NT Properties, the majority lot owner in Sycamore Vista served a Complaint for “Breach of Contract” on me today. On it’s face, the Complaint looks totally bogus, not even any documents attached. Moreover, the Assignments of the Special Assessments Mr Russo sent to me do not mention lots 67 & 68 as being assigned to NT Properties. The “Assignments of Assessments” also show that the liens/contracts expired due to statutes of limitations: contracts expire in six years, A.R.S 12-548 and, liens for assessments expire in three years, A.R.S. 33-1807.

NT Properties v 666isMONEY (Complaint, the complaint mentions lots 67 and 68 those lots were actually assigned to someone else.)

AmendedComplaint (Omits lots 68 & 67, cover letter is weird: assessments have expired due to limitations like the liens, when did he think the assessments were due?)

Assignments of Assessments (Copies of NT Properties’ authority to go after me. Did Russo really pay Sullivan $12,500 per lot?! I had sent Mr. Sullivan a notice, two quit claim deeds and $10, which is what you do prior to quieting title and Sullivan’s lawyers then must have contacted Russo.)

The person who originally bought these Assignments (Sullivan) was a friend of the previous majority lot owners, he lost a lot of money investing in New Tucson / Sycamore Vista. A $1-billion bankruptcy lawsuit was filed against the company he was CEO of, First Magnus: “it [he and 39 others] were a significant cause of the credit crisis.” (Another local story about First Magnus with good comments.)

Corona de Tucson brochure from promotional materials sent to a buyer in the 1970s. The original plat maps called the subdivision “Corona de Tucson,” the 1964 deed restrictions also mention the name-change.

I found an attorney to represent me

His name is Steven W. Cheifetz, he’s one of the attorneys who won the Dreamland case, which I’m going to use in challenging the lawsuit against me. I really like this lawyer, I told him, “I love your attitude,” he is very sharp and enthusiastic, he asks all the right questions too.  Here are some of our goals:

1. Paragraph two of the Complaint mentions the CC&Rs of the HOA so we’re going to bring in the HOA and counterclaim the CC&Rs are bogus, per the findings in the Dreamland case. (Dreamland says Deed Restrictions can’t be changed into CC&Rs with dues, assessments, etc.)
2. Try and get back all the dues and maybe the assessments I paid into the HOA — over $6000 in dues and $60,000 on two lots in Unit 2 that they were supposed to help me sell to KB Homes.
3. By the end, my lots will be free and clear, we won’t have to pay any more dues or assessments.

He was also astonished about the Assignments of Assessments to private parties. He’s not the only one I talked to that wondered about the legality of this. In California, a statute prohibits an association from assigning liens:

Under Civil Code §1367.1(g) an association may not “voluntarily assign or pledge the association’s right to collect payments or assessments, or to enforce or foreclose a lien to a third party. . .” There is an exception to this rule when the association assigns or pledges the right to collect or foreclose to a financial institution or lender as security for a loan obtained by the association. (Source.) (It’s now Civil Code 5735)

Mr Cheifetz said, “I’m not bragging but I’m probably the best attorney in Arizona regarding fighting HOAs.” I believe him! Tuesday I have an appointment with him in Phoenix.