Post reply

Questions (...still) come to mind here... (by KC):

drk14 wrote:

I read in your questions an opinion that somehow corporations are less acceptable than individuals. I've been in business for almost half a century and have never found this to be an attitude I've seen or felt.

With all due respect, you read / interpret incorrectly; I harbor no opinion at all on any such gradations of "acceptable". Moreover, my question is fundamentally one of legality (i.e., not relating in ANY way to "perceptions" or "attitudes").

My questions were (and frankly, still remain) based upon a presumption that any attentive resort might very well choose to challenge the legal validity of any and every "resale" deed in which there is suddenly no identifiable, accountable individual(s), absent the requisite (and time consuming, expensive) legal energies required to "pierce the corporate veil". In such a potential scenario a "donor", even after seeing a new deed recorded in the new "corporate grantee" name (...and even after paying your $500 "service fee"...) could still find themselves hounded by collection agencies for maintenance fee payments (plus interest) by a resort which refuses to accept or acknowledge the validity of ANY "faceless corporate grantee" deed.

Mine is clearly a legal concern and issue, perhaps one also subject to variances in different states' laws. It is, in any case, a matter admittedly outside my own realm of legal knowledge and / or expertise. That much clearly acknowledged, you will still have to just "color me dubious" that this particular contrivance of "ownership abandonment" actually exists on legally solid ground...