The Alphaville Herald

22 Responses to “Op/Ed: The Dangers Of Dealing With Private Estate Landowners”

1. 

   Mary
   

   May 19th, 2009
   

   So you went to an adjacent island that was for sale and tried to convince then to buy your island rather than the one they were looking at? That’s pretty trashy. You and the estate owner both have some blame here.
2. 

   Ari Blackthorne
   

   May 19th, 2009
   

   Only fools actually *buy land* from an estate owner.

   If you intend to actually buy the land, buy it from LL on the mainland. if you want space on an estate, then find a place where all you pay is the tier (not actually buying the land). And only a place that allows weekly payments (though first payment is usually two weeks).

   Caveat emptor.

   Even though it’s virtual land, you still need to appraoch and treat it like first life REAL ESTATE – which is the most complicated and vetted purchase you can possibly make in first life.

   So, uh, yes. You ended up with an asshole landlord. They are a dime a dozen. But at the same time, you’d have been better to just set the land for sale and left it alone. If the tier runs out, then it runs out.

   When actually buying land, you can only trust LL.

   Chalk it up to experience and learn from it.

   Oh and it’s funny how you validate my comments here:
   http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2009/05/single-sl.html

   LOL
3. 

   Kahni
   

   May 19th, 2009
   

   I LOVE my estate landlord. Been renting with her for over 2 years now, and she actually RESPONDS to issues that come up, unlike the Lindens if you rent on mainland.

   Yup. Bad landlords are all over. Before you get land, it’s always advisable to talk to the neighbors of your parcel you want and ask them about their interactions with the landlord. If people don’t know who the landlord is on a personal basis, don’t rent there. I’ve been renting 2 years now issue-free, but I TALK to my landlord, and shoot the breeze with her often. It helps a LOT.

   So don’t give up on estates and go back to mainland, you’ll never be happy. But look for something in the Odessa regions. The landlord rocks.

   /love ya Sofia!
4. 

   IntLibber Brautigan
   

   May 19th, 2009
   

   If you are renting an apartment from someone, and decide to move out, and advertise for someone else to move in, have you ever in your life had a landlord agree to transfer your paid up rent to the new resident? I haven’t, and I highly doubt anybody else here as either.

   That said, at BNT, if you move from one parcel to another, we will apply your old tier to the new parcel, but making tier transferrable to new residents is not only not in keeping with normal rental practices in RL, it also causes a bookkeeping nightmare.

   See, when you transfer a parcel, each parcel has a claim date on the about land info, which tells us when you bought the land. That tells us when your tier is due each month. If there was tier applied from previous residents, then we’d have to deal with dates all over the calendar and keeping track of them would be a bookkeeping nightmare.

   Some people like to make a practice of gaming the rental boxes like the hippotech ones, they’ll wait out the 5 days that the system lets you be in arrears, then when it resets, they pay it again and the renewal date changes, giving them 5 days of free tier. Thats theft. So, landlords, faced with this sort of rampant tier theft, have to go by reliable data, which is the claim date on the parcel when double checking rental boxes and adjusting them when someone tries to game them in this way to steal tier time.

   Having land in estate sims is worth it, you not only get more personal attention, support, and security, you are most likely going to have a sim that isn’t hemmed in by a bunch of other lagged up sims, spilling their lag over their borders and bogging everybody down in high rendering costs and script time. Mainland is a lag swamp, most people have to keep their draw distances at 64 meters there, but can open it up to 512 meters on estate sims. Thats a good comparison about the lag differences.

   Sure, some estates act unfairly, so do some residents. The best you can do is rent from estate companies that have been around a long time, like BNT has, for over 2.5 years. We’ve got a record of standing up for the residents, giving good pricing and excellent security. We run over 50 sims across the grid and are an Extended Support customer of LL, one of only 35 such on the grid, meaning we can get fast assistance from LL for any support need we or our residents have.
5. 

