Talk of The Villages Florida - No more wal-mart cart trail?

Talk of The Villages Florida (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/)

- The Villages, Florida, General Discussion (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-general-discussion-73/)

- - No more wal-mart cart trail? (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-general-discussion-73/no-more-wal-mart-cart-trail-205736/)

Ironically residents that live on the Historical side of TV and in that area get their electricity from Duke Energy. For years golf carts passed through Duke's property so customers of Duke could go to work, buy groceries, and get needed pharmacy supplies. Suddenly and without notice a no trespassing sign appears. One would wonder why they would treat their good customers in this manner. Was this cart path really that big of a liability issue? Really? Or is something else the problem here? Does Duke Energy "care" about the residents (their good customers) and what hardships this decision might cause? It appears Duke Energy has the power in more ways than one. Just a thought.

Might be Duke trying to entice Walmart to buy the trail thru the Duke property.

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoMoSno (Post 1272770)

...and when Mr. Brown shuts down his path, due to liability, Harbor Chase will be the only destination.

I believe Mr Brown (a cousin of the Morse's) sold his property to the Morse's a couple years ago. Maybe the Morse's will shut down that portion of the path between Harbor Chase and the Lowe's etc shopping area.

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by debow (Post 1272791)

Maybe Duke put the sign up to protect against liability. If they really want to block cart traffic, a sign won't work.

Yep, that's my take on it.

They simply put a sign up to mitigate their liability.

After all, it would be very inexpensive to really stop golf cart traffic.

In about 30 minutes, a backhoe could dig a trench/berm across the trail that would stop even 4X4 ATV's from traversing the trail...if they had truly wanted to physically stop carts. :shrug:

Quote:

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore (Post 1272948)

A neighbor of mine up north who also happens to service my oil furnace told me of his no trespassing signs that a fat neighbor woman traversed, sued him and won because she tripped on his property and broke her ankle. Signs don't mean ****.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RickeyD (Post 1272950)

I don't doubt that it might occasionally happen whereby someone is still successfully sued with signs up (I would be curious as to what they based their successful lawsuit on, as I'm not sure you got the whole story from your neighbor :shrug: ), but I also know of many companies/entities that have avoided lawsuits because they installed no trespassing signs.

Trespass in Structure or Conveyance- Florida | Criminal Law

Quote:

2) Trespass on Property Other Than a Structure or Conveyance- this type of trespass occurs where a person who, without being authorized, licensed, or invited, willfully enters upon or remains in any property other than a structure or conveyance. The elements that must be proven at trial for this offense are as follows:

- The defendant willfully entered upon or remained in the property alleged;

- The property was owned by or in the lawful possession of the person/entity claiming the trespass;

- Notice not to enter upon or remain in that property had been given by either actual communication or by posting, cultivation, or fencing on the property, and

- The defendant’s entering upon or remaining in the property was without the permission, express or implied, of the person or entity claiming the trespass or any other person authorized to give that permission. See Section 810.09, Florida Statutes.

The phrase “posted land” is legally defined as land upon which signs are placed not more than 500 feet apart along and at each corner of the property’s boundaries. The signs must prominently display (in letters not less than 2 inches high) the words “No Trespassing” and must, in smaller letters, state the owner, lessee, or occupant of the land.

However, if the property is less than five acres in area, and a dwelling house is located on it, the property will automatically be treated as “posted land” even though no signs have been erected.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chuckinca (Post 1272929)

Might be Duke trying to entice Walmart to buy the trail thru the Duke property.

.

There was already discussion on this very topic going on between Walmart and Duke over a year ago. It looked like they were going to come to an agreement until the wall and then gate went up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by debow (Post 1272791)

Maybe Duke put the sign up to protect against liability. If they really want to block cart traffic, a sign won't work.

This may be the first step. A fence may be next.

My yard man told me the scoop on this. I used Google Translator to put his words into English. It seems that the evil ones who run The Villages...I think they are collectively known as "They".....were sitting around drinking brandy and smoking illegal Cuban cigars, when Janet Tutt said she wished there were a way to deflect some of the daily criticism she receives. One of the minions who runs The Villages sign painting operation, suggested they use a ploy whereby another institution appears to do something so dastardly that Janet gets a few days respite. There you have it.

The only ones really harmed by this are the residents that only have the use of their golf carts as a means of transportation. Others can use their cars. That said, they can use the bridge over 441 for grocery and pharmacy medications. That said, it was a convenience and perhaps for a few a means to get to doctors and to work. One can only wonder how many fall into this category of being really "harmed" by this so called "liability issue" or whatever has caused this problem. I can completely understand the frustration of all (even the stone cresters) who wonder---really what is the big deal here.

just wanted to mention....if anyone knew this or not....but...we had friends visit and they rented a golf cart for $21 for 24 hours from the villages golf cart store.

so non-villagers can rent a golf cart anytime they choose, for a very low amount and use the paths that...we pay for...

so I really don't see the difference.....with stone crest using the paths as well....

either way.....homeowners see no profits from others using the property we supposedly financially support...

I think the important point is that they were your guests and you pay to maintain the MMPs. Just like your guests can use the pools, rec centers, and executive courses, that you pay to maintain. The people in Stonecrest are not your guests.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kstew43 (Post 1273240)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rapscallion St Croix (Post 1273199)

Thank you for giving a good chuckle!!! That said, I can understand the frustration of folks for sure. I'd bet just as many Villagers use that trail, as do Stonecresters. But the utility has a right to put up such signs. It has nothing to do with our developer.

The signs are on either side of the path, and observation today indicates interpretation is that it means stay on the path. It's business as usual and everyone is happy.