More conflicts between buyers and developers

Buyer goes after Related assets in condo lawsuit

A Coral Gables law firm is seeking to garnish Related Group assets for failing to pay a condo depositor despite a Miami-Dade Circuit judge’s order.

The company was ordered to pay Rafael Maldonado $16,388 after Circuit Judge Jon I. Gordon sided with the would-be buyer, who demanded the return of a portion of his down payment after he failed to close on the condo under a 2005 contract. Maldonado’s attorneys, Robert G. Post and Carlos A. Romero with Post & Romero, say it’s a story they’ve heard too frequently since the housing market crashed: a developer engaging in delaying tactics and not returning deposits.

The funds remain in an escrow under the control of Chicago Title Insurance. Romero said the company will not release the funds without authorization from Related. Romero’s firm filed a motion for a writ of garnishment against the company Monday. Escrow account managers at Chicago Title’s Florida offices did not return calls for comment before deadline. Although the April 13 judgment does not state when the funds should be paid, Romero cites a state law that allows for collection on the judgment after 10 days if the defense doesn’t post bond or seek an appeal. Monday was the 27th day.

“It seems to me that if the developer just wanted to pay, it would have done so in 2009 without making an innocent party jump so many hoops unnecessarily. These delay tactics continue to be seen and felt by innocent buyers,” Romero said.

He said the developer’s in-house counsel, Elizabeth E.S. Hollander, is now coming up with reasons to justify delaying payment. “This in-house counsel took the position that they had a ‘reasonable amount’ of time to pay the judgment,” Romero wrote in an e-mail Monday. “The judgment neither reflects nor provides for postponement of payment for any time, let alone a reasonable period of time.” Hollander, Related’s assistant associate general counsel, argues the judge’s order could be interpreted to allow the company to disburse funds at a later time, according to an e-mail provided by Post & Romero. Hollander declined comment.

The company’s lead attorney in the case, Related vice president and associate general counsel Betsy McCoy, did not return calls by deadline. The final judgment ordered the company to pay Maldonado a portion of his deposit. He put down $59,780 on a $298,900 unit on the 11th floor of the Arquitectonica-designed 500 Brickell West Tower condominium. Gordon ordered Related to return 25 percent of the deposit plus interest as required by the purchase contract. When Maldonado found the unit in 2005, the Puerto Rican attorney thought it was a perfect fit.

He was looking for a small condo near the heart of the city, a place to stay during short visits to see his mother and sister. The one-bedroom unit was just a few steps from the gym, on the same floor as the swimming pool and had a sunset-view balcony. When the housing bubble burst, the condo lost value, and Maldonado — who represents developers — decided to pull out of the deal and keep a portion of the deposit. “The worst part is they sold the apartment to someone else, and they haven’t paid me my miserable 25 percent.

I’m losing a considerable amount of money,” Maldonado said Tuesday. “I’ve been dealing with canceling this for over a year now.” Related, which uses the motto “Redefining cities and skylines” on its Web site, was one of Miami’s most prolific condo builders during the boom years and became a national leader in the industry.

Like many other developers, Related went into contraction mode, recently pulling out as a partner in the Trump Towers luxury condo in Sunny Isles Beach.

Henry B. Nathan is a Florida Realtor at United Realty Group Inc.
Visit my website: GoldenIsles-homes.com
where you can search for Golden Isles Real Estate

BP's disaster, Offshore Drilling, and Florida

In September 2009 I endorsed, on this blog, the opposition, by some Florida West Coast politicians, to offshore oil drilling outside Florida Gulf Coast.

For many people, and many of our elected officers, it might have seemed "sensible" to accept taking high stake risks to feed our appetite for fossil energy, as opposed to seeking renewable and non-polluting ways to power our vehicles, factories, and homes.

Is it the easiest way to go?
Nobody is saying so.

Will it work at once?
No

Is it the only long-term solution?
Hell yes!

Is it only about Global Warming?
Not really.