   Jorden
   

   May 19th, 2009
   

   Well being ” person 2′ i have to say Johanna came to me without and prompting on land i was purchasing and offered up her lands. and kept talking even though i made it clear i wasnt interested . She was rude to the sim owner as well. Stormi is my landlord and has been nothing short of a gem. Always helpfull and friendly. Also Johanna has been floating around the sim dropping this notecard on people who just dont care including people on my land. I have had to ban her….someone hand her some meds before she implodes
6. 

   Heather Frimon
   

   May 19th, 2009
   

   Yes intlibber, running a business DOES take a lot of work. Good record keeping and all is essential. But it seems BTE wants the land owner to pay instead of doing the paperwork to run their business. I haven’t been around sl that long, but I’ve purchased land on several estates and transferring the tier to the next owner seems to be the norm in SL. BTE is the first place I’ve seen using this practice. Think of it as equity or property tax. It’s not like rent as you mentioned. We didn’t rent an apartment. We purchased land from Belle Terre Estates. In RL, the equity, or paid up property tax goes to either the new land owner or the current land owner gets it back. The state or mortgage company doesn’t just get to keep it. But, if non-refundable tier is so common and acceptable, why don’t they tell you this up front? Is it because they could not sell any land if prospective buyers knew about this policy? I know Johanna and I would not have purchased land at BTE if we had been told about this unwritten policy. Try putting that little bit of information in the covenant and see how much how many buyers you get.
7. 

   Heather Frimon
   

   May 19th, 2009
   

   Well Jorden, we heard that you were upset about your name being involved in this, so we changed the names to protect the innocent. I guess that was false indignation.
8. 

   Lisa
   

   May 19th, 2009
   

   This piece isn’t an Op/Ed. It’s using The Herald as a public forum to attack someone you have a personal grievance with. I’m not surprised that the estate owner banned you, what the hell were you thinking trying to sell that land to one of her customers?
9. 

   Johanna Renfold
   

   May 19th, 2009
   

   It’s good to see some response to this issue. This is exactly what we had hoped for.

   I could refute Jorden’s slightly biased reply point by point since she gives a false perspective of what actually transpired. However, I think I’ll let the message text speak for itself. In my opinion, this is micro detail and only serves to distract us from the important issues that can impact everyone who buys land from private estate owners.

   The real issues are these:-

   1. Should private estate owners be allowed to act with impunity on whim or fancy and simply confiscate peoples property because they know they can (and do) get away with it? Should LL take the lead in dealing with bad estate owners rather than just telling us we can go to a RL lawyer, which is obviously impractical for many SL residents?

   2. Is it reasonable for Belle Terre Estates to require tier to be paid monthly in advance and not to inform buyers up front that when the land is resold any remaining tier at the time of sale is forfeit to Belle Terre?

   I feel these are the issues we should focus on, not subjective micro detail thrown up to muddy the water.

   I should also add that we now live on another private estate and the owners have been great to deal with, friendly and responsive. No problems whatsoever, so clearly not every woodpile is full of snakes
10. 

    The Grown Ups
    

    May 20th, 2009
    

    >>In our opinion and by any reasonable standard, the unwarranted and malicious action of Stormi Capalini is a clear case of land theft, breach of contract, unjust enrichment and tortuous breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, harassment and abuse of other Second Life residents.<<

    Sounds like Belle Terra ejected either a paralegal, a law student, or a huge fan of Law and Order. Either way, I suspect we’re in for a battle.

    I’m a bit confuzzled though, when you “buy” an island from a private estate owner, aren’t you actually just renting it? So how long a period was the $5,000 supposed to cover? If you were then merely trying to sublet your rental, why did you put it for sale? If I rent an apartment and then sublet it, I’m the one on the hook with the property owner for the rent and i might advertise that my apartment is for sublet, but not for sale.

    Finally, it sounds like Johanna got ejected for being a pain in the ass. While being able to eject people from anywhere for such a thing is a fantasy of mine, it’s probably not good public policy as we’d all be standing in the cornfield watching.
11. 

    Ari Blackthorne
    

    May 20th, 2009
    

    @ Johanna

    SL “real estate” is unregulated.

