Quote:
Originally Posted by Sly
(Post 14888291)
It sounds like they sent him several letters and he simply never replied... what should they have done instead? Like I said, I think it's a total waste of resources what happened... but based on the information given, I don't see how this guy is simply some innocent being getting screwed. He did not reply to multiple requests. If I don't pay my rent and after multiple requests, regardless of my financial situation, guess what happens? The court gets involved.
|
From the article:
Quote:
In an interview at the jail Friday evening, Prudente said he thought he had made a good financial hardship case to the association: His adjustable rate mortgage went up an extra $600 a month. Wachovia repossessed his Toyota Scion. His daughter and her two young children, who had fallen on hard times, moved in with him and his wife, Pat.
|
Deducing from that, he told them about his situation, and after that, ignored any further demands. Clearly, he could have dealt with the situation a lot better. There is no doubt about that. But like many people, especially those in stressful situations, he didn't handle a particular problem well.
The HOA, probably mainly in response to his stubborn attitude, decided to let the conflict escalate as much as it could.
The court, showing its teeth, didn't throw out the case or insist a compromise should be reached, but instead punished the man's attitude in the harshest possible way.
All parties are at fault here.
The HOA should have realized that the only way to win in this situation would be to draw the conflict out of all possible proportions. A bit like when a drunk wino in the street insults you - you could beat him senseless, but taking the moral high ground and simply reprimanding him and walking away is infinitely better.
The court should have realized immediately that it should not get involved in this situation, because nothing good could come of its involvement.
And obviously, the old man should have been more reasonable in the first place.
But the real problem here is not the old man. It's that this situation should never have been allowed to come this far. Confronted with the man's behaviour, the HOA and the court should have found a solution that did not involve having a harmless old man thrown in jail for failing to sod his lawn.
Sure, the rules were followed. But rules aren't everything. Sometimes, even if you are technically right, you have to accept that you can't get what you want without doing things which are clearly immoral. And that's certainly the case here.
Rules make it exceedingly simple to ignore and even forget the human side of issues. Still, the very core of morality is exactly to stay focused on that human side.