THIS WEBSITE IS NOT THE FFCA, BUT A WEBSITE MAINTAINED BY LOT OWNERS TO BE A SOURCE OF INFORMATION FOR OTHER LOT OWNERS.
THE FFCA HAS NO LEGAL RIGHT TO COLLECT ANY MANDATORY FEES OR HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION FEES :
THEY ARE NOT A PLANNED COMMUNITY ENTITY and DO NOT QUALIFY UNDER HRS Title 23 to collect road fees. This is their latest claim. If that was the case, why did they need the judgement in the first place. This just validates their deliberate and calculated criminal intent to continue to use the word mandatory versus voluntary in reference to the road fees. The judgement gave them the authority to use the word mandatory. Once it expired, so did their authority. The lot owners own the roads.
THEY CANNOT PUT LIENS !!!
IT IS A CRIMINAL TACTIC OF EXTORTION !!!
If this wasn't true why haven't they sued me yet ?
This website is contains information about an organisation called the Fern Forest Community Association (FFCA) on the Big Island of Hawaii. This corporation has been claiming that it has a valid judgement to collect mandatory road fees when it does not.
The FFCA has and is committing fraud, theft by deception, misrepresentation, extortion and other crimes. It also has operated for years changing the bylaws without a membership vote as well. It has claimed that it is a nonprofit/ homeowners assoc./ community organisation/ a group pf agricultural producers which is impossible to be all those business types. Currently it is attempting to claim it is a planned community organisation. Just another lie in a long line of lies. Their Articles of Incorporation with the State of Hawaii DCCA state they are a domestic nonprofit community organisation (You can read it on their website even. The purpose states it is,"To improve the quality of life in the Fern Forest Subdivision by initiating physical improvements on common property within the subdivision and by initiating other projects for the common benefit of fern Forest residents and land owners." At that time residents and land owners were members and you paid to be a member. After they got the judgement they illegally cut out residents and made us all involuntary members without a vote.) , Now, they claim their purpose is that they are governed by judgement 87-519, which has expired. This is fraud. Plus, the members never voted to change the purpose of the organisation.
Further, all corporations are governed by the Federal, State and County laws. When the judgement was valid, it only governed the details of the mandatory road maintenance fee collection, which they violated day one when they illegally raised the Court mandated $15/year fee to $25 the first year therefore violating it because the document states the action is court jurisdiction. (Link to the judgement is provided further down) In fact anyone that owned property before April 1991 and have not sold it were never subject to the judgement because the judgement stated it was not retroactive. But none of that matters now since the State law HRS Title 36, Chapter 657-5 is clear that it is, as described further below in a letter Grace Miles wrote after my intro. (After the intro and Grace Miles' letter is a description of the lawsuit that I filed in 2016-2017.
The link to the Expired Judgement Findings and Facts is HERE
The link to the law that states it is over after ten years if not extended (and it wasn't) is HERE
Also,just as some side information - I am adding. link to the Civil Beat newspaper article about the FFCA 2018 Board elections HERE
Many details to the illegal acts of the FFCA have been slowly piling up over the years. I, Thunderfoot ( full legal name) moved to the forest in Jan 1996 and was unaware the legal road fee was only $15/year and not the $35 it was at the time. So, I didn't question anything until a problem in 2001 when they dissolved our volunteer fire department for the first time. I actually negotiated with the County to get it back. They have dissolved it and revived at least five times now. There is so much history to tell that I don't want to put it here because it is so long it would take forever. For example, they illegally created a daughter corporation with FFCA road money, called the Community Development Hui of fern Forest) and transferred the community lot deed back and forth among the two corporations. If you do a property tax map key search for the community lot of Captain's Drive (Ala Kapena) you will see the it sold for zero, then it would get sold back for $20,000. They did this several times. Who pocketed that 20 grand ? That is money laundering. And it is a matter of public record. When I pointed this out, they sold the lot back to the FFCA and dissolved the Hui. That act surely magnifies the criminal intent. That fact was discovered in a lawsuit 2016-2017 which is described below section with the letter Grace Miles wrote. That letter is the most current information. Please read it because it contains valuable information about a discovery that I made around 2019-2020, and that is that the Judgement is expired and is no longer valid. An attorney by the name of Ken Goodenow verified that the judgement 87-519 is no longer valid and enforceable in a court of law. There is a link to a copy of the judgement below. The following is a summary of what the expired judgement means and what you can do about it. :
_____________________________
The letter below was written by Grace Miles.