    So the answers to your questions are:

    1) No (but that would require regulation, which there is none.)
    So the response is DO private estate owners… (Answer: yes)
    Fortunately, they are the puny minority in SL.

    2) Reasonable to charge a full months tier up-front? That’s relative. it was reasonable to you as you paid it. it’s not reasonable to me, I wouldn’t rent there. Not because I wouldn’t stay that long, but because it’s not LL (who will never take your land away unless you don;t pay) – there is no control.

    As for the no refund of remaining tier: well again, it’s a resident, not LL.
    See my post prior.
    Learn it, love it, live it.

    Caveat emptor.
12. 

    Dana Vanmoer
    

    May 20th, 2009
    

    After speaking with Stormi we decided not to run this story as it seems one of the pair was causing trouble before this incident which is why they were selling in the first place AND because Stormi did in fact offer to pay Heather the purchase price of the land even though it is not refundable in a case of this kind.
    I agree whole heartedly with the person who said ‘This piece isn’t an Op/Ed. It’s using The Herald as a public forum to attack someone you have a personal grievance with. I’m not surprised that the estate owner banned you, what the hell were you thinking trying to sell that land to one of her customers?’
    I would do exactly the same if someone tried an underhanded trick like that.
    After speaking with residents in the area there are no complaints about BTEs estate management in fact the opposite all i heard was praise – at least i took the time to research before publishing spiteful lies and breaking the TOS to boot.
    Dana
13. 

    Johanna Renfold
    

    May 20th, 2009
    

    In answer to some comments made in recent replies:-

    The Grown Ups.

    When you buy land on a private estate you accept the covenant which sets out the conditions of purchase and which usually states, inter alia, “Purchased land in this region may be resold”. Providing you abide by the rules and pay the tier (something like a property tax) to the estate owner, the land then belongs to the purchaser in perpetuity and may be advertised and resold at any time at whatever price the seller decides. Hence, you are buying an asset that may go up or down in value according to market forces.

    Ari Blackthorne.

    Whether the tier payment is weekly, monthly, non-transferable etc. is a commercial matter for the estate owner to decide. Most estates transfer any paid-up tier money to the new owner when property is sold. However, Belle Terre Estates does not follow this policy. The point at issue is that the covenant should state clearly if tier money is forfeit upon resale. In our case, we were not made aware of this until we had put our land up for sale. So by making the tier payment monthly instead of weekly and by concealing the fact that it is non-transferable just about every resident is going to forfeit what could be a reasonable sum of money. In an extreme case, if you paid your tier (which in our case was L$17,000) and sold your land the next day, you lose the full L$17,000 to Belle Terre. All we are saying is that this should be made clear on Day One.

    Dana Vanmoer.

    It’s a pity Dana did not genuinely take the trouble to check the facts.

    1. Dana has never once bothered to contact me to seek any clarification concerning the baseless allegations made by Stormi Capalini.

    2. Stormi Capalini has alleged, inter alia, that “Johanna caused havoc to the estate” and “was a problem on the estate”. This is totally false and a poor excuse to cover her apparent lack of business ethic. I have never received any message or complaint of any kind from Stormi Capalini or anyone representing Belle Terre Estates to this effect. I challenge Stormi Capalini and you, Dana or anyone else to post any evidence here to the contrary.

    3. We decided to sell our island because we had ALREADY purchased a SIM at another estate that better suited our requirements and not because of any trouble or problems at Belle Terre.

    4. Stormi Capalini offered to refund the sale price of our island AFTER this article was published in Alphaville Herald.

    5. There is no reason for existing residents of Belle Terre to be unhappy or to complain as far as I know. We also had no complaints until our island was stolen, converted and resold by force.
14. 

