|
Walker Lakeshores Landowners Association v. William Pearn and Amelia PearnSuperior Court of Pennsylvania - Docket 1463 EDA 2017 |
October 23, 2018
In September the Shohola Township Solicitor Jason Ohliger asked the Pike County District Attorney's Office if he could act as a prosecutor on a tickets case in front of Magistrate Cooper.
I would assume that this type of attempted involvement would have been approved by our three supervisors since it would have been paid for by the taxpayers and, since it is a HIGHLY unusual request, I also assume that he was told "no" by the DA's office.
One has to wonder: why was there such an aggressive attempt to prosecute a tickets case at the taxpayers expense?
There is no doubt that Shohola PD issued the tickets in error. The boat launch Mr. Sherer was using is clearly marked on the plat maps filed for Maple Park in Milford (see map graphic - Plat map book 8 page 250 filed in 1971) AND his deed (as well as ALL Maple Park deeds) clearly states his right to use all of this area.
There is no doubt that Shohola PD issued the tickets in error. The boat launch Mr. Sherer was using is clearly marked on the plat maps filed for Maple Park in Milford (see map graphic - Plat map book 8 page 250 filed in 1971) AND his deed (as well as ALL Maple Park deeds) clearly states his right to use all of this area.
This plat map show that Mr. Sherer was clearly entitled to be where he was with his vehicle. He WAS NOT trespassing in any way.
The honorable thing for Shohola PD to do here is drop the tickets. I've been quite surprised that they haven't since my opinion of them was much higher at the beginning of all this. The longer this goes on, the more it APPEARS they may be bowing down to some private interests and not upholding the written laws of the land.
The attempt by the township solicitor to so aggressively pursue prosecuting an error by the township police department, as opposed to rectifying it, should be disturbing to everyone in this township.
The attempt to secure a loss in court against Mr. Sherer is an attempt to take away the deeded rights for all 60 Maple Park land owners who have used this boat launch for over 50 years.
Whose rights will be next?
The honorable thing for Shohola PD to do here is drop the tickets. I've been quite surprised that they haven't since my opinion of them was much higher at the beginning of all this. The longer this goes on, the more it APPEARS they may be bowing down to some private interests and not upholding the written laws of the land.
The attempt by the township solicitor to so aggressively pursue prosecuting an error by the township police department, as opposed to rectifying it, should be disturbing to everyone in this township.
The attempt to secure a loss in court against Mr. Sherer is an attempt to take away the deeded rights for all 60 Maple Park land owners who have used this boat launch for over 50 years.
Whose rights will be next?
Side note: Since this map is from 1971 I wanted to mention that it shows that Maple Park had the right to SWIM and USE BOATS VIA OUR BOAT LAUNCH in Walker Lake BEFORE Walker Lakeshores Landowners Ass. even existed.
This is part of the reason that we don't have to pay the lake assessment to use the water, per my judgement.
This is part of the reason that we don't have to pay the lake assessment to use the water, per my judgement.
September 20, 2018
Another news article regarding our little area here in Shohola.
Pennsylvania really needs to get its act together with the laws (and enforcement of the laws) surrounding these associations. The Poconos is littered with home owner associations and property rights takes a back seat all to often, and, to the detriment of all of us.
One note: There is a typo, the current WLLA president's name is Janice Hahn.
Fun fact: Fran Orth is the president who decided to appeal the case against me (for money I NEVER owed) to the Superior Court of PA - "When it came to light that board president, Fran Orth, had not been paying her dues, she said she never received a bill and promptly resigned."
Cute right? I guess she figured that I could pay her share?
Read the article by clicking the link below:
Pennsylvania really needs to get its act together with the laws (and enforcement of the laws) surrounding these associations. The Poconos is littered with home owner associations and property rights takes a back seat all to often, and, to the detriment of all of us.
One note: There is a typo, the current WLLA president's name is Janice Hahn.
Fun fact: Fran Orth is the president who decided to appeal the case against me (for money I NEVER owed) to the Superior Court of PA - "When it came to light that board president, Fran Orth, had not been paying her dues, she said she never received a bill and promptly resigned."
Cute right? I guess she figured that I could pay her share?
Read the article by clicking the link below:
September 19, 2018
To dispel the myth: The Maple Park (AKA Swezy Beach) was NOT obtained via a tax sale. It was obtained via a classic WLLA "back dues" lawsuit (much like the one against me).
Walker Lakeshores Landowners Assoc v. Charles D Swezy - Docket Number: MJ-60303-CV-0000288-2012 Civil Docket
Walker Lakeshores Landowners Assoc v. Charles D Swezy - Docket Number: MJ-60303-CV-0000288-2012 Civil Docket
The reason that Art's letter is addressed to "Mrs. Swezy" is because Charlie was in a nursing home at this time.
|
|
This is one of the most repugnant things that I have ever seen.
Not only was the lawsuit dishonest since he never owed dues, but, they cherry picked the property they wanted as their compensation.
In my opinion, since this was a board sanctioned maneuver it should be very concerning to EVERY property owner in this area. This wasn't something Art did alone so the risk of it happening again didn't die when he did. This risk remains as long as this type of thing is viewed as acceptable by the board. So far that appears to be exactly how it's viewed.
