Jury is almost in

The court action against Carol Ebsen and Al Dittbrenner is complete. I can say with confidence that this is going to be a slam dunk. The 2 areas of concentration for the judge were as follows:

The judge eluded to the fact that the recipient of a weeds fine deserves the opportunity to resolve the issue and be heard before the fine is applied. The boards' representative Gene Sullivan (New Concepts Management) produced a document which he said was sent to the plaintiff. The judge pointed out to Gene that this document simply states that "a fine will be imposed" and there is no chance for the recipient to react. The conversation was clearly in response to our state laws in 515b which particularly discuss the issue of warnings and requests for action before fines are levied. It was also argued that this document was not sent out. My guess is that the document was sent to the rental property and not the billing address which is my home. This has been a problem issue for most of the time.

Regarding the $250.00 payment made to Carol Ebson for her time in court. The judge held his hands up in the air and told Gene "how do I know what her real costs were?" Then he asked Gene if he would be opposed to making Carol return the money to the maintenance fund. Gene said that it would be ok and that Carol would probably be ok with that as long as "she was able to come up with her real documented cost and get paid". He just let everyone know here that she simply picked a number out of the air and can probably come back with a more realistic number.

Gene who was paid $120 per hour to appear in court will be paid around $480.00 if he includes his driving time. His case was weak and he simply pointed out parts of the "rules" that state "fines can be levied" and various other irrelevant items. I term them irrelevant since the declarations and covenants always rule when there is a discrepancy. Clearly, there are discrepancies. For an owner of a management company getting paid $120 per hour to defend board members, I would be ashamed of his presentation. They will be even more ashamed when the case is lost and documented. Gene told me that he needs to be neutral however, he clearly does not understand the laws as they pertain to homeowner associations and is clearly on the side of the losing board. I conclude that he is only trying to keep the account and keep the president happy. Too much "old boy" network going on if you ask me.

This will be time for Carol to reflect on her actions and realize that she goes too far and should resign after having the court direct her to return the funds she obtained. This will be her second loss this year where she is slapped.

Rest assured that any pay stubs produced from her employment will be copied to me since I have a right to all documentation. This will be scrutinized to the Nth degree since Carol is a part owner in her business and in essence can write her own ticket. As the judge asked "do you have her pay stubs?" I will also be watching for an effort to push this off onto either management or "the other board members" We will deal with that too.

We are in wait mode and I expect a quick decision within one week.