The History of “On the Spot” Judgment and Fine.

For more than a month, I was in limbo; the Club’s wrongdoing caused my wife and me great stress, unhappiness, and unnecessary costs.
The Club’s members of the board of directors (BOD) and the Club’s Manager ignored my written communication.
My discussion with the then Chairman of the Architectural Committee revealed a disturbing picture of how the Club operates.

Even though the Club reversed its ruling, damage was done.
No one apologized, and more importantly, no one took any responsibility.

I realized that the Club presents a great danger to Indian Hammock’s Owners’ Rights and started this website and other communication channels to make the Owners aware of what is happening.

From Start to Finish
December 15, 2019
During the Club’s BOD on December 15, 2019, the Club’s BOD stunned me with a great surprise.
Without following procedures set up in the Club’s documents, the BOD announced that I had committed a violation on my lot and Issued “On the Spot” a Fine and Punishment.
The BOD canceled my scheduled membership service and disapproved a Building Application Packet that followed all requirements.

Architectural Review Committee

• • _Lot 246 – Etzion. John Moore moved to not approve the request due to the removal of their buffer. It was seconded by Barry Scanlon.          o Barry Scanlon made a motion to call the question. Corey Miller seconded the motion and     it passed unanimously.
  •          o The original motion passed with Joe Coyle opposed. Bob will follow up with a violation for removal of the buffer.

December 18, 2019
My First written response and request.

December 18, 2019
To: Indian Hammock Hunt and Ridding Club Board of Directors and Manager
Re: David Etzion Lot 246

In the monthly meeting of December 15, 2019, you disapproved my request for a second drive way and entrance to lot 246.
You declared that your disapproval is due to me, not obeying the rule of keeping a 25 feet buffer on lot 246
You based your decision in regard to the buffer on Google map presentation.
The vegetation on lot 246 was destroyed by fire a few years previous to the time I purchased it.
All trees (besides a handful pine trees, two small oak trees, some bushes and palmettos) were destroyed in the fire.
Lot 246 was overgrown with the invasive Cogan grass.
When I cleared lot 246, I took care to preserve any remaining trees, palmettos and bushes that survived the fire.

I applied for, and got your permission, to install a Hog Fence on the boundary of lot 246.
This necessitates a pass way next to the fence.
The vegetation that was removed and kept out of the buffer and the lot was tall Cogan Grass.
This Cogan grass took over lot 246 after the fire and was removed.
I have a person attending to Lot 246, especially to the buffer, about four days a month, keeping invasive vegetation off the property and trying to thicken the buffer.

It was quite a shock to hear for the first time, during the meeting, that the architectural committee had any issue with Lot 246.

All this said, I need a clear instruction of what the Board of directors and the Manager want me to do.
A statement like “restore the buffer to what it was” is totally wrong, not practical and unjust.
No one should be asked to restore five feet high invasive Cogan grass on their property.
If you believe that some trees or bushes were removed from the buffer of lot 246 by the company that cleared my lot, then please indicate where, and instruct me what trees and bushes you want me to plant and where you want me to plant them.

I ask for any member of the Architectural Committee, the Board and the manager to come to Lot 246, inspect it, and assess the situation in a fair and just manner.

I am asking for this issue to be attended to urgently, as your decision has impaired the usage and enjoyment of my property.

Sincerely
David Etzion
Lot 246

Delivered to Indian Hammock Hunt and Riding Club’s Manager by email and by hand

December 26, 2019
My Second written response and request

December 26, 2019
Dear Board members, Architectural Committee members and Indian Hammock Manager
On the 15^th of December 2019 the Board of Directors followed the Architectural Committee recommendation not to approve my submitted request for a second entrance to lot 246.

On December 18, 2019 I hand delivered a letter to the manager and emailed same, disputing the alleged violation.
I presume that the manager forwarded my email to the board members.

On December 19, 2019 I signed for and received Indian Hammock’s certified letter that officially advised the alleged violation and the resolution procedures. This letter did not contradict Article XIII Dispute Resolution.

Article XIII Dispute Resolution in the association documents clearly dictates how an alleged violation should be handled by the board and Indian Hammock’s members.

My submitted application for a second entry must be handled without any consideration to any alleged violation.
The Board of Directors failed to act on the only point that matters, being, are the submitted documents in compliance with Indian Hammock’s requirements or not.

The Board of Directors ignored Article XIII Dispute Resolution and handed “on the spot” judgement and punished me by disapproving my submitted application for a second entrance.
My work order to Indian Hammock’s members services is now shelved and will be delayed.

I hereby stress again to the board members, that this behavior is causing me real damage by preventing me from fully enjoying my property and my investment in Indian Hammock.

I urge you to approve my work order to Indian Hammock’s members services without delay.
The alleged violation should be handled as per your certified letter’s initial requirements, which I already fulfilled in my letter that I hand delivered on December 18^th

Sincerely
David Etzion
Lot 246

January 2, 2020
My Third written response and request

January 2, 2020
To: Indian Hammock Hunt and Riding Club Manager and Board of Directors
From: David Etzion Lot 246

Dear Manager and Board Members
The Board of Directors wrongly acted on two separate issues.

Issue 1. David Etzion’s Application for a Second entrance to Lot 246
This application should only be judged and can only be rejected if it does not comply with the building requirements set in the Declaration of Restrictions.

Nothing in the Club documents allows the Board to reject such application as a finning/punishment for a violation of any kind, definitely not for an alleged violation which is under dispute.
The Chairman of the Board should instruct all involved that the architectural committee should base their recommendation on the criteria, does the application conform with the Club Building Restrictions or not.

Issue 2. Alleged Violation in regard to the Buffer on David Etzion’s Lot 246
The Board did not follow Article XI section 3.

“Notice to any Owner of a violation of any of these restrictions shall be in writing and shall be delivered or mailed to the Owner”

David Etzion heard for the first time about the alleged violation in the December 2019 Board Meeting.

Further and worse, the Board ignored Article XI section 2. “A fine or suspension may not be imposed without notice of at least 14 days to the person sought to be fined or suspended and an opportunity for hearing before a committee of at least three Owners”

The Board summarily “judged” David Etzion, and “issued a verdict” finning/punishing David Etzion by preventing him from executing the improvement to which he is entitled.

I am appealing again, to each of you, to speedily approve my application for a second entrance to Lot 246.

The disputed alleged violation regarding the buffer should be, and will be, handled according to the Club documents.

Regards
David Etzion
Lot 246
By email and Hand Delivered

January 19, 2020

On January 19, 2020, the newly elected BOD reversed the wrong ruling, basically acknowledging it was illegal and not in compliance with the Declaration of Restrictions or the By-Laws.

OLD BUSINESS
Lot 246 driveway Carla Sapp made a motion and Rachel Hall seconded to approve. Motion passed