Bottom line, it appears as if Charbit is working together with Ruiz who owns 40 acres above VE to have access THROUGH THE VE GATES for their new multi home project!!!
It is with mixed feelings to discover this article on the internet written about current events in VE that has effected and will continue to effect our home values.
We need a vote and soon to get Charbit OUT ASAP, he / this SC are destroying our community! Please everyone, Vote NO on this budget asa 1ST STEP! Rumor is Charbit is the Money behind This Ruiz! WE NEED TO GET THIS SC REMOVED!
Read the entire article here. It is long, but NECESSARY AND FULL OF INFORMATION WE ALL NEED TO BE AWARE OF AND ACT UPON IMMEDIATELY!
Link to Boquete Guide article is here and is also shown in full below. http://www.boqueteguide.com/?
The story begins in 2001, with a high profile, $80 million dollar residential project called Valle Escondido, in Boquete, Panama. This project, the first to be funded by foreign investors, has tipped an unprecedented real estate boom in Panama.
In an effort to cooperate with a local farmer who needed access through the project
to his 16 hectares (approximately 40 acres) of land, project managers allowed passage on the condition that his workers be transported via truck, to and from the boundaries of the property. Shortly thereafter, about 50 indigenous workers came through the property carrying signs claiming that they had been held hostage on the farm because they were not being allowed passage through the project. Over the next several days national papers ran the story and the TV news showed videos of the workers reuniting with their families at the front gate, claiming to have been "held hostage" for weeks." Latin Business Chronicle
This situation turned into a Criminal lawsuit which was won by the developer, Valle Escondido. The owner of the coffee farm, Sr, Rojer Ruiz, then filed a civil suit for damages. He prevailed in local court, then in appeals court and once again in the Supreme court. The case is currently with the Panama Supreme court again, a decision is expected soon. This decision will tilt the future of Valle Escondido.
Should Sr Ruiz the owner of the 16 hectare coffee farm prevail in addition to a large damage laward he will gain his primary goal, a Survey Dumbre, an easement, to use the roads of Valle Escondido to access his sixteen hectares and develop them. This outcome will make Valle Escondido a gateway to his property.
In January 2010 Mr. Sam Taliaferro, the man who created Valle Escondido (VEHOA), published the General Regulations of
THE VALLE ESCONDIDO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
COVENANTS, RIGHTS, DUTIES AND RESTRICTIONS
In that document he created the home owners association and stated their responsibilities in Chapter two, article one.
"Article 2. Mandatory Powers and Duties. The Association shall exercise the following rights,
powers and duties:
(a) To hold and administer the Common Areas for the benefit and enjoyment of the owners andq
occupiers of lots in the subdivision. The purpose of this provision is to impose on the Association
the obligation maintain the same for the benefit of owners and occupants of Lots; and
(b) To create and enforce the rules that govern the usage of the Common Areas and all the
regulations provided by these Covenants, Rights, Duties and Restrictions.
L(c) To create, to enforce, to collect and to manage of the maintenance fees and the charges for the
services provided for the benefit of every member of the Association.
(d) To provide the personnel, procedures and equipment of the vigilance security staff in the Valle
Escondido Urbanization"
In this the duties are delineated and the right to assess fees is created.
Article 6 created a five person steering committee elected by the owners.
"Article 6. Steering Committee: This group is composed of 5 members who will serve as the
decision making body for the Valle Escondido Homeowners' Association. All procedures for the
election of the Steering Committee will follow the guidelines established in Chapter III of this
document"
Currently of the five members of the Steering Committee only two are in Valle Escondido. In early 2014 the position of President of the steering committee was assumed by a new resident in Valle Escondido, Jean Richard Charbit. Who for reasons detailed below is no long present in Valle Escondido.
Richard Charbit, the President of the VEHOA Steering Committee is mentioned article in the New York Times from 2002. It discusses questionable marketing of the stock of Baltia Airlines using SPAM email.
"Baltia said it was not behind the (SPAM) mailing. "A brokerage firm sent out a bunch of e-mails without us knowing about it," said Igor Dmitrowsky, president and chief executive of the fledging carrier. "We have not paid for theadvertising."...