The Fern Forest Community Association formed in the 1970s as a community organisation. It never applied for nonprofit tax exempt status with the Internal Revenue Services (IRS), so it is not possible for it to become one now according to publication 557 of the IRS. Unless you are a church, you only have 27 months from birth to apply, and they are not a church.
In 1991 the trustee of the Polynesian Investment Company died. They had held in trust for lot owners $75,000 and its' use was never determined. By the way, that money disappeared. It was not used to buy the community lot. Only the Quanset hut and water tank were purchased and the rest of the money disappeared.
So, Penelope Blair, The DeLorms, Phil Clemmer, Bill Watkins and others decided to start a court proceeding to get that money and impose mandatory fees on us. People were voluntarily giving money for the roads and the crew was all volunteers prior to the death of the trustee, all recorded in court records. They won in court and a Judgement for case 87-519 was entered. You can find the Judgement here at this link
https://fernforestcommassoc.wixsite.com/fern-forest/judgement-87-519
The judgement gave them the power to say the road fees were now mandatory. The judgement gave them the right to collect a mandatory road fee of $15 per year/lot, not retroactive to the judgement, and was at the jurisdiction of the court. The document states all that, so it is clear what was legal.
They began to violate the judgement right away when they raised the mandatory fee in the very first year, as evidence came out in a civil lawsuit against them in 2015-2016 time frame. I can get that if anyone wants it.
Years of oppression and abuse went on until today, including locking us out of our community lot and dissolving our volunteer fire department five times.
There have been many illegal events and acts by the FFCA such as commingling funds with personal bank accounts, and yes we have court evidence and bank statements. They also lost accounting for $72,000 worth of lot payments that they did not know who paid what lot. And instead of admitting it, they waited for people to complain that they were over billed and had already paid. As far as we know, there is still some of that money in an account somewhere ? Facts that have evidence and witnesses. That is when they illegally hired Data Processing Services. If that judgement was valid it is clear the road money was for road maintenance only, read the document. This does not include attorney fees, changing street names, mowing easements etc... In fact they were told the easement is separate from the road and is the property of the home owner and if they cause damage to it, like spraying poison and killing plants, that they can be sued. They ignored this too, and continue to admit to mowing the easement.
Around 2019-2020, a person named Thunderfoot discovered that the Hawaii law states all judgements in Hawaii are finished if not extended within the 10 years of getting it. Title 36, Chapter 657-5
§657-5 Domestic judgments and decrees. Unless an extension is granted, every judgment and decree of any court of the State shall be presumed to be paid and discharged at the expiration of ten years after the judgment or decree was rendered. No action shall be commenced after the expiration of ten years from the date a judgment or decree was rendered or extended. No extension of a judgment or decree shall be granted unless the extension is sought within ten years of the date the original judgment or decree was rendered. A court shall not extend any judgment or decree beyond twenty years from the date of the original judgment or decree. No extension shall be granted without notice and the filing of a non-hearing motion or a hearing motion to extend the life of the judgment or decree. [CC 1859, §1051; RL 1925, §2643; am L 1927, c 16, §1; RL 1935, §3914; RL 1945, §10425; RL 1955, §241-5; HRS §657-5; am L 1972, c 105, §1(d); am L 1992, c 74, §1; am L 2001, c 145, §1]
https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol13_Ch0601-0676/HRS0657/HRS_0657-0005.htm
This was confirmed in a meeting with an attorney by the name Ken Goodenow.