Not only was the lawsuit dishonest since he never owed dues, but, they cherry picked the property they wanted as their compensation.
In my opinion, since this was a board sanctioned maneuver it should be very concerning to EVERY property owner in this area. This wasn't something Art did alone so the risk of it happening again didn't die when he did. This risk remains as long as this type of thing is viewed as acceptable by the board. So far that appears to be exactly how it's viewed.
September 16, 2018
Just an FYI - § 3717. Trespass by motor vehicle. (a) General rule.--It is unlawful for a person to knowingly operate a motor vehicle on private real property other than a private road or driveway without consent of the owner or lessor of the real property.
Here is a covenant from our Maple Park deeds:
So how can a Maple Park person get trespass tickets from Shohola PD for using a boat launch we've had a right-a-way to use since at least 1966?
August 29, 2018
I had hoped that things would calm down and get better with the new influences over in WLLA. I had even played with new layouts for this website with a "new beginnings" type of format. As it turns out, I was quite naive to believe that the herd mentality of an HOA desperate for cash would change.
It appears that some scumbag keeps calling the police on Maple Park people legally using their access point. Now since the PSP correctly declined to get involved citing it as a "civil matter" this scumbag started calling the Shohola Township Police and things got interesting with that.
Shohola Township PD gave tickets to a Maple Park person for being in a place he is LEGALLY ALLOWED TO BE and doing activities HE IS LEGALLY ALLOWED TO DO!!
Shohola Township supervisors had ALWAYS declined to get involved in this "civil matter" when I was asking for any kind of help from them when the WLLA embezzlers (come on now we all know there was more than one) were trying to take my home based on bogus "assessments" on it.
So the embezzlers trying to take my home was a "civil matter", BUT, a Shohola resident using a boat launch he has the deeded legal right to use gets a criminal trespass ticket. That universe does that make sense in?
It appears that some scumbag keeps calling the police on Maple Park people legally using their access point. Now since the PSP correctly declined to get involved citing it as a "civil matter" this scumbag started calling the Shohola Township Police and things got interesting with that.
Shohola Township PD gave tickets to a Maple Park person for being in a place he is LEGALLY ALLOWED TO BE and doing activities HE IS LEGALLY ALLOWED TO DO!!
Shohola Township supervisors had ALWAYS declined to get involved in this "civil matter" when I was asking for any kind of help from them when the WLLA embezzlers (come on now we all know there was more than one) were trying to take my home based on bogus "assessments" on it.
So the embezzlers trying to take my home was a "civil matter", BUT, a Shohola resident using a boat launch he has the deeded legal right to use gets a criminal trespass ticket. That universe does that make sense in?
May 22, 2018
Hmm....maybe we are making some progress?
WLLA needs to understand our differing roles here in the Walker Lake area. Whomever "discovered" these rentals has zero right to be discovering anything in Maple Park, but, it does appear that Attorney Farley has made some positive headway in this undesirable situation.
From the April 21 WLLA board meeting minutes:
WLLA needs to understand our differing roles here in the Walker Lake area. Whomever "discovered" these rentals has zero right to be discovering anything in Maple Park, but, it does appear that Attorney Farley has made some positive headway in this undesirable situation.
From the April 21 WLLA board meeting minutes:
RENTALS- Three long term rentals without proper documentation were discovered in Maple Park. They have their own HOA with their own rules and regulations therefore it is to be handled by Maple Park however they wish.
I would give some props for this next clip but my "bill" was $385.00 and not $10.
"Billing problems" have plagued WLLA for the last decade so that excuse is nonsense.
It isn't tough to just bill correctly. PPL, Blue Ridge, local contractors, local restaurants, gas stations, insurance companies, mortgage companies, phone companies, etc, etc ALL seem to be able to bill correctly the vast majority of the time.
"Billing problems" have plagued WLLA for the last decade so that excuse is nonsense.
It isn't tough to just bill correctly. PPL, Blue Ridge, local contractors, local restaurants, gas stations, insurance companies, mortgage companies, phone companies, etc, etc ALL seem to be able to bill correctly the vast majority of the time.
WLLA owns the Maple Park Beach (Swezy Beach) area and the pro rata share for its maintenance will be determined and equally allocated to WLLA and Maple Park Landowners. The current 2018 Maple Park invoices of $10 have been mailed to Maple Park property owners.
The full meeting minutes are available on www.WalkerLake.com
Go on there and stay informed!
They have been doing a great job of adding new things on there.
Go on there and stay informed!
They have been doing a great job of adding new things on there.
April 23, 2018
Since WLLA was the Plaintiff in my case you'd think they'd be inclined to abide by the court's decision. Oddly, the two bill I received this year reflect NOTHING that the courts decided.
In fact, these two bills don't even abide by what the Walker Lakeshores Attorney says (see the April 4th post below).
Hmm......it appears that not much has changed.
In fact, these two bills don't even abide by what the Walker Lakeshores Attorney says (see the April 4th post below).
Hmm......it appears that not much has changed.