    Heather Frimon
    

    May 20th, 2009
    

    That was great a great bit of research you did there Dana. I’m sure you dug deep to find the real truth behind the ‘spiteful lies’. No…wait. you didn’t talk to me. You didn’t talk to Johanna. You talked to Stormi and a few of her friends and then proceeded to explain OUR motivation for selling our land at Belle Terre? From that one conversation with Stormi, you learned all you need to know about us and why we sold our land? I find this so amazing that I have to assume you are kidding. Surely the editor of SL-Newspaper.com is professional enough to get all the facts on a story before making a judgment. There are two sides to a story, and you feel that only talking to one side is adequate “research” to get all the facts? Maybe you should have talked to both sides first, because only Johanna and I know why we sold our land. But, since you only asked
    Stormi, I’ll tell you in this forum what our reason for selling was.

    We were happy at BTE. We were so happy that when an entire sim next to our island became available, we were interested in buying it. We im’ed Stormi to ask a few simple questions about what was included and the access rights. But, she was so rude and condescending, that we decided to pass on it and purchase a sim on another estate. We found a sim to purchase and moved our home, and put our island at Belle Terre up for sale. Almost two weeks later, Stormi informs us that tier is non-transferable. About one minute after questioning this policy, I was banned and my land sized by Stormi.

    And yes, Stormi did offer me my purchase price back on the land she seized from me. She did this AFTER the Alphaville Herald ran this story. We had a long chat and she asked me right up front if this was about the money. I told her that it wasn’t about the money. I told her it was about informing the public of the unfair practices of dishonest estate owners. She stated that she knew it was never about the money, yet she asked me to clarify this TWICE during our conversation. Later, she goes ahead and offers me my money back, knowing full well that I won’t take it. This was an obvious attempt to buy my silence and to drop the issue, and she made sure she was not going lose a cent before making this ‘token offer’. Its’ obvious that this is ALL about the money to Stormi Capalini. She just wanted to get her ‘offer’ in the record.

    We did not have a problem with paying monthly tier. What all this is about is the practice of non-transferable tier, and not informing the buyer up front of this policy. This is bad enough on its own, but when you combine this policy with a mandatory monthly tier, it really makes this into a profit machine for Belle Terre. Our monthly tier was 17,000. Assuming a weekly tier would be 4,250L$, the most one would forfeit to Belle Terre after being surprised by this non-transferable tier policy, would be one weeks tier. Mandatory monthly tier in this case, is just a gimmick to maximize the profit Belle Terre makes when land changes hands. Most people will think monthly tier is unusual, but will not see anything seriously wrong with it. The dirty little secret at Belle Terre Estates is the non-transferable tier and how these two tie together to get your money.

    I’ve never read the SL-Newspaper Dana, but if the EDITOR sees nothing wrong with conducting such slanted investigations, I’ll pass. I have to assume the employees writing for it are taught that getting only one side of a story is enough ‘research’ to go to press. If the EDITOR is so quick to jump on the side of the big estate owners, I have to assume its’ not going to be good reading for the common person like me.
15. 

    Solar Legion
    

    May 21st, 2009
    

    Johanna, here’s a fact for you: Within Second Life, unless the Sim you have ‘purchased’ was through Linden Lab … you are RENTING it. Even THEN you are STILL renting it from Linden Lab, who retains the ability to reclaim it for whatever reason they deem fitting: End of Story.

    Welcome to Second Life: Get with the program.
16. 

    Alesia
    

    May 21st, 2009
    

    It’s hard to believe that Dana is the EDITOR of a rival newspaper. She seems to have no idea how to conduct proper investigative reporting. Or maybe she wasn’t really trying?

    Dana, put the personal crap and bias aside and address the issues?

    Remember, you are supposed to be a newspaper editor, not a taxi driver.
17. 

    markbyrn
    

    May 21st, 2009
    

    Right of resale not withstanding, the covenant doesn’t need to specify ethical prohibitions such as poaching customers and it appears that’s what caused the problem. The estate owner needs to make conditions of resale crystal clear (e.g. transfer of tier), but approaching prospective clients on the estate owner’s open lots and trying to get them to buy your resale lot instead of the open lot is poaching.
18. 

    Earthy Ling
    

    May 24th, 2009
    

    “A Call For Virtual Justice!”

