Post reply

Re: Board of Directors (by Tom V.):

I disagree in that 1. There seems to be no excuse for the insurance company denying the claim, based on input from my insurance agent. The water damage is not based on floods, which would have required a seperate policy. It is the same as damage from a leaky roof....even if the roof were faulty. 2. The work will mean two buildings, roughly 20% of the capacity of the resort, will not be available for owners. It also means that we, the owners, have to come up with more money over a shorter period of time than if we were to do the work over 10 years and only ask for 1/10th the money per year as a special assessment.

We should have been given options instead of a board of directors decision and a mandated SA....

I suspect that they want us, the deeded owners, to walk away from the property....it works for them to assume ownership of weeks already sold.