Assault On The Free Press!

Dear Sierra Pointe Home Owners,

 

On September 14, 2009, e-Pointe! received an inquiry from our web provider, based on a complaint letter sent to them by Mrs. Gene Schermerhorn.

 

The complaint letter sent can be read as follows, as forwarded to us by our web provider:

 

The actual page containing a very libelous account of my court case is found at: http://www.epointeweb.com/epointe_web_010.htm. The site owner has refused to remove this content and that is why I am contacting you as her domain register/hosting company. This account, written from your client’s point of view (thru her “reporter”), is highly inaccurate and slanderous.

If I was a public figure in any shape or form, I could understand the exposure. However, I am a private individual and this account, while extremely slanted and false, contains privileged information that was confidential between the homeowner’s board and our attorneys. There is other misinformation within that Web site, but it is the court case article that I am requesting to be removed.

I wanted to see if this could be done without me and my husband needing to bring the matter to our attorney who handled our court case in 2005. Thank you for your help.

DeborahSchermerhorn

 

 

As e-Pointe! was asked to respond to this complaint, the following letter was sent in response:

Dear Mr. Dimov,

 

Allow me to introduce myself. I am Ralph Beuc, who is the author of this article in question. I was also the President of the HOA at the time this case was in court, and the very one who had to defend this case against our HOA. So, all my knowledge of this matter is first hand, and quite accurate. I do not see how this can be a case of the "client’s point of view (thru her “reporter”)", when I, the "reporter," was the very one who had to stand in court on this case, under oath, defending our HOA in this case. It is also not secret in any way. The case is in public records, and there is no confidentially breech if the court records can be found freely on the Internet. In fact, the results were published publicly previously! I was also on the board during the 2 previous years worth of information stated at the beginning of the article. So, that information is also first hand.

 

I also find it curious that this complaint is being filed, after being up on the web site for well over two years (with no one complaining)! I think it is perhaps longer, but I am erring on the side of being conservative in this case. I think that it is perhaps that this is being complained about now, because the very individual (Mr. Gene Schermerhorn) who brought this case before the board (Trying to get the HOA to pay for a remodel of his unit), is now President of the board, and is being watched very carefully by the home owners. You see, once proven to be corrupted, fewer people tend to trust him when he is in the position of power.

 

I would like to make note Mrs. Schermerhorn's comment in her complaint "If I was a public figure in any shape or form, I could understand the exposure." Mr. Schermerhorn, who this article is about, IS a public figure in our HOA. He sits in the seat of President of our HOA! Therefore, using simple logic, I think it can be argued that this should be found understandable by the very individual complaining about it.

 

As the article clearly stated, Mr. Schermerhorn LOST the case, and I might add quite badly. Not only did he lose an $8,000 lawsuit claim for a $150 toilet clog mess, but he was also made to pay the HOA attorney fees. I also find it very interesting, that with Mr. Schermerhorn as President of the association, Mrs. Schermerhorn is threatening to use the HOA attorneys to come after me, having the home owners once again pay the bill for their own personal vendettas! Although Mrs. Schermerhorn in her complaint did not state specifically on using the HOA attorney, this is the only one that could be referred to here. I refer to her statement "...bring the matter to our attorney who handled our court case in 2005." You see, Mr. Schermerhorn did not use a lawyer in his lawsuit against the HOA. He chose to represent himself!

 

I might also add that this site is done on a volunteer basis, using no funds from the HOA. It is because of that, individuals who want to "rule" our complex are angry when there is a publication outside of their influence. Nothing published is false information, and can be backed up fully by public court records, audio recordings, signed documents and other certifiable sources of information.

 

However, in the spirit of being fair, I do fully intend to let both sides of the issue be known. Please take note that I will publish Mrs. Schermerhorn's complaint in our next newsletter, so her voice may be heard as well. I hope this is a sensible compromise, and will satisfy "the necessary steps to resolve this matter."

 

If you wish to speak to me about the matter, you of course may call me. The article, if you wish to review it yourself, can be found at http://www.epointeweb.com/epointe_web_010.htm  I look forward to hearing from you, if you have any further questions on the matter you wish to ask me.

 

      Thank you.

 

 

            -Ralph Beuc 

Our web provider did respond to my answer, and gave the following reply:

 

“We will close our case on this matter now and you can rest assured that we will take no further action from our side except for letting the complaining party know our position.”

 

Rather than write any lengthy blog or other articles, it is probably best to lay the bare facts on the table, for you the readership to see.

 

When people can’t stand to hear the truth, they will try and silence the opposition, rather than let the truth be known.

 

 

Care to Comment?   Send an email to epointeco@gmail.com