Thank God some people still have some common sense on Van Mar.

Sounds like a serious ethical violation on the part of Mr. Cassell.  Were they clients or not?  Did they solicit you?  Did you make them clients of your own accord?  What was the motivation here? 

I’m guessing that once the names of the plaintiffs were publicized, they realized they were subject to public scrutiny and decided to back down.  Private intimidation is very different from publicly attempting to throw out a neighbor. 

Were they clients or weren’t they?  Perhaps the Va. Bar should investigate.

Moreover, since Danny McD is an elected official - it would’ve been political suicide to sue a neighbor, constituent and a local cop/hero.  Great time to wuss out McDaniel family.

Private intimidation is very different from publicly attempting to throw out a neighbor.

I think you have something there Will.

I am sure that Danny McDaniel was one of the first to pull his name from the lawsuit as soon as he saw it in the local paper. He has a reputation to uphold to get more votes in the next election.  Consider the headlines “McDaniel sues Neighbor to Increase His Propery Value”. He has already lost votes on his past vocation as “principal” at two Wythe County schools.  He can not afford anymore.

Regardless of the reasons that they have had their names removed from the lawsuit, it shows character on their part that they do not wish to be involved in the ousting of a wonderful family from their home. If my math is correct, according to the names still listed on the suit by the paper, there are only 15 people left that continue to have this unChristian attitude towards the William’s. Hopefully they will realize that this is not a lawsuit that they can win and try to work at being good neighbors with the Williams and have the whole thing dismissed.

It is hoped that after this mess is all over with that they can still enjoy their home, even if they are living close to people that find it objectionable.  The obvious has already been hashed by others on these blogs and the remainder of the plaintiffs need to understand that their opinions are being applied very subjectively. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.

In my opinion if they had any character their names would not have been there in the first place. I don’t think many people are going to buy that they withdrew for any reason other than public scrutiny.

I have to agree with J.R., if they had any character their names would not have been there in the first place. Ok, I have a question, if they received letters in April from Cassell, why did they wait so long to remove their names? Go back and read the article where it says “In April, Zuurbier noted, he and his wife received a letter from Cassell referring to them as clients. According to him, he informed the attorney he and his wife were not his clients.” It would stand to reason that if the Zuurbiers received a letter everyone else would have. This removal of names happened after the article in the paper named Cassell’s so called clients. I have also heard that there have been others who say they only signed the petition but did not opt to be named in any lawsuit. Ok, question number 2: why were there certain ones chosen from the petition and added to the lawsuit? I spoke to a Wythe View Resident several weeks ago and she said she signed the petition but she was not listed on the lawsuit. Why is that? The ones who were listed and say they were not supposed to be, who did that? Did Mr. Cassell do it, did the man who initiated this entire situation do it or who put their names on without their permission? Looks to me like some are abandoning ship. Well, for whatever reason, I’m glad some have had a change of heart, that is a good for the Williams family. I still think the Wythe View residents should not be involved in any of this.

What I don’t understand is WHY did it take them so long to decide to withdraw from the case?

Suppose they originally thought many would support their efforts to oust a family?

How does an attorney file suit without the plaintiffs knowing and understanding what they have agreed to do?

In my opinion, this was rubbish from day one and now contines to be so!!  You were smart enough to know you didn’t want your property values affected, smart enough to sign a petition, and didn’t know you were named plaintiffs involved in a lawsuit????  Come on!!

Now, the others should follow suit, withdraw, and stop the embarrassment this has caused for the fine citizens of Wytheville, along with public apologizes to each and every Williams family member!!!