April 14, 2018
|
“The Darkness at Decker Lake”
When Harvey, a small time con man, learns about this isolated retirement lake community, he knows that it will be the perfect addition to his greatest money making scheme. It is there that his long and arduous journey continues, from a simple fraud to terror and to murder. The conspirators are unaware that they will be in the midst of one of the most horrific individuals ever born and that the best laid plans…… Available on Amazon as an ebook and paperback. |
April 4, 2018
So back in January I received a copy of this letter from WLLA's attorney and I thought....hmmm, good, maybe we are starting to go in the right direction.
Well, that appears to have been a short lived thought.
In the end of March new bills came out to Maple Park residents that COMPLETELY contradict both Judge Kameen's decision AND what their own attorney said!
Well, that appears to have been a short lived thought.
In the end of March new bills came out to Maple Park residents that COMPLETELY contradict both Judge Kameen's decision AND what their own attorney said!
I don't know who the mental giant was who decided to re-bill over here but this is certainly not the way to rebuild trust and relationships.
February 21, 2018
According to the new 2018 Fee Schedule on the Walker Lakeshores website Swezy Beach has a charge of $10 for Maple Park people. Well, that's probably a good start.
Then it says "**Maple Park Lake Assessments are currently under review and subject to change."
I'm not sure who is reviewing this but unless they are in a position higher than Judge Kameen they have no right to "review" it. Judge Kameen specifically DENIED the collection of lake assessments in Maple Park because we are not and never have been part of Walker Lakeshores.
Did anyone else notice the 2017 budget that was posted? I know these are just numbers Ron was given so if you go looking for it please read his disclaimer. By all accounts Ron has been doing a good job in a difficult situation.
Anyway, a couple things I noticed:
1. Lake Assessment Income was listed as $77,701. The assessment was $325. That means only roughly 240 people paid out of about 450 owners who are responsible to pay.
2. Legal Fees $0.00 !!?? How did Fran (who hadn't paid assessments in several years) pay Eric to appeal my case (over assessments I never owed) to the Superior Court? Interesting.....
3. Court Filing Fees $0.00 !!?? Fran or Eric paid the $85.00 fee in my case out of somewhere. I find it hard to believe they dove into their own pocket(s).
4. Everything got paid right? The lights are on, the lake is fine, the roads got plowed.....yet the books only show about 240 people out of about 450 paying (go back to #1).
Hmmmm...... That means that ALL the bills get paid when only about half of the assessments get collected.
So, either the assessments are VERY inflated and half the people skate without paying, or, the assessments are VERY inflated and about half the money ($68,250) has gone missing every year.
I wonder which it is.
Then it says "**Maple Park Lake Assessments are currently under review and subject to change."
I'm not sure who is reviewing this but unless they are in a position higher than Judge Kameen they have no right to "review" it. Judge Kameen specifically DENIED the collection of lake assessments in Maple Park because we are not and never have been part of Walker Lakeshores.
Did anyone else notice the 2017 budget that was posted? I know these are just numbers Ron was given so if you go looking for it please read his disclaimer. By all accounts Ron has been doing a good job in a difficult situation.
Anyway, a couple things I noticed:
1. Lake Assessment Income was listed as $77,701. The assessment was $325. That means only roughly 240 people paid out of about 450 owners who are responsible to pay.
2. Legal Fees $0.00 !!?? How did Fran (who hadn't paid assessments in several years) pay Eric to appeal my case (over assessments I never owed) to the Superior Court? Interesting.....
3. Court Filing Fees $0.00 !!?? Fran or Eric paid the $85.00 fee in my case out of somewhere. I find it hard to believe they dove into their own pocket(s).
4. Everything got paid right? The lights are on, the lake is fine, the roads got plowed.....yet the books only show about 240 people out of about 450 paying (go back to #1).
Hmmmm...... That means that ALL the bills get paid when only about half of the assessments get collected.
So, either the assessments are VERY inflated and half the people skate without paying, or, the assessments are VERY inflated and about half the money ($68,250) has gone missing every year.
I wonder which it is.
January 23, 2018
My board meeting notes (obviously not the official minutes) for the Walker Lakeshores Landowners Meeting January 20, 2018 are on their page here.
January 17, 2018
I just received this as part of a much larger document from Attorney Farley to my attorney who has been working to sort out some of this mess for Maple Park.
This clip is Attorney Farley is referring to the 2018 "assessment" bills that were sent out to Maple Park residents. If any Maple Park person would like to see the original, just let me know.
This clip is Attorney Farley is referring to the 2018 "assessment" bills that were sent out to Maple Park residents. If any Maple Park person would like to see the original, just let me know.
I was at that meeting and I only remember 1 person from Maple Park who mentioned wanting to be part of their association.
That aside, each Maple Park household has that option this year. So if you want to participate you are good to go and if not you pay nothing for 2018.
That aside, each Maple Park household has that option this year. So if you want to participate you are good to go and if not you pay nothing for 2018.