"Baltia did not reap any direct benefit from the start of trading on Jan. 8. According to its registration statement, all of the 5.75 million shares were formerly restricted stock sold by Steffanie Lewis, the company's lawyer, and Richard Charbit, a business consultant."
According to a resume published by Mr Charbit he was a consultant to Baltia from 1997 to 2002, Link. From the same article:
"Since Baltia Air Lines shares began trading on Jan. 8, the price has fallen to 45 cents from its initial price of $1. " NY Times Mr Charbit had a significant interest in selling the stock. He had 2,573,352 shares in 2002. SEC I have no knowledge of whether Mr Charbit sold his stock but the airline stated he did. "stock sold by Steffanie Lewis, the company's lawyer, and Richard Charbit, a business consultant."
From another source on investments:
"The promoters' e-mails sound a common theme; Baltia Air, they say, has big plans for 2002, including service to eight domestic and international destinations – Russia, Latvia, the Ukraine, Belarus, Chicago, Orlando, Florida and Los Angeles. That's not all. According to the promoters, Baltia Air plans to have 560 employees and operate seven aircraft - four Boeing 747-200's and three Boeing 737-200's – all before the end of the year 2002.
With $3204 in the bank that would be a neat trick. The Company owns no planes, but its assets do include automobiles worth approximately $30,000 (before depreciation). Right now, that would make it more likely for Baltia Air to drive to St. Petersburg, Florida than to fly to St. Petersburg, Russia." More on Balita
Balita Air lines still exists, it has stock selling for under $.02 a share and according the their web site, fourteen years after the stock sale they are yet to fly, but they do have a photo of an airplane. Balita Airlines.
You might say, so what, a good business move, pump and dump. But there is a pattern, another "pump and dump" case ended with jail time for Mr Charbit. FBI announcement.
In case he was accused of offering $100,000 to a broker to influence prices of the shares of another OTC stock ZNXT. He wanted the buyer to use discretionary funds of $300,000 to purchases the stock, increasing its market value from $.04. to anticipated $.50 a share. He was arrested and plead guilty to security fraud.
"01/18/2011 78 JUDGMENT as to Jean R. Charbit (2), Count(s) 1, Imprisonment: 9 months. Supervised Release: 2 years.; Count(s) 2-3, 4-5, Dismissed. Assessment: $100.00 Fine: $40,000.00. Signed by Judge Ursula Ungaro on 1/18/2011. (asl) (Entered: 01/19/2011)" Investor Hub
Mr Charbit is also CEO of a California Company called Great Entertainment Inc., their website is on Blogger, you can have one there, free. It is an odd choice for a big Hollywood production company. His film history on IMDB is rather limited, one small film in 1988. On that the Great Entertainment website they discuss their "non profit", Great Treasures Foundation Inc. According to the IRS website, there is no listing for Great Treasures Foundation, so although it might not earn a profit, it is not a non profit entity under 501 C 3, IRS.
Mr Charbit has voluntary accepted the invitation of the US government to leave the US and not return, rather than fighting his deportation. I cannot find out why Homeland Security wanted him out, but he is gone.
He has also been expelled from Panama as a security risk for presenting fraudulent or altered documents regarding his immigration into Panama. Mr Charbit is also alleged to have held Analia Velasquez, manager of Valle Escondido, captive in her office. Criminal charges were filed and then withdrawn, when he attempted to use this pending criminal matter as a reason Panama could not deport him, he was deported to France.
On June 22 2014 Mr. Charbit wrote on http://www.vehoa.com, website " I was detained by immigration on June 5th and held until June 14. I was not arrested nor deported and no charges were ever filed. During the period of my detention, it was determined I was a threat to the security of Panama." I have a copy of the expulsion document from the Ministry of Security of Panama expelling Mr. Charbit it is dated 9 Jun 2014, thirteen days before he wrote he was not deported.
Mr Charbit was sent to France and on 19 August 2014 was in Colombia. He filed a power of attorney from Colombia requesting an appeal of his deportation from Panama. His appeal was filed 13 August 2014, before the attorneys had legal authority to file it. That is a problem for the courts, but it is clear Mr Charbit thinks returning to Panama is important.
There is more on Richard Charbit published by VE residents at this link.
