Yup - we were in crisis w/ my mom and dad and our realtor assured us that she checked
his background and would be a good tenant because he was a professional. Didn't say
anything bad about him. Didn't say anything about how Aruba renter's law was.
Just looking for the money and never replied to me again. Maybe once or
twice with incredibly low offers on the house because he was there.
Rigged? I think so.
By the way my house is for sale - i'll be posting that soon
Liz, I think you owe it to the forum members to explain the profession of the real estate lady's husband. No names mentioned but I think then the link and reference checking will be understood
The hit-and-run case might be the slightest of this problems. I just came across this article:
Dutch lawyer commits perjury in Aruba Airlines quarrel
February 19, 2016 at 15:04
Aruba Airlines airline has to deal with financial turmoil and feuding captains. A judge has now ruled that director Onno de Swart made a breach of a relevant tax lawyer, who is still entitled to nearly fifty thousand dollars.
Goings on in the Antilles: Aruba Airlines has established in Oranjestad urgently need $ 6.3 million to stay alive. But the company has to deal simultaneously with a management which goes quickly down the street.
The struggle for power is so intense that the management is put on non-active on the court order. CEO Onno de Swart and CEO Esteban Valles have a "profound disagreement" about the future direction of the ailing airline.
A brand new award, owned Quote, shows that the Aruban snake pit goes even deeper. The court in Aruba Wednesday a judgment passed on a long argument between Onno de Swart and Geoffrey Weaver, a tax lawyer active on the island.
'Artful raised smokescreen'
It appears that the bands still have money credit of De Swart, who has wrongly that Aruba Airlines shares 'not' be transferred to, in succession, a trust company and a company called Seastar Holding. From a supplied 'share purchase agreement' is to make the Seastar has paid nearly half a million dollars for ninety percent of the Aruba Airlines shares.
The court comes to the conclusion that the Swarts proposition "sufficient basis" fog and there is a 'cunning smokescreen erected or spurious "that the sale was disguised. From a shareholder diagram it can be seen how complex the relationships are in Aruba Airlines. It appears that De Swart majority shareholder of the Aruba Dream Private Foundation, which again owns Seastar. In short: De Swart sold the shares to himself.
"Contrary to the truth '
The remaining ten percent of Aruba Airlines is owned by the Hoogd Gabri, a past discredited lawyer played a remarkable role in this case. He testified under oath in court that the Swarts version knocked the share sale. Now it is certain that this is incorrect, the court concludes that the Hoogd 'repeatedly declared contrary to the truth [has]. " This is called perjury. The Hoogd Should this be prosecuted, he can be put out of his office.
The only winner in this thorny issue seems to listen to provisionally named Geoffrey Weaver. He claimed the verdict right to ten percent of the share sale, which translated represents a sloppy € 43,000.
See also: Aruban judge is considering charges against Dutch lawyer
Aruban judge deliberates on a case against Dutch lawyer
February 25, 2016 at 11:53
The ups and downs of the ailing Aruba Airlines and its feuding drivers persist. In the Antilles raging court battle over who is the boss in the airline.The court examines whether a declaration is made against a lawyer who stated under oath "repeatedly in conflict with the truth."
It is the case for the Hoogd Gabri, a counselor who has a private interest of ten percent in Aruba Airlines airline. He declared under oath that the remaining ninety percent of the shares 'not' be transferred to a company called Seastar Holding.
The share issue is the subject of litigation between the recently inactive periodically Aruba Airlines director Onno de Swart and a tax lawyer named Geoffrey Weaver. Last week the judge pronounced Weaver is entitled to a compensation of the equivalent of € 43,000 since been sold under a share purchase agreement 'shares for an amount of nearly half a million dollars.
Despite the ruling Hoogd holds the full that's right his version of the story, and he does not violate declared the truth. "And I stand by. If I had to explain again, I did exactly that, "he says in the Antillean newspaper Daily Herald.
Meanwhile performs the Aruban court consideration of a complaint against the Hoogd perjury. The lawyer defends himself by saying that "there is need for more." This means the Hoogd that there must be a deliberate traveled false declaration. He also indicates that Onno de Swart has appealed against the verdict. In short: to be continued.