Redfish Village Beach Access

[Kevin Thompson]

KT-You do not want me to post the Developers Discloser Prior to sale section do you.

Edroedrog you have completely lost me with your "paste your development comments" and "Developers Discloser". Do you mean Developers Disclosure? Just keep babbling away and maybe you will "find the prospectus". You really need to think about what you say. The point with you is that you don't live here, you don't own property in Blue Mountain and you are trashing people I know and I won't let you do it without responding. Keep trying and I will keep defending them. Agreed it started because I was selfish and didn't want people walking down my road and now it is just because I think you and Vagrant can't go unchallenged.

 

[SHELLY]

All of the above posts are regarding Redfish's statements and whether they were lying, and that is an issue for the people who have contracts, but that doesn't have anything to do with the Private Access being legally permissible to go onto lot #2.

....I thought it was pretty ballsy of the developer to think the "private beach access" was a done deal when they started hawking the condos to the masses and that in the end their political lapdogs would roll over and do as they say....and as this thing plays out....it appears they were right.


.

 

[Kevin Thompson]

Nor did the developer have any of the other amenities such as the open-air gathering place and a restaurant with bar. Doesn't mean that they had not planned to get them built and in operation. If they don't doesn't mean that they are liars. If the advertised ammenities were material changes, the buyers may have a way out of the contracts without penalty.

What if the land on the property where the restaurant was going to be built was suddenly inhabited by an Ivory-billed Woodpecker and all construction was halted and the project was forever dead? Would you still call the developer a liar? Things change with time, and there are many unknowns when developing property. Was Redfish Village a little crazy for marketing the property with the Private Gateway to the Beach? In my opinion, yes. They will tell you that they were able to command higher prices with the private beach access, but during that frenzy, I don't think that would have stopped anyone from purchasing, at what even I thought were high prices.

It seems to me that you guys are still more pissed about the developer than you are concerned with the Private Beach Access. All of the above posts are regarding Redfish's statements and whether they were lying, and that is an issue for the people who have contracts, but that doesn't have anything to do with the Private Access being legally permissible to go onto lot #2.

Get out of the sandbox, boys, it's bedtime. ;-)

Smiling Joe I am not saying you agree with everything I say but man you really say things well sometime. I just think there are some people, especially Edroedrog who have an axe to grind with these people and will try anything they can, any angle day after to day to try and do something. What that is I don't really know but it is all about trashing people who I think are good people. My only guess is they are disgruntled former employees of somebody or Redfish buyers who are desperate to get out of their contract. Why else would Edroedrog be on here every day all day when he doesn't live here and doesn't own property here?

 

[edroedrog]

Edroedrog you have completely lost me with your "paste your development comments" and "Developers Discloser". Do you mean Developers Disclosure? Just keep babbling away and maybe you will "find the prospectus". You really need to think about what you say. The point with you is that you don't live here, you don't own property in Blue Mountain and you are trashing people I know and I won't let you do it without responding. Keep trying and I will keep defending them. Agreed it started because I was selfish and didn't want people walking down my road and now it is just because I think you and Vagrant can't go unchallenged.

No I think it is "Developer Disclosure". Now that you helped me find it. lol

I just get so excited responding to you. I like it when you get upset and start kicking on everyone that posts something against your Village.

 

[Kevin Thompson]

No I think it is "Developer Disclosure". Now that you helped me find it. lol

I just get so excited responding to you. I like it when you get upset and start kicking on everyone that posts something against your Village.

Well I am glad to entertain you since you are entertaining everybody else here.:clap_1: I had the last word last night so I will leave you with it. I am headed to Old Florida for some sushi if you want to join me for a drink.

 

[fisher]

so, if a builder states that the house will have granite countertops before the house is at frame, he's practicing false advertising? aren't they only required to have this PBA in place by the time the first contract is closed?

Come on--Big, BIG difference between granite countertops and saying you can provide a private beach access.

I am not talking about legally doing something. I talking about doing what's right, from an ethical standpoint.

