8 class action lawsuit against Bella Collina (Part 8 of 15)

On June 4, 2004, the Sutherins purchased lot 277 of Bella Collina and constructed a home for $2,100,000 in which they resided with their family until 2015, at which time they felt compelled to leave the community and rent their home due the harassment of the Conspirators.
Randall Greene was Accused of Stealing Bella Collina House

Back to part 7 of 15

KATHRYN AND BART SUTHERIN

  1. On June 4, 2004, the Sutherins purchased lot 277 of Bella Collina and constructed a home for $2,100,000 in which they resided with their family until 2015, at which time they felt compelled to leave the community and rent their home due the harassment of the Conspirators.
  2. They also bought an undeveloped lot which they surrendered to the mortgagee, SunTrust Bank.
  3. The Conspirators, through the POA and the Golf Club, mail false invoices for club dues each month.
  4. Every month from July, 2012 to until the present, the conspirators mailed false statements for alleged assessments for POA assessments and club dues on both properties.
  5. During 2013, Greene threatened to prevent school bus access to the community as retaliation against the Sutherins.
  6. During August or September 2014, without any POA board meeting, Aegis, Burman and Greene, in furtherance of the Conspirators’ objective to harass homeowners, prohibited the Lake County School District from picking up the Sutherin children, among the very few children in the sparsely built our community of school age, at a sate and convenient location within Bella Colina and required the District’s buses to transport the children at a dangerous, inconvenient location outside of the community.
  7. The DCS controlled POA sued the Sutherins in the Circuit Court of Lake County, Florida for the illegal special assessment on their home at case number 2012-CA-004493, for the illegal special assessment on their surrendered lot at case number 2014-CA-000528 (even though SunTrust subsequently satisfied all liens and encumbrances during a transfer of 78 foreclosed lots it surrendered to DCS to satisfy illegal assessment demands of the POA), for an injunction against helicopter flight (withdrawn) at case number 2015-CA-001532, for speculative water usage payments falsely claimed by the DCS controlled Pine Island COD and use of a landscape irrigation well authorized by the CC&Rs but outlawed by subsequent illegal and fraudulent CC&Rs at case number 2016-CA-001274.
  8. When Sutherins paid the partial judgment to the POA, Ryan rejected the payment and instructed her to make the check payable to an account controlled by the Ryan Law Group, depriving the POA of any benefit.
  9. The Conspirators prohibit the Sutherins from access to the Golf Club even though they are current in all dues.
  10. The conspirators threatened interference with the rental or sale of the Sutherins’ home.
  11. On May 3, 2016, at 9:13, Greene texted Katherine Sutherin, after illegally obtaining her cell phone number from POA records, and issued the following thinly veiled threats: “Catherine, it was really good seeing you so much this past weekend when you would stop in front of my house and lay on the horn. It’s good to see that you miss “us”….”By the way, congrats on your new tenant,” “can’t wait to see you guys soon,” and at 10:15 “Ha! You’re funny. Once again you always have incorrect information (so typical of you) We will be in touch very soon on what you owe us. See you soon in Court.”
  12. During the May 3, 2016 exchange of texts, Greene responded to Kathryn Sutherin’s accusation that he was obsessed with harassing and intimidating them and sent a Bella Collina embossed mug to their new home for that purpose with the following:

“Once again you give yourself too much credit in assuming I am obsessed with you people. You don’t pay your bills to anyone including several lawyers I know. We sent you a mug just to let you know that we have not forgotten that you still owe us money and we know where to send the copy of the judgment when we get it. You are the child blowing your horn and so is your husband w the chopper buzzing houses in BC. Next time I get an N number when comes out here, my lawyer will file another complaint..” “I really don’t like white trash.”

  1. The POA denied and will continue to deny the Sutherins access to their community by turning off their transponder, which allows residents of Bella Collina to access the community using the automated gate.
  2. Further, the Club at Bella Collina, LLC, denies the Sutherins access to club facilities even though they are current with all dues and monthly minimums, as retaliation for the Sutherins’ resistance to the Conspirators’ control of the community.
  3. On July 31, 2016, Katherin Sutherin discovered that the transponder for her vehicle had been disabled by the POA, and she had to gain access to her community by seeking the permission of a security guard to enter through the guest gate.
  4. On August l, 2016, Bart Sutherin discovered from the security guard posted at the entrance gate that his transponder had been disabled by Greene, an employee of DCS and its appointed member of the POA board.
  5. Security further informed Mr. Sutherin that they were required to follow him and report his location to Greene.
  6. While Mr. Sutherin was on his property, Green pulled up in a car to a nearby vacant lot to observe him.
  7. Greene used his position in the HOA to gain access to the Sutherins’ cell telephone number to send harrassing texts, and mailed a mug to the Sutherins’ new home after they changed their residence as a thinly veiled threat.
  8. POA assessments on lot 277 are fully paid.
  9. The POA never conducted a board meeting to consider suspension of the Sutherins’ access rights or informed them in writing of such a suspension as required by law.
  10. Despite receiving full payment for any and all outstanding amounts, the POA continues to refuse to allow the Plaintiffs access to their community in violation ofFlorida Statutes §§ 720.305, which states in pertinent part:

(a) An association may suspend. for a reasonable period of time, the right of a member, or a member’s tenant, guest, or invitee, to use common areas and facilities for the failure of the owner of the parcel or its occupant, licensee, or invitee to comply with any provision of the declaration, the association bylaws, or reasonable rules of the association. This paragraph does not apply to that portion of common areas used to provide access or utility services to the parcel. A suspension may not prohibit an owner or tenant of a parcel from having vehicular and pedestrian ingress to and egress from the parcel, including, but not limited to, the right to park.