January 7, 2018
Another article from the Pocono Record in Stroudsburg, PA
January 2, 2018
A follow up article from The River Reporter in Narrowsburg NY
December 29, 2017
My notes from the December 28th board meeting are on this page http://www.shoholapa.com/walker-lakeshores-landowners-association.html
December 27, 2017
|
There is a meeting tomorrow at the Walker Lake Clubhouse (The Walker Lake Firehouse if there is a big turnout) at 7:00pm. If you are in Walker Lake, PA Lakeshores, Hinkel or Maple Park GO and be heard!! |
I have two things for today. First, a new post from the Walker Lake Eagle and, below that, a few of my thoughts on the latest buzzword - "transparency".
Ok, now on to "transparency".
Here is what "transparency" apparently looks like to some people.
You set a meeting date and make the people feel warm and cared for.
Here is what "transparency" apparently looks like to some people.
You set a meeting date and make the people feel warm and cared for.
Then, if things make you look bad, you say the meeting is cancelled.
That way, if things like this report will be coming out, less people will be around for you to be "transparent" to!
December 23, 2017
Well, I finally got a bill. The bill is for things Walker Lakeshores was specifically told by the courts that they could not charge.
My guess is that they want to pretend that we never went to court since the courts did not rule in their favor..
My guess is that they want to pretend that we never went to court since the courts did not rule in their favor..
December 8, 2017
Over 300 members just got this in their email and several forwarded it to me.
The audit is revealing a lot of the lies told by Walker Lakeshores when they were in court trying to steal my money and property.
Some of it is evident if you go back to the Pocono Record article. In the article, do you see how their last president says everyone pays? Walker Lakeshores testified to that too several times and it is all a bunch of lies.
Some of it is evident if you go back to the Pocono Record article. In the article, do you see how their last president says everyone pays? Walker Lakeshores testified to that too several times and it is all a bunch of lies.
|
|
|
|
| greetings_members_of_walker_lake.pdf |
December 2, 2017
I'm not going away until I get a bill settling this matter. So, for the one person who likes to ditch my sign down in Shohola, you're just going to have to deal with it. Maybe you should tell your buddies over at Walker Lake to send me a bill to square it all up if this makes you uncomfortable, or, grow a pair and come talk to me.
November 30, 2017
I'm wondering if all the dues paying members over there know that they took out a $174, 450 variable interest rate loan, in July of 2015, that pledged not only all the common property but future 'rents' (aka assessments) if it goes into default.
That is an interesting scenario. If you default on a loan like this you lose all your common property AND have to pay your assessments right to the bank, but, the bank has no responsibility to maintain any of the common properties.
I guess the logic question is - where did the $174,450 go? Or, is it not used yet?
FYI - I still haven't gotten a bill to close out my case.
That is an interesting scenario. If you default on a loan like this you lose all your common property AND have to pay your assessments right to the bank, but, the bank has no responsibility to maintain any of the common properties.
I guess the logic question is - where did the $174,450 go? Or, is it not used yet?
FYI - I still haven't gotten a bill to close out my case.
These are the mortgage documents in their entirety.
|
| ||||
November 19, 2017
Well, so much for trying to move on from this saga.
Rumor has it that there were A LOT of dirty little fingers pulling funds out of the coffers for personal use.
FYI - that email that went out saying the meeting yesterday was cancelled appears to have been a ruse. The meeting was never cancelled.
Rumor has it that there were A LOT of dirty little fingers pulling funds out of the coffers for personal use.
FYI - that email that went out saying the meeting yesterday was cancelled appears to have been a ruse. The meeting was never cancelled.
November 6, 2017
|
Walker Lakeshores appears to have some trouble complying with the courts.
I still haven't gotten a bill to zero out my case and now Hinkel Estates has had to file a motion to compel Walker Lakeshores to comply with their settlement agreement. I posted the settlement agreement that this court date is referring to below in PDF form. It's kind of a long agreement, but, it is very straight forward and nothing that can't be complied with. In fact, it appeared to me to be things that any homeowners association should be doing anyway.
| ||
One has to wonder.....where the hell is their membership in all this?
October 24, 2017
No bill yet.
It doesn’t appear that these people ever actually wanted a court judgement on this matter since they certainly don’t appear to want the money the court gave them.
So they wasted the money from their members (in their lawyer fees).
They wasted my money (in my lawyer fees, lost work, etc.).
And they wasted taxpayer money (in the court costs that exceeded the filing fees).
It’s quite amazing actually. It used to be that they would show up to court with a bill, which I hadn’t even seen yet, which was hot off the printer. They used to just spin them out willy-nilly without any foundation or explanation.
Now it seems that everyone’s fingers are broken and no one can push the print button.
While I’d love to sit here and not worry about it, the title on my home had been clouded because of this since about 2009 and they appear to want to keep it that way. That can’t go on forever because it ruins my investment.
Any logical person needs to wonder why. Who would benefit? More specifically, who IS STILL THERE that would benefit? SOMEONE seems to have a personal interest in leaving this matter open.
It doesn’t appear that these people ever actually wanted a court judgement on this matter since they certainly don’t appear to want the money the court gave them.
So they wasted the money from their members (in their lawyer fees).
They wasted my money (in my lawyer fees, lost work, etc.).
And they wasted taxpayer money (in the court costs that exceeded the filing fees).
