Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Sure do, Water is clear and fresh. The public park right off the road by the town of Arenal is a nice place to access the lake. Water is a bit cooler then my liking, but on a hot day is sooooo refreshing!
Just spend some time in CR and make some friends (expats) that are there fulltime and you can see the improvements in health! Although I’m only able to visit for a week or two at a time I feel the improvements my own health. But more amazing is the folks that I know that are there fulltime! The first change is they all lose weight! It always amazes to me to see them, lots of fresh fruit, so much less processed foods, no fast food! Dropping the pounds, one of the best ways to improve your health! They’re all so much more relaxed. It’s the diet and the lifestyle. I find the daylight schedule has a lot to do with it also… the whole “early to bed, early to raise” thing.
I’m interested in how your attorney feels you would be treated better as a resident rather than a tourist? Treated better by whom? The police or the courts? I’d love to hear his reasoning.
How about a good old fashion quick resolve to this problem. They placed materials, buildings and trash on your property. Is there a problem with hiring a man with a bulldozer for the day and simply “clearing” YOUR property by pushing their (the developer) problem into their road and calling it even? It would be worth it to me to do so even if I had to pay the man and the dozer double his going rate! And what might the “developers” defense be to such a SIMPLE solution to this misunderstanding? It doesn’t seem he has a leg to stand on. Seems I read that the local governments were doing this to buildings in beach areas where folks had expanded their businesses into the maritime zone. Seems the same solution would apply here. They have no legal basis to fight your actions if you do indeed have clear title… so rather than waste time and money on a legal process… take action! I’m sure once they see the dozer they’ll be more then happy to compensate you and make you whole for the loss you’ve suffered.
Edited on Nov 06, 2007 19:37
The sovern rights of any nation cannot and will not be bound by a “agreement” should they chose to opt out. Just look at how the US honors the agreements it makes and breaks… or how it takes out other governments… the BIG lie is that Arias is telling his nation that he cannot renegoiate the present agreement… ANY agreement can be fine tuned. He needs to step up and be honest.
Hey Scott! Thanks for clearing up the project this fellow was suppose to be working on for you! Sorry you got the short end on the deal, we all know what a great resouce you are to the folks that read this board! If there’s any way we can help please let us know! I’m sure the word will get out about this guy!
I make it a habit of NEVER giving a large deposit on any work I have done unless I can justify that the person doing the work is going to have some type of upfront expenses (ie building materials). Even then I make it my policy to buy the materials as per the direction of the person doing the work. I find that reputable business people don’t have a problem with it. The few times I’ve had someone balk at this arrangement I’ve walked away. And in hindsight it’s been the best move!
As is the case here, when someone gets so much money upfront they have little motivation to do the work!
Simple answer…. DON’T do Business with people that look to pressure you and make demands like you’ve stated… something is wrong… something is wrong… yes I said it twice! If I were you… I’d make them wait until you arrive and offer them $10,000 less… see what happens!
I just had to make a comment… a bit off topic… but isn’t it funny that Uncle Sam is taking 12 weeks to issue passports for people to LEGALLY leave the US… but there’s no waiting if you want to come in ILLEGALLY! It’s really starting to hit home that being an American is no deal…
Mike…. RUN…. don’t walk away from this “deal”! The Costa Rican system of real estate uses lawyers/notories in every step of the process.
ANYONE that tells you that you don’t need a lawyer is trying to get over on you. ANYTIME you’re signing a contract you should be represented. And I don’t even think I need to get into “wiring” money into someone’s personal account…. BIG no-no… I have to assume the issue of the contract was that it was NOT in spanish as I believe it is REQUIRED to be by Costa Rican law. That in itself should have been a big tip off. It’s tough to seek protections of the CR courts as it is… to have a contract that on it’s face it void makes it even tougher!
And if she did in fact own the property… presenting the plano and registry information would have been as easy as sending you a fax containing the information that you’d need to check it yourself, or at the very least if you didn’t know how, have an attorney do it.
You don’t mention if this lady was tico or not… I’m wondering about that.
Who knows… perhaps this lady is completely on the level and doing things “her” way… but with all the points you brought up… should the transaction hit a bump… or if she’s just looking to rip you off… you have been warned! It’s a train wreck waiting to happen!!
Edited on May 12, 2007 16:24
Hey Jo,
Here’s a link to what we’re talking about… be careful not to get too close… these Otters are know to attack and sink large boats and eat people whole….. only kidding!! LOL 😉
I’ve spent a lot of time explorng the shores of the lake and fishing….haven’t seen any gators…. have spotted a few large river otters… fun to watch and can be mistaken for a gator if you don’t know what your looking for!
