{"id":262959,"date":"2026-04-11T19:23:08","date_gmt":"2026-04-11T19:23:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/262959\/"},"modified":"2026-04-11T19:23:08","modified_gmt":"2026-04-11T19:23:08","slug":"the-california-agency-failing-to-stop-abuse-by-conservators","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/262959\/","title":{"rendered":"The California agency failing to stop abuse by conservators"},"content":{"rendered":"

This story<\/a> was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up<\/a> for their newsletters.<\/p>\n

When Bruce Knopf needed someone to oversee his brother Vinyasi\u2019s special needs trust in 2012, he said, he turned to Donna Bogdanovich because she was licensed by California.\u00a0<\/p>\n

As a professional fiduciary, Bogdanovich was paid to manage Vinyasi\u2019s money.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But over time, she stopped paying the bills, and the consequences piled up. His car broke down. He faced eviction. \u201cThere were times I went without food,\u201d said Vinyasi, who legally goes by one name.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

So he turned to the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau, the place Californians are supposed to rely on in situations like these. Vinyasi filed a complaint in June 2019<\/a>, alleging that Bogdanovich had not paid his rent and was \u201chabitually\u201d late paying his other bills.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The bureau didn\u2019t take action against her at the time, and Vinyasi said he eventually became homeless.\u00a0<\/p>\n

It turns out that Vinyasi wasn\u2019t alone. The bureau started getting complaints<\/a> about Bogdanovich just months after the agency awarded her a license, giving her the authority<\/a> to control the finances and lives of vulnerable people deemed unable to take care of themselves.<\/p>\n

Over the years<\/a>, the bureau fined her multiple times for not providing records<\/a> during an investigation and operating with an expired license<\/a>. In fact, about a year before Vinyasi\u2019s complaint, someone warned the bureau<\/a> that Bogdanovich was transferring money between client accounts, but the complaint didn\u2019t go far. The bureau closed the complaint<\/a> because it didn\u2019t have contact information for the alleged victim. Bogdanovich maintained power over Vinyasi\u2019s life.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Years later, even after police stepped in and arrested her on charges of stealing<\/a> $2.5 million of her clients\u2019 funds, Bogdanovich maintained total control over Vinyasi\u2019s finances for nearly 10 more months before she resigned<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Two decades ago, the California Legislature designed the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau after a Los Angeles Times investigation<\/a> showed judges were not preventing abuse and insider dealing. The state gave the bureau the responsibility to license fiduciaries, enforce the law<\/a> and uphold ethical standards.<\/p>\n

An ongoing investigation<\/a> by CalMatters, based on a review of probate court records, agency documents and interviews with scores of affected families, found that the agency has failed to fulfill its vital promise to protect<\/a> Californians, even as the state\u2019s population ages<\/a>.<\/p>\n

It hasn\u2019t stopped conflicts prohibited by its own code of conduct or outrageous behavior by California fiduciaries, frustrating desperate families trying to protect their loved ones and hold on to their family wealth.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The information it maintains on fiduciaries is often kept secret or is sometimes inaccurate, giving the people who rely on the industry little information about who they should \u2014 and shouldn\u2019t \u2014 trust. The agency operates largely on an honor system, leaving it to fiduciaries to report publicly whether they\u2019ve been removed from a case for misconduct.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The bureau itself has puttered along with no leader and a few employees. Gov. Gavin Newsom hasn\u2019t filled its open chief position for a year and a half. In fact, it has just one employee at the moment, because two of its other three positions are also vacant, an agency spokesperson told CalMatters. The bureau oversees nearly 900 licensed fiduciaries; it said it also gets support from its parent agency, the Department of Consumer Affairs.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In 2025, the agency received 174 complaints<\/a>. The bureau can fine and cite fiduciaries for violations such as late annual statements and inaccurate information relatively quickly. In 2025, the bureau took 58 days<\/a>, on average, to issue a citation.\u00a0<\/p>\n

However, seriously punishing a fiduciary usually takes longer. That same year, the bureau took, on average, more than two years<\/a> from the time of a complaint to suspend, revoke or surrender a license.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

The bureau has revoked the licenses of five fiduciaries since 2022, according to the agency\u2019s annual reports<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cWhy put up a false front that they\u2019re there to serve a purpose? They don\u2019t serve any purpose,\u201d Vinyasi said. \u201cEven if you couldn\u2019t fix the problems, at least erase the lie that they\u2019re there to do something, because they don\u2019t do anything.\u201d<\/p>\n

