|Battle for investigation of DBPR goes on|
The battle for an investigation of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation goes on. Many condo owners from all over Florida are accusing the DBPR of not following their own mission statement and abandoning the consumers.
Below the latest in a series of letters exchanged between Amelia Island resident Stephen Comley and the DBPR. His emotional appeal at the last meeting of the HOA Task Force in Tallahassee already created headlines in many newspapers around Florida.
It seems obvious that the DBPR is having serious problems doing its duty as charged. Especially -- since downsizing from 160 to 91 employees -- consumers, relying on the DBPR to protect their rights, are feeling the impact of dealing with a seriously reduced staff.
Read the latest response Stephen Comley received from the Office of the General Council:
STATE OF FLORIDA
March 5, 2004
Stephen B. Comley
Dear Mr. Comley:
I am responding to your certified mail of February 20,2004 (and its attachments) which you directed to Deputy Secretary Lianne Acebo. The department receives many letters from citizens throughout the state and it strives to answer these promptly and thoroughly. As with your letter, many of these are related (directly or indirectly) to the actions of licensees that fall under the department's regulatory ambit. In such circumstances the department must remain fair and impartial to all parties concerned. While it is your right to have and to express your-opinion on state laws, -the department must maintain neutrality. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with your suggestion concerning the Woodside case.
You next ask for a response to your letter to Deputy Secretary Acebo, dated January 26, 2004. In that letter you repeat a series of questions and statements which relate directly or indirectly to your complaint(s) against your board. As you have been previously informed, your complaint(s) has been thoroughly reviewed and re-reviewed. I respect your right to disagree with our decisions but must tell you that those decisions have not changed. Thus, I cannot comment further in regard to your letter of January 26, 2004.
Your last question references yet another correspondence that you sent to the department, an email, dated February 5,2004 and directed to me. On February 10, 2004, I responded to your email. I would respectfully request that you review my response carefully. At that time it was clearly explained to you that any complaints you have concerning the department, or its personnel, should be forwarded to the Department's Inspector General.
It is distressing to me that you are unhappy
and dissatisfied with our many attempts to address your concerns. Having
said that, we are clearly at a point of disagreement. You have repeatedly
questioned the department's handling of your complaints and you have repeatedly
questioned the department's answers to your inquiries. I sincerely believe
that every avenue has been exhausted in responding to you. But, as I have
informed you before, if you wish to complain in regard to these matters
please contact the Department's Office of the Inspector General. If that
does not suffice, you may also contact the Office of the Chief Inspector
cc: Ms. Diane Carr, Secretary,
Stephen Comley's comment: