Post by Admin on Jan 18, 2017 18:39:18 GMT -5
The rumbles and grumbles continue….Chap is reportedly sticking his nose into private owners’ business--again (and still).
There are several owners complaining about Chap “not giving permission” to do certain things on their private property and are threatening to hire a lawyer. You know what that means! Another round of lawsuits over non-existent architectural controls and another expensive lesson for the Board and Management Company!
Are we seriously going down this road again!? It wasn't enough to spend $70 THOUSAND DOLLARS of owner money to learn that there is/was never a legitimate covenant or a rule on an architectural matter? Chap wants to rinse and repeat?
Reportedly, Chap is interfering in private business transactions between owners and their contractors by intimidating the contractor seeking "permission". They tell the contractor that "S-bag covenants are revitalized”. The contractor only wants to please his client and understands this office statement as a "no". The contractor believes they will not be able to do business in S-bag unless they play ball with Chap.
This is corrupt on so many levels it is hard to know where to begin-vendor favoritism, bid-rigging, discrimination, tortious interference, racketeering and …FRAUD. There are possibly violation of HUD laws and constitutional rights which SLohA is attempting to impair.
Fraud?
Yes-fraud. SLohA office is knowingly FALSELY representing to the contractor/owners that covenants are in place to legitimize SLohA’s practice of all the above activities. The fact is that contractors cannot be expected to know or understand the true nature of covenants (which have, in fact been reinstated per DEO decision). Notwithstanding that the decision is being appealed and an appeal will be filed soon, the contractor can only interpret this “covenants” statement as being a “no”. SLohA is inserting itself fraudulently between Owners and their guest/invitee/contractor by the implication that a contractor must do something that is unnecessary based on an authority that does not exist. The contractor believes they must do what they are told to do by the office--not their client--or they will not be allowed to do business anymore in S-bag!
The contractor is caught behind the 8-ball and Saddlebaggers are seemingly forced to do business with only those contractors who will obey the Chap’s illegitimate demands for drawings and permission slips.
If I were being intimidated by SLohA, I would begin to paper Chap and the office. I would contact my lawyer for guidance. Chap needs, at the very least, a documented behavior that is unlawful per FS720 so that a CAM complaint can be lodged against his license—Toneesha’s license and Stmbug Ixx’s license.
The Board/Management Company/office/Chap have ZERO architectural authority in SLohA save for border plants. Read the documents for our campground! Homes and permanent structures are expressly prohibited so it follows that there was never written authority to oversee “architectural” matters. There is not now and never was a contractual agreement between property owners and SLohA to say squat about what owners do with their private property.
Additionally, there are no rules--but even if there were--one cannot have a rule addressing an uncovenanted matter. It would be an internal document conflict and a violation of hierarchical superiority if one attempted to enact a rule for which there was no foundational restriction in the Covenants. Office SOP’s/procedures and resolutions have no legal force. They are simply guidelines and suggestions.
Only Polk County and Owners get to vote on owners' use of their property. Got a Permit? Tell Chap to take a hike.
SLohA cannot redline S-bag from the laws of society by selectively denying rights to its owners--property rights available to NON-HOA owners!
There are several owners complaining about Chap “not giving permission” to do certain things on their private property and are threatening to hire a lawyer. You know what that means! Another round of lawsuits over non-existent architectural controls and another expensive lesson for the Board and Management Company!
Are we seriously going down this road again!? It wasn't enough to spend $70 THOUSAND DOLLARS of owner money to learn that there is/was never a legitimate covenant or a rule on an architectural matter? Chap wants to rinse and repeat?
Reportedly, Chap is interfering in private business transactions between owners and their contractors by intimidating the contractor seeking "permission". They tell the contractor that "S-bag covenants are revitalized”. The contractor only wants to please his client and understands this office statement as a "no". The contractor believes they will not be able to do business in S-bag unless they play ball with Chap.
This is corrupt on so many levels it is hard to know where to begin-vendor favoritism, bid-rigging, discrimination, tortious interference, racketeering and …FRAUD. There are possibly violation of HUD laws and constitutional rights which SLohA is attempting to impair.
Fraud?
Yes-fraud. SLohA office is knowingly FALSELY representing to the contractor/owners that covenants are in place to legitimize SLohA’s practice of all the above activities. The fact is that contractors cannot be expected to know or understand the true nature of covenants (which have, in fact been reinstated per DEO decision). Notwithstanding that the decision is being appealed and an appeal will be filed soon, the contractor can only interpret this “covenants” statement as being a “no”. SLohA is inserting itself fraudulently between Owners and their guest/invitee/contractor by the implication that a contractor must do something that is unnecessary based on an authority that does not exist. The contractor believes they must do what they are told to do by the office--not their client--or they will not be allowed to do business anymore in S-bag!
The contractor is caught behind the 8-ball and Saddlebaggers are seemingly forced to do business with only those contractors who will obey the Chap’s illegitimate demands for drawings and permission slips.
If I were being intimidated by SLohA, I would begin to paper Chap and the office. I would contact my lawyer for guidance. Chap needs, at the very least, a documented behavior that is unlawful per FS720 so that a CAM complaint can be lodged against his license—Toneesha’s license and Stmbug Ixx’s license.
The Board/Management Company/office/Chap have ZERO architectural authority in SLohA save for border plants. Read the documents for our campground! Homes and permanent structures are expressly prohibited so it follows that there was never written authority to oversee “architectural” matters. There is not now and never was a contractual agreement between property owners and SLohA to say squat about what owners do with their private property.
Additionally, there are no rules--but even if there were--one cannot have a rule addressing an uncovenanted matter. It would be an internal document conflict and a violation of hierarchical superiority if one attempted to enact a rule for which there was no foundational restriction in the Covenants. Office SOP’s/procedures and resolutions have no legal force. They are simply guidelines and suggestions.
Only Polk County and Owners get to vote on owners' use of their property. Got a Permit? Tell Chap to take a hike.
SLohA cannot redline S-bag from the laws of society by selectively denying rights to its owners--property rights available to NON-HOA owners!
