gusto
Addict
"A Friend of Bill W."
Posts: 117
|
Post by gusto on May 27, 2014 23:24:18 GMT -5
|
|
Anonymous Environmentalist
Guest
|
Post by Anonymous Environmentalist on May 28, 2014 7:29:50 GMT -5
I do hope that what I've read also bothers others, I know it really sends alarms off in my head, since I am a retired bookkeeper/accountant that did A/P; A/R; P/R; Trust Accounting and Auditing--but NEVER ALL AT THE SAME TIME FOR THE SAME COMPANY, and that is the FACT that: our management company is: 1) taking in our money; 2) paying our bills AND 3) auditing our books--which reeks of impropriety, not to mention another FACT: THIS IS TOTALLY AGAINST G.A.A.P.--Generally Accepted Accounting principles!
This clearly shows that one entity is responsible for all phases of our accounting needs and that is NOT PROPER! The separation of duties with taking care of the accounting needs of any company is always done by different people and/or separate entities.
I have NEVER in my entire 30 years of working with companies' books seen a single entity do all phases of accounting! And NO, I do not believe that as with the paving that they do books differently in the South!
This is a really good way to fleece money from our accounts without our knowledge!
And, more importantly: this situation screams for a forensic audit!
|
|
|
|
Post by DB on May 28, 2014 11:03:28 GMT -5
I do hope that what I've read also bothers others, I know it really sends alarms off in my head, since I am a retired bookkeeper/accountant that did A/P; A/R; P/R; Trust Accounting and Auditing--but NEVER ALL AT THE SAME TIME FOR THE SAME COMPANY, and that is the FACT that: our management company is: 1) taking in our money; 2) paying our bills AND 3) auditing our books--which reeks of impropriety, not to mention another FACT: THIS IS TOTALLY AGAINST G.A.A.P.--Generally Accepted Accounting principles! This clearly shows that one entity is responsible for all phases of our accounting needs and that is NOT PROPER! The separation of duties with taking care of the accounting needs of any company is always done by different people and/or separate entities. I have NEVER in my entire 30 years of working with companies' books seen a single entity do all phases of accounting! And NO, I do not believe that as with the paving that they do books differently in the South! This is a really good way to fleece money from our accounts without our knowledge! And, more importantly: this situation screams for a forensic audit! I'm not sure where you get your information and wonder why the Admin for this web site doesn't correct you. Don't tell Bunting, Tripp & Ingley, LLP, (the Auditors) that they are part of SLohA management company. They have been doing the audits for SLohA for several years and use G.A.A.P.. If you go to the office you may ask to look at the Auditors report and if you want copies, they can made available for you. They might charge you a fee for copies. If you want to stop by my place I would be happy to let you look over my copy. |
|
Hypocrite yes or no?
Guest
|
Post by Hypocrite yes or no? on May 28, 2014 12:41:02 GMT -5
I do hope that what I've read also bothers others, I know it really sends alarms off in my head, since I am a retired bookkeeper/accountant that did A/P; A/R; P/R; Trust Accounting and Auditing--but NEVER ALL AT THE SAME TIME FOR THE SAME COMPANY, and that is the FACT that: our management company is: 1) taking in our money; 2) paying our bills AND 3) auditing our books--which reeks of impropriety, not to mention another FACT: THIS IS TOTALLY AGAINST G.A.A.P.--Generally Accepted Accounting principles! This clearly shows that one entity is responsible for all phases of our accounting needs and that is NOT PROPER! The separation of duties with taking care of the accounting needs of any company is always done by different people and/or separate entities. I have NEVER in my entire 30 years of working with companies' books seen a single entity do all phases of accounting! And NO, I do not believe that as with the paving that they do books differently in the South! This is a really good way to fleece money from our accounts without our knowledge! And, more importantly: this situation screams for a forensic audit! Question for Admin: Talk about a hypocrite, am I missing something here? |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 28, 2014 14:17:05 GMT -5
Why is this report not posted in CHUG? Owners already paid $20K for this material to be generated. What justification is there to charge owners even more to see what they have already paid for? And, most people do not need hard copies; only a digital version which costs virtually nothing in time or materials.
This record should be available for everyone in digital form on CHUG. But, like most things selected to be posted on CHUG, pertinent records are omitted and Management Company, with the approval of BOD, makes it as hard and expensive as possible to cause owners to jump through hoops i.e. certify mail, pay for ridiculous Admin time to take 30 seconds to locate a digital record and email it to an owner requesting to see their own corporate business.
I do not equate the Accounting firm with the Management company--but I think it is common sense to have a new accounting firm take a fresh look at SLohA every couple years. There is also the possibility of complacency and "discounts" compromising a strict and rigorous application of the process--there is a great deal of money involved in the professional fee for accounting.
It seems like most MANBOD actions are designed to provoke and arouse distrust among owners who have already learned to expect lies, misdirection and refusal to provide any meaningful information with regard to our financials and maintaining simple compliance with our own Bylaws. Between MANBOD's ongoing evasive and punitive behavior i.e. attempts to extort owner internet money for the benefit of the trio, ignoring simple Bylaws regarding ratification of budgets and neglecting to follow internal accounting controls mandated by the Bylaws, it's no wonder that many are talking about a forensic audit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fact Checker on May 28, 2014 14:58:05 GMT -5
Why is this report not posted in CHUG? Owners already paid $20K for this material to be generated. What justification is there to charge owners even more to see what they have already paid for? And, most people do not need hard copies; only a digital version which costs virtually nothing in time or materials. This record should be available for everyone in digital form on CHUG. But, like most things selected to be posted on CHUG, pertinent records are omitted and Management Company, with the approval of BOD, makes it as hard and expensive as possible to cause owners to jump through hoops i.e. certify mail, pay for ridiculous Admin time to take 30 seconds to locate a digital record and email it to an owner requesting to see their own corporate business. I do not confuse the Accounting firm with the Management company--but I think it is common sense to have a new accounting firm take a fresh look at SLohA every couple years. There is also the possibility of complacency and "discounts" compromising a strict and rigorous application of the process--there is a great deal of money involved in the professional fee for accounting. It seems like most MANBOD actions are designed to provoke and arouse distrust among owners who have already learned to expect lies, misdirection and refusal to provide any meaningful information with regard to our financials and maintaining simple compliance with our own Bylaws. Between MANBOD's ongoing evasive and punitive behavior i.e. attempts to extort owner internet money for the benefit of the trio, ignoring simple Bylaws regarding ratification of budgets and neglecting to follow internal accounting controls mandated by the Bylaws, it's no wonder that many are talking about a forensic audit. You really do have a hard time reading things, don't you? I read that it says "might" charge a fee. I know that at the auditors meeting with the members, they always have copies available. Did you pick up your copy? If not, why not? I know they were available and announced that they would be available for a couple of months after the audit. Guess after that point you have to assume that everyone that wanted a copy had gotten one. Do you think the BOD should go door to door and hand everyone a copy? What about the Anon Enviro that though the management company was doing the audit? The Dark Side actions are designed to provoke and arouse distrust among owners who have already learned to expect lies, misdirection and refusal to provide any meaningful information with regard to our financials and maintaining simple compliance with our own Bylaws. Lets' see, where did I hear that before? |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 28, 2014 16:33:02 GMT -5
"Might" is a wiggle word. The preponderance of evidence is that there is no "might" about it. Owners would be charged a fee on the principle of making the acquisition of information inconvenient and expensive. That is the nonstop direction that MANBOD has been going in the last two years. The benefit of the doubt as to the real meaning of "might" does not favor MANBOD.
There are many people who are not physically present, for various personal reasons, to "pick up copies", and that is not your place to question. Personally, I do not WANT a paper copy--they are inconvenient, anti-environmental and expensive. I want a digital copy. I want to access this corporate record from the "Official Website--CHUG" on my own schedule--not MANBOD's. This is an inexpensive and convenient way to review records anytime without taking employee time and resources. In this age, typewriters no longer generate content; there is no record produced that is not produced digitally and transmitted digitally. Even complex graphics e.g. xrays, ct's and mri's are rendered digitally. Is that unreasonable?