CalMatters tried to speak with someone at the agency for over a year for this series, but the Department of Consumer Affairs would not make anyone available for an interview, citing its open director job.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Newsom\u2019s spokesperson, Izzy Gardon, said in an email that the governor is \u201cactively recruiting to fill the position.\u201d<\/p>\n

Bogdanovich\u2019s scheme didn\u2019t unravel until a victim went to the Los Angeles Police Department in 2022<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

All told, she pleaded no contest<\/a> to taking more than $160,000 from Vinyasi and over $1 million from her other clients, court records show, continuing to funnel their money to her accounts even after the bureau placed her on probation.\u00a0<\/p>\n

At the bureau\u2019s request, the court suspended Bogdanovich\u2019s license<\/a> weeks after she was arrested, while the agency waited for a hearing to revoke her license<\/a>. The suspension didn\u2019t remove her<\/a> from any of her appointments.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The bureau\u2019s records indicated that Bogdanovich was managing 24 open cases and $2.8 million in assets while she sat in jail, a bureau investigator told the court in a March 2024 letter<\/a>. The state eventually revoked Bogdanovich\u2019s license<\/a> four months after her arrest.<\/p>\n

In response to questions, agency spokesperson Monica Vargas said in an email that \u201cthe Bureau must do its due diligence to gather facts and collect evidence to take action against a license.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

Bogdanovich eventually was sentenced to four years in jail and four under supervision.\u00a0She did not respond to CalMatters\u2019 request for an interview.<\/p>\n

For years, as the bureau investigated Bogdanovich, she avoided serious punishment simply by not cooperating, according to the bureau<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

At the time, the agency didn\u2019t have the authority to revoke a license for refusing to respond to an investigation.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The Legislature closed that loophole<\/a> in 2023. At the same time, the bureau got the Legislature to further restrict the information it can share with the public.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The bureau cannot share publicly:<\/p>\n

Whether the fiduciary has a business or family relationship with companies hired with their clients\u2019 money and any details about that connection.<\/p>\n

Whether a court has found that a fiduciary breached their duties.<\/p>\n

Case numbers or details when a fiduciary was removed or resigned from a case or agreed to a settlement after a dispute.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Instead of receiving details that would show a fiduciary\u2019s past issues, the public can only see a document that\u2019s essentially a wall of black ink, with only yes-or-no boxes that may or may not be accurately checked.<\/p>\n

\"AThe Professional Fiduciaries Bureau redacts most of the information on its members\u2019 annual statements, significantly limiting what it shares with the public. Illustration by Miguel Gutierrez Jr., CalMatters<\/p>\n

A 2021 law<\/a> is supposed to require courts to notify the bureau if judges punish fiduciaries for abusing their license, but it only goes into effect if the lawmakers fund it. They haven\u2019t, according to a spokesperson for the Judicial Council, the policymaking body of California courts.<\/p>\n

Carole Herman, an advocate who helped start the bureau, said the Legislature should take a look at it. \u201cThey\u2019re insufficiently staffed and funded,\u201d Herman said. \u201cNobody is really monitoring like they should.\u201d<\/p>\n

She thought the bureau would provide strong oversight. \u201cBut that\u2019s not how it turned out,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

\u2018I plead the Fifth\u2019<\/p>\n

If you read Leyla Zabih\u2019s annual statements, you\u2019d have no idea she resigned<\/a> as a conservator after a family objected to her spending and then didn\u2019t follow a court-approved settlement agreement<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Nancy Encarnacion\u2019s family and Adult Protective Services had worked together to move the 83-year-old to assisted living in 2019 because she and her husband couldn\u2019t afford 24-hour home care<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Later that year, Zabih petitioned the court<\/a> to be Encarnacion\u2019s conservator, saying that Contra Costa County Adult Protective Services had notified her that Encarnacion wasn\u2019t capable of taking care of herself.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

Zabih told the court that Encarnacion was at risk<\/a> of being kicked out of the facility if she didn\u2019t have a conservator to manage her care and finances. Probate law requires that family members be notified<\/a> when someone files for a temporary conservatorship, but Zabih requested an exemption, citing medical and financial emergencies<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Encarnacion herself wasn\u2019t outright against the conservatorship, but she didn\u2019t want Zabih in charge after finding her to be \u201crude and bossy,\u201d Encarnacion\u2019s attorney told the court<\/a>.<\/p>\n