This means any mandatory road money greater $15 per year/lot from April 1991 to April 2001 is an overcharge that they owe you a refund for. All monies collected by the FFCA after April 2001 was voluntary, but by continuing to claim it is mandatory is fraud and theft by deception. Any lot owner can write them a letter with the amounts they are due. Be sure to put a required response date to hear back from them. And if you do not hear back from them, or they refuse to reimburse you, then that would be an "exhaustion of your remedies". After that the only recourse is to complain the the State of Hawaii DCCA and the Attorney General. I will put the links below this novel.
This is further complicated by the issue of lien threats for nonpayment of an unenforceable judgement in a court of law. Once they threaten a lien for nonpayment of their fees, it crosses into extortion. Plus, since they admitted in their February 2021 Zoom meeting that it is expired, and continue under the guise that they are now saying they qualify for mandatory because they are a group of agricultural producers. That is not what their Articles of incorporation with the DCCA say. It says they are a community entity yet, they claimed to be a shareholder corp in court, and use an expired judgement as their company purpose to the DDCA. Everything they do is without the participation and consent of the members whom they continue to omit the truth from.
This lack of transparency and truthful disclosure to its members further validates the fraud, deception and extortion, among other crimes.
You can also sue them in civil court on top of complaints to the A.G and DCCA.
There are too many illegal acts to mention here, so just the main ones are being posted here as not to add to this already confusing mess. If you want to know more email me at [email protected] ( or contact [email protected] ).
Link to State of Hawaii DCCA
https://cca.hawaii.gov/ocp/consumer-complaint/
Their complaints concentrate on protecting consumers, and we are consumers.
Link to State of Hawaii Attorney General
https://ag.hawaii.gov/contact-us/
Complaints to them involve crimes with criminal intent for more than one County. And the FFCA is suing the Untied States Post Office to illegally solicit a "mandatory" road fee and lien threats. that is mail fraud. Be sure you mention these things when you complain about how they illegally gained money from you.
By the FFCA continuing to use the word 'Mandatory" and ignore the law, this is an example of criminal eminent because they knew they were wrong and did it anyway. There are many examples of this behaviour, and acts to prove it.
We as citizens have a responsibility under the Constitution to obey the laws, to patriotism and concern for the welfare of those around you. So, this is a responsibility it is even more important than a duty because the Constitution requires that these are our responsibilities as citizens of the United States. So, we have an obligation to report crimes. If we know there is a crime and fail to report it, then under the law, we are accessories after the fact.
So, please, be proactive when you know there is wrongdoing happening.
If you do not get any satisfaction from the FFCA, or the DCCA you can sue them in civil court for overpayments. If it is under $5,000 it is easy because the court has forms for small claims court. If the A.G.'s office tries to get out of prosecution, just remind them their office's mission and that the criminal activity is beyond one county. Therefore, it falls on them. Citizens cannot prosecute for crimes. All we can do is try and get our money back, and hope the State does its' job on the criminal side.
(Disclaimer : I am not an attorney, but I did consult with one, and what I have posted here was confirmed by this attorney, Ken Goodenow.)
Grace Miles maintains a Facebook group where current discussions happen.
The group is called Fern Forest Glenwood Hawai'i Real Connections.
here is the link https://www.facebook.com/groups/458902221617001
__________________________________________________________
Below is a detailed explanation written by me, Thunderfoot ( full legal name, one word) of some past history that happened with a Civil lawsuit against the FFCA by 30 or so lot owners. It is written in chronological order. The summary for the 2017 Civil lawsuit is at the end:
A 9/13/17 newsletter was sent out by the FFCA that is full of misinformation, slander, political propaganda, and more. Please be advised that they will be held legally responsible for the vindictive and retaliatory behaviors and remarks against individuals who were only asking for accountability and transparency. Their venomous diatribe is full of agendas and motives of personal gains, as exhibited in their letter, instead of just being accountable and transparent. In fact their combining slander with mentions of an election, is electoral fraud. Plus, they used road maintenance money to do it ,when it had nothing to do with road maintenance; which is a misappropriation of funds and a violation of the court order 87-519. Further, there is only the one annual newsletter allowed in the By-Laws. Still further, there is a new board application for the board to approve the candidates as stated in their newsletter. So, that means that the board self-picks the nominees. That is electoral fraud, conflict of interest, and not in the By-Laws. So, these examples, and more, are good reasons to sue them.