My point of discussing the President of the Steering Committee and low of involvement of active residents of the Valle Escondido Home Owners (VEHOA) becomes clear when you think about how the committee has used much pent up animosity against the current management to do harm to others and to potentially do harm to all residents.
Ralf Henrich was Director of Operations for Boquete Consulting Security SA (BCS) , the company that provided security to Valle Escondido. In a denucia dated 20 August 2014 Ralf claims that specific members of the Steering Committee of Valle Escondido Home Owner association, including the President Richard Charbit, libeled him. In Panama this is a criminal offense.
There are statements in the denucia that claim Ralf has no law enforcement training and no certifications. Ralf claims he was damaged and it appears he was, since he is no longer working in Valle Escondido. The denucia has an inch of documents all notarized and Apostilled that refute the claims against him. There was a concurrent dispute about payment to BCS for an increase of cost of services. The VEHOA withheld all payments to BSC until they broke the company and then they paid off the contract, another story, but important understanding the issues. The effect was that the VEHOA steering committee terminated its contract with BCS SA.
Why is all of this drama happening now in Valle Escondido, it appears to tie back to the Civil case between the developer and Sr. Rojer Ruiz, the one started more than a decade ago.
Why did Richard Charbit want a thankless position, President of the VEHOA Steering committee
Why does Richard Charbit want to get back into Panama so badly when his business interests are in the US and he makes no effort to return there.
Why was removing the BSC security so important as to defame Ralf Henrich and breach the contract with BSC.
Why (allegedly) threaten and unlawfully detain Analia Velasquez in her office.
A lot of questions, and perhaps some answers.
I have interviewed Ralf Henrich, Analia Velasquez, Thalia Velasquez, Julio Espinosa, the attorney for the VEHOA and residents of VE for this article and have facts to share. All the information necessary for you to reach your own conclusion is in this article and I have the documents to prove all statements.
My questions were answered by Richard Charbit himself in a June 22 2014 Letter from the VEHOA President. This letter is on the members only VEHOA.com, website but I do have a copy. I wonder how many residents bother to read the letter, it only had one comment when my copy was printed.
Mr Charbit listed his agenda, I will skip all of part one listing potentially legitimate functions of the VEHOA and go to what is conveniently numerated section 2.
"2. Resolve the conflict with Rojer Ruiz", (the topic of the civil lawsuit against the developer, not the VEHOA, currently in the Panama Supreme Court). VEHOA is not a party in that lawsuit.
He states that "the developer has been sued repeatedly, and has repeatedly lost those suits, for blocking Mr. Ruiz from access to his finca. which lies up the Valley from VE. By blocking that route, Mr Ruiz has no access, thus depriving his of constructive use of his property." ( One lawsuit going on for more than ten years would be more correct.)
There is another access to the Ruiz finca but it is less direct. As the beginning of this post states, the original criminal claim ruling was not in favor of Mr Ruiz, but in favor of Valle Escondido. Mr Ruiz has only one lawsuit in which he has prevailed and that is again back in the Supreme Court of Panama so until that court speaks it one unresolved civil claim.
Passing a few points, Mr Charbit states
"Mr Ruiz would then be able to develop his property."
"Could this property possibly be a future extension of VE? That's a decision the VEHOA would have to make"
"In any case, Mr. Ruiz has proved he has the right to develop his property with or without approval or permission from the VEHOA, the developer, or the resort. Simple he has an absolute right of passage through VE."
Valle Escondido owners put these facts together.
1. Your President is a confessed fraud, who served jail time for stock fraud.
2. He cannot re-enter the United States, nor Panama.
3. He is recent in your community and assumed a position that no one else wanted, President of your Home Owners association steering committee.
4. He immediately alienated and provoked the development manager to the point of a Criminal lawsuit for unlawful detention, kidnapping.
5. After eliminating BCS as security it was expected gate security would go to the new firm selected by the VEHOA steering committee. It did, but the resort continued to have people there also. Why was this a major problem for your steering committee. Why was controlling access so critical to someone what has stated, "In any case, Mr. Ruiz has proved he has the right to develop his property with or without approval or permission from the VEHOA, the developer, or the resort. Simple he has an absolute right of passage through VE."