It’s quite amazing actually. It used to be that they would show up to court with a bill, which I hadn’t even seen yet, which was hot off the printer. They used to just spin them out willy-nilly without any foundation or explanation.
Now it seems that everyone’s fingers are broken and no one can push the print button.
While I’d love to sit here and not worry about it, the title on my home had been clouded because of this since about 2009 and they appear to want to keep it that way. That can’t go on forever because it ruins my investment.
Any logical person needs to wonder why. Who would benefit? More specifically, who IS STILL THERE that would benefit? SOMEONE seems to have a personal interest in leaving this matter open.
What is the solution? I have to take them back to court to force them to bill me to clear the title on my home?
October 13, 2017
I have not received a bill to settle this matter out yet. It's actually been well over a week now. This really shouldn't be a big deal. They whipped out plenty of bills when they were suing me.
September 28, 2017
And that's a wrap folks. The official paperwork from the Commonwealth Court came in.
Judge Kameen's decision is now reinstated.
I am expecting Walker Lakeshores to fully respect his judgement for all of Maple Park since it was their decision to pursue this matter in the courts. I have not yet received anything from them to properly bring this issue to its final conclusion but this just came in yesterday so there is some time for that.
In the next couple weeks I'm going to change the website to reflect Shohola as a whole. It will be a nice change to move on to more positive content.
Judge Kameen's decision is now reinstated.
I am expecting Walker Lakeshores to fully respect his judgement for all of Maple Park since it was their decision to pursue this matter in the courts. I have not yet received anything from them to properly bring this issue to its final conclusion but this just came in yesterday so there is some time for that.
In the next couple weeks I'm going to change the website to reflect Shohola as a whole. It will be a nice change to move on to more positive content.
September 22, 2017
The Commonwealth Court closed out the docket.
Along with the people mentioned in the video, I would also like to thank:
-My fabulous neighbors for assisting over the years!
-My attorneys for all their hard work and patience with me.
-The River Reporter, Pocono Record, and Wayne-Pike News for their support.
-My fabulous neighbors for assisting over the years!
-My attorneys for all their hard work and patience with me.
-The River Reporter, Pocono Record, and Wayne-Pike News for their support.
September 18, 2017
The Commonwealth Court has their docket open so we are waiting on their decision.
September 15, 2017
The Superior Court closed out their docket. I don't have any word yet from the Commonwealth Court.
I'm wondering, how much taxpayer money has been spent to get this to this ridiculous point?
The costs of these things aren't just shared by the parties involved. The REAL costs have got to be the burden of the taxpayers. I'm sure I'm missing a lot of things but by real costs I mean:
The filing fees to appeal were only $85.50 so that doesn't cover the actual costs. That amount probably pays for about one hour of one judge's time since PA code says "The annual salary of a judge of the Superior Court shall be $194,422."
Taxpayer money is covering ALL the rest of the costs at the Superior Court, and, now taxpayer money will be needed to cover all the costs for this to be completed at the Commonwealth Court.
I'm wondering, how much taxpayer money has been spent to get this to this ridiculous point?
The costs of these things aren't just shared by the parties involved. The REAL costs have got to be the burden of the taxpayers. I'm sure I'm missing a lot of things but by real costs I mean:
- the physical court buildings and furnishings
- all the people who work there (judges, security, clerks, janitors, etc.) including their benefits and retirement packages
- the computers and all the software systems
- paper, printers and other day to day office supplies
- the phones systems, heating, cooling, electric, sewage, security systems, and all the other utilities
- the insurance policies, etc.
The filing fees to appeal were only $85.50 so that doesn't cover the actual costs. That amount probably pays for about one hour of one judge's time since PA code says "The annual salary of a judge of the Superior Court shall be $194,422."
Taxpayer money is covering ALL the rest of the costs at the Superior Court, and, now taxpayer money will be needed to cover all the costs for this to be completed at the Commonwealth Court.
September 9, 2017
One court has spoken. Now we wait on the Commonwealth Court.
A follow-up article from The River Reporter: http://riverreporter.com/news-news-stories/homeowners-association-moves-withdraw-appeal
September 2, 2017
Walker Lakeshores Landowners Association has decided to ask to withdraw their appeal.
The best information I have for their reason for this appears to point in a couple of possible directions:
1. They feel that they don't have a case.
2. They didn't want to go to the Commonwealth Court under the premise that they are a nonprofit corporation when they are (according to a PA State Prosecutor) a for-profit corporation.
There are plenty of other rumors about this but I've not yet verified any of those. Maybe their membership got tired of paying tons of money for this?
The best information I have for their reason for this appears to point in a couple of possible directions:
1. They feel that they don't have a case.
2. They didn't want to go to the Commonwealth Court under the premise that they are a nonprofit corporation when they are (according to a PA State Prosecutor) a for-profit corporation.
There are plenty of other rumors about this but I've not yet verified any of those. Maybe their membership got tired of paying tons of money for this?
I don't know if this is the end of it since I have not been given much more information beyond what this paper says. I added a video on the Video Blog page about this new development.