I. FIRST SECTION --- Recent or upcoming events
NOTICE : There is going to be a second lawsuit by lot owners in the Fern Forest subdivision against the Fern Forest Community Association due to alleged crimes, like racketeering and other issues. Contrary to rumors on FFCA website, we have not sued them for almost ten years. Anyone can do a court case search with the State of Hawaii, Hawaii Third Circuit Court by clicking on the word court. Then scroll down to where it says Proceed Ho'ohiki Case Searching, in blue at the bottom of the page. Insert the FFCA all spelled out to search for its' case history. It reflects that there has only been one lawsuit for lot owners to sue the FFCA. And that was called Thunderfoot, et al (and everyone) vs. FFCA (spelled out). Plus, anyone can request any documents from the Court that they want to read. So, please do not believe the slander. In fact we have two years to sue them for that. All we wanted was accountability and transparency and the community lot opened back up. Most of us do not want to be on the Board at all. We just want to fix this mess and get back to our lives. But the first glaring issue is that we are being charged more than $15 per year for road fees as per the Court order 87-519. So, why are we paying more than the $15 when the Order had no provision to raise the fees ? The road fees have been raised to more than most people's property taxes. And they spend the road money on things that have nothing to do with road maintenance, like hiring police for their meetings. That is not road maintenance. Other communities do not do this. Plus, many communities do not even have a mandatory road fee. So, please contact us via our contact page, if you feel the same and want to join us..
UPDATE:
Next hearing --- There is no hearing scheduled at this time. The counterclaim is still active though from first lawsuit . Please read the entry for the August 25th 2017 hearing below. It describes what the Court has determined so far from first lawsuit.
There will be more hearings, but some of the Plaintiffs have surgery and things going on in their lives, so it will be a several months before anything else is filed for starting the new lawsuit as instructed and encouraged by the Court.
II. SECOND SECTION
Court History - Below are the hearings and a brief summation, starting with the first hearing and continuing to the most recent :
First hearing - October 19, 2016, Judge Hara said that our complaints stand, other than 414D-252; and did not dismiss the case,, based on failure to make a claim. The Court Ruled that 414D-252 be thrown out, but all other claims may be litigated. The Defendant's Motion was denied. The Judge asked us to summarize the complaint into 5 pages or less. That was submitted Nov. 29,2016. Their attorney responded and we filed a motion to dismiss his paperwork and counterclaim filed on Dec. 19,2016 to be heard at a hearing on January 18, 2016 at 9 a.m. The main results of this hearing though was that their Motion to Dismiss our Complaint against them, the FFCA, was denied. The Court determined that our complaints were going to be litigated.
Second Hearing - January 18, 2017 the Court heard our Motion to dismiss their attorney for perjury, incompetence, being paid with misappropriated funds of the road maintenance money, hired by an illegal board, etc... But basically we could not dismiss him because we did not hire him. But Judge Freitas did instruct us that we could file a police report and report the attorney to the Office of the Disciplinary Counsel. The Court also determined that the 21 that signed the Summarized Complaint is where we are at, and that other Plaintiffs may join by filing their own Motion. Also, there were several Motions for Petitioner Thunderfoot to prove her standing and technical things like that. The Court approved of Thunderfoot's standing, ability to represent herself, and ability to write pleadings and Motions and other documents. The Court also Ruled that the Defendant was required to send each of the 21 Petitioners from the Summarized Complaint their own copy of any Motions, and that the 21 were to respond on one document with all the signatures on one copy. All other in-coming Petitioners will have to file separately though.
Third hearing - April 5, 2017 the Court ruled against them, the FFCA, in their attempt to get a protective order against us for discovery of evidence. They were also trying to stop certain documents that were requested through a subpoena duces tecum with a Motion to Quash (squash) them. Their motion was denied. There were ten motions that day, but that was the main one. They also filed a complaint about our mailing list document, but it got denied. The rest were regarding things like an extension for the filing of the Pretrial Statement. It was granted and we now have until October 15, 2017 to file it with the option for another extension if we need it. Our request to be designated complex litigation was denied. Also, we will need to schedule Pretrial Conference before October. There were several motions to correct clerical errors from both sides as well. And also, a Ruling to add to the title caption on the following court documents for this case.