    I’m flabbergasted by this whole imbroglio, as outlined in the above Alphaville Herald Op/Ed piece, “The Dangers Of Dealing With Private Estate Landowners” placed by Johanna Renfold on May 19th, 2009! Johanna Renfold and Heather Frimon contracted with Belle Terre Estates (or “BTE” from now on) of Second Life (or “SL” from now on) to “purchase” a plot of land which BTE’s governing covenant for the land clearly stated could be resold without mention of any exceptions or stipulations. Then, when Ms. Renfold attempted to sell their land in a perhaps inadvisable fashion (but it should be noted a method that was NOT disallowed by the covenant!), the owner of Belle Terre Estates, one Stormi Capalini, peremptorily decided to eject and ban first Ms. Renfold and subsequently Ms. Frimon from their own land, then seize and resell their land to someone else without providing either a sensible justification for her actions or compensation for the thousands of Linden dollars the two women had expended?? Surely I am not alone in finding this a highly disproportionate and unfair reaction to the matter at hand by Ms. Capalini?! Would not a warning have been a more appropriate response? In any event, Belle Terre Estates had conferred rights upon Johanna Renfold and Heather Frimon when they purchased their lot, as specified in the covenant – a form of a contract – and these rights ought not to have been disregarded willy-nilly, as they apparently had been!

    Stormi Capalini appears to be using a claim of “rudeness” on the part of Johanna Renfold as an excuse for her actions, but even if true (and I don’t see any compelling evidence to justify such a claim), since when is “rudeness” grounds to nullify and ignore the terms of an agreed-upon contract, and to violate the rights of another by seizing their assigned property? In the real world (or “RL” from now on), such an excuse would be regarded as laughable to the point of farce were one to exercise it – why should business dealings in a virtual world be any different? If Ms. Capalini couldn’t bring herself to tolerate the presence of Johanna Renfold and Heather Frimon within her estate any longer, she should at least have had the decency to have offered them compensation in full for the price of their land as well as a reimbursement of the unused remainder of their paid-up tier! Further, one suspects that this harsh response on the part of Stormi Capalini may to some degree be due to intolerance for Ms. Renfold and Ms. Frimon as an avowed lesbian couple. (If not, what exactly then did Ms. Capalini mean by her comment that “I don’t understand you two”? What’s so hard to understand? They thought they had purchased land that they had the right to access and enjoy!)

    Some have claimed that the actions undertaken by Stormi Capalini and Belle Terre Estates in this matter were not typical of their behaviour in the past – was it possible that Stormi Capalini was having a bad day when all this went down? (Or perhaps, seeing as how she selected “Stormi” as the first name for her avatar, tempestuousness is a personal attribute of hers?) But her advice to Johanna Renfold is telling: “Good luck at your next place…” Good luck in what, finding an honest land-broker the next time to sell her land, one that won’t seize it suddenly & without compensation??! It’s not a good situation when it’s only luck that’s safe-guarding someone from being defrauded! (While I gather that the apparently non-transferable balance of the tier on the plot of land is part of this dispute, in that case at least there wasn’t a claim made that the tier would be transferable to a new owner or owners, but even there it would have been good practice to have advised purchasers in advance of that restriction.)

    This case provides shocking evidence of the need for a better system or systems in Second Life to if not ensure fairness in business dealings in SL, then at least provide some means of redress when things go sour. In real life, there are enforceable laws and regulations in most jurisdictions that specify minimum standards for business transactions; alas, in SL, these seem to be almost non-existent. Certainly, one can hope that the people one does business with in SL operate on a basis of honesty, fairness, openess and transparency, and employ a basic truth in advertising approach, but what happens when they do not? And what happens if contracts are involved – and the so-called “covenants” governing lots on estate-owned land are essentially such – and the parties to the contracts fail to honour the terms they’ve agreed to?

    The principle of “caveat emptor” or “buyer beware” is a good one to follow, both in real life and in Second Life, and often can give an inkling of which merchants and property management organizations to steer clear of, but it’s not foolproof, and there needs to be a back-up system. (And in this case, if it’s true that this dispute is an isolated incident on the part of Belle Terre Estates, any “due diligence” conducted by Johanna Renfold and Heather Frimon in investigating BTE prior to their land purchase would not have been helpful to them in sending up a red flag!) In Second Life, this is especially true for deals involving land, which tend to involve larger sums of money than is typically the case for purchased goods and services. (An example of how the adoption of a caveat emptor approach falls short in RL in protecting consumers’ interests might be in food safety. If a food manufacturer has had repeated, publicized instances of food safety recalls for its products, then consumers who are aware of such problems might be advised when grocery shopping to select a brand from a different company instead, but if the latter company’s product is nonetheless found to be tainted, the consumer will expect that company to be prosecuted and punished if it’s found to have violated pre-existing standards. Even in a less serious situation, such as a case of false labelling or advertising wherein a product’s packaging purports it to contain one ingredient, but instead it contains another, a consumer can expect to have either a refund or an appropriate substitution made, often with consumer protection branches of government available to step in if needed. There is a presumptive and enforced expectation that consumers will get what they’ve been told they are to get.)

    For virtual worlds such as Second Life to gain increasingly in perceived legitimacy, it’s incumbent upon their administrators to take appropriate measures to bring about fair dealing. If such three-dimensional worlds are to ultimately become the successors to two-dimensional E-commerce web sites, as I believe they will become in time, they’ll have to adopt and enforce standards of fair play. This should surely be as important to Second Life’s administrators, Linden Labs, in their quest to persuade real life companies that SL is a valid and viable place to do business, as is sequestering adult-oriented sites within the SL world! While Linden Labs may have an understandable reluctance to become more directly involved in mediating third-party disputes, I believe they should at least state unequivocally their expectation that all participants in SL adhere to a minimal set of guidelines, and spell out what those ought to be. Providing carte blanche to estate land-holders to do as they please, regardless of any commitments or promises they’ve made to renters or “purchasers” is not an ethical stance to take. Linden Labs may regard such estate land-holders as providing them with a significant revenue stream, but in truth, the renters are also paying Linden Labs, albeit indirectly. All are worthy of fair treatment. And perhaps Linden Labs should contemplate disallowing the purported “sale” of estate lands, as such sales are arguably bogus, since Linden Labs regards the estates as retaining all property rights. In a genuine sale, property rights are transferred with a title, not retained by the selling party!

    I propose the following as possible methods of alleviating some of the problems I’ve outlined above: the widespread adoption of a “better business bureau” type of organization and official and/or unofficial mediators to resolve disputes, a consumers’ rights body, a central location to log complaints that people can refer to – especially registries of both good and bad landlords and tenants (since tenants ought to honour their commitments to landords also!), and even an in-world law court to hear “civil cases” so people won’t feel the need to resort to real life courts as they’re entitled to if all else fails. (And the bad publicity that can ensue if matters have to be brought before a RL court of law to obtain a just outcome is surely something that Linden Labs and all who care about the Second Life world should seek to avoid.) To advance these developments, I suggest, as and if it proves necessary, that appropriate groups be formed and a petition launched to lobby for such changes, a JIRA initiated, and if all else fails, a boycott be launched. (Imagine the loss of revenue if many renters of estate lands were to simultaneously give up their rented properties until their rights were more adequately protected!) Regardless of how it’s brought about, a “level playing field” that reassures consumers and commercial entities alike that their legitimate concerns will be addressed will be a good thing for all but the deliberately nefarious minority. Let’s ensure that “virtual justice” is a central part of our virtual lives!
19. 

