Litigation Settlement Proposal UCO vs. WPRF
Today (04/03/2008) at a special meeting of the Executive Board the proposed Settlement Agreement was briefed and a copy was distributed.
This agreement was achieved as a result of a marathon session of Mediation lasting some 11 hours.
I believe this was a truly statesmanlike effort on the part of both UCO and WPRF, and that this settlement should be supported by the Delegates at the Delegate Assembly meeting on Friday.
The Executive Board supported this Agreement by a vote in the affirmative by all members present, save but one abstention.
Failure to support this agreement will result in additional huge expenditures of our money with no guarantee of success, it should be noted that total expenses both paid and anticipated will approach or exceed $500,000.00; In short, Peace is at hand, let’s seize the opportunity and put this episode behind us.
Following is extracted one critical paragraph which explains the monetary component of the agreement:
“Para. 3 Payment:
After the Effective Date, in full and final settlement of any and all claims in this Arbitration and/or Litigation, WPRF agrees to make the following payments;
1. On the Effective Date of this agreement, WPRF shall pay to UCO the amount of
$400,000.00 to reimburse UCO for litigation fees and expenses incurred;
2. On or before June 1, 2009, WPRF shall pay to UCO the amount of $200,000.00 for additional expenses incurred;
3. Beginning on or before the 10th day of January 2009, and on or before the 10th day of the next 23 months (for a total of 24 months) WPRF shall pay $100,000.00 per month into the Operating Account. The funds for these payments shall be made from the existing residents’ reserve account; the remaining balance necessary to make the foregoing payments into the Operating Account shall be paid by WPRF as necessary.
UCO waives any rights with respect to any amounts currently in the residents’ reserve account. The payments set forth herein shall not be deemed Operating Expenses by WPRF.”
Additionally $150,000.00 in Business Interruption Insurance Premiums, witheld by UCO for two years will be forgiven by WPRF.
In addition to the monetary component, the personal lawsuit by WPRF against UCO President George Loewenstein;
W.P.R.F., Inc. v George Loewenstein, Case No. 50 2007 CA 017430.
Will go away by means of joint parties’ stipulations.
This also applies to the Arbitration Case No.32 181 Y 00138 07.
Dave
8 comments:
Thank you Dave for getting this information out.
One of the matters discussed at today's Executive Board meeting is that we have ALREADY spent $500,000 in legal and engineering costs and it could cost up to another $500,000 in legal fees to continue with the litigation with no guarantee as to the outcome.
MANY people including myself, have spent countless hours on trying to get this matter resolved. We are at a point that we can bring this painful matter to a conclusion and move on with our lives and hopefully bring peace and harmony back to the village.
I was encouraged that the vote today was 100 percent in favor of the settlement. Yes there was one abstention which I understand is a NON VOTE.
Larry,
An abstention is a non-vote (with no effect) only when the voting basis is by "votes cast" or "present and voting". Again, Board votes are ALWAYS based on the approval of a percentage of the members present, in this case a majority. For example, if thirty members are present, 16 affirmative votes are required to approve. An abstention has the effect of a negative vote when based on a percentage vote of the members present. In the above example, if 14 voted For, 1 voted Against and 15 Abstained, the motion would properly fail, as a majority vote OF THE MEMBERS PRESENT was not achieved.
Many thanks Dave.
So, some of the past resident payments into the residents’ reserve will flow back into the Operating account over the next 2 ½ years. The hopeful residents waiting for a payout from their share of $6M-$11M will get $000000.00.
Would Myron please stand up and explain this.
PS Who pays Business interuption insurance premiums from now on?
Hi A Nony Mouse,
The issue of BI would have been very sticky to try to litigate.
We have been paying it for years as part of the "Insurance Bundle", and it is after all an Operating expense and we are obligated to pay Operating expenses.
So, we will resume paying the BI Premium.
Dave
When the previous negotiating committee met with WPRF they told us the the issue of the Business Interruption Insurance was one that was going to be difficult for them as it is an item that concerns all four villages. I am surprised that they were willing to forgive two years of premiums.
As I see it the settlement is $2,400,00 paid over two years. $400,000 for UCO legal expenses paid now and another $200,000 paid in 2009. Plus $150,000 for the insurance premiums PLUS the $471,240 ( $5.00 per month)
monthly allowance for 2007 that was already done.
If my calculator is corcect the grand total is $3,621.240
If I understand the settlement we went from $1.8M to a grand total of $3M, minus $600,000 for legal expenses. That leaves us with $2.4M that is going to the Operations Committee over 2 years. So our UCO leadership, with the approval of the delegates, put us through all this negativity for what ?? How much damage did UCO leadership cause the Village. Can you measure that in dollars and cents ? What made everybody think that they were entitled to a brand new club house at no expense to themselves. Had they read and understood the Millennium Amendment, this lawfiasco would have never happened. It is time to start educating the so-called delegates that they have fiduciary responsibilities to the unit owners. The unit owners have the responsibility to elect qualified delegates. And if you cannot manage that, then it's high time for professional management. Remember, you get what you pay for. This Village has the leadership it deserves.
Maybe the previous administration who wanted facts and truth, knew what they were talking about. Maybe it would be nice to apologize for some of the awful things that have been said about them over the last two years.
Post a Comment