6. On Jun 22 2014 he wrote the VEHOA needs to "Resolve the conflict with Rojer Ruiz", that the property Mr Ruiz has will be developed. "That Mr Ruiz has an absolute right to develop his property" He does have the right but the other statement about it possibly being an extension of VE is what should concern you. ""Could this property possibly be a future extension of VE? That's a decision the VEHOA would have to make" Where in the VEHOA regulations does the VEHOA have a right to do that?
7. In his Jun 22 2014 letter Mr Charbit states in section 3. "I have invested considerably in farmland in the area surrounding Boquete." later he also states his agenda is "Not - Building high-rise condos on the Rojer Ruiz Finca" he also denies an intent to build 100 homes on the Ruiz Finca. Finally after denying both of those statements, he did write, " In any case, Mr Ruiz is the one who would be developing the property and he can build anything he wants. That's not our say"
If Sr. Rojer Ruiz prevails in court and has access to pass through Valle Escondido the tranquility of your lives will certainly be changed by traffic though Valle Escondido to develop his sixteen hectares.
How much will your property values be affected by development above your location, how will your watershed be affected? You might consider how much of your HOA payments are going to legal expenses instead of fixing infrastructure. What are your contingent legal liabilities if the VEHOA becomes enmeshed in a law suit with the developer, one has been filed.
Owners you should consider becoming engaged in your own community and help make intelligent informed decisions instead of leaving in the hands of someone else. I hope this sheds some light on the situation.
7 comments:
Comment to Ms. Bell in response to what she podted on Boquete Guide:
Ms. Bell, you have no credibility being aligned with a convicted felon who has made it his career to rip people off. Mr. Charbit is the type of individual who gives foreigners in Panama a bad name and helps promote the ongoing Xenophobia movement. As long as you and your associates have any association with this felon, who has been appropriately expelled from Panama, you yourselves are not welcome here. Ms. Bell you have been complicit in hiding Charbit’s identity from the Boquete community. What does this say about your character? Lee did a great job of demonstrating of exactly what type of individual Mr. Charbit is. He has been ripping people off with his scams for years and yet you still support such an individual. Shame on you! You are the true definition of ugly American.
Fellow homeowners, I just received the latest rant Rchard put up on the VEHOA website via email.
Amazing that I have to defend myself once again here and I hope that somehow this gets on both blogs.
For the record, Lee Zeltzer did approach me while I was in Boquete in regards to the rumors going around about me. I gave him access to copies of my lawsuit, criminal charges against the SC, and a copy of the post "Clarity about Richard Charbit's criminal past".
Nothing more as I didn't want residents to blame me for airing dirty VE laundry outside of VE. I never gave him internal VE documents nor did I mention the Veneighbors blog. I do not have access to VEHOA website and Lee did not gain access to posts there and the CC&R's from me. Lee did mention that he is close friends with Julio Brown, the VEHOA attorney, and planned to speak with him also. I am confident that Lee Zelter will confirm these facts.
Also, I find it interesting that Richard just stated that he is "not interested in the slightest in doing anything like this now", in regards to the Ruiz property. If this is not an obvious admission that prior to this Richard was interested than I don't know what is. Freudian slips tell all.
Ralf Henrich
This is Lee Zeltzer. Julio Espinosa did not provide me any documents. I have many other sources for information.
Found it interesting that the no vote yesterday was 58. Curious if there are already 70 ready to oust the SC why did they not vote?
One item to consider is that 13 votes were received which were not accepted; either due to incorrect form, not considered a valid property to vote (i.e. the voter hasn’t obtained title) or otherwise as determined by the voting inspectors.
Another would be it’s off-season, many people are traveling elsewhere, and might not have even seen their emails and been aware of the vote.
Many people had problems with the electronic voting system and just gave up. I know I did. The better question to ask is if the VE homeowners are so behind the actions of this SC, led by a convict career criminal, then why did they only get 34 votes supporting their great plan. 34 votes is only 20% of the entire homeowners. This should be a wake up call to the SC that, contrary to what they have been claiming, the majority of homeowners do not support them.
Given that Charbit has three properties, Loveless has three, Bill Day two, the three Steering Committee members that are allowed to be in Panama three more. there is a total of 11. So outside of that little group there are only 23 homeowners that support the SC efforts. Sounds like the support is declining.
Post a Comment