A judge approved Zabih\u2019s petitions. Encarnacion\u2019s relatives, on the East Coast, said they were taken aback by how quickly they lost control of Encarnacion\u2019s life.\u00a0<\/p>\n

After the family complained about Zabih hiring an unlicensed contractor to remodel Encarnacion\u2019s home, court records show<\/a> Zabih denied it. She portrayed the family as meddling, saying \u201cthe steady stream of negative and critical input we receive from Nancy\u2019s extended family has become extremely counterproductive.\u201d<\/p>\n

A few months later she conceded the family was correct about the unlicensed contractor, court records show<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The family grew concerned after learning<\/a> that Zabih sold Encarnacion\u2019s Chevron stock at a significant loss, paid for 24-hour care while Encarnacion lived in a care home that provided nursing services, and fell behind on paying the rent to the facility, according to an objection that family members filed<\/a> with the court.<\/p>\n

Barreling towards an expensive legal fight, the two sides agreed to a settlement<\/a>: Zabih would file a final accounting of Encarnacion\u2019s money and resign. The elderly woman\u2019s niece would take over and not report Zabih to the bureau.<\/p>\n

Even though the bureau\u2019s rules prohibit licensed fiduciaries from entering into agreements that limit someone\u2019s ability to file a complaint<\/a>, Judge Susanne M. Fenstermacher approved the settlement<\/a> in November 2020. Zabih resigned, and Encarnacion died about a month later<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In 2022, court records show, Zabih was not adhering to the agreement. She had not filed a final ledger of Encarnacion\u2019s money, forcing the case back to court.<\/p>\n

The court found that Zabih was \u201cin breach\u201d of the settlement agreement and ordered her to explain why the court shouldn\u2019t report her to the bureau for \u201cfailure to account and failure to comply with a Court-approved settlement agreement,\u201d a temporary judge wrote in November 2022<\/a>.<\/p>\n

She filed the final accounting<\/a> a month later.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Zabih requested<\/a> $9,000 in addition to $13,000 she\u2019d already received in compensation.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The family objected and alleged<\/a> that Zabih employed one of the registered nurses it used for Encarnacion\u2019s care and didn\u2019t disclose the relationship. The court record does not reflect that Zabih responded to the objection, and she did not respond to CalMatters\u2019 question about it.<\/p>\n

Fenstermacher did not approve<\/a> Zabih\u2019s accounting of Encarnacion\u2019s money and denied Zabih\u2019s request for additional pay, saying in an order<\/a> that \u201cthe compensation requested did not benefit the conservatee or her estate.\u201d<\/p>\n

The family also asked Fenstermacher to report Zabih to the bureau for \u201cfailure to properly account, provide receipts and invoices, disclose affiliate relationships with caregivers\/agents she hired, and comply with the terms of a Court-approved settlement agreement,\u201d according to the order. But Fenstermacher scribbled out that entire paragraph<\/a> in the final order.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cI feel like Leyla Zabih should not be a professional fiduciary,\u201d said the family\u2019s attorney, Cara Lankford, in an interview.<\/p>\n

As all of this unfolded, Zabih\u2019s annual statements to the bureau made no mention of it.\u00a0<\/p>\n

When asked on her 2021 annual statement if she\u2019d resigned<\/a> or settled<\/a> in a case where a complaint had been filed, she checked \u201cno\u201d in response to both questions.<\/p>\n

When CalMatters asked Zabih why she didn\u2019t tell the bureau about her resignation, she said, \u201cI plead the Fifth.\u201d<\/p>\n

She stood by the care she gave Encarnacion. \u201cI miss Nancy,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

The agency said it relies on its fiduciaries to be transparent.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cLicensees attest to the information they\u2019ve submitted is truthful and accurate,\u201d Vargas said. \u201cIf the Bureau becomes aware of information provided that was not accurate, it will open an investigation.\u201d<\/p>\n

Encarnacion\u2019s family eventually filed two complaints against Zabih, for hiring an unlicensed contractor and not following the court-ordered agreement.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The bureau cited her in 2023<\/a> and 2024<\/a> for not filing timely annual statements and operating with an expired license. The citations do not mention her failure to report the settlement or her resignation.<\/p>\n

In an interview, Zabih blamed her late annual statement on covid-19, saying she was busy \u201cout holding your parents\u2019 and grandparents\u2019 hands during the pandemic.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u2018I\u2019m not practicing, I\u2019m just finishing\u2019<\/p>\n