Why does the paper continue to misleadingly refer the the Williams home as a modular home? By state code the home is an industrialized building, however it is commonly referred to as an on-frame modular home. These on-frame modular homes are a hybrid of a traditional modular home and a mobile home. It has several mobile home characteristics such a being on a permanent steel frame and and is attached to the foundation by straps just like a mobile home. One of the biggest differences is historical traditional modular homes increase in value like a stick build home, where an on-frame modular home decrease in value like a mobile home. It is very misleading to the readers of this paper to continue call the Willams home a modular home. I would suggest the writers do little more research and explain both sides of this issue the next time they decide to write about this lawsuit, reporting both sides of any issue should be the goal of any good journalist. 
If the Williams had placed a traditional modular home on their lot then the would be no grounds for a lawsuit and I suspect that almost everyone would have welcomed them to the neighborhood.  However because the home has mobile home like characteristics and would have been considered under state code in effect at the time the subdivision was created as a mobile home then the is the question of where this is allowed by the covenants. Enforcing covenants are not the responsibility of the town so saying all town requirements were meet means nothing regarding this lawsuit.
A covenant is a private contact between the land owners of a subdivision that restrict the use and type of structures that can be placed on the property, usual this is to maintain resale value. When someone purchased a piece of land in a subdivision they sign a deed with the covenants and restrictiosn therefore agreeing to follow the covenants and restrictions. Those who have filed the lawsuit clearly feel that the Williams have violated the covenants and as such they have the right to dispute the placement of this home. Unless this can be settled privately between the different parties then either party has the right to file a lawsuit and take the dispute to a civil court. In a court of law both sides will be allowed to present their side and a judge will rule based on the covenants and the legal definition of terms within the covenants. In this country public opinion and/or the opinion of a police officer do not determine the interpretation of private contracts. I for one look forward to the court hearing this case and ruling on this issue putting it to rest once and for all.

Their home is a modular home… Where do you get off to have the right to tell someone if their home is a modular or not? WR maybe you need to do a little bit more research. Van Mar states that a modular can be placed their. The Williams’ home is a modular. It doesn’t state whether it has to be on-frame or off-frame. And truthfully, there isn’t much of a difference.

The question was: “Why does the paper continue to misleadingly refer the Williams home as a modular home?” The newspaper has rules, guidelines etc that they follow. The Williams’ home is a modular. I believe if the Williams family had placed any home on their lot they would have been tormented in some way because of the guy who is seeking revenge over the job he did not get. There are no grounds for a lawsuit anyway.  If there were, these same people would have started the same thing over the other modulars in the same neighborhood and in the neighboring Wythe View. But as we all know, there was nothing done there. Two of the couples said last week they never intended to be included in the lawsuit. I would still like to know how that happens without your knowledge or permission. Some stated “We never intended to throw this family out of their home”. What did they think was going to happen when they signed a petition to make these people move their home from the so called elite neighborhood? Then there were others who declined comment on their reason for withdrawing.

Everyone is still forgetting the most important issue here. There are HUMAN BEINGS involved in this who just want to live in peace. They want to come home without be watched by people or their video cameras. They want to sit on their deck in the evenings without having vehicle headlights pointed at them so someone can watch to see what they are doing. They want to work on their landscape without finding blackballs on the lawn. How about this, they do not wish to be under the so called microscope because a few people think their home is not good enough for the neighborhood.

I’m sure the Williams family want this all “put to rest as well so they can live their lives without the stress this has placed on them as well as their children and families.

I suggest all of the plaintiffs, including the dropped one spend the money that would have been used for this lawsuit and do an Extreme Home Make-Over or Habitat for Humanity Love Home for the Williams and show how much love the neighborhood has to offer!

Spread the love and make it right with your money rather than creating such rubbish for this family!

How about Plaintiffs- dontate your time and money and give the William’s a Van Mar “acceptable” home!!

And my guess, the courts are going to throw this right out or drag this out forever!!

What judge is going to agree to kick a family out of their home/neighborhood because some don’t “like” the home style?

Hey, plaintiffs what similar cases have actually won in court anyway?

Let me share some things I discovered concerning this situation with the Williams family and their home. There are 2 separate subdivisions in this situation that have different sets of restrictions. Birdland and Wythe View so the only people who should be involved are the Bird land/Van Mar residents. But I guess it looked real good having Ministers, their wives, teachers and a man who is an elected official on there. This is the sad part some of these people are the ones who “TEACH” our kids. What kind of an example is this?

I have also learned that the first complaints were actually made before the Williams had even finished putting the stakes in the ground on their property much less a house. Now why would someone complain before even knowing what type of home was going there? Eddie & Sherry Williams were told by the manufacturer, the local Building Inspector, and the State of Virginia that their house is a modular. Surely all of these people can’t be wrong.