Fourth hearing - May 24, 2017 the Court denied Petitioner Thunderfoot's Motion to Compel Data Processing Services to Produce documents. The Court suggested I get that information from the defendant directly. The hearing for the production of documents from the Defendant will be on June 7, 2017. The Motion by Petitioner Thunderfoot to request the Defendant produce a newsletter to disclose the lawsuit to lot owners was denied. However, the Court did say we could file a Motion to get the mailing list. Also, the Big Island Federal Credit Union handed over bank statements to the Court that Thunderfoot requested. The Court will review them and probably turn it over to Thunderfoot is what the Judge said. The last Motion was by the Defendant to question the claim of Petitioner Thunderfoot, it was continued to July 12, 2017.
Fourth and Fifth hearings - June 2 and June 7, 2017 were continued to July 12, 2017 at 8: 30 a.m.
Sixth hearing July 12, 2017 postponed to August 25, 2017 at 8 a.m. at the Courthouse, room 3D
Seventh hearing -August 25, 2017 --- The Judge informed us that we have a good case, but it would be a derivative lawsuit and told us to refile. He also commented that he hopes we come back and instructed the lawyer to talk to his people, because there is obviously a problem. We still have the nonprofit issue to address, the violations of Court order 87-519, the ignoring of the By-Laws and procedures. in them, electoral fraud, co-mingling of FFCA funds with a personal bank account. The Court gave us the bank statements, so we can prove that in black and white. They have done other things, but the main focus will be on these issues for our next filing. Also with the nonprofit issue there seems to be a question as to how many lot owners we need to file the lawsuit. Individuals can also file personal lawsuits against them for vehicle damage to lack of road repair, slander by them on their website, and overpaying them since court order said $15 per year with no provision to raise it, or spend that money on anything but road maintenance, like hiring an attorney for a case that has nothing to do with road maintenance. Plus, the Court did say the the EASEMENT is the PROPERTY OF THE HOME OWNER and that we can sue them if they spray our easement and kill our plants for example. By the way Bill Watkins was kicked out of the Courtroom, so he has o idea what happened in the 3 hours of the hearing. In fact he tried to come back in a second time and he was escorted out again by security.
To read the major documents that have been filed with this case go this link. There are three pages there. The Original Verified Petition to Dissolve, the Summarized Complaint and the Motion to Dismiss the attorney, which was denied because we did not hire him. So, we cannot fire him.
Also be aware if you are going to view those pages from a cell phone , especially the Verified Petition, it is long and may crash your phone. WEBSITE LINK BELOW
therealfernforesthawaiiorg3.webs.com/
Last update of that civil suit is that the use of the word "derivative" to confuse the judge in Court is what caused the case to be dismissed, with encouragement from the court to return. Turns out that derivative cases are only for shareholder corporations. The FFCA is trying to claim it is like a share holder corporation, but it is not. It told the State of Hawaii DCCA it is a community organisation. I did not know this in court at that time, and so could not explain to the judge why it was not a derivative case, so he dismissed the case. Turns out it cannot be a derivative case because the FFCA is not a shareholder corporation. You would have to issue stock or shares and they don't. We have deed transfers between private owners that existed prior to the creation of the FFCA, so it could not own all the properties and give us shares. In fact the lots it owns now are held in trust for the lot owners that have no recourse to get their organisation back. There is no State law that allows members to root out corruption and replace the board. So, the only way to remedy this is to report their crimes to the Attorney General's Office. Their crimes include, but are not limited to, : theft, fraud, misrepresentation, libel, mail fraud, liens, harassment, bullying, etc...
You can address them in Civil court for the money that you overpaid. You can also ask the court to issue a writ or mandate to legally refrain them from illegally billing and/or threatening liens on you again ever.