Is it about a healthier life in a less polluted environment?
Sure.


Is it economically practical? Won't it destroy our present way of life?
It might not work for a few years, until our present civilization adapts, but nobody can envision a different road to ensure human life for centuries to come.

Will it be a factor in world-wide human happiness?
I believe it will. Lack of adequate sources of energy is a large factor of poverty in many third world countries.

Will it make sense for the US?
It should. Unless you think that dependency on Middle East Sheikhs, Iran's Mullahs, Chavez & Co., is beneficial to our economy and world's democracy.

What is the cost associated to making these big changes happen?
If you factor in the costs of Irak,and other historical wars and conflicts originated in oil dependency, and oil business, it might actually be pretty cheap.

Will somebody lose in these proposals? Why are so many of our policy makers favoring the "drill-drill" ideology?

Actually somebody might have a problem with renewable energy. Perhaps the Big Oil conglomerates? But even these corporations could gradually switch to renewable-energy if they were willing to sacrifice for a few years part of their exorbitant profits.


Here is what I read today in the news, that provoked my thoughts:

From FloridaRealtors.org :

Oil issue dead in Florida for now

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – May 4, 2010 – Gov. Charlie Crist declared the issue of drilling off the Florida coast effectively dead Monday as he monitored the latest news surrounding an oil spill caused by an explosion on a BP rig last month.

"It hasn't happened in Florida, but it happened in Louisiana and we may suffer as a result of it," he said. "But I think the timeliness of when this occurred is pretty extraordinary when you think about it because there may have been legislation in this last week that would have permitted it, but for this occurring."

Incoming Senate President Mike Haridopolos and House Speaker Designate Dean Cannon have pushed for offshore oil drilling in Florida for the past two years. The two have held hearings over the past year on the subject to garner support for the proposal. With the two of them set to lead the two chambers come November 2010, oil drilling was expected to become a major part of their platforms.

A committee led by Cannon had even released a report talking about the potential benefits of drilling.

But when the oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico exploded, the two incoming leaders were less fervent in their support of drilling, saying they needed to monitor the situation closely and tour the coastal areas.

"We're going to take the entire summer and fall to see, first and foremost, what happened in the Gulf," Haridopolos told reporters last week. "It gives me great pause. But a tragedy does not stop all progress."

Nearly every major candidate for office has weighed in on the issue. Chief Financial Officer and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Alex Sink called for disaster loans and an oil spill task force Monday afternoon. And Attorney General Bill McCollum said last week that he would veto Cannon's proposal if he were governor because it involved drilling too close to the shore.

"If I'm governor, he'll face a veto on my desk if he brings it up the way it is now," McCollum said last week.

State Sen. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach, who is running for attorney general, put out a release saying he was "inalterably opposed" to drilling. What potential Cabinet members think matters because under the proposal as it was last floated, the Cabinet would ultimately decide on new leases.

"I don't think we need to study it, I think we need to reject it outright and put the entire idea where it belongs: in our rear view mirror," Gelber said.

Scott Maddox, a Democratic candidate for agriculture commissioner, held a press conference Monday asking all candidates for Cabinet positions to sign a pledge saying they would not support offshore oil drilling in Florida.

"No state in the nation is dependent on its beaches for tourism the way Florida is," he said.

His Republican opponent, U.S. Rep. Adam Putnam, R-Bartow, also released a statement saying he was "deeply concerned" about the economic and ecological impact of the spill.

"It is clear to every elected official, from the President on down, that consideration of any new exploration closer to shore needs to be taken off the table and we need to have a thorough investigation into what happened and the inability of the industry to effectively respond," Putnam said.

Henry B. Nathan is a Florida Realtor at United Realty Group Inc.
Visit my website: http://www.condo-southflorida.com
where you can search for Aventura Condos, Florida Condos, Sunny Isles Condos,

They will never give up!

Look at what I have read today:

The amount of cynicism is infinite, but we are getting used to it.