What a silly thing to say. No one expects the BOD to do squat. They are completely under the control of the manager.
I don't think that was what was meant. I interpreted the post to mean that was "in control" of all aspects of the accounting process. This concentration of all aspects of accounting increases the potential for abuse through familiarity, secretiveness and privilege. Perhaps Anon Enviro could clarify that.
In the current climate of MANBOD's penchant for intimidation of owners, lies about the purpose of the past budget increase, refusal to disclose information even when asked outright, answer multiple requests by owners for financial accountability and the continuing trend of making it more difficult to see understandable financial records--I agree that MANBOD should not be entrusted with control and access to all aspects of the financial operations of SLohA.
I have no idea what you are implying and where you might have heard this before; maybe you are having a "Senior Moment". The Dark Side? The only Dark Entity that I know that lies and evades is MANBOD.
If MANBOD had any intention of recapturing what is left of its credibility through constructive means, it would answer owner correspondence to the Board under BOD President's signature rather than handing off accountability to people like the 's bookkeeper and the Rulebook Committee--for starters--and disclose SLohA expenditures on check registers for both Operating and Reserves without owners certifying mail and begging for information about where the money is going.
|
|
Anonymous Environmentalist
Guest
|
Post by Anonymous Environmentalist on May 28, 2014 17:58:48 GMT -5
So, if the accounting firm mentioned that does our audits is not affiliated with the management company we have, we still have a problem with separation of duties.
The management company is still: taking in our money, AND paying our bills, AND have check signing privileges. This is still a NO-NO.
Hope that is the clarification that was needed.
|
|
GTO
Addict
Life is Tough ! It's even tougher when you're stupid ! Jhn Wayne J ohn Wayne
Posts: 198
|
Post by GTO on May 28, 2014 22:15:45 GMT -5
How come our Board has not answered this NO-NO question? Just Curious, GTO 1964
Note: 4th Request
May 9, 2014
To: Board of Directors ONLY via Hand Delivery to SLohA Administration @ 499 S-bag Trail, Lake Wales, FL and email: President@slrmail.com, VP@slrmail.com, Treasurer@slrmail.com, Secretary@slrmail.com
RE: Authorization to Access SLohA Bank Depository Accounts-- (4th Request)
Due to a recent misunderstanding in which we were chastised by the bookkeeper from the management Company for including it in SLohA Board correspondence, we are resubmitting a second request to the Board only--without copy to management company.
Apparently, our previous request was routed in error to the bookkeeper, who had an oral conversation with "an attorney" about our concern. As reported, the attorney’s opinion was clearly contrary to SLohA Bylaw. As communicated by the bookkeeper, the attorney opinion was that the Bylaw permitted others to sign checks to withdraw from SLohA depository accounts as long as One officer signature was on the check. Our subsequent request for a confirmatory written attorney response was declined.
We remind the board that drawing funds on SLohA depository accounts is a specific and reserved power that the Board cannot delegate to vendors and non-officers:
ARTICLE VII FINANCE Section 1. The funds of the corporation sH all be deposited in such banks or depositories as may be determined by the Board of Directors from time to time, upon resolutions approved by the Board of Directors, and sH all be withdrawn only upon checks and demands of monies signed by such officer or officers of the corporation as may be designated by the Board of Directors.
However, the board has the power to appoint a non-officer of the Board of Directors or a non-Director member as an officer, either as an Assistant Secretary or an Assistant Treasurer:
ARTICLE VI OFFICERS Section 1. The Directors may appoint one or more assistant treasurers, one or more assistant secretaries, and such other officers as their judgment may be necessary. Such assistants and /or officers need not be members of the Board of Directors.
Clearly, the Bylaw makes no exception to permitting a non-member, in this case a Vendor, of the Association to be party to depository accounts of the Association. Additionally, the Bylaws require the board to appoint either a member or director as an authorized officer if additional signatures are needed.