I went back to the first article and read what some people had to say when this first started. This is the link to that article:

http://www.swvatoday.com/comments/from_dream_home_to_nightmare/

I found this statement in a response by Eddie William’s sister. I am placing it here to remind everyone of a couple of things.

“I am Eddie Williams’ sister and I want to bring a few facts to light.  First of all, not everybody knows that the protests about their house came after a neighbor applied for a job with the Wytheville PD and was not given the job.  He has stated that Eddie cost him this job but Eddie is just an investigator and does not make employment decisions.  Hence a personal vendetta!  Secondly, as far as tax values going down first let’s point out that in the rear of this subdivision is a cow farm and at the end there is trailer park. “

She is right about all of this. My son and I sat in the Williams living room and watched the cows on the other side of the fence in their backyard. This farm with the cows connects to this Birdland/Van Mar subdivision. Now I wonder can all of this come out in court.  It is true that this man who started all of this went to Eddie Williams and accused him of costing him that job which is a false accusation. Also, there is a trailer park and it was owned previously by one of the Wythe View Residents.  This person allowed mobile homes not 30 feet from Birdland Subdivision and yet signed a petition against the Williams family. What about the Williams home being vandalized, is that ok? These people have been stalked, blackballed, accused of being shown favoritism because of Eddie being a Police Officer, they’ve had things said to their daughter and day by day they never know what they will face next. They have no idea what to expect when they come home from work. They cannot work outside without being watched and they have had people who once were friends going against them attempting to force them out of the neighborhood. I am so sorry that the Williams family has to endure what they are and have told them so. My son and I visited them to show our support and were watched the entire time we were there. The Williams were out mowing their lawn and were watched by the neighbor below them the entire time they were mowing. I know this for a fact because like I said, my son and I were there. Yes it is true people can go out walk their property lines, sit on their decks and whatever but every time the Williams family are out working around their home. That is a bit much and I believe it is called stalking. The scary thing about this is this stalker works for our local Post Office delivering people’s mail. If he is stalking the Williams family, who might he stalk on the mail route?  Wonder if those in charge at the Post Office know they have a person like this working for them?

How sad and petty some folks chose to be!!

Life is way to short for this behavior!

Who would want to leave this world tomorrow and be known as one who judges thy neighbor by the home they live in!!

I was rereading some of the comments that have been made concerning this lawsuit against the Williams Family over their home. I came across this comment in a response from WR, “reporting both sides of any issue should be the goal of any good journalist.”
That is true but it is also a little difficult when only one side is willing to be interviewed. This could not be settled privately between the different parties because the party who caused all of this and started this lawsuit sneaked around the neighborhood doing so. Others just watch and spy on the Williams family. I will have to say I am appalled at this postal carrier being the person who is doing this. From what I understand most of the people on the suit have refused to talk to the press. Channel 10 news wanted to report on both sides but the other side would not talk to them. So how do you report both sides? Let’s give the news media a break, they are trying to be fair.

If a US government employee is doing such actions can’t a report be filed?  No one surely wants a US Postal employee “going postal” in town!!

My comments about the journalist not explaining both sides of the issue was directed at the Wytheville Enterprise. I know for a fact that not everyone listed in the paper as being a party to this lawsuit has been contacted by this writer or anyone from the Wytheville Enterprise. I was personal told this by one person who is listed in article , however I am not sure they would comment if contacted today because they feel the paper is biased in its reporting of this matter. As for channel 10 they did contact this person and left a message at their home, however they were out of town during this time and did not get the message until a few days later. Besides not everyone wants to be on TV.

As for my comment regarding them referring to this as a modular home. This home is an on-frame modular home, if people want to call it a modular home this is fine with me. However the paper should use the correct terms and considering the number of articles they have already devoted to this matter I would suggest that they included an explanation of the differences between on-frame and off-frame modular homes. I know before this started I did not know that the was such a thing as an on-frame modular home and I think many of the readers also do not understand the differences.