(b) A fine or suspension may not be imposed by the board of administration without at least 14 days’ notice to the person sought to be fined or suspended and an opportunity for a hearing before a committee of at least three members appointed by the board who are not officers, directors, or employees of the association, or the spouse, parent, child, brother, or sister of an officer, director, or employee. If the committee, by majority vote, does not approve a proposed fine or suspension, it may not be imposed. The role of the committee is limited to determining whether to confirm or reject the fine or suspension levied by the board. If the board of administration imposes a fine or suspension, the association must provide written notice of such fine or suspension by mail or hand delivery to the parcel owner and, if applicable, to any tenant, licensee, or invitee of the parcel owner.

(3) If a member is more than 90 days delinquent in paying any fee, fine, or other monetary obligation due to the association, the association may suspend the rights of the member, or the member’s tenant, guest, or invitee, to use common areas and facilities until the fee, fine, or other monetary obligation is paid in full. This subsection docs not apply to that portion of common areas used to provide access or utility services to the parcel. A suspension mav not prohibit an owner or tenant of a parcel from having vehicular and pedestrian ingress to and egress from the parcel, including, but not limited to, the right to park. The notice and hearing requirements under subsection (2) do not apply to a suspension imposed under this subsection.

(4) An association may suspend the voting rights of a parcel or member for the nonpayment of any fee, fine, or other monetary obligation due to the association that is more than 90 days delinquent. A voting interest or consent right allocated to a parcel or member which has been suspended by the association shall be subtracted from the total number of voting interests in the association, which shall be reduced by the number of suspended voting interests when calculating the total percentage or number of all voting interests available to take or approve any action, and the suspended voting interests shall not be considered for any purpose, including, but not limited to, the percentage or number of voting interests necessary to constitute a quorum, the percentage or number of voting interests required to conduct an election, or the percentage or number of voting interests required to approve an action under this chapter or pursuant to the governing documents. The notice and hearing requirements under subsection (2) do not apply to a suspension imposed under this subsection. The suspension ends upon full payment of all obligations currently due or overdue to the association.

(5) All suspensions imposed pursuant to subsection (3) or subsection (4) must be approved at a properly noticed board meeting. Upon approval, the association must notify the parcel owner and, if applicable, the parcel’s occupant, licensee, or invitee by mail or hand delivery.

(Emphasis added.)

  1. As indicated in Exhibit B, the Sutherins suffered damages in the nature of decreased property value and expenses of at least $1,529,110, all of which is directly and proximately caused by the conspirators’ conduct as described in this complaint.

BRAD AND LANA C. HECKENBERG

  1. Brad and Lana Heckenberg owned four lots.
  2. Lots 408 and 409, located at 16536 Bolsena Drive, Montverde, Florida 34756, were consolidated and improved with a residence.
  3. In 2012, the Conspirators sued for false assessments, which suit they dismissed in consideration for the surrender of two lots, at a below fair market price, and the execution of a settlement agreement with a liquidated damages penalty clause of $100,000 for breach of confidentiality or disparagement.
  4. The Conspirators mail a false invoice for club dues each month.
  5. The Heckenbergs sought to build an addition to their home, but were required to use Phoenix Homes, owned by conspirators Clarke and Arrighi, which made the project cost prohibitive.
  6. The Heckenbergs have been subjected to constant harassment, including denial of resident access to the community involvement in the POA, insults and threats of fines for fabricated violations related to signs, refuse, irrigation well usage, and denial of Country Club use, even though the coerced membership is fully paid.
  7. The illegal control of the POA, suppression of lot prices and inflated POA and COD and charges caused a diminution of the value of their property of, as indicated on schedule

ITZ GROUP, LLC

  1. Petitioner ITZ Group, LLC owns lot 48 located at 160I5 Pendio Dr., Montverde, Fl. It entered into a Lot Purchase Agreement on April 24, 2004 and closed on June 7, 2004. The Conspirators mail a false invoice for club dues each month.
  1. It entered into a Lot Purchase Agreement on April 24, 2004 and closed on June 7, 2004
  2. The Conspirators mail a false invoice for club dues each month.
  3. As indicated on Schedule B, attached hereto and incorporated herein, the conduct of the Conspirators directly caused the loss o f $448,308.

THE SHIN TRUST AND PJS

  1. PJS Rental LLC, managed by Dr. Kyu Ho Shin, M.D. for his children, purchased lot 268 for $40,000, from Won S. Yi, who had purchased the lot for $40,000 from Dr. Kyu Ho Shin, M.D. and Won T. Shin his wife who had purchased the lot from Ginn for $709,900, receiving a deed dated June 13, 2005.
  2. PJS Rental, LLC received Ginn a HUD registered report dated April 2, 2004, which indicated on page 13 that construction of the country club, and other amenities, was optional at the discretion o f the developer and membership was not mandatory.
  3. By deed dated October 6, 2008, the Won Y. Shin Trust dated December 12, 2004 purchased lot 379 for $265,000 from Joseph Sonny who purchased the lot from Ginn on July 9, 2004 for $589,900.
  4. The Ryans and the Ryan Law Firm, in furtherance of the Conspiracy, filed a lawsuit to enforce a build compulsion contained in the Amended CC&Rs and the Second Amended CC&Rs, which had expired in 2014, but had been illegally extended for another ten (10) years in the fraudulent Third Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for Bella Collina at paragraph 23, subparagraph 5 states that the repurchase right shall expire'”…teR (IO) twenty (20) years after the date of these CC&Rs are recorded in the Public Records.”
  5. The illegal enforcement of an expired build compulsion was a scheme that the Conspirators employed to selectively extort lots from Bella Collina lot owners.

Continue to part 9 of 15

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on pinterest

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *