|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 9, 2014 10:37:38 GMT -5
Frd O'N eel (Attny), attorney for owners Lra and Gngr, has answered SLohA's Complaint. It is attached without most exhibits, since most exhibits are posted elsewhere on the forum and I need to conserve allowable server space on this free forum. The exhibit list is attached so that you can reference them if you like. The chain of title exhibits can be referenced with a simple title search on the property. Also, some exhibits were deleted because they are more personal relating to the owners' distress at being pursued by MANBOD and add little to the discussion. TomaykoFullAnswer.pdf (71.59 KB)<<<The foundation of the case is the affirmative defense that the Covenants do not exist on the property. The evidence of this is found in the chain of title, in statutory law and in case law and these are referenced in the Answer.  The Exhibit is the permission slip approved and signed by Melonknee Krow on Jan 27, 2014.  Here is an enlargment of the approval and signature portion. This is not so important to the overall case but submitted in support of an affirmative answer to one of SLohA's allegations. Of note, SLohA did not turn this case over to Tower Hill insurance carrier to handle and be paid for by our D & O insurance. That means that SLohA is paying the BIG BUCKS to GaGaKnees, Brown et al to persecute and prosecute for what will eventually be tens of thousands of dollars "for the good of the community". Here's how I see the outcome. The homeowners will never be required to move a stone on their property and SLohA-should it even prevail on a Declaratory Judgement--will spend tons of money for nothing and never recover a dime from this homesteaded property. |
|
|
|
Post by Lra on Aug 9, 2014 19:41:53 GMT -5
Frd O'N eel (Attny), attorney for owners Lra and Gngr, has answered SLohA's Complaint. It is attached without most exhibits, since most exhibits are posted elsewhere on the forum and I need to conserve allowable server space on this free forum. The exhibit list is attached so that you can reference them if you like. The chain of title exhibits can be referenced with a simple title search on the property. Also, some exhibits were deleted because they are more personal relating to the owners' distress at being pursued by MANBOD and add little to the discussion. <<<The foundation of the case is the affirmative defense that the Covenants do not exist on the property. The evidence of this is found in the chain of title, in statutory law and in case law and these are referenced in the Answer. The Exhibit is the permission slip approved and signed by Melonknee Krow on Jan 27, 2014. Here is an enlargment of the approval and signature portion. This is not so important to the overall case but submitted in support of an affirmative answer to one of SLohA's allegations. Of note, SLohA did not turn this case over to Tower Hill insurance carrier to handle and be paid for by our D & O insurance. That means that SLohA is paying the BIG BUCKS to GaGaKnees, Brown et al to persecute and prosecute for what will eventually be tens of thousands of dollars "for the good of the community". Here's how I see the outcome. The homeowners will never be required to move a stone on their property and SLohA-should it even prevail on a Declaratory Judgement--will spend tons of money for nothing and never recover a dime from this homesteaded property. Add to the above that Ms. Kreemcow was at the gate when this unit arrived and allowed it onto the SLohA property on February 18, 2014. Earlier that morning she asked for drawings and those were emailed to her. One of the owners still has those emails on her computer. In addition, it was NOT until a certain resident who we will not name filed a complaint because as it was known to sat: "If I can'have a home as nice as that neither can they". Further, at the March board meeting a letter of correspondence was read from Stmbug Ixx, Inc. Apologizing to the SLohA Board form the mistakes their employee made regarding 66 Silversides. Stmbug Ixx, Inc's only employee on the premises is Ms. Kreemcow. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 9, 2014 20:10:07 GMT -5
If this idiot Board had any sense, they would drop this expensive, unnecessary and ugly lawsuit.
IMO, your damage award is likely to be sizeable on your counterclaim. SLohA is gonna lose big on this one with not only a Covenants Declaratory Judgement but their costs PLUS your costs and damages.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Aug 9, 2014 23:14:47 GMT -5
SLohA Directors are FOOLS & it will be Show-Cased in Court, just how Big of A FOOL we have as Directors in SLR.
Please Note: The Money these Fools are spending is Your $$$$$. Again we are taking another ride, and this one will be costly for sure !!!
PS. Question, how come Tower Hill has not taken the lead with this Silly Law Suit?
I have my idea on why....
|
|
Anonymous Environmentalist
Guest
|
Post by Anonymous Environmentalist on Aug 10, 2014 20:44:50 GMT -5
If this idiot Board had any sense, they would drop this expensive, unnecessary and ugly lawsuit.
