Quote:
Originally Posted by graciegirl
I am convinced that since this just occurred that the new assisted living has decided they didn't want a cart path across the property they are using. If "they" took the wall down, perhaps you could prove that it was used in that way for so long that now it legally is a pathway...or you could be arrested for trespassing.
I can see that it truly is a great inconvenience for many but I did read on the online paper, Villages Voices that there is another muddy way out that would take you some back way to the places that are necessary. Does anyone want to comment on that? I think that I would think long and hard before I lawyered up. You can buy a used car that works for very low prices and get to where you want to go. You can spend a lot of money on lawyers and be out a lot of money and be right where you were at the beginning.
I understand your frustration. There is an answer here somewhere and it is probably a good idea to start with that.
|
Gracie, let's think logically. We will know more as the day goes on, but for now let's be level headed and try to get correct answers. How and why would the wall be on TV property if it belonged to someone else? Why would the assisted living advertise as golf cart accessible and have golf cart drivers sign a petition and even promise to pave the path and keep it opened for travel and then come onto TV property and erect a wall and put up signage saying the access is closed? Why would the assisted living put signs up directing cart traffic around the construction if they thought people were trespassing? Why would the businesses in the area have golf cart parking, yet, say people in carts are trespassing?
Maybe you'd be kind and copy and paste the story about the muddy path.