I don't think we would call the physically disabled piranhas if they wanted ramps and bigger bathroom stalls. ADA applies to all who have legitimate disabilities, not only those who use wheelchairs. We see signs with wheelchairs on them, so we are conditioned to think of just those with wheelchairs, forgetting there are others with different disabilities.

This whole business illustrates very well how mean-spirited TV is, and I am glad I read the book "Leisureville" first way back in 2008 when we were transferred to Florida.

How does this post remotely relate to the thread or even the post it quoted?

Reading the fictional work, "Leisureville" to learn about TV is like reading Snow White to learn about the challenges and lifestyle of midgets.

[QUOTE=EPutnam1863;1365303]I don't think we would call the physically disabled piranhas if they wanted ramps and bigger bathroom stalls. ADA applies to all who have legitimate disabilities, not only those who use wheelchairs. We see signs with wheelchairs on them, so we are conditioned to think of just those with wheelchairs, forgetting there are others with different disabilities.

This whole business illustrates very well how mean-spirited TV is, and I am glad I read the book "Leisureville" first way back in 2008 when we were transferred to Florida.[/QUOTE]

And this means what??

I don't think anyone opposes the ADA requirement for assistance for the deaf if they're attending LLC classes.
And according to The Villages, that assistance was offered.
I realize the high-lighted comment in your post was designed to unfairly denigrate residents of The Villages, so I won't take the bait.

I would offer that a judgement of over $200,000 would indicate that The Villages was NOT offering the required assistance!

Apparently you missed the several hundreds of postings in this thread.

The assistance TV offered to the deaf were not of the kind they needed. Equipment such as the loop, etc. probably would have helped the hard-of-hearing and the late-deafened but not the profoundly deaf who depend on lip-reading (which is tough, tough, tough) and/or signs.

By the same token, we would not offer crutches to quadriplegics, would we, to save money on building ramps?

So the deaf Villagers were right in bringing suit, although I wish they tried facilitative advocacy first. Maybe they did. Nine years was how long it took them. I doubt the physically disabled would want to wait this long to get their ramps.

BRAVO.......well said....

Who pays this judgement and court costs as the LLC is no longer in existence? If we do then what was the reason for the LLC termination? A new LLC type organization under TV recreation department control will correct the issues? Sorry, I forgot “where’s the beef” in this long discussion.

See Property Owners, Association of Florida LLC will be back in existence but may be of a different format Also see http://www.**************.com/distri...rning-college/.

Hmm ... eight or nine years of negotiation and litigation, thirty plus plaintiffs, out of state counsel = $200,000. I don't think I would have capitalized the NOT.

The total judgment is $215,500 for the plaintiffs with which the defendants do not agree, so they are consulting with their attorneys to see if it would be worthwhile appealing. I doubt very much the judgment includes attorney's fees and other court costs. Appealing would cost them much more in the long run, so they may be better off to just cough up the money and be done with it. Yet on the other hand, that would be admitting they did wrong in the first place.

See Deaf win right to interpreters from The Villages - Orlando Sentinel

EPutnam: the majority as reflected on this site seem to be enamored with the developer and anything"even remotely connected to "the villages". Why? A developer by any other name is a corporation that is going to get as much from you as the traffic will bear and at the least possible costs. In this case the residents pay all the bills to put this place on the map and they paid dearly.

I am not an attorney but for many years,on any given day I oversaw hundreds of lawsuits across the country.
I explained on these pages early on that LLC was in violation of federal laws and they would have been wise to strike an immediate compromise.

Some posters are dismissive of the award to the plaintiffs but the facts are that they won this lawsuit.

What concerns me is that The Villages (Developers) lawyers have been very cavalier with our money and the costs of defense for this case must be staggering.

It then begs the question exactly how should the amenity fees be defined and thus applied?

One poster claimed the definition was to cover comfort, convenience and passion? My rebuttal was then a resident could claim convenience, comfort and passion for a call girl and the amenities fees would cover it.

On a serious note lawsuits keep popping up here and they are a result of the (The Villages Lake-Sumter, Inc, (TVLSI) ( the Developer's) decisions but the TVLSI shifts the burden on residents.

There is not one organization here that has the guts and the know how to face up to this entity.

I just hope that if the district does continue LLC it does so in such a manner that residents are not caught up applying amenities fees to them in any way and that the legalities of this operation are separated and independent of residents being financially obligated.

As of yesterday (March 8, 2017), the plaintiffs filed a motion to extend the deadline from March 10 to March 24 to file bill of costs, etc. against the defendants. They discussed this with the defendants, but the defendants refused to agree to the extension of the deadline.