 

[fisher]

Nor did the developer have any of the other amenities such as the open-air gathering place and a restaurant with bar. Doesn't mean that they had not planned to get them built and in operation. If they don't doesn't mean that they are liars. If the advertised ammenities were material changes, the buyers may have a way out of the contracts without penalty.

What if the land on the property where the restaurant was going to be built was suddenly inhabited by an Ivory-billed Woodpecker and all construction was halted and the project was forever dead? Would you still call the developer a liar? Things change with time, and there are many unknowns when developing property. Was Redfish Village a little crazy for marketing the property with the Private Gateway to the Beach? In my opinion, yes. They will tell you that they were able to command higher prices with the private beach access, but during that frenzy, I don't think that would have stopped anyone from purchasing, at what even I thought were high prices.

It seems to me that you guys are still more pissed about the developer than you are concerned with the Private Beach Access. All of the above posts are regarding Redfish's statements and whether they were lying, and that is an issue for the people who have contracts, but that doesn't have anything to do with the Private Access being legally permissible to go onto lot #2.

Get out of the sandbox, boys, it's bedtime. ;-)

No, but the developer did OWN the property on which such places could be built. Big difference between that and beach access. Just ask John Willis about private beach access for Cypress Dunes.

And, I agree that the prices are very, very high. Look down the street at Adagio. Bigger condos, pool overlooking the ocean, PRIVATE BEACH ACCESS, very large second pool, closer to ocean, etc. The non ocean front units are now being marketed by some folks for mid $800's fully furnished. The smaller lots at Redfish will be closing at around $1 million unfurnished. I would be seriously thinking about walking away from my deposit after looking at those numbers.

Sleep tight Joe.

 

[edroedrog]

Well I am glad to entertain you since you are entertaining everybody else here.:clap_1: I had the last word last night so I will leave you with it. I am headed to Old Florida for some sushi if you want to join me for a drink.

I am living up to my name today (inuendodrog). Love that name but it is hell to type on the keyboard.

Like I said in my earlier post I do not like the smell of fish. Maybe we can meet up for some Lobster stew and beer later to laugh about this whole thing.

 

[Kevin Thompson]

I will do you one better. A nice letter was sitting on my fax on the way out the door. I am only typing the main part if you want the rest I would guess you can get it from Walton County it should be in the public records right? This to me puts to bed the issue of the County letter talked about in the Walton Sun (sure Vagrant will try to spin it). I am off to dinner so I will let Smiling Joe (if you would) to comment on this:



As we discussed Wednesday, Holland & Knight represents Redfish
Village, LLC and in this capacity has been provided a copy of your
letter dated May 5, 2006. The purpose of this letter is to memorialize
our conversation, and to further respond to your letter.

Your May 5 letter contains several unsubstantiated statements,
based on which you imply that Redfish Village, LLC ("Redfish") may have
made false and deceptive representations to prospective buyers.
Notwithstanding the seriousness of these statements, in our discussion
Wednesday morning you agreed that you do not have any direct personal
knowledge supporting these allegations, which are based on such things
as hearsay from self-interested persons.

As I explained, we simply cannot permit such accusations to remain unchallenged. Specifically, you indicate in your letter that Redfish has advertised in writing and in oral representations that Redfish has "county approval to construct a private beach access across a lot in Blue Mountain Beach for the use of residents of Redfish Village."

You acknowledged, however, that the written advertisements on which you rely do not identify the location of the private beach access, and that you cannot identify any oral representations supporting this claim. You further advised that you cannot identify any oral or written representation by an authorized Redfish representative to the effect that Walton County has approved the use of the Blue Mountain Beach lot for such access.

 

[John R]

I am not talking about legally doing something. I talking about doing what's right, from an ethical standpoint.

so, this statement was soley about ethics?

Let me get this straight--just because someone else has advertised falsely in the past, it makes it okay for Orchard Group to do the same thing????

This developer did not have the beach access when the ads were written, correct? And, there was no guarantee that they would get the access. I agree with the folks that call this false advertising regardless of past practices. The ad should have said, "developer is seeking property to give residents a private gateway to the beach, however, such property has not been acquired as of the date of this ad." I know it doesn't sound as good as the original, but it sure is truthful.