Explain the lawsuit
 

Can someone, more intelligent than me, please give us an explanation in simple english the pending lawsuit mentioned in today's Sun against just about all, and it's impact on the bond refinance? What is the "transfer" the lawsuit is referring
too?

See that story on the Local Front page.

I have followed this bond issue from its inception and secured the filings by the IRS to understand their list of complaints. I strongly suggest that people should read for themselves the IRS filings and the circumstances of negotiations between Villages of Lake Sumter, Inc and the District. This latest class action suit followed by District 5 probably stems from the initial IRS complaints. since this is a class action suit residents affected should be given a copy of the complaint and/or a detailed written explanation as to the allegations involved in this suit. We should also be advised as to how this lawsuit is being financed?

If my opinions are incorrect then someone with legal authority needs to come forward and finally open this IRS bond issue in its entirety to get it aired out once and for all so that we can determine the truth and finally solutions

I opine other can decide

We don't get the paper. Would appreciate hearing about what this lawsuit is. Thanks.

The Villages IRS Problem

It sounds like it has something to do with alleged irregularities with purchases through bonds in District 5. They really do not give much in the way of details probably because it is in litigation. They name the parties, lawyers, etc. but do not say much more than that.

Why does this lawsuit only pertain to alleged irregularities with purchases through bonds in District 5? Has the developer turned over to the district all the amenities in District 5?

What
 

I did and it doesn't say squat, except the refinance will not be available and it will cost the vcdd "millions"!

I do not think this has anything to do with the IRS lawsuit. It seems that it is a lawsuit by these three people against TV. TV is causing it a frivolous lawsuit because there is nothing they can sue about.

Forget the IRS in this lawsuit.

Z

From August 6, 2014

The lowering of the interest rates paid on the bonds would have saved the homeowners money because the money used to pay the interest comes out of our amenity fees.

I am no attorney but in my opinion I think it would have been more financially prudent to wait till after the lower rate bonds were issued to make a stink.

Possible political theatre
 

There is a possibility that this is political action by a lawless IRS designed to tie down or intimidate Morse; a big political player on the other side of the aisle. Certainly the IRS under this Justice Department has earned no benefit of the doubt against such speculation.

If so, the whole issue should start winding down over the next couple years.

I have a couple of observations:

1. This lawsuit is obviously extremely important to Villagers. It was initiated in March. Why is the Daily Sun only now reporting its existence, and in such a cryptic manner as to make it impossible for readers to understand the issues and implications? (It is reminiscent of the Daily Sun's treatment of the IRS investigation.) Also note that the article only quotes the Developer's side of the story. It would have been a simple matter to send a reporter out to interview the plaintiffs. Note that the Plaintiff's attorney is the same one who represented the plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit that recovered $43 million from the Developer for the benefit of The Villagers, so I would not be quick to conclude that this lawsuit has no basis.

2. It will be worthwhile attending the POA meeting this Tuesday evening, where we can probably get an explanation as to what the lawsuit involves-- since we are not going to get it from the Daily Sun.

I am very skeptical about this. THE SAME PEOPLE???? Talk about cryptic, I could never understand why the "other" lawsuit was brought.

I am not a fan of the POA. I would gladly join a new organization if one were formed. AND I trust the Daily Sun.

The previous $43 million lawsuit (which the developer lost, BTW) was due to shortchanging the districts on maintenance and replacement funds for all the facilities transferred to them by the developer. At that time, all of Districts 1, 2, 3, and 4 (not sure about the Lake County district) were involved but nothing south of CR 466 was involved. This sounds like similar shenanigans were discovered/suspected/alleged in District 5 - which is now pretty much turned over by the Developer to the residents - and they are seeking their share of the money. If I recall, the original lawsuit was initially classified as frivolous by the Developers lawyers yet they lost to the tune of $43 million and it led to the formation of the AAC. That doesn't sound so frivolous to me. I do hope we get a clearer explanation of the suit Tuesday at the POA meeting - I will be there.

I believe that is your opinion. The lawsuit was sealed, those involved are not allowed to talk about it, right? So what it was about is not clear to me and to anyone who I have talked to.

I think those who don't like the Morses think one way and people like me think another way. People can sue others for a lot of reasons. A LOT of reasons.

This is not an accusation I would make at this time for sure. I am not educated enough on this thing, but I do know, the practice in question is not new and the IRS did not say a word until 2009, thus the calendar does support this possibility.

HOWEVER, I have not heard this accusation before, but then I never heard of the others that have been made. Every analysis I have read keeps referring to how gray an area this is, so......

I agree.

Why is a lawsuit filed in the county court not open to public information?

