A Problem In Pocasset - Editorial
Litigation involving a mobile home park’s resident association and the investment firm looking to buy it is currently unfolding at Barnstable Superior Court after the firm, Crown Communities LLC, named both the park’s owner and the resident association in a civil complaint asserting that it is their right to purchase the property.
It all started in November 2019 when Philip Austin, owner of The Park at Pocasset off Barlows Landing Road, entered into a purchase and sale agreement to sell the property to Crown Communities for $3.8 million. According to the complaint filed with the court, Mr. Austin was supposed to provide only “required” notice of the sale in accordance with Massachusetts General Law, meaning that should 50 percent or more of the residents request information regarding the sale in writing, information regarding that sale would be released. Crown Communities alleges that prior to any request being filed for that information, Mr. Austin notified all residents by mail of the proposed sale of the park. About one month later, the park’s homeowners association incorporated as a nonprofit organization and shortly thereafter gave notice to Mr. Austin that it was their intent to exercise their right of first refusal and purchase the park.
Justine Shorey, president of the Pocasset Park Association, also sent Mr. Austin 61 signatures from park residents, fulfilling the requirement that at least 51 percent of the park’s residents must be on board to buy the park for Massachusetts’ right of first refusal law to be triggered. But even this list of signatures is being contested, with Crown Communities alleging in its complaint that a number of those signatures have been rescinded for a variety of reasons—misrepresentation, fraud, duress and forgery.
In turn, the association is alleging that Crown engaged in unsavory practices and scare tactics. The Boston Globe recently reported that Crown has dangled various carrots in front of the residents in an attempt to sway their allegiance, including gift cards, a two-year rent freeze, and a $5,000 reimbursement. Letters sent to residents from Crown have an air of condescension to them, with Crown promising a “nicer place to live” compared to what an association-run park would be able to produce. One letter obtained by the Globe said that an association-owned park puts residents at risk of “being told what to do by other residents in the park who may themselves not be financially responsible.”
On the topic of financial responsibility, it’s worth noting that one of Crown’s managing partners was accused by federal regulators in 2009 of defrauding investors who put nearly $10 million into a fund to invest in mobile home parks.
The situation further complicates in light of additional court documents filed. It’s important to delineate how mobile home parks typically function; while residents may own their actual homes, they only rent the land on which those homes sit, leaving them at the mercy of landlords who set the rent. According to an emergency motion filed by the Pocasset Park Association in June, Mr. Austin sent a letter in late March to all homeowners and residents of the park threatening to increase rent by more than 12.5 percent effective May 1. This move alone appeared to be unlawful, as the emergency motion filed asserts that Mr. Austin’s own lease form provided to tenants limits rent increase to 6 percent.
Even more puzzling than the threat to increase rent by nearly double the allowed percentage is the allegation that Mr. Austin, in an attempt to halt the association from filing a motion to enjoin him for the threatened action, promised to cap the increase at the allowed 6 percent on the condition that the association withdraw its motion. For some reason, the association agreed and the motion was never filed.
The emergency motion goes on to allege that Mr. Austin is retaliating against the association’s president, Ms. Shorey, and its vice president, Robin Harris, by serving them and their respective boyfriends eviction notices. The reasons given for the evictions varied, but summarily were because a nonapproved tenant was living in their homes.
It’s a classic “he said, she said,” with every side taking turns pointing fingers and hurling accusations. But with people’s actual homes at risk, it’s shameful to see the litigation unfolding in such a way.
Andrew Danforth, founder of the New England Resident Owned Communities program with which the association has partnered to pursue the right of first refusal, said that a majority of The Park at Pocasset’s residents are considered low to very low income, being mainly retirees, blue-collar workers, people with disabilities, and families. The tactics employed over the past two years by both Crown Communities and Mr. Austin exhibit blatant disregard for the residents’ attempt to have a hand in their own destiny and keep their homes secure.
In a situation like this, mobile home residents are in a precarious position: most are not financially able to afford the thousands of dollars it would cost to pick up their trailer and move to another park. If The Park at Pocasset is sold to Crown, what then are their options? It’s hard to say, and sad to watch.
Since a jury trial was waived, it will be Associate Judge Gregg J. Pasquale of Barnstable Superior Court who will have the final say, but we can only hope that goodwill will be shown to the residents who have fought diligently to gain a semblance of control over their own homes.