    brinda allen
    

    May 24th, 2009
    

    Sadly there are those ppl that just seem to forget the “First Rule of SL…..HAVE FUN!”. I own a full sim as well as a homestead sim next door which is primarily for my residents to have a water recreational area. My parcels are ‘no money up front’. I do “sell” the parcels…thats so I dont have to count prims….but my sales ares for zero L$. I collect tier only..and dont allow resale. As was so aptly commented on by Solar Legion…all ‘land’ in SL is basically rented. I remember early on reading somewhere that Estate Owners may reclaim parcels for any or no reason. Ive only had to do that once….and in that case I returned over 85000L$ in tier. It’s called ethics. It is sad that we have unscrupulous ppl in SL. This metaverse is truly a ‘Second Life’…the losses here are rather minimal in comparison with first life…but it doesnt make one feel any better. I didnt look at the rezz dates of the ppl involved in the land scam. But as a general rule…I dont trade with most ppl that have a relatively short history in SL.
20. 

    Prof. Archie Lukas
    

    May 28th, 2009
    

    I’ve slipped some toads into her underwear, who have started fornicating in the damp environment – that should teach her!
21. 

    Ranma Tardis
    

    Jun 2nd, 2009
    

    Suppose Desmond Shag has spoiled me all of these years. *grins* He transfers tier with the lot but if the clock runs (no more paid tier) out there is a good chance someone else will pay the tier and own it. There are exceptions but that is between the renter and the guvnor. I think he is my #1 fan in Second Life. He is a very exceptional person!
    I do not know what rules Stormi Capalini has made for her renting but somehow feel like there is part of the story missing. I should know that name but am very tired tonight. My gut feelings is she is very honorable and a fair landlady
    Have to run, my bed time soon.
22. 

    Coral Serpente
    

    Jul 13th, 2009
    

    I’m not sure how your gut works Ranma Tardis (the most recent commentator), but I think it must be malfunctioning – you’d better get to your doctor quickly before it bursts & overwhelms you with malodorous & noxious emissions! I’m aware of the appalling situation that befell Johanna Renfold & Heather Frimon, & what was done to them doesn’t seem in the slightest something an “honourable & a fair landlady” (as you put it Ranma) ought to do, even if said landlady did feel irritated by arguable brusqueness on Johanna’s part. I saw the covenant that Stormi Capalini provided for the land at the time Johanna & Heather held it, when I visited their lovely Emerald Cove beach & marina, & it clearly stated that purchased land could be resold by the purchaser, without any stipulations or restrictions imposed. Therefore, even if the unused portion of the tier was not considered transferable to a new owner (though perhaps it ought to have been, or purchasers at least informed of that limitation prior to purchase), the ladies should have been compensated for the purchase price of their land & the unused tier, if Stormi Capalini couldn’t countenance their continued presence within the bounds of her overall estate! THAT would have been more in keeping with the practises of an “honourable & fair landlady”! What transpired was anything but fair, & strikes me for one as brazen in the sheer gall that Ms. Capalini’s peremptory actions must have surely required!

    Here is an exact copy of the covenant that governed the property that was at the heart of this dispute from the time of the purchase (that was saved from that time) until the two owners were dispossessed of it, & which all obligations Johanna & Heather met, as even Ms. Capalini didn’t dispute :

    COVENANT

    This land is strictly residential. No commercial allowed. Skyboxes are to be rezzed at least 400 meters up.

    You do not need a premium account to purchase land at Belle Terre. You may resell your land. Your land could possibly be reclaimed if tier is past due. Subdividing is allowed within reason.Only one home per parcel attached to the Estate.

    Ban lines are not allowed. You may use a security orb to protect your home and surrouding land, but please do not protect the water.

    No buildings over two stories allowed. You must maintain as many meters from the parcel boundary as your build as tall. For example if your build is 10 meters tall . You must leave 10 meters from the parcel edge on all sides.

    Castles are allowed only in the northern mountain regions, and only on parcels 32768 and larger. And they need to be nice castles. With management having final approval.

    Any region added south of terre de reves and east or west of High Island will be strictly island, beach, tropical, or tiki themed. So the builds must match this theme.

    Please help keep Belle Terrre a beautiful Estate.

    Please IM stormi Capalini, Kadee Tiratzo or TiMeTrAVelleR Wise with any questions, comments or concerns.

Leave a Reply