The Amenities lawsuit was valid and the only criticism I have for that lawsuit is that it was settled too quickly by taking the first offer. And because it was a class action suit members of the class should have been given an opportunity to voice their opinion.

The IRS Inquiry that followed this lawsuit made some serious allegations concerning the 2003 bond purchase against Villages Lake-Sumter, Inc, The District and the Board members having voting rights. These allegations have not been proven true and I make no claim that they are true.

It appears that District Five and the three plaintiffs feel strongly enough about irregularities here that they felt compelled to file a lawsuit. It is common practice for defendant to denigrate such actions as frivolous.

Residents need to stay very aware of this issue and demand transparency concerning the 2003 lawsuit, the IRS Inquiry and the March 2014 lawsuit. We deserve no less as this is an issue of good faith and ethical handling by Villages Lake-Sumter, The District, the VHA, the POA, the county commissioners who oversee the administration of Sumter county and the Judges we elected to serve our interests and local state representatives

The IRS investigation began in January 2008. If you read deep into this article from Buzzfeed, you will find a very good explanation of the business practices of the developer written in an easy to understand way, not legal mumbo-jumbo.


http://www.buzzfeed.com/likethebread...retirem#cma11w

I am very glad that I live south of 466 where the decisions have not been turned over to the residents. I think that the Morses run things better than any place I have ever lived. I also think that a lot of people don't like the Morses because they are very wealthy and also because of their politics.

I had heard that Lake county was never as crazy about The Villages as Sumter is. There are all kinds of unseen forces at work, in my opinion.

Bump

It appears to me that this whole article is meant to entertain, and In my opinion, the author strays from reality in several areas.

There are several misstatements in this thread about both the first class-action lawsuit and the IRS investigation. For example, the current IRS investigation actually began in January 2008, under the Bush administration, and allegations that it was or is politically motivated have no basis.

To get the facts on both the IRS investigation and the first class action, go to poa4us.org.

I got my information from a Bloomberg article..pretty detailed... written in 2012.....

"The districts were used “to perpetuate this ‘government by developer’ phase indefinitely,” wrote IRS examiner, Dominick Servadio Jr., in a 2009 letter to the Village’s CCD chairman. The May 2012, IRS brief said the agency believed that the 167-acre Village Center CDD and the 432-acre Sumter Landing CDD both failed to meet state requirements to be a district.

n 2009, the IRS requested a settlement requiring the Village Center and Sumter Landing districts to pay $16.5 million tax on the then-outstanding bonds, refinance $355 million of the bonds through taxable bonds, and to refrain from issuing municipal bonds in the future. The settlement was probably declined given the continuing investigation. "

Billionaire Morse Behind Curtain at Villages - Bloomberg

I saw not mention of January 2008 HOWEVER if Bloomberg erred, I was in error and stand corrected.

Not saying I am right or even Bloomberg, but based on a few posts, I just have to add.....I do trust Bloomberg much more than BUZZFEED on just about any subject :)

Bloomberg didn't err. The investigation began in 2008. The IRS proposed the settlement in 2009. The whole thing has, incredibly, bounced along ever since and still continues.

Pure and simple this topic should only focus on the economic affect for residents resulting from the IRS inquiry and this recent lawsuit. It isn't about taking sides and it isn't about right or wrong. Its about bringing the parties to settle all of these disputes to the benefit of residents.

Our amenities are paying for the IRS Inquiry defense and now this latest lawsuit which means that the amenities intent in providing golf maintaining rec centers etc is going to be compromised.

The District and Villages of Lake Sumter actions of claim interest free bonds has placed us in a difficult position. Had they opted properly we would not be dealing with these issues because our facilities would have been defined private creating many more opportunities for residents.

I become considerable concerned about wild accusations and misplaced loyalties. Residents would be wise to view these legal actions as strictly pocketbook issues

We searched for information about the legal issues in The Villages when we were in the looking stage of buying. We couldn't find information that we clearly understood in non-legal terms and/or without a bias on one side or the other. This may be due to there being no clearly defined lines until the suit is settled. Or, did we just give up and say 100,000 other people have purchased in The Villages and it can't be that bad?

Going back to the OP, it appears to be a different suit than the IRS issue. Is there any place where each of the cases are clearly defined in layman's terms stating only facts? I know this is selfish, but is there a place that clearly defines how different outcomes will personally hit a home owner financially? As home owners, we all are entitled to this information. Past threads have dealt with everything from nothing will happen in my life time to lets hang the developer. It's hard for me to believe that someone a whole lot smarter than I am, hasn't developed a spreadsheet with this information. Or, simply, the unknown is too great to speculate?