We respectfully request that you specifically state the lawful basis which authorizes the board to conduct SLohA business contrary to SLohA Bylaws. Alternatively, we again urge the Board to immediately hold a Special Board Meeting for the purpose of bringing SLohA financial conduct in compliance with Bylaws.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 29, 2014 8:13:31 GMT -5
For the record and to address your "wonder"-- this is not Admin's responsibility.
I do not CORRECT-I will ask a question, inquire for more information or post alternate point of view or factual, source information for readers to consider. This forum is an adult venue and all are welcome to speak their minds regardless of accuracy. Accuracy, however, is important to the fundamental premise of the forum. Otherwise, it becomes a digital form of pool gossip.
CORRECTING is the appropriate job of parents, police and the judicial system.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maybe on May 29, 2014 9:05:52 GMT -5
For the record and to address your "wonder"-- this is not Admin's responsibility. I do not CORRECT-I will ask a question, inquire for more information or post alternate point of view or factual, source information for readers to consider. This forum is an adult venue and all are welcome to speak their minds regardless of accuracy. Accuracy, however, is important to the fundamental premise of the forum. Otherwise, it becomes a digital form of pool gossip. CORRECTING is the appropriate job of parents, police and the judicial system. So you are now saying this is a digital form of pool gossip (because it far from accurate) and you shouldn't be correcting the BOD and management because that is the appropriate job of parents, police and the judicial system. Did I get that right? |
|
|
|
Post by Back to basics on May 29, 2014 9:23:55 GMT -5
For the record and to address your "wonder"-- this is not Admin's responsibility. I do not CORRECT-I will ask a question, inquire for more information or post alternate point of view or factual, source information for readers to consider. This forum is an adult venue and all are welcome to speak their minds regardless of accuracy. Accuracy, however, is important to the fundamental premise of the forum. Otherwise, it becomes a digital form of pool gossip. CORRECTING is the appropriate job of parents, police and the judicial system. I think Back got it more accurate. Here we go again with the hypocritical views. You only correct the truth (cause you don't like it) and let the misinformation slide cause that is what this forum is all about (misinformation). Okay, there is some factual information on here like posting F.S. 720., but that can be gotten on line anyway. Jimmy is the one you should be concerned with abuse of your site. I think the article from Back on Trolls really sums up what you and your cronies are all about. Everyday Sadists. Dark tetrad. I looked them up and both are scary. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2014 9:58:47 GMT -5
For the record and to address your "wonder"-- this is not Admin's responsibility. I do not CORRECT-I will ask a question, inquire for more information or post alternate point of view or factual, source information for readers to consider. This forum is an adult venue and all are welcome to speak their minds regardless of accuracy. Accuracy, however, is important to the fundamental premise of the forum. Otherwise, it becomes a digital form of pool gossip. CORRECTING is the appropriate job of parents, police and the judicial system. I think Back got it more accurate. Here we go again with the hypocritical views. You only correct the truth (cause you don't like it) and let the misinformation slide cause that is what this forum is all about (misinformation). Okay, there is some factual information on here like posting F.S. 720., but that can be gotten on line anyway. Jimmy is the one you should be concerned with abuse of your site. I think the article from Back on Trolls really sums up what you and your cronies are all about. Everyday Sadists. Dark tetrad. I looked them up and both are scary. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/5ax7Su-eVjA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> |
|
|
|
Post by justme on May 29, 2014 13:49:01 GMT -5
First, Copy your link to the desired target website In your REPLY text box: 1. Place your cursor on the point in your REPLY where you want the URL to appear. 2. Click on the first icon in the third (last) group on the right A popup "Create Link" will appear 3. Enter the link URL that you copy/pasted from your desired address into the second box (Note: URL stands for Uniform Resource Locator; pronounced "Earl" and is the unique address for a file that is accessible on the Internet.) 4. The top box labelled "Text" is where you can customize your address and this will appear in the box in your REPLY. 5. Click Create Link button Your Text Link will immediately appear where you put your cursor and it will be active. *After publishing the post, if you hover your cursor over your link it will turn red. Note: One thing I dislike about the link setup on the Forum is that they don't jump out at you and appear in color like we have come to expect. One way around this is to refer to it in your text and then use a carot in back and front of your URL (Forward carot is the "period" key and Backward carot is the "comma" key.) I might go in search of an 'app for that' one of these days... |
|
|
|
Post by justme on May 29, 2014 13:54:25 GMT -5
It has taken me 5 days of going crazy trying to figure out how to activate links on posts.
