Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Retirement community wants 6-year-old evicted
www.wtsp.com ^ | 10.23.09

Posted on 10/23/2009 8:53:41 AM PDT by InvisibleChurch

Pinellas Park, Florida-- A six year old girl sent to live with her grandparents as a baby is now being evicted from her home, for being too young.

The grandparents, Jimmy and Judie Stottler, live in a Pinellas Park retirement community that doesn't allow children. The Home Owners Association now wants the child removed.

"For some reason, there's a few, just a few who don't want Kimberly. And I just don't get it," said Judie Stottler.

The granddaughter was taken from her home at just six months old after the state discovered her mother was abusing drugs. She's lived with her grandparents against the rules ever since.

The family says they want to move out of the neighborhood, but by the time they put their home up for sale, the housing market crashed.

"They have no more assets to go out and purchase a rental property," said attorney Robert Eckard who is representing the family free of charge. "If they sell the home they can move. If not, they're homeless on the street."

The H-O-A president has been quoted saying he is only trying to enforce the rules. And while some residents argue the rules need to be followed, others suggest a compromise.

Either way, it will be up to a judge to decide what happens to the six year old next.

If the grandparents are unable to sell their home, the granddaughter could be sent to foster care.

That's something the Stollers say they will never let happen.

"They will have to drag me out in handcuffs and tear her from my arms," promises Judie Stoller.

"I'm not putting her out on the streets."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: buthishouse; buythishouse; fl; moralabsolutes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-220 next last
To: RWGinger
This is a sad situation but they knew the rules. If they are allowed to violate them why would anyone else follow them.

I do think they can give an extension so they can sell the home
but rules are rules
**********************************************************

Correct. If this young girl is allowed to stay then how can any other child or anyone else under the age allowed as called for in the by laws be denied?

I happen to live in a 55 and over retirement Community and I frankly wouldn't want a bunch of screaming kids or worse, drag racing drunk teenagers bouncing around the community

41 posted on 10/23/2009 9:10:13 AM PDT by 101voodoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RWGinger
there is no definition of a newbie, but i think 4 months is below the cut-off.

anyway, these people didn't ask for the kid, but they took her. to ask someone to sell their house because they had a child thrust upon them is a little silly, IMHO.

yes, it may be against the big bad old folks home's rules, but sometimes you just have to take the totality of the circumstances into account. you think everybody who breaks the law goes to jail just because they are eligible to?

they are trying to sell but it's not really economically possible right now. and they say that it is a vocal minority who do not want this kid around.

but to me, the point to this is that they got this kid involuntarily. they are doing the right thing.

42 posted on 10/23/2009 9:10:30 AM PDT by thefactor (yes, as a matter of fact, i DID only read the excerpt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: new cruelty
NO WOMAN IS ILLEGAL

Maybe some should be.

43 posted on 10/23/2009 9:10:31 AM PDT by paulycy (Predatory Pricing = Public Option = Unethical Competition .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark

They have had this child since she was a baby. The HOA has known for 6 years of this little girls presence. Now they want to enforce the rules? HOA’a are Nazi organizations. I still can’t believe how anti child some of the Freepers are.


44 posted on 10/23/2009 9:11:39 AM PDT by Bruinator (People are.............Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MortMan
if you had read the article a bit more carefully you would have known the child was 6 months when she came to live with her grandparents.

please see my post #42.

i see charity and understanding of people's circumstances have taken a vacation day here at FR.

45 posted on 10/23/2009 9:12:46 AM PDT by thefactor (yes, as a matter of fact, i DID only read the excerpt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Bruinator

Yes, the argument that this situation has existed for ultiple years does in fact cut both ways.

I wonder what the rest of the real story is.

Ps - I HATE HOAs, too.


46 posted on 10/23/2009 9:12:50 AM PDT by delphirogatio (Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

That may be so but its not the path of honest and ethical people.


47 posted on 10/23/2009 9:13:02 AM PDT by HerrBlucher (Over, under, sideways, down, backwards, forwards, square and round.....when will it end?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Bruinator

What an idiotic thing to say. Asking for a contract to be honored is not anti-child. Preferring the quiet surroundings of a retirement community is not anti-child. Those people had 5 years to make other living arrangements for themselves. Instead, they chose to violate their contract, and the peace and serenity of the community—which, by the way, showed remarkable patience in waiting this long for them to get right with their contract.

Some people pay a LOT to live in such communities—and you’re saying they don’t have the right to the amenities promised them in their contracts? What liberal truck did you fall off of?