August 25, 2017
I have more papers and letters like the one below and the letter (from 2001) on the Maple Park page. All of them are seeking help from the PA Attorney General's Office at different times. Many people here called the Attorney General when this was circulating. The response from that office was poor.
I think I'm going to collect all these and make a new page about people who have asked for help from various governmental agencies/ officials and how our property rights continue to be ignored. If the PA Attorney General's Office had done their job back in 2001, or in 2014 when this anonymous letter was sent out, I wouldn't be in this situation now.
This letter was anonymous so the person makes a lot of opinionated statements. While those items need to be taken with a grain of salt, some of the other claims have proven to be true and those are really the important points. I speak about those items in the associated video.
The video talking about this letter and the PA Attorney General issue is on the Video Blog page.
I think I'm going to collect all these and make a new page about people who have asked for help from various governmental agencies/ officials and how our property rights continue to be ignored. If the PA Attorney General's Office had done their job back in 2001, or in 2014 when this anonymous letter was sent out, I wouldn't be in this situation now.
This letter was anonymous so the person makes a lot of opinionated statements. While those items need to be taken with a grain of salt, some of the other claims have proven to be true and those are really the important points. I speak about those items in the associated video.
The video talking about this letter and the PA Attorney General issue is on the Video Blog page.
August 23, 2017
The latest news article on our case: http://riverreporter.com/news-news-stories/shohola-property-rights-legal-battle
August 14, 2017
Ultra Cheap Real Estate video can be found on the Vlog page
Court dockets can be searched here: https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/docketsheets.aspx
Deeds can be found here: https://pa.uslandrecords.com/palr2/PalrApp/index.jsp
Court dockets can be searched here: https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/docketsheets.aspx
Deeds can be found here: https://pa.uslandrecords.com/palr2/PalrApp/index.jsp
As I spoke about in the video, this is one of about 20 cases I've been following to see what happens to the real estate after there is a court case brought by Walker Lake Shores Landowners Association.
A visual of the proximity of the tax sale lots compares to the foreclosed home. Per the public records the three tax sale lots appear to have been bought by the board member circa December 28, 2016. The HOA takes title to the foreclosure January 4, 2017.
Tax information can be found here: http://gis.pikepa.org/myiDVViewer/Map/6fa0db243f2226d2/Pike-County-Parcel-Viewer
Tax information can be found here: http://gis.pikepa.org/myiDVViewer/Map/6fa0db243f2226d2/Pike-County-Parcel-Viewer
The foreclosure is given to the HOA for $1.
The computed value of the foreclosed home is $58,968.00
This was sent via email to a select group of people. Some of those people sent it to me.
As luck would have it, the highest sealed bid ($2,000) appears to have come from the board member who bought the tax sale lots next door to the foreclosure.
That is roughly a 96.5% discount on the computed value of the home.
That is roughly a 96.5% discount on the computed value of the home.
To define the term Self-Dealing that I used in the video, Wikipedia says: Self-dealing is the conduct of a trustee, an attorney, a corporate officer, or other fiduciary that consists of taking advantage of his position in a transaction and acting for his own interests rather than for the interests of the beneficiaries of the trust, corporate shareholders, or his clients.
The IRS has further information on self-dealing: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/private-foundations/acts-of-self-dealing-by-private-foundation
The IRS has further information on self-dealing: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/private-foundations/acts-of-self-dealing-by-private-foundation
On an unrelated note - the attorney suing me for the HOA bought a tax sale lot right next to my home in 2007. The $5,440.98 "back dues" lawsuit the HOA brought against me was for years 2008, 2009, 2010.
August 3, 2017
I found a letter from a Maple Park property owner to the Pennsylvania Attorney General that was dated back in 2001. That person complains, among other things, that the HOA's tactics are both "unorthodox and bizarre".
His argument appears to be exactly the same thing we just had to argue in court. That means that he was right, and, any attorney at the Attorney General's office should have seen that he was right.
It's a curiosity as to why, despite multiple complaints over at least 16 years, the PA Attorney General will do nothing to help Maple Park. Read his letter on the Maple Park page.
His argument appears to be exactly the same thing we just had to argue in court. That means that he was right, and, any attorney at the Attorney General's office should have seen that he was right.
It's a curiosity as to why, despite multiple complaints over at least 16 years, the PA Attorney General will do nothing to help Maple Park. Read his letter on the Maple Park page.
August 2, 2017
They appealed to the wrong court so now the case has been transferred.
July 29th 2017
In Walker Lakeshores Landowners Association's Post Trial Motions - #2 refers to a double billing issue that they had refused to acknowledge even though their own paperwork shows they had improperly received money from the Department of Veterans Affairs for my property.
Six out of six of the last foreclosures in Maple Park all had "back dues" lawsuits. I know that some of them were double billed.
It took Walker Lakeshores six years to finally admit that they were suing me for money they had incorrectly billed (since they weren't entitled to it) and had already been paid. They only did that when the case was at trial in 2016.
Here is a clip from their own Post Trial Motion (2017).
Six out of six of the last foreclosures in Maple Park all had "back dues" lawsuits. I know that some of them were double billed.
It took Walker Lakeshores six years to finally admit that they were suing me for money they had incorrectly billed (since they weren't entitled to it) and had already been paid. They only did that when the case was at trial in 2016.
Here is a clip from their own Post Trial Motion (2017).
Here is their own 'Account Breakdown': we received this in 2008 or 2010 but it says 2006 because they said they had "changed systems" or something.
Note that the assessments and dues only run about $235 per year at that point.
The Department of Veterans Affairs had paid Walker Lakeshores $997. 57 January 31, 2004. That same amount was charged to the 'account' that same day.
Note that the assessments and dues only run about $235 per year at that point.
The Department of Veterans Affairs had paid Walker Lakeshores $997. 57 January 31, 2004. That same amount was charged to the 'account' that same day.
Here is the first amount they sued me for (2010). Note that the $235 +- annual assessments, they are claiming to the court that we owe on our 'account' with them, have now ballooned over $3,090.23 in 4 years.
That is $772.55 per year. That amount (which did not include the court costs or lawyers fees they wanted) reflects an amount that is still higher than their own members' pay for lake and road assessments plus membership dues.
That is $772.55 per year. That amount (which did not include the court costs or lawyers fees they wanted) reflects an amount that is still higher than their own members' pay for lake and road assessments plus membership dues.
Despite testifying to the contrary in court in 2016, Walker Lakeshores did in fact assert that I had no right to the use of my easement granted to my property via the 1911 deed. Read the highlighted passage on the top right side of the 2013 bill below.
In 2017 Walker Lakeshores is quoted in the Pocono Record as saying:
"Their deeds give them access and the right to use the lake,” said Politano. “Nobody forbids anybody from using it. Nobody is denied access to the lake.”
http://www.poconorecord.com/news/20170121/fees-muddy-waters-at-walker-lake
Also, this bill ignores the Magistrate's decision ( see the Lawsuits page) and reflects an annual billing of $795.05 a year from the previous bill.
In 2017 Walker Lakeshores is quoted in the Pocono Record as saying:
"Their deeds give them access and the right to use the lake,” said Politano. “Nobody forbids anybody from using it. Nobody is denied access to the lake.”
http://www.poconorecord.com/news/20170121/fees-muddy-waters-at-walker-lake
Also, this bill ignores the Magistrate's decision ( see the Lawsuits page) and reflects an annual billing of $795.05 a year from the previous bill.
July 27th 2017
See the second section of the Home Page for the contradictory statements Walker Lakeshores makes regarding assessments, and, see the bottom area of the Maple Park Page about the double billing issue.
July 25th 2017
Three new updates for today: the requirements for the briefs, the Motion to Quash, and the Judge's opinion about the points Walker Lakeshores Landowners Association made on the appeal.
I added some of my opinions in text but the PDFs are long so to include things in their entirety I just posted the PDFs.
I added some of my opinions in text but the PDFs are long so to include things in their entirety I just posted the PDFs.
These requirements appear to be why these things get so expensive for everyone involved. You'd think any party appealing a case this far would be careful to be sure they actually had a case worth it.
We filed a Motion to Quash the appeal. It appears that while they want to avoid abiding by the court's decision, they don't appear to want to actually do the work involved in the appeal.
| motion_to_quash.pdf |
It looks like part of the appeal process is that the Judge being appealed responds to the points made by the Appellant. Here is the response to Walker Lakeshores Landowners Association's appeal from the Pike County Court of Common Pleas.
My opinions on it:
Anyway the Judge is spot on, and to the letter of the law, and I will always be grateful for his clarity and judgment on this case. When this is all done I am certainly going to send him a thank you note expressing my appreciation for his work.
My opinions on it:
- I particularly like the parts where the Judge says things like "...Defendants were not and are not members of Plaintiff..." That is what we've known all along and the HOA repeatedly tried to make us ( and plenty of other people ) believe otherwise.
- It's not an honest mistake on their part either. They have had an attorney on retainer since the day they incorporated so they know the laws.
- If you read that graphic with the snippet below you will understand why there hasn't been a published budget since 2013. The assessments don't even match the budget.
Anyway the Judge is spot on, and to the letter of the law, and I will always be grateful for his clarity and judgment on this case. When this is all done I am certainly going to send him a thank you note expressing my appreciation for his work.
| pearn_bill___amelia_judge_response.pdf |
July 20th 2017
It appears that Walker Lakeshores Landowners Association cannot be bothered to file the paperwork for their appeal. This was due July 3rd and according to the Prothonotary they have not received it.
Court statement June 23rd: "Appellants are directed to show cause as to the basis of this Court's jurisdiction over this matter. This statement is due within 10 days of the date of this order. "
July 19th 2017
I'm still waiting on receipt of the response Walker Lakeshores Landowners Association was supposed to submit to the Superior Court by July 3rd. I don't know if they asked for an extension or if I just haven't received it. The Superior Court was the wrong court to appeal to so they have to explain why they appealed there. Here is the docket:
June 24th 2017
|
Regarding the June 15th paperwork: I'm not at all opposed to people maintaining their easements. We all have a deeded requirement to maintain our road easements here in Maple Park. We are required to maintain the road in front of our property to the middle of the road. When people don't maintain their part, the burden of maintenance then falls on the local elderly and families who have to have the ingress/egress to their homes.
Snow plowing and erosion control are an annual issue here and it is often avoided by the owners who are investors. This photo is a good example of what happens when someone does not maintain their easement. My property stops at the first telephone pole on the right. The next lot up is owned by the HOA's attorney. |
Since he does not maintain his part of the easement, as he is required to do in his deeds, the road often floods and freezes from that point in front of his lot by the big pine tree on the right. In the 10 years that he has owned that investment lot (and two more Maple Park lots up further) I have never seen him maintain his part of any easement.
He actually questioned me in court about how we maintain our Maple Park roads. When I started to explain about the issues with "uninvolved investors" that line of questioning promptly stopped. That was a shame because I had a lot to say about elderly war veterans having to pay for the easement maintenance of lots owned by investors. Those veterans have to have necessary services to their homes. They have no choice but to pay the extra to keep the roads open and that disgusts me.
As a community we should all do our part at least where we are REQUIRED to do it. We should not be SUED to maintain easements in areas where we have no rights or responsibilites.
He actually questioned me in court about how we maintain our Maple Park roads. When I started to explain about the issues with "uninvolved investors" that line of questioning promptly stopped. That was a shame because I had a lot to say about elderly war veterans having to pay for the easement maintenance of lots owned by investors. Those veterans have to have necessary services to their homes. They have no choice but to pay the extra to keep the roads open and that disgusts me.
As a community we should all do our part at least where we are REQUIRED to do it. We should not be SUED to maintain easements in areas where we have no rights or responsibilites.
June 20th 2017
Oopsie - The appeal was filed in the wrong court.
June 15th 2017 - Concise Statement of Matters
I had quite a few comments I typed up about this document, but, I'm just going to narrow that down to two main points. Here is page 1 of 2:
Point 1. In section one part B, the time period of the suit is 2008 -2010. Here is their own budget from that exact time period which is available on their website in newsletter July/Augusta 2009 Volume 112.
How does anyone come up with a $5,440.98 bill out of this budget? Even full members with multiple lots and road assessments wouldn't have a bill that high for those years.
How does anyone come up with a $5,440.98 bill out of this budget? Even full members with multiple lots and road assessments wouldn't have a bill that high for those years.
The follow up budget from the newsletter of July/August 2010 changes the assessments to be equal across the board. We are not equal. We are a separate development with a 106 year old easement. Based on these budgets, a $605 minimum assessment for all new owners appears to be a bit self serving.
Concise Statement of Matters, page 2 of 2:
Point 2. Section 4. Walker Lakeshores directors have repeatedly told Maple Park people that “The Pearn case only applies to their property and no one else in Maple Park.” ……but now the Whyte case suddenly applies to my property?
Which way is it Walker Lakeshores Landowners Association? You can’t have it both ways. Since you are trying to use Whyte’s case against me as a “precedent”, it is then fair to assume that Walker Lakeshores Landowners Association will be honoring the outcome of my case with ALL Maple Park owners, right?
From what I remember, Whyte's case appeared to have been settled out of court after arbitration and did not get a Court of Common Pleas judgement like I did. That means that I AM the precedent for Maple Park. So why are the bills in Maple Park not being adjusted according to my judgement from December 2016?
Which way is it Walker Lakeshores Landowners Association? You can’t have it both ways. Since you are trying to use Whyte’s case against me as a “precedent”, it is then fair to assume that Walker Lakeshores Landowners Association will be honoring the outcome of my case with ALL Maple Park owners, right?
From what I remember, Whyte's case appeared to have been settled out of court after arbitration and did not get a Court of Common Pleas judgement like I did. That means that I AM the precedent for Maple Park. So why are the bills in Maple Park not being adjusted according to my judgement from December 2016?
June 12th 2017 - I haven't heard anything new about my case, but, PA State Rep. Rosemary Brown's House Bill 595 is moving along. Please support her efforts.
Status on Home Owner Association Legislation – House Bill 595
As you probably know, I am sponsoring House Bill 595, a bill to improve the way investigations and mediation complaints are handled in residential communities across the Commonwealth. Click here to learn more about the bill, which passed the House in April and was sent to the Senate. Because I have heard from many constituents asking about the current status of this bill, I want to give you a status update.
The Senate Urban Affairs and Housing Committee passed the bill on May 24. The bill must now be considered by the full Senate. My staff and I are suggesting concerned constituents call their state senator and let them know how important this bill is, and ask that he or she support a full Senate floor vote on House Bill 595.
Area senators’ district office contact information:
Sen. Mario Scavello: 570-620-4326 - mscavello@pasen.gov
Sen. John Blake: 570-207-2881 - jblake@pasenate.com
Sen. Lisa Baker: 570-675-3931 - lbaker@pasen.gov
May 30th 2017 - We are waiting on receipt of the Concise Statement of Matters Complained as requested by the judge. I'm curious to see how the Appellant wants to try to justify this.
I also found the Superior Court docket.
I also found the Superior Court docket.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania - Walker Lakeshores Landowners Association v. William Pearn and Amelia Pearn - Docket 1463 EDA 2017
