|
I recently read
with interest an article about buyers who are requesting their
deposits back from developers. [Groundwork, “Brickell
Foreclosure Fallout,” published Oct. 11] I have no special love
for the developers, with whom I have had no contact whatsoever.
The buyers in
question called, fought for, rushed to stand in line, brought
along cousins, brothers, sisters, parents to stand in line for
them so they could get contracts on the condos, not to live in
them but to make money. This has been done by the same buyers
time and again. They turned the condos and made huge profits.
When my broker
and I applied to the sales office for a condo, for live-in
purposes, all of the units were under contract. They told me I
could probably buy one of the units from one of the buyers who
had it under contract.
These greedy
buyers tied up all the units, and people who really wanted to
live in them could not buy one. Now when things turned they’re
crying foul.
So like the
stock market, when we all got greedy (including myself) and lost
all the money we invested, including our retirement money, no
one gave it back to us. We had no one to blame but ourselves.
So, to the buyers, take your loss and get on with your life.
It’s your own fault.
Audrey Beckoff
Sunny Isles
Beach
Once Again,
I Am Not That Robert Seitz
Thank you for
attempting to clarify that I am not the Robert Seitz your
article was about [Wakefield, “What’s In a Name?” published Nov.
22].
As you are
aware, I am a practicing attorney in Miami-Dade County and
appear before numerous judges in this county, and I believe your
article falls short of differentiating between the two Robert
Seitzes who have the same name. I have nothing but the utmost
respect and admiration for the fine judiciary presiding in this
county and throughout the state of Florida.
Robert C. Seitz, Esq.
Miami
No
Connection Here
We are a
company committed to serving our clients nationwide with
vehicles on lease to virtually every
U.S.
government agency nationwide as well as to many local and state
agencies. Angie Hargot should have known that CT Corp is what
out-of-state companies use as a registration agent for
service process, etc. We do not know anyone at the dealership
cited in Angie’s article, Lexus of Kendall [“The Hybrid
Inquiry,” published Nov. 22] nor would we in all likelihood
necessarily buy in Florida the vehicles requested.
John P. Cullen
Managing
Member, ACME Auto Leasing
New Haven,
Conn.
Her Honor to
Supporters: Thanks for the Votes
I want to thank
you for your support this past year and specifically this month;
I would not have been elected mayor of Miami Beach without it
[“Bower Power,” published Nov. 22]. I asked you to go out there
and make your vote count, and you did. I am honored to serve as
your mayor for the next two years.
I look forward
to seeing you and speaking with you throughout the community, as
well as serving as your Mayor. Again, I thank you for giving me
this wonderful opportunity.
Matti Herrera
Bower
Mayor of Miami
Beach
Don’t
Invisible Fence Me In
This week I saw
a rebroadcast of the Surfside Planning and Zoning Board
non-reality show. A proposed ordinance (coming up for continued
discussion by the town) demands removal of chain link fences in
back yards that cannot be seen from the street unless they can
be concealed on the neighbor's side.
However, these
fences were approved many years ago by the town on the property
lines. You can't just walk over and install landscaping or
another fence on the neighbor's property.
What interests
are served by going after fences that cannot be seen from the
street? Will town staff walk without authorization into our
backyards to find chain link? Maybe they also will find Jimmy
Hoffa. Or, is this an invitation for neighbors to rat out each
other because of other grievances? I understand concern about
visible chain link fences, but I don’t understand legislating
against what can't be seen. Give me a break!
There is a
simple solution: Let the only people affected by the fence
determine what should be done. Let the fence remain unless there
is an objection by a neighbor now (or in the future). If there
is an objection, the fence must then be concealed or
removed/replaced. Otherwise, let town staff busy themselves with
real problems.
I urge the town
to reconsider this proposal.
Howard
Talesnick
Surfside |
