|
An
Opinion By Jan Bergemann
President, Cyber Citizens For Justice, Inc.
Published
October 1, 2010
Homeowners
living in community associations are always told that they signed a
contract and have to obey it. But what about the other parties to the
contract -- developer and association? Are they not bound by the same contract?
People unfamiliar with community associations are always wondering why
these associations are riddled with litigation. And even if you are
familiar with the many problems in these associations, are you aware that a
wide majority of these lawsuits deal with issues caused by one party to
the contract changing the original contract without the consent of the
homeowners?
Especially developers and their so-called successors are known to change
the existing contracts without asking the owners. Many of them rely on the
fact that most homeowners are not able to financially sustain a lawsuit to
fight for their rights.
But
the dreadful economy and the dead real-estate market are forcing more and
more owners to fight for their rights in order to protect their homes [Please
see links to many recent cases below!]
Developers,
amazed at the audacity of these owners willing to fight for their rights,
normally answer with frivolous libel/slander lawsuits aimed at bleeding
these owners financially dry.
And if it's not the developer, it's the so-called successor, who only too
often fails to be the "legal" successor. We have read about
the developers raising dues sky-high, trying to sell unprofitable
golf courses to naďve homeowners and just changing the
final date of turn-over to prevent owners taking control of their
community.
In
the THE CASCADES OF GROVELAND HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION,
INC.
[ASSOCIATION
LIFE IS NEVER BORING!] the
original developer Levitt & Sons defaulted on the loan. The bank had
receiver Andrew J. Bolnick
[SEE: NATURE
WATCH] appointed. Bolnick then changed the voting rights
by amending the deed restrictions without owners’ approval. The
bank then sold the properties acquired through foreclosure to another
developer, who is definitely not a developer-successor, but is equipped
with a sweetheart deal caused by these unapproved amendments. You can read
all the legal allegations in a lawsuit filed by one of the homeowners [CLUNEY vs THE CASCADES OF GROVELAND HOMEOWNERS’ ASSOCIATION, INC].
In my opinion this is the sentence in the filed lawsuit that explains the
whole issue best: "The Supplemental Declaration adversely alters the proportionate voting interests appurtenant to the Subdivision by creating an additional 216 votes (one vote per acre of proposed Phases 4 and 5) notwithstanding that the Declaration, as originally recorded, did not authorize such a procedure, and only authorized voting rights upon: (a) the platting of those phases into actual, bona-fide, platted lots; and (b) the annexation of those lots into the Subdivision."
It
seems pretty obvious that the Supplemental Declaration of Restrictions and Protective Covenants
dated March 7, 2005 violates § 720.306(1)(c), Fla. Stat.
Lengthy discussions about this issue took place -- without being addressed
properly.
And
the letter from Alan B. Taylor, Esq. to the association explaining that a
lawsuit will be filed if the issue isn't addressed properly was not
triggering any real reaction. The answer from the association to the initial demand letter,
sent by attorney Thomas R. Slaten Jr. on August 24, 2010 is maybe good for a laugh: "The Board has been addressing and continues to address these issues in the best interest of the community."
[SEE COPIES
OF LETTERS]
Thomas Slaten,
Esq., shareholder of the law firm of Larsen & Associates, P.A. in
Orlando., and members of this firm have a reputation among homeowners to have “their own interpretations" of the
laws -- and what's good for communities. [See: SOME CALL IT ENFORCING DEED RESTRICTIONS -- OTHERS CALL IT HIGHWAY ROBBERY!]
If the problem is being addressed -- as Slaten claims -- why is nothing being done to remedy the situation
that is costly for the homeowners?
And
once the lawsuit was filed, the association and its board president Eric
Sorkin still didn't want all the owners to know the full truth.
In
an e-mail to the community members Eric Sorkin wrote:
|
9-24-10 CASCADES OF
GROVELAND – ASSOCIATION SUED BY HOMEOWNER
A
few hours ago the Association’s Board of Director’s was made
aware of a lawsuit filed against the Association.
The
following statement is from our Association counsel.
As you will see when you read our counsel’s statement
below, the board has been advised not to make any additional
comments.
"Stephen
and Donna Cluney recently sued the Association in Lake
County Circuit Court, Case # 10CA4156. Due to
legal restrictions the Association cannot provide a copy of the
lawsuit. However, you may visit the courthouse to
review the court file or visit the clerk of court's website to
follow the case on-line. On advice of counsel, the Board
of Directors must refrain from discussing the details of the
case. However, we wanted to notify you of the suit and let
you know that Larsen & Associates, the Association's legal
counsel, is defending the Association."
Eric Sorkin
|
Actually,
once a lawsuit is filed, it becomes public record -- no questions asked.
Claiming legal restrictions for not providing a COPY
OF THE LAWSUIT is just another excuse to keep many owners in the
dark about the fact that they are paying more than they actually should --
see lawsuit!
This
lawsuit is another example of a family which is finally sick and tired of
seeing their home and their life-savings going down the drain. It is
really disgusting to see. Folks
that saved all their lives for their dream retirement homes in the
Sunshine
State
are treated badly and used as cash cows by developers.
If
this doesn't change really fast,
Florida
's real estate market and economy will collapse even further.
The lax laws and the total lack of enforcement of the existing laws
have stopped the flow of retirees and snowbirds -- formerly the biggest
source of income for the State of
Florida
.
|