assets, or property..."
— Florida Statute §825.103(1)(a)
Not Just Her
Ms. Johnson is not the only victim. Center Street Lending has a documented pattern of predatory behavior, regulatory violations, and lawsuits from borrowers across the country.
CALIFORNIA DFPI — LICENSE REVOKED
Center Street Lending V SPE, LLC — Order Summarily Revoking
On April 19, 2022, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) issued an Order Summarily Revoking Center Street Lending V SPE, LLC's license for non-filing of required annual reports. They were ordered to "discontinue making or brokering of any loan."
CFL License # 60DBO-93787 — dfpi.ca.gov
FEDERAL LAWSUIT — OCTOBER 2025
Brownstone Capital Group v. Center Street Lending Corporation
Another borrower filed a federal foreclosure lawsuit against Center Street Lending VIII SPE, LLC and Center Street Lending Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The plaintiff sought a temporary restraining order to prevent sale of property.
Case No. 2:2025cv10092 — C.D. Cal.
BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU
NOT BBB Accredited — C+ Rating
Center Street Lending is not BBB accredited and holds a C+ rating due to failure to respond to complaints. Borrower reviews describe "complete failure of a company" and loans not being funded. Management: Stephen Couig (President), Dan Baruch (CEO).
BBB Pacific SW — bbb.org
EMPLOYEE REVIEWS
"Extremely Toxic" — Former Employees
Former employees on Glassdoor describe Center Street Lending as "extremely toxic" with warnings to "be very, very careful before taking a job here." One employee noted they were "reselling loans to Credit Suisse so it might as well be a conventional loan lender" — yet charging hard money rates.
Glassdoor — glassdoor.com
ANOTHER FORECLOSURE — 2026
Center Street Lending VIII SPE LLC v. Giferro Investments Inc.
Yet another foreclosure action by Center Street Lending VIII SPE, LLC — the same entity suing Ms. Johnson — against a small investor for default on a $250,613 loan. The pattern repeats: target small investors, stack loans, foreclose.
Case No. 26-000519-CA — trellis.law
Contingency Fee Opportunity
For Attorneys
This case presents a strong opportunity for a consumer protection or elder law attorney seeking a contingency-fee engagement with statutory fee recovery. Ms. Johnson was previously paying $400/month out of $2,400 disability income for legal representation — nearly 17% of her income — until her attorney withdrew when the case grew complex. She needs counsel who will work on contingency and be paid from the recovery, not from her disability check.
Statutory Claims
- •Exploitation of elderly/disabled (Fla. Stat. §825.103)
- •Civil remedy for treble damages (Fla. Stat. §772.11)
- •FDUTPA enhanced penalties for seniors (§501.2077)
- •Fraud in the inducement (common law)
- •Economic duress / unconscionability
- •FTC Telemarketing Sales Rule violation
Case Strengths
- •Treble damages: $839,585.64 minimum
- •Attorney’s fees recoverable under §772.11
- •Defendant is a well-capitalized corporate lender
- •Pattern of similar conduct (multiple lawsuits, DFPI action)
- •Clear protected class: disabled senior on fixed income
- •6-month bridge loans structurally designed to fail (10.5% → 18% default)
Case Summary
Center Street Lending Corporation induced a disabled senior citizen to enter four stacked hard-money loans through her LLC by verbally promising no personal liability. They then forced personal guarantees on three of four loans at closing under economic duress, coerced an additional $100,000 down payment on a jumbo loan (doubling the agreed amount), issued 6-month bridge loans at 10.5% that were structurally impossible to repay in the loan term (triggering 18% default interest), and are now foreclosing — while the subject property is pending sale at $495,000.
The lender offered $10,000 deed-in-lieu for a property with $192,509.67 in borrower equity, waiving their own $87,352.21 in accrued interest to acquire it. They also solicited the borrower for additional loans while simultaneously foreclosing, then called again after being told to stop.
The case is currently pending as a counterclaim opportunity in Case No. 25-CA-004167, 13th Judicial Circuit, Hillsborough County, Florida. Next court date: June 22, 2026. 30-day statutory demand letter sent May 12, 2026.
Interested in This Case?
Contact Ms. Johnson directly to discuss representation:
[email protected]Subject line: "Case No. 25-CA-004167 — Attorney Inquiry"