So, these insurance companies are so, but so worried that Citizens, (the state sponsored Property Insurance company which insures a large proportion of our homes against hurricane risks), could get in trouble. Actually Citizens is their competition and they are doing fine.

Listen to this: “Floridians would be faced with even higher assessments from Citizens. We simply can’t afford to let that happen,” said Jay Newman, chairman of Davie-based Sawgrass Mutual Insurance Co.

Have these insurance companies suddenly become our new public advocates?

What they can't or do not want to afford is losing the business of Floridian homeowners who would be caught under their grip without remedy if these bill are ever passed.

These insurance companies have been trying to raise their rates for a long time. Even though we haven't had a major hurricane in five years. Not only so, but they now also want to limit the consumers' claims, by:

"reining in" the PUBLIC ADJUSTERS (because they are too friendly to the consumer - you're right: collect more and pay less is good for business)

And last but not least, we are not dupe because:

" Both bills also call for insurance rate hikes, an issue downplayed by the group."

This is in reality the bottom line and all what really matters. These are powerful corporations and their ultimate goal is to make money at any cost and as much as possible.

We all understand that. So don't try to fool us into all this nonsense. They want to make more money, that's all.

This is what I read in the news today:

A Tallahassee-based organization that represents Florida insurers is urging state lawmakers to pass legislation they claim will shore up the property insurance market.

Without passage, the Property Insurers CEOs Group claims that Floridians will end up “saddled with billions of dollars of debt, should a major storm strike the state.”

The group, which comprises CEOs representing 21 insurance companies statewide, held a news conference Wednesday morning to warn that, with just two weeks left before the end of the legislative session, systemwide changes are desperately needed before hurricane season begins June 1.

The group is urging passage of Senate Bill 2044 and House Bill 447, which, among other things, impose a three-year limit on hurricane claims, require that insurance payments be used to repair homes damage by a hurricane or sinkhole, eliminate frivolous sinkhole insurance claims, address fraud and strengthen laws to guarantee the solvency of insurance companies.

Both bills also call for insurance rate hikes, an issue downplayed by the group. Instead, they noted that, if insurers can’t attract enough capital, more Floridians would be dumped into Citizens Property Insurance Corp., the state-run property insurer of last resort.

“Floridians would be faced with even higher assessments from Citizens. We simply can’t afford to let that happen,” said Jay Newman, chairman of Davie-based Sawgrass Mutual Insurance Co.

Members said that even though Florida has not had a major hurricane in several years many private property insurers are not building the capital reserves that would be needed should a big storm, or a series of storms, hit the Sunshine State. “If a catastrophic storm strikes the state, it will be left to residents to pick up the difference in the form of assessments added to their insurance premiums,” the group claims.

The group said that, according to figures from the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation, 52 state domestic property insurers and the Florida subsidiaries of three national carriers had underwriting losses of $750 million last year, despite the fact that there were no hurricanes.

The group also is calling for public adjusters to be reined in.

“There are many good public adjusters and they serve the public well in terms of language barriers, we recognize and respect that. What we don’t respect is fraud, invented claims,” said Bob Ritchie, CEO of Tampa-based American Integrity.

David Beasley, president-elect of the Florida Association of Public Insurance Adjusters, said his organization has been working on compromises and agreed language to the legislation that will benefit not only consumers, but also the insurance industry.

“A lot of times, we are painted with a broad brush that doesn’t reflect the best efforts,” he said. “A lot of public adjusters are there to support consumers first. Sometimes, that comes in opposition to carriers.”

Beasley said that, while there are people in any business who “take shortcuts,” his organization has always supported initiatives including tougher licensing and education standards.

Source: South Florida Business Journal – April 21^st, 2010

Henry B. Nathan is a Florida Realtor at United Realty Group Inc.

Visit my website: http://www.condo-southflorida.com

where you can search for Aventura Condos, Florida Condos, Sunny Isles Condos

Compassionate Legislators at work?