For anyone who might be interested in the differences in the different types of modular homes below is a link to Cardinal Homes website page that is a good start for understanding the differences. Check out the chart about 1/2 down the page. Cardinal Homes is a well known manufacture of off-frame modular homes based in Virginia and as such on the chart where it list Cardinal Homes they are referring to off-frame modular homes.
http://www.cardinalhomes.com/buyer/aboutus.aspx

I found the above link in about 5 minutes using Google when I wanted a better understanding of this issue. I also found information that indicated that several mortgage companies, including mortgage security giant Fannie Mae, make distinct differences in their underwriting of mortgages between on-frame and off-frame modular homes. I will not go into details here because it is very complicated to explain, however anyone who wants to be informed can use Google and search for this information themselves.

I have researched articles on modular homes. Below is some of what I learned from researching and making calls. This particular article came from a lender.

ON FRAME VS OFF FRAME FROM A LENDERS POINT OF VIEW

“I had a very wonderful phone conversation today with a young lady seeking some clarification on this topic.  And I will tell you that there is so much confusion as to what is and is not a MODULAR that we can spend hours discussing this topic and probably not bring much clearing to the fog that surrounds this viable much put down form of housing.  But I will try to clear the muddy waters.  AS A LENDER I ONLY CARE ABOUT “WHAT CODE IS THE HOME BUILT TO”.  I am sorry if people tell you that the home is a MODULAR just because it is built in 2 or 3 sections, that means nothing to me.  What matters is the code.  HUD code or UBC/IBC.  That is all Freddie and Fannie care about.”

What is a modular home?

A modular home is any home factory-built to a local state code. In some cases, a state may have adopted one of the uniform construction codes (i.e. UBC, IRC, etc.).

A modular home can be built as an “on-frame” or “off-frame” modular. On-frame will be built on a permanent chassis, whereas, the off-frame modular will be built with removal of the chassis frame in mind. An off-frame modular will usually require additional cranes to assist with home placement. 

What is a mobile home?

A mobile home is a factory-built home that is 1) built before June 15, 1976, and 2) not built to a uniform construction code.

The best way is to make a friend that is in the FACTORY BUILT OR SYSTEM BUILT HOUSING INDUSTRY, those are the new buzz words.  There are some inside ways to tell and they are subtle.  The easiest is the interior walls. Check the thickness, UBC/IBC will have 2X4 walls with have inch sheet rock.  Also there should be smoke alarms hard wired in every room or open area.

Hope this helps.”

Just to clear this up now, Fanny Mae is the lender in the Williams case. The Williams had very strict guidelines to follow before they would even allow them to place the house on the lot or disburse the funds for the construction. There are places that only sell off frame modular’s and will not admit that on frames are a true modular but the State of Virginia does.

No one said that every person on the lawsuit has been contacted by the media but for the most part the ones who have refused to comment.  I do not believe the paper is biased in its reporting of this matter, they just have nothing from the other side to report. I have spoken to some of these people also and they have said they had no idea where this was going. They were told by the gentleman who went through the neighborhood that the Williams family had placed a Mobile Home on that lot. Without checking it out, they signed because this man who passed the petition is also employed in law enforcement is a server of the people.

I had someone ask me if some of these comments were coming from a member of this lawsuit. I hadn’t thought of it until they asked but I guess it is possible.

The bottom line is, the manufacturer, the local Building Inspector, and the State of Virginia approve this modular and now we know Fannie Mae did too. What will be the next issue since this home is financed by Fannie?

The plaintiffs were smart enough to become a part of this lawsuit- I’m pretty confident they are smart enough to contact the local paper/tv/media and request an interview or send a letter to the editor and have their side told! 

Why are so many now trying to put “Spins” on the real issue?

I, for sure know who I will avoid and where I will not live or associate with after reading about this incident.

Thank you Enterprise for reporting the stories!!

Good Luck Williams family~ may your home continue to be your home in the place you desired to build and live!!

I wqould like to remind those who are in support of the Williams Family that we have an online petition going. For those of you who have not seen it I am posting the web address below. Pass it along to all your friends. We are asking the judge who hears the case to allow the Williams family to stay where they are. This will go to the Williams Attorney and to the Town Council.

http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?24382