While late annual statements are often deemed a minor citation, cases reviewed by CalMatters show that fiduciaries who face disciplinary action for more serious offenses often have a previous record of filing late, inaccurate and incomplete annual statements.<\/p>\n

Take Iris Hecker, for instance. She had submitted late annual statements to the bureau for nearly a decade<\/a>.<\/p>\n

But the bureau didn\u2019t start investigating until someone complained about how she handled a case in 2022.\u00a0<\/p>\n

That year, Hecker approached Betty Stagnaro while she was in a nursing home receiving rehabilitation for back pain, according to an account<\/a> Hecker gave to the bureau. Stagnaro, who was 93, had dementia.<\/p>\n

Hecker told the state<\/a> that the nursing home administrator and a private care manager found the friend whom Stagnaro had designated to make her medical decisions \u201cvery difficult to work with\u201d and asked Hecker to take over. She said the home wasn\u2019t being paid for Stagnaro\u2019s stay.<\/p>\n

Hecker had Stagnaro sign documents to make the switch from the friend.<\/p>\n

Unlike conservatorships, which are public and are overseen by a judge, agreements like these are typically private and don\u2019t automatically have court oversight<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

However, there were multiple issues with the documents that Stagnaro signed, according to the bureau\u2019s investigation<\/a>. A patient advocate or ombudsman was not present to witness the signature at the nursing home, as they are supposed to be under state law.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Hecker also didn\u2019t have anyone assess whether Stagnaro was fit enough to sign documents, investigators found<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But the signature put Hecker in charge of Stagnaro\u2019s finances and health care.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Within three months, Hecker sold the elderly woman\u2019s condo<\/a> and got rid of her personal belongings. She also isolated Stagnaro<\/a> from her friends while hiring people<\/a> to provide her with companionship. She later admitted to lying<\/a> to a bank to create a trust account for Stagnaro, even though the woman didn\u2019t have a trust, according to the bureau\u2019s investigation<\/a>.<\/p>\n

In addition, Hecker paid herself $65,000 in advance fees<\/a> and admitted to the bureau that the amounts she withdrew from Stagnaro\u2019s accounts as advance payments were \u201cexcessive,\u201d according to the bureau\u2019s investigation. She also submitted inaccurate invoices<\/a>, charged Stagnaro for duplicate services<\/a>, and billed Stagnaro for her time dealing with an investigation the San Mateo Police Department and the county ombudsman were conducting over her handling of Stagnaro\u2019s case, according to the bureau<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Hecker provided \u201cno credible support for the fees she collected against the advance payments,\u201d the bureau found<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Around the same time, the bureau audited Hecker\u2019s license and discovered that, in addition to her late statements, she had previously worked with an expired license for over a year, according to bureau records<\/a>. The bureau fined her $5,000.<\/p>\n

Hecker told CalMatters that \u201cthere was no impropriety.\u201d She said she believes the bureau is important because \u201cthere\u2019s a lot of abuse.\u201d Hecker said that she was \u201ctoo tired to fight\u201d the bureau\u2019s accusations, and she agreed to surrender her license<\/a> at the end of 2024.<\/p>\n

But that didn\u2019t stop her from working as an unlicensed fiduciary, which someone can do under very limited circumstances, according to state law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Even though the settlement required her to resign from her positions and confirm her resignation with the bureau, it\u2019s unclear whether she ever did. Those records are not public, and the bureau would not answer questions about Hecker.<\/p>\n

Last month Hecker signed a document selling<\/a> her now-deceased client\u2019s San Francisco home for $2.25 million.<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n

When asked about it, Hecker said, \u201cI\u2019m not practicing, I\u2019m just finishing.\u201d<\/p>\n

CalMatters<\/a> is a nonpartisan and nonprofit news organization bringing Californians stories that probe, explain and explore solutions to quality of life issues while holding our leaders accountable.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters. When Bruce Knopf needed someone to…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":262960,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[7,9,8,115440,115441,50573,115442,115443],"class_list":{"0":"post-262959","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-california","8":"tag-california","9":"tag-california-headlines","10":"tag-california-news","11":"tag-conservatorship-abuses","12":"tag-conservatorships","13":"tag-elder-abuse","14":"tag-elder-care","15":"tag-financial-abuse"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/262959","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=262959"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/262959\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/262960"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=262959"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=262959"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=262959"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}