In our best interests, God forbid.

I just read some incredible news. To "get the real estate back on track" this is what they had come up with.

For the Florida Bankers Association it's just business.

As it is to charge consumers 38.9 billion dollars in overdraft fees in 2009 (approximate total charged in the US).

Or to gamble our savings in "derivatives" speculation that drives the whole country to the brink of ruin.

Here is what I read today. And I hope it 's just a false alarm.

Foreclosure bill rouses rally

From FloridaRealtors.org – April 20, 2010 – Lawyers and consumer advocates plan a rally in Tallahassee on Wednesday to protest a controversial bill that would speed up foreclosures in Florida.

The legislative bill would allow lenders to foreclose on homeowners without approval from a judge in as little as 90 days.

It appears to have stalled, but the group said it wants to send a message to legislators. “Do not take away valuable consumer protections,” the lawyers say in a written announcement. “We want to work together to solve the current crisis.” One of the lawyers organizing the event is Matthew Weidner of St. Petersburg. He says hundreds, possibly thousands, will attend.

“People feel insecure about their futures and finances,” Weidner said. “This is an issue that touches everyone.” House Bill 1523 would allow lenders to skip legal proceedings unless the borrower requests the foreclosure go through the courts. Florida law requires a lender to file a foreclosure lawsuit and have the foreclosure granted by a judge. There are nearly 500,000 pending foreclosure cases in Florida, among the worst in the nation. Because of the backlog, foreclosures can take months or years. Critics say the bill significantly shortens the foreclosure process, making it more difficult for troubled borrowers to save their houses. They say the bill would not help the backlog of foreclosures because it applies only to new cases.

Supporters say it would help judges and be good for neighbors weary of long-vacant houses in their community. There are 30 states that have a nonjudicial foreclosure process, allowing some lenders to foreclose on properties in as little as a month. Anthony DiMarco, executive vice president for governmental affairs for the Florida Bankers Association, said lenders hope the bill will pass. “We’re disappointed that it may not pass this session,” DiMarco said. “But we understand that we’re making a major change to the law. What we’re proposing won’t solve everything, but we can’t get the real estate market back on track until we deal with these foreclosures.”

Henry B. Nathan is a Florida Realtor at United Realty Group Inc.
Visit my website: http://www.condo-southflorida.com
where you can search for Aventura Condos, Florida Condos, Sunny Isles Condos,

These guys ain't getting my vote! Traffic Cameras are a scam

That's what the experts say.

And they are right.

A Judge against them a few weeks ago in Aventura. However many cities haven't moved to take them out.

Their hope is that they will finally overcome this judge's opinion. The ruling was only the state could issue traffic violation tickets of this kind.

Oh yea? said the State. Just give us our cut and the cameras will stay.

What a shame! Let's put cameras in our homes, in our schools, in our theaters, in our parks. We'll then supervise everybody and prevent all infractions. A camera in my bedroom? Why not?
A camera in the bar to monitor how many shots you've had tonight? Wonderful.

Is this going to be the wonderful world our elected officers promised us?

I hope not. I will monitor every one of my city's commissioners. And whoever voted yes to these cameras is not getting my vote next time.

This is what I read a couple of days ago. It will give my readers an idea about how greed and bureaucracy unleashed can work.

Will Florida take a cut? Red-light cameras make millions -- but may be in peril

In the Florida House and Senate, one bill would kill red-light cameras, while two would allow them but cut the state in on the fines. Which option do you prefer? Kill red-light cameras. They're unfair and a moneymaker for areas that install them. Let the state take a cut of fines. Cameras make money off scofflaws -- what's wrong with that? Neither. Cameras have their benefits, but the state doesn't deserve any of the fines.

Cameras that catch motorists running red lights are generating millions of dollars for cities such as Orlando and Apopka, but the future of the programs is uncertain - thanks to the Florida Legislature. Three bills are working their way through the House and Senate: One would kill the cameras, while two others would allow them to continue but cut the state in on the action. "I would suggest to you that anyone who says they know what is going to happen is a liar," said Scott Dudley, a lobbyist for the Florida League of Cities.

More than 100 cities, including at least 30 in Florida, and 20 states allow red-light cameras. More than 30 countries have approved them, too, as far back as the 1970s. Orange County and St. Petersburg intend to install them but are waiting to see what the Legislature decides.

Supporters say the cameras cut down on accidents because motorists learn to slow and stop at the intersections, which are marked with signs. Opponents dismiss them as money generators that actually make intersections more dangerous because people stop unexpectedly to avoid a ticket, causing followers to hit them from behind. There are no definitive studies backing up either side.

Lawmakers have discussed installing cameras on state roads for years but have not passed a law to enable them, in part because they were wary of the claim that the arrangements are simply a government moneymaker, not a true safety measure. But this time could be different because lawmakers once again are pressed to balance the budget and are running out of financial options. That has triggered some legislators, such as Republicans Thad Altman in the Senate and Ron Reagan in the House, to consider funneling potential fines from red-light cameras into the general fund. Rep. Ron Schenck, R-Spring Hill, has a bill that would abolish the use of red-light cameras in the state.

Previous legislative discussions had centered on taking ticket revenue and using it largely for public safety or to underwrite emergency-room operations. State law overrules local regulations, so whatever Tallahassee decides must followed by the cities or counties. Officials in Orlando and Apopka want their programs to continue, but they have different agendas. Orlando, which has collected more than $3.3 million in fines since operating the first camera in the fall of 2008, uses the money to pay the private operator of the system and to expand to more intersections. Initially, the city had five; now 12 intersections are monitored by cameras. The city keeps the money in a separate account.

"We're not using it for police or fire or the general fund," said Kathy Russell, the city's lobbyist. Apopka also places its money in a separate account but intends to use it to for the city's daily operations, once the Legislature decides what it will do, said Apopka police Chief Chuck Vavrek. "It should help to offset [expenses] and help the citizens," Vavrek said.

Vavrek is not a fan of Florida getting into the business - because the two of the bills being considered would take money from the city operations and funnel it to the state. "Here we go putting money to Tallahassee when it doesn't help [Apopka]," he said. Orlando thinks it can break even on the cameras even if the state takes some of the money. The city just wants a decision. "Come on, Legislature," Russell said. "Get it done."

Since starting its program in mid-2007, Apopka has brought in more than $1.4 million in fines from two intersections, both of which cross U.S. Highway 441, the main drag through downtown Apopka. Unlike Orlando, Apopka also issues a ticket for vehicles that do not come to a complete stop before making a right turn on a red light. Vavrek said he could not break out how many citations are issued for turning right versus going straight through an intersection.

Both Orlando and Apopka charge $125 a ticket. The state could charge $150 or more. Critics maintain the cameras do little other than run up fines on unsuspecting motorists.

"Cameras are a total fraud," said Greg Mauz, a Texas consultant who works with the Best Highway Safety Practices Institute, a nonprofit founded in Portland, Ore., that tracks motoring. He estimates that cities across the country are bringing in $18 million a day through red-light cameras.

John Large, a University of South Florida professor who has extensively studied the setups, said if safety is the real concern, cities would simply lengthen the amount of time the yellow light is on by at least one second. He maintains the vast majority of red-light-camera tickets are issued to people who entered the intersection less than a second after the light changed. He also recommends having all the lights at an intersection stay on red for a second to allow traffic to pass through.

Follow those two suggestions, he said, and "I guarantee you these camera companies will disappear because they will not make enough money."

From the Orlando Sentinel – April 10, 2019

Henry B. Nathan is a Florida Realtor at United Realty Group Inc.
Visit my website: http://www.condo-southflorida.com
where you can search for Aventura Condos, Florida Condos, Sunny Isles Condos,