48 posted on 10/23/2009 9:15:07 AM PDT by MizSterious (Do you not think an angel rides in the whirlwind and directs this storm? John Page, 1744-1808)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: thefactor

The problem here is that many retirement communities enjoy reduced property taxes based on not being a burden on the school system.

There is no easy answer to this one.


49 posted on 10/23/2009 9:16:51 AM PDT by NY.SS-Bar9 (Bread and Circuses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Bruinator

Exactly. The HOA gave up the rule already and can’t enforce it now just because the child is growing up. They allowed the child in already. Should be a done deal unless there was an agreement about how long or to what age the child could live there.


50 posted on 10/23/2009 9:16:54 AM PDT by ltc8k6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
If I were the grandparents in this situation and the facts stated here are correct (i.e., the HOA wouldn't let them sell at a "below-market" price), then my solution for this would be simple:

1. Remove all valuables from the premises.

2. Find another place to live on a short-term basis.

3. Burn the house to the ground.

At least we'll find out very quickly what the real market price of the home is. And rveryone goes away happy, right?

/sarcasm off/

51 posted on 10/23/2009 9:17:27 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (God is great, beer is good . . . and people are crazy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: thefactor

I think it is great that they are taking care of their grandchild.
But they also want the nice lifestyle of a retirement community.
They tried to pull a fast one on their HOA. When the child arrived 5 years ago- they should have immediately sold their home and moved when the market was at its peak.
Now, when the market is low, they say that they cannot sell. They had their opportunity to do it 5 years ago, but thought they could get away with defying HOA rules.
I guess the HOA called their bluff.


52 posted on 10/23/2009 9:17:50 AM PDT by kaila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
Not much of an excuse.

So. They get the girl, as a decision by the court, for what was probably to be a short term, so the mother could clean up her act. They likely thought it wouldn't be a five-year deal. Once they realized the mother wasn't going to clean up her act, and the market crashed, what do they do?

53 posted on 10/23/2009 9:18:20 AM PDT by IYAS9YAS (The townhalls were going great until the oPods showed up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: thefactor

1) It sounds like the place has let her live there for 5 years or more before making an issue of it? Isn’t there some legal principle (estoppel or something) that keeps them from selective enforcement?
2) It is possible that the grandparents never anticipated she would be with them “permanently”, thought the mother would rehabilitate and take her back, so they did not rush to sell when she was first placed.


54 posted on 10/23/2009 9:19:54 AM PDT by NEMDF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious

The way I see it, there is a basic legal/administrative conflict here that needs to be resolved . . . between the HOA rules prohibiting children and a judge’s order requiring the girl to live in her grandparents’ custody.


55 posted on 10/23/2009 9:20:11 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (God is great, beer is good . . . and people are crazy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: thefactor

so You are the arbiter of what constitutues a newbie? How silly but if it makes you feel big, have at it

Do you know how many times the HOA reminded these people of the rules they VOLUNTARILY agreed to and signed on to. We don’t know if the HOA has been trying to be lenient but at some point rules are rules.

Sorry these people knew the rules when they took the baby in and ignored the rules for 5 years , during which they could have sold the home at the top of the market.

Yes they did the right thing in taking the little girl who is the innocent in all this and it is thoughtless of the grandparents to trot her out and whine. How does that make the child feel?

One last question, OLDIE, do you selectively obey rules for contracts you’ve signed? Do you for instance pay credit cards late and expect no penalty?


56 posted on 10/23/2009 9:20:27 AM PDT by RWGinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious

The HOA is setting a precedence. If they allow this 1 child, soon there will be 44, along with playgrounds and swingsets. Screaming kids in a Senior’s Community?


57 posted on 10/23/2009 9:21:42 AM PDT by Justeggsactly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: ltc8k6
Very good point. If the child has been there for 5+ years, the common law principle known as equitable estoppel might preclude the HOA from enforcing its rules in this case.
58 posted on 10/23/2009 9:21:44 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (God is great, beer is good . . . and people are crazy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious

When and individual uses “poor Kim” in their words I say that person has a problem with children. Everyone including the HOA new of her presence, how could they not. Now they want to evict? Something amiss here.


59 posted on 10/23/2009 9:22:26 AM PDT by Bruinator (People are.............Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
The girl has been living there for 5 and a half years.

A bad precedent for the HOA. They allowed the girl to live there for 5 and a half years. They failed to enforce their rules and get a judgement 5 and a half years ago. Pretty good case for the grandparents. In many states, a lack of enforcement, over a period of time, of a particular rule on the HOA's part can lead to the HOA losing the right to complain about that rule being followed years later.

60 posted on 10/23/2009 9:22:26 AM PDT by IYAS9YAS (The townhalls were going great until the oPods showed up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-220 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson