HOAG/Plaintiff Email

Last week, homeowners received two emails from the HOAG and plaintiffs; one was a flyer, the other an email with attachments.  Let’s start with the email addressed to “Fellow Homestead Home & Condo Owners”:

The first paragraph begins with the history of Homestead’s lawsuit:
“The HOAG was initially formed to try and find a solution, that failed because MJ Management and 18 Paradise didn’t want to negotiate. So, a litigation was started…”   

Since many people have moved to Homestead since 2020, we wanted to provide details about these negotiations from the HOAG’s own updates:

Dec. 29, 2019, HOAG Update 1: “The first goal is to get organized, then move to negotiation or lawyer.”

Jan. 16, 2020, HOAG Update 3: “If you were not able to attend the Jan. 13 meeting, then the following is for you: We are working on setting up an Attorney Fund.”

Jan. 29, 2020, HOAG Update 4: “We had a meeting with two attorneys, Dave Andersson and Daniel Clark. We learned and discussed legal avenues that we can take if needed.”

In one month, the HOAG was already:
– Meeting with attorney David Andersson
– Setting up an attorney fund
– Discussing legal options
In hindsight, involving David Andersson this early appeared to create a pressure to choose litigation for the HOAG who, we believe, had good intentions in representing us homeowners. We also believe, based on what HOAG members have told us, they initially wanted to avoid litigation but with an attorney influencing their decisions, the scale was tipped. Without trying arbitration or mediation, and despite a second attorney recommending Summary Judgement for a quicker solution, their decision gained momentum.

Feb. 28, 2020, HOAG Update 5: “Unfortunately, negotiations with MJ Management have failed. As a result, we feel that there is no other alternative than to consider a possible legal case against the current owner of the golf course (18 Paradise LLP) and MJ Management.”

The HOAG’s email then ends with additional information:
“While this was going on, a different group of homeowners that didn’t want the litigation formed a group that tried to produce a plan while working thru it with Mick. Well Mick declined their plan too.”

This “different group” is the Advisory Board which the HOAG website, throughout 2021 and 2022, labeled a “myth” and claimed the members were “chosen by MJ Management,” which we now know was careless misinformation from lawyers and plaintiffs. The Advisory Board had spent a year working to re-structure Homestead on behalf of the homeowners’ need for accountability, setting up a reserve fund, prioritizing repairs, amending CCRs and amendments. Mick’s decision to decline their plan showed they were an independent Board working for the homeowners.

If the HOAG and plaintiffs did not bother to verify the truth about the Advisory Board for nearly 2 years, and continued to post this falsehood on their website, can we trust them to verify any of their other claims?