The reason why they are bringing this expensive, unnecessary and ugly lawsuit is because they have no sense; no sense of what is right and certainly no common sense!
|
|
|
|
Post by slanty on Aug 10, 2014 22:29:02 GMT -5
Frd O'N eel (Attny), attorney for owners Lra and Gngr, has answered SLohA's Complaint. It is attached without most exhibits, since most exhibits are posted elsewhere on the forum and I need to conserve allowable server space on this free forum. The exhibit list is attached so that you can reference them if you like. The chain of title exhibits can be referenced with a simple title search on the property. Also, some exhibits were deleted because they are more personal relating to the owners' distress at being pursued by MANBOD and add little to the discussion. <<<The foundation of the case is the affirmative defense that the Covenants do not exist on the property. The evidence of this is found in the chain of title, in statutory law and in case law and these are referenced in the Answer. The Exhibit is the permission slip approved and signed by Melonknee Krow on Jan 27, 2014. Here is an enlargment of the approval and signature portion. This is not so important to the overall case but submitted in support of an affirmative answer to one of SLohA's allegations. Of note, SLohA did not turn this case over to Tower Hill insurance carrier to handle and be paid for by our D & O insurance. That means that SLohA is paying the BIG BUCKS to GaGaKnees, Brown et al to persecute and prosecute for what will eventually be tens of thousands of dollars "for the good of the community". Here's how I see the outcome. The homeowners will never be required to move a stone on their property and SLohA-should it even prevail on a Declaratory Judgement--will spend tons of money for nothing and never recover a dime from this homesteaded property. Add to the above that Ms. Kreeow was at the gate when this unit arrived and allowed it onto the SLohA property on February 18, 2014. Earlier that morning she asked for drawings and those were emailed to her. One of the owners still has those emails on her computer. In addition, it was NOT until a certain resident who we will not name filed a complaint because as it was known to sat: "If I can'have a home as nice as that neither can they". Further, at the March board meeting a letter of correspondence was read from Stmbg Ixx, Inc. Apologizing to the SLohA Board form the mistakes their employee made regarding 66 Silversides. Stmbg Ixx, Inc's only employee on the premises is Ms. Kreeow. The owners I am told, have three more very pertinent facts that will come to light on things that happened PRIOR to the their purchase and subsequent delivery of their home. Two involving Board members and one involving the head of the Rules committee. This on top of the fact that SLohA was in violation of Florida State Law 720 at the time their home was build and then delivered. Specifically, NO architectural review committee was in place and that there is still no follow - up that new owners DO receive a copy of the Covenants, Rules and Regulations 3 days prior or at the time of closing. Further, SLohA stands in violation of Florida State Law 360 in that they CANNOT stop people or persons from coming to you privately owned property as the roads within SLohA are not deemed PRIVATE, as guests and visitors are allowed to use the roads and thus blocking the road is a misdemeanor of the first degree. Please refer to the Attorney General's for specific reference. |
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Aug 10, 2014 23:25:10 GMT -5
Our Board Members live in a different World. I have never seen a Group of People, with such a Sm all amount of Common Sense. Well, I did work on Capital Hill in DC.for a number of years, our House and Senate Representatives, 50% beat out our SLR Leaders.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 11, 2014 0:48:24 GMT -5
True, there is no provision in the Declarations for an Architectural Review Committee and, even if there was such a provision, it would not apply to the Owners because the Declaration's CC&R's expired 2 1/2 years ago. Here is just the first part of the Statute requiring the Association to have authority to control architectural specifications granted by the Declaration:
SLohA Covenants address campground "camping facilities". The Covenants do not permit manufactured homes, much less address architectural specs for them. Rules cannot be lawfully enacted without the underlying authority of the Declaration and in no case can Rules conflict with the Covenants. The Declaration only addresses a "camping facility"; therefore, only Rules about camping facilities are valid (provided they have been duly adopted by the Members). Polk County trumped the Declaration's restrictions when it approved manufactured homes in a 1994 PUD modification. Notwithstanding Melonknee's frequent distress calls to Polk Permit Dept, SLohA has no authority to limit or reinterpret Polk County Building Codes.
FS689.26 is the homeowner disclosure law and requires the Seller to provide disclosures to the Buyer when (a), there is a mandatory OR voluntary homeowners' association, or, (b) there are, or will be, recorded restrictive covenants governing the use and occupancy of properties in the community, or, (c), there are assessments. If the notice, in statutory format, is not given to Buyer, Buyer can cancel the contract within 3 days of receipt of the written disclosure or before closing, whichever occurs first.
I am unsure if you are referring to HOA Disclosure Law or Homeowner Association law which requires HOA's to provide owners with a copy of the governing documents within 10 days, upon written request.
I couldn't find a state statute 360 relevant to preventing access; could you give more info on that law?
|
|
Anonymous Environmentalist
Guest
|
Post by Anonymous Environmentalist on Aug 11, 2014 13:25:27 GMT -5
The one thing that I have found that people universally have at their disposal--their brain--is frequently disposed of when it is needed the most, and I'm not just talking about the board and the manager.
|
|
The Exhibit is the permission slip approved and signed by Melonknee Krow on Jan 27, 2014.
Here is an enlargment of the approval and signature portion.
