Sapphire Bay Condominiums West


May 14, 2004



TO: Members of SBCW


From:  Board of Directors


            As you may or may not be aware, SBCW has been experiencing a problem created by a new owner.  The Board feels that it is necessary to inform you, as members of the association and property owners of the events. See Response


July 28, 2003 – Mr. and Mrs. George Simpson closed their purchase of Unit C-4. See Response


August 2003 – Without the permission or knowledge of the Board of Directors of SBCW, the Simpson’s removed the bearing wall between the living room and the front porch, including the bracing at each end of the wall.  This renders the building unsafe as the essential bracing has been removed. See Response


October 2003 – Mr. Simpson gives an undated letter to General Manager, Frank Barry, asking for permission of the Board of Directors to change the front windows of their apartment.


November 10, 2003 – Mr. Simpson’s request is placed on the Board of Director’s meeting agenda.  He and Mrs. Simpson presented their case for changing the windows and are told that they can’t do this by the Board President Steve Kershner.  Other board member comments are negative on the changes, but out of respect to an owner, he is told that the Board will continue to discuss the situation and that the Board will let him know the results. See Response


November 28, 2003 – Jack Donahue, a Board member, writes a letter to Mr. Simpson, stating that the Board has denied the request to alter the windows of C-4. See Response


Subsequent to the November 10, 2003 board meeting, Mr. Simpson begins to call and write letters to the Board of Directors and General Manager and publish on a website ( comments calling various members of the Board and the General Manager liars, cheats, dishonest and other terms deemed slanderous and libelous by the Board’s attorney, Andrew L. Capdeville.  Those comments have continued to the present time (May 2, 2004) See Response


February 16-20, 2004 – Steve Sokolow, a member of the Board of Directors and Frank Barry, General Manager discover that the bearing walls in the Simpson’s apartment have been removed. See Response


March 11, 2004 – Udo Penther, a Registered Professional Engineer, provided a report to the Board of Directors stating that the removal of the bearing walls in the Simpson’s Apartment created an extremely unsafe condition. See Response


March 17, 2004 -- At a Board of Directors meeting Mr. Simpson was officially given 30 days to correct the unsafe condition in his apartment. See Response


March 19, 2004 – Steve Kerschner, Board President, officially notified Mr. Simpson, by registered mail of the Board’s action directing Mr. Simpson to correct the unsafe condition in his apartment. See Response


March 31, 2004 – Since there had been no communication from Mr. Simpson concerning the bearing walls and he, during General Manager Frank Barry’s absence, replaced the windows contrary to the Board’s decision, the Board of Directors held an emergency meeting and authorized legal action to be commenced by Attorney Andrew Capdeville.
See Response


April 12, 2004 --- A lawsuit was filed to enforce compliance with respect (to) replacing the bearing walls in Simpson’s apartment and to remove the windows he installed, replacing the original windows. See Response


April 20, 2004 – A civil action for damages, including punitive damages was filed against Mr. Simpson to force him to cease his conduct against the Board of Directors and the General Manager, as well as his statement on his web site which he has labeled ‘the official web site of SBCW’, which your Board believes damages our whole community. See Response


April 22, 2004 – In Mr. Simpson’s response to the lawsuit to require him to return his apartment to a safe condition and to remove the windows and replace them with acceptable ones, he states that he hired Udo Penther, the Board’s expert, to provide him with a proposal to cure the deficiency and work has commenced.  This may or may not be true.  What is true, however, is that prior to this response, neither the Board nor the General Manager has had any notice of this. In a phone call to Mr. Penther to verify Mr. Simpson’s statements, Mr. Penther said that he could not comment on any of this, as Mr. Simpson had sworn him to secrecy.  The Board finds this very curious and wished that Mr. Simpson had kept us informed, which might have avoided costly litigation. See Response


May 5, 2004 – As a response to Mr. Simpson’s complaint to The Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources wherein he listed the following apartments:   A-2, A-4, A-14. A-18. A-20. B-2. B-7, B-8, B-9, B-10, B-11, B-12, B-13, B-16, B-17, B-18, C-1, C-3, C-4, C-6, C-8, C-23, C-24, C-26, C-29, C-30, C-32, C-34, C-36, D-2, D-6, D-17, D-20, D-21, D-25, D-26, D-27, D-30 and D-34, we have been informed that a DBNR representative will be on the property Monday, May 10, 2004 to personally inspect all of these apartments. See Response


May 12, 2004 – The inspection was made on May 12, 2004.  Frank and Bud Wood accompanied the inspectors they found no major problems.   Several suggestions were made concerning smoke detectors and Ground Fault Interrupter switches.  The DPNR respresentatives indicated they will send a written report in a few days. See Response


Your Board of Directors has been forced to engage in litigation because of the lack of communication from and the uncooperative nature of one of our owners as well as the derogatory comments concerning the Board, the General Manager and Sapphire Bay Condominiums West that this owner published on a web site.  This is unfortunate and your Board regrets having to pursue these actions, but feels that they are necessary for the safety and quiet enjoyment of all owners at SBCW. See Response


This owner is costing all of us.  The Board believes that his web site may have a negative effect on the currently rising property values here at SBCW.  In addition, his allegations and actions are taking a great deal of Frank’s time away from the normal, day to day operations Frank has to deal with.  We are also incurring legal frees for the necessary litigation we are pursuing.  We have reason to believe those fees will be recovered. See Response