Glad to see a positive outcome…. there’s a lesson here for anyone reading this forum and thinking about sending money sight unseen to ANYONE…. DON’T do it!
I’d still like an answer from those involved as to why it takes so long to send a refund? I’d have to guess that the deposit was wired to the company… why not wire it back? If there’s such a rush to get the deposit to get in on the “Costa Rica real estate boom” why wouldn’t these folks want to return the deposit to allow customers to find the property of their dreams! 🙂
Good business practices go a long way… as does good will… I don’t see much of either in holding deposits for such a long time.
Can someone explain why it takes MONTHS for this company to return sight unseen deposits? Although it’s something I would never do… I have to wonder about someone that made me wait months to return a deposit… after all it’s not as if the company has an expense in taking the deposit… so why? I’m not bashing them… don’t know them… don’t do (or have done) business with them…. I’ve seen their ads… I’ve read the stories about them…. both good and bad… but I have an open mind… it’s just a question that perhaps one of the folks representing them might have an answer for.
It would seem to me that when there are people out there bashing you that you’d make every effort to keep your reputation spotless and not do things like holding deposits.
I’ll await a reply…. or for my posting to disappear.
The assets in Costa Rica were owned by a CR S.A….. thus the suit is trying it’s best to tie the CR S.A. to the US to obtain jurisdiction. And as I said… all that does is allow the case to be heard in a US court… it’s all uphill from there!!!
The suit isn’t against the owners… I don’t think the article stated that at all! If it had been as easy as going after the owners of the S.A. as US citizens and their assets in the states there would have been no need for all the work trying to get it into a US court. And as the article indicated… the plaintiff is looking to go after the CR assets… good luck with that one!
As I like to say… ANYONE can sue ANYBODY for ANYTHING… but that doesn’t mean you’ll collect a dime! In this case the S.A. should shield the owners personal assets… unless the plantiffs attorney is able to “pierce” it… they would need to show a lot more than what I’ve seen thus far.
Having the S.A. assets mortgaged to the max will head off the claim… in a situation like this it’s hard to believe that the boat operators didn’t have some basic insurance… I’d love to know the WHOLE story!
Hi Scott and Terry…
You’re not going to get an arguement from me… the government is hell bent to fund itself… I know that all too well. It’s amazing that during a period of rising interest rates that the government “recalculated” the method by which it pays interest on US savings bonds (basically paying below market rates)… they are really scraping! They’ll do anything to stay afloat… seems there’s WAY to many people taking from the system and not enough putting in! So they come back to the well…. the middle class… and I for one am quite tried of the attack! It’s easy for them… adjust the tax rate… and the money comes flowing in!
Currently as a simple W-2 kind of guy I’m a hostage of the system…. I have taken the steps of moving my assest off-shore… not that Uncle Sam is after me… but it’s nice sleeping at night know that if I should be in the crosshairs of some attorney and a white trash client looking to take what I’ve worked for…. they’re in for a battle… Taxes are something I’ll work on next after retire… I do pretty well now knowing the system… years ago I worked for the IRS… so the system isn’t much of a mystery.
As for the issue of the lawsuit at the root of this discussion…. it has nothing to do with the government looking for a payday…. this is nothing more than a US citizen with a lawyer looking for a payday…. which… by the way (personal injury awards) are NOT currently taxed by the US… perhaps they might look there for another revenue stream! It would be a gold mine! This way lawyers aren’t the only one benefiting… we’ll ALL get a little tax relief!
The issue of on-line gambling is a whole other issue… I can go into the good, the bad, and the ugly of the industry and gambling itself… but the issue you bring up is all about the fact that the US governement didn’t want the money going off-shore via credit cards which had been the case. They put a law on the books to stop it… nothing stops someone from making a deposit with a website and then gambling… the problem became that the operators couldn’t make it without the credit card players. I’m not a gambler… no luck… so no big deal! The issue was much clearer in that… the webplayers were gambling in the US… at their home computers… with a company that was doing business INSIDE the US… and not paying taxes. I have less of an issue with that logic than the boat incident.
As for the courts ruling on emminent domain… that was a bone head move… and many states have placed laws on the books to protect private property owners from such actions. While the courts intention was well meaning… the overall picture was one that left a bad taste inthe mouth of the people. No one wants to see an 80 year old barricaded in the family home with a shotgun holding off the bulldozer! It was an isolated case that should have never been placed before the court. I’m sure we’ll see a modification to the ruling with future cases.
Edited on May 07, 2007 15:20