I agree with what you say, particularly the need for residents to try to stay informed on this new class-action lawsuit. I feel that the Daily Sun should be ashamed at its burying the story until now.

However, I want to point out that the first class-action lawsuit documents are a matter of public record. There have been frequent posts in this forum by members alleging that they have been sealed. This is simply not true. There is a link to information at poa4us.org. Villagers are not informed about it for two reasons: First, most are not particularly interested. Second, the Daily Sun has under-reported the story and the articles that have appeared have given the Developer's spin.

As to your concern about whether the $43 million settlement was enough to compensate Villagers for the damages they incurred from the Developer's actions, only time will tell. But so far, things seem to be working out okay. The one thing that is clear is that an additional $43 million, that without the first class-action lawsuit would have been in the Developer's pocket, is now available for amenities. We owe the plaintiffs a vote of thanks for that.

Likewise, information on the current class-action lawsuit is a matter of public record: https://www2.myfloridacounty.com/ccm...722f197914ea10
But to actually see the documents, it apparently is necessary to go to the court house since we are not going to get any real information from the Daily Sun. I am certain that somebody will bring this new lawsuit up at the POA meeting tomorrow night, and, hopefully, we will get some enlightenment there. Maybe we can ask the POA to publish a copy of the complaint and answer on its website, since few of us are inclined to make a trip to the courthouse to see them.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...es-fees-lawyer



All I see is that the developer doesn't seem to have to have his feet held to the fire to keep things painted, in good repair and to improve things around here. I see no evidence of skimping on the things that he builds and outfits such as the rec centers and the magnificent large trees planted down by Brownwood. I cannot get it through my head that he had to be sued to make him do anything .

Advogardo: You have a reasoned mind. I suspect and with good cause that there is more to all of this than meets the eye. However as I have repeatedly stated bottom line for me is we need to have the parties get to the store because these unsettled issues are well unsettling, distracting and just plain hurtful.

I can tell you that my questioning of the Amenities Lawsuit is done with knowledge of the nature lawsuit. If the Villages of Lake-Sumter, Inc first offered $43 million there was more to be had and a more experienced negotiator would have counter demanded. Enough said.

What has me baffled is where are the irate residents who marched to have the developer "tear down that wall "but remain silent concerning these legal disputes why are they not out with their protest signs, chants and talking to the local papers?

IMO, residents are not out protesting because these lawsuits seem like such complicated issues, and purposely so. It is easy to understand a wall, but when one starts talking about bonds, many eyes glaze over.

I, for one, am outraged that our amenity fees are being used to protect the developer's bottom line. Ms Tutt is supposed to report monthly on the amount of money being paid to the attorney. I haven't seen a report for almost a year. Where is it written that this practice is allowed?

This is almost the perfect storm, where the victims get to pay the ransom.

If this isn't the most perfect place in the world to live, then it is very easy to sell and make a profit.

Didn't realize until now that if you aren't living in the "most perfect place in the world" you have to love it or leave it. No criticism accepted even if it's factual and warranted.

Apparently a condition of the "silent generation" striving for simplicity and conformity regardless of the circumstances.

THE lawyers are protecting the CDD form of government which I like very much. The money is protecting our way of life here.

I agree. It's complex for a lot of people. Others have the mentality that the Developer can do no wrong, so don't want to face the facts that maybe something is wrong with this picture. I feel so fortunate we have the POA look out for our interests.

According to published reports, the class-action lawsuit filed last March claims "the developer benefitted by illegally using the amenity fees as collateral to issue bonds for community expansion".

All residents of District 5 should plan on attending the POA meeting Tuesday to learn the details of this lawsuit.

I hope this question is not ignored...I ask in all sincerity and with an upfront admitting that I do not understand it completely. It is very complex and everyone says that. Most articles on the details say it is a very gray area.

I have two questions and do not read anything into these questions...after reading what you folks who have intimately followed this, ......this is what I honestly want to know...

1. In all the years this dispute has been going on, has there been any adverse results in any area of The Villages ? To the amenities or to the homeowners ?

2. I hear a lot about the amenity fee being used to pay lawyers and hoping someone can supply some sort of link so I can see that in print. Not questioning it, but can find nothing at all on that other than a few posts on here.


Thanks to anyone who can answer.

lawsuit
 

After the $43 million suit was settled (without trial) we saw many upgrade and restoration projects get underway using those funds. The developer was gone from the area involved since all his homes were sold, so why would anyone believe the developer would have come back to do these upgrades for free? He is not known to be benevolent.

Why do you say that? HOW do you see a person as benevolent? What is it that you think the Morses should do????????