It shows that perseverance really does work
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 29, 2014 15:31:31 GMT -5
That is not at all what I said and I am certain you are aware that you are deliberately misconstruing the meaning and intent of my words. However, I will clarify for you and any other readers who may be confused.
Nobody--not even the legal team hired by the MANBOD--has the power to "correct" the BOD. That is reserved for the Management Company--by passive agreement of board members.
Owners are voting Members of the Association and have rights that are supposed to be protected by our elected representatives. Additionally, not-for-profit corporation law (FS617) provides for input by the owners, as detailed in the statutes and Bylaws. It is obvious to many Owners that Members' interests are not being protected unless it happens to suit the MANbod to do so at the moment.
Responsible citizenship/membership carries with it moral and ethical imperatives to bring unlawful actions to the attention of not only the BOD, but the other Owners. That is why one Owner has made repeated attempts to elicit a response from BOD regarding its unlawful practice of permitting a vendor to be a signor on SLohA checks--which is clearly prohibited by SLohA Bylaws. Even though BOD may choose to violate SLohA laws, at least other owners can be informed and exercise their will at the ballot box (at least in concept). The continuing nature of the unlawful action and the willful neglect of the board individuals who abandoned their fiduciary duty to MEMBERS is documented in SLohA Official Records.
This may, at some point, Bite the Butts of the Board; many D&O policies will not cover this kind of situation if it results in a potentially covered loss. However, unless and until these people are removed, quit, or fail re-election--it is the only tool available to Owners to encourage the BOD to SELF CORRECT.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maybe on May 29, 2014 17:02:16 GMT -5
You said, ("Accuracy, however, is important to the fundamental premise of the forum. Otherwise, it becomes a digital form of pool gossip.)"
I took that to mean, if something posted on here wasn't accurate it would become a digital form of pool gossip. Sorry.
|
|
Anonymous Environmentalist
Guest
|
Post by Anonymous Environmentalist on May 29, 2014 21:29:47 GMT -5
What I find extremely ignorant is the person coming on here calling others "hypocrites". Let me reveal the true meaning of the word in order to correct this person's obvious misunderstanding of it's meaning and use.
A hypocrite is a person who says one thing, yet does completely the opposite. It could also be said that a hypocrite is a liar.
Since you don't even know me or S.T., and have never spoken to either one of us in person, or know how we'd handle this situation, or that situation, you cannot speak to that at all nor make any judgment(s) along those lines. You seem to think you know things, things you call facts, but alas, you don't.
You come on here with your angst, anger and hatred for S.T. and others, yet have shown no proof of certain things you've claimed. You claimed S.T. is trying to destroy this community and has told lies about MANBOD. I get up every morning and I don't see anything like you describe--our community is still intact. As far as things MANBOD have said that aren't true --you can bet that S.T. or one of the rest of us will (attempt) to correct your faulty thinking/logic and/or lack of knowledge with facts.
You listen only to MANBOD and have repeated their rhetoric frequently. Perhaps you have come to see that a lot of what MANBOD is telling you is conflicting. You don't even know why that is, do you?
I can tell you one thing: If I am getting conflicting information, then I'm going to do research to find out who is right and who is wrong. That makes the most sense to me--obviously you don't even want to find out that what you're being told is true--you accept it on blind faith, and go along with everything they say, and accept it as fact and without question.
If you go back and read threads on certain topics we've discussed recently, you will find enough truth, facts, and logic in the form of posted information available to everyone. S.T. has already done the leg-work, all you have to do is read in order to fully understand that what you've been lead to believe, in most cases, is not what is really so.
It does seem however, that, from time to time--and I'm being polite here, that MANBOD are the hypocrites. There are several examples of that. When certain board members have said that SLohA records are available for owners' inspection, there are residents who have requested information long ago--information we are allowed to see, but certain records that were requested are being withheld from the owners who requested them.
