Here’s how to help tornado relief efforts in the Triad

‘Nightmare nanny’ agrees to move out, under certain conditions

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

A 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.


  • Mark Stabler

    This case is a warning to anyone that considers hiring an individual to work for them and especially if they are going to reside in their residence. If a thorough background check had been conducted they would have found that this individual has filed many frivolous, unwarranted lawsuits in the past. In fact, she had filed so many that she is on a State watch list for individuals filing unwarranted law suits.

    • j

      Would that definitely show up since its not a crime? It does say they ran a background check. I wonder what kind of backround check you need to request to get ALL the dirt? This is scary!

      • Chucky

        You are correct about the criminal background check but a check of civil records would have showed a civil litigation history which could be a warning sign as well. I wouldn’t have let her move in if I had seen her history.

    • Grammar Nazi

      ridiculous* rights* unbelievable* Here is how your sentence would be with PROPER GRAMMAR. “Come on, This is ridiculous! How about the homeowner’s rights!!! Unbelievable.” USE PROPER FUCKING GRAMMAR NEXT TIME. IF I CATCH YOU IN THIS AGAIN I WILL FILE A LAW SUIT!

      • Sarah

        Some Grammar Nazi, the T in “this” does not need to be capitalized and you forgot the comma after again in your last sentence. Stop being a jerk!

    • laffinatcha

      In California, those who most normal & intelligent people would consider to be in the “right” are often in the wrong. Get out of California…

      • Chucky

        That is true. Anyone in California seeking to rent property, or anywhere for that matter, should be very familiar with the landlord / tenant laws in their state and should watch the movie, “Pacific Heights”. Some other movies that have some basis in reality and might have scared the couple from doing this are “The Hand That Rocks the Cradle” and “Single White Female”. I liked all three movies but they make you think. :) While “Pacific Heights” is a movie, it’s not completely beyond the realm of possibility that something like that could happen, though perhaps a bit exaggerated to make it more exciting. It’s difficult to write laws that protect the rights of tenants and landlords alike. Many times the person who is most familiar with the law as to who wins the battle.

  • Teresa Phillips

    They better cancel those out of town plans for the week of the 4th – – – and make sure she does move out.

  • mimilll

    STUPID LAWS*****I thought NC was the only state who has *STUPID LAWS*… is sad the *law makers* approve so many *stupid laws*…..In NC there is a law which *allows a NC Citizen to walk into a NC Magistrates Office and take out a warrant, or multiple warrants for that matter, against another person for just about any crime, WITHOUT providing any proof or evidence and without any sort of investigation. CAN YOU BELIEVE ANY STATE WOULD HAVE THIS KIND OF LAW???????????????? PERHAPS other states also have laws like this, I have no idea. One would also *think* that IF a person walked in multiple times over a short period of time, taking out warrants against the same person, that perhaps this would *SEND UP A FLAG* to someone who is in charge and someone would then take some *action* to actually look into this *ISSUE* a bit closer, perhaps have an investigation done, just to make sure that there was a
    *valid reason* for what was taking place. And then I have to wonder…..HOW many warrants would it take for someone to check something like this out….1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, ??????????? 7 warrants in less than 8 weeks????????? I think we all know just how long it takes some things to get into court to be heard these days. Could some one taking out multiple warrants without any evidence of the person doing anything possibly be violation of a person’s rights? It seems like someone should be accountable and responsible for just how far this can or might go.

    • Chucky

      While your comment has very little to do with this particular story, you are correct about anyone being able to walk in to a magistrate’s office and request that charges be issued. As for “providing any proof”, that is what a trial is for. Magistrates only need probable cause which is met when a person testifies to the magistrate that elements of a crime have been met and the magistrate has no reason to doubt the testimony, they must legally issue the warrant or in some cases a summons.

      It’s not a perfect system but the police don’t have time to investigate every time a crime is alleged and there is often times no physical evidence when that takes place. For example, one could threaten a person with bodily harm but there would be no physical evidence. In that case, unless an officer actually heard the threat, they could not file the charges. It seems to me that you might have been charged like you described, or you know someone who has. In either case, there is the potential for the courts to fine the person who takes out frivolous charges. In most of these types of cases though, judges tend not to do that except in extreme situations because they don’t want to discourage those who really do need help from being able to seek it. Also, it must be proven to a judge that the abuse of the system has taken place before a judge can do anything about it, and in most cases, the judge is unaware of it.

      • mimilll

        So you are saying that *probable cause* can be *anyone’s word, in other words, *he said, she said*…..yep….this is a VERY stupid NC LAW. I have also *observed* that most judges DO NOT know the full story about anything…..and they DO NOT EVEN care to listen to it either. ONLY when someone goes through such an ordeal do they understand just how much *corruption and cover up is allowed in our so called Judicial System*. Actually, not many judges do anything about someone *abuses the system*, when they know that this is being done. What a web innocent people can get tied up in without doing anything at all. And in AMERICA…..everyone is *entitled* to certain freedoms. A person can get *WIPED OUT, financially and mentally as well and have their life completely turned *UPSIDE DOWN* in a very short time, thanks to the *STUPID LAWS* that are in place.

  • Angie

    I’m sorry I would of had the owner turned off and stayed with family….I bet she would of left then

Comments are closed.