There are also questions that owners have that have gone unanswered--this is, once again, in direct conflict with what board members have said at meetings which is that if any owners have any questions, we will answer them or get the answer(s) for them, but, once again, this is not what is being done.
I would really like to know why. And you know what? A lot of other owners in here would also like to know "why".
Doesn't anyone else find it strange as to why MANBOD would say these things and then not follow through?
Why is information and records that owners should get being withheld?
|
|
|
|
Post by Back to basics on May 30, 2014 11:21:57 GMT -5
What I find extremely ignorant is the person coming on here calling others "hypocrites". Let me reveal the true meaning of the word in order to correct this person's obvious misunderstanding of it's meaning and use. A hypocrite is a person who says one thing, yet does completely the opposite. It could also be said that a hypocrite is a liar. That is exactly why I used that word. Thank you very much for agreeing with me.Since you don't even know me or S.T., and have never spoken to either one of us in person, or know how we'd handle this situation, or that situation, you cannot speak to that at all nor make any judgment(s) along those lines. You seem to think you know things, things you call facts, but alas, you don't. I do know you and S.T., and have spoken to S.T. but you don't let anyone even look at you. I have proven some facts to you, if you could only understand them.You come on here with your angst, anger and hatred for S.T. and others, yet have shown no proof of certain things you've claimed. You claimed S.T. is trying to destroy this community and has told lies about MANBOD. I get up every morning and I don't see anything like you describe--our community is still intact. As far as things MANBOD have said that aren't true --you can bet that S.T. or one of the rest of us will (attempt) to correct your faulty thinking/logic and/or lack of knowledge with facts. First of all, I don't hate anyone. I do hate what some people are doing to destroy this beautiful friendly community. Secondly, S.T. said that correcting someone is not her job. (She posted that yesterday. Do you not read the rest of the forum?)You listen only to MANBOD and have repeated their rhetoric frequently. Perhaps you have come to see that a lot of what MANBOD is telling you is conflicting. You don't even know why that is, do you? Could you give me an example?I can tell you one thing: If I am getting conflicting information, then I'm going to do research to find out who is right and who is wrong. That makes the most sense to me--obviously you don't even want to find out that what you're being told is true--you accept it on blind faith, and go along with everything they say, and accept it as fact and without question. Could you give me an example?If you go back and read threads on certain topics we've discussed recently, you will find enough truth, facts, and logic in the form of posted information available to everyone. S.T. has already done the leg-work, all you have to do is read in order to fully understand that what you've been lead to believe, in most cases, is not what is really so. That's what I told em. What people are being lead to believe is not what is really so. (remember you said this)It does seem however, that, from time to time--and I'm being polite here, that MANBOD are the hypocrites. There are several examples of that. When certain board members have said that SLohA records are available for owners' inspection, there are residents who have requested information long ago--information we are allowed to see, but certain records that were requested are being withheld from the owners who requested them. Can you give more than two examples?There are also questions that owners have that have gone unanswered--this is, once again, in direct conflict with what board members have said at meetings which is that if any owners have any questions, we will answer them or get the answer(s) for them, but, once again, this is not what is being done. Could you give me an example?I would really like to know why. And you know what? A lot of other owners in here would also like to know "why". Doesn't anyone else find it strange as to why MANBOD would say these things and then not follow through? Why is information and records that owners should get being withheld? Just guessing but maybe it's because they abuse their privilege. |
|
|
|
Post by BagLady on May 30, 2014 13:04:14 GMT -5
One observation and One Comment:
1- Observation: All that RED font reminds me of what Mr Internet Bb does on his posts. You are apparently "him" or following his lead. Good--makes it easy to see responses!
2- Comment: ALL the examples you need are already posted on this Forum. No one is going to spoon feed those who wish to participate or regurgitate for another Guest material that has been accumulating for 2+ years. Please read up and catch up. The Forum is pretty well-organized topically and you should be able to identify "examples" with just a little effort and insight. With that background, you will no doubt be able to contribute more content that is relevant and provide alternate facts and insight worthy of examination.
|
|
