Buying the house back from LCAP

GammaZeta · #1 03-22-2007, 03:19 PM

See Tom, I just don't agree with you on the "caretaker" aspect.

They may have started out with that intention, but as you can see through the examples that you provided, it has evolved.

I would love to tell you everything going on with Gamma Zeta, but it is still a few more months until I file with the court.

EM1843 · #2 03-22-2007, 04:05 PM

Shocker! You don't agree, well that was enough to change my views. Seriousy Gamma, you're in law school you should be able to come up with a better argument than that. LCAP screwed you, we heard that story already but there were too many details left our for me to really agree with your story. I'm not sure if LCAP would sell a property back, but I have to assume that like any other property owner there is a price.

GammaZeta · #3 03-22-2007, 04:17 PM

Em, I am disagreeing with the "caretaker" part of Tom's argument.

From my experiences, the way LCAP is setup, and from what was posted on here, I do not believe LCAP is in the "caretaker" role anymore.

I am saying that they have evolved. LCAP probably started out as "caretaker", but soon evolved into an organization that needed to maintain fiscal viability, which in turn made the "caretaker" role obsolete.

In my previous post, I pointed out that the financial aspect of LCAP forced it to leave it's caretaker role behind.

Moose's chapter really can't talk to LCAP as if they are in a caretaker role and simply want to run their house again.

EM, I would love to talk to you over the phone soon about the legal web that is now Gamma Zeta, illegally operating corporations, the actual title of GZ and so on. You would probably find it interesting.

PM me if you want to talk. I would be more than willing to fill you in on everything, but with pending legal action, it wouldn't be appropriate on this board.

Tom Earp · #4 03-23-2007, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GammaZeta

Em, I am disagreeing with the "caretaker" part of Tom's argument.

From my experiences, the way LCAP is setup, and from what was posted on here, I do not believe LCAP is in the "caretaker" role anymore.

I am saying that they have evolved. LCAP probably started out as "caretaker", but soon evolved into an organization that needed to maintain fiscal viability, which in turn made the "caretaker" role obsolete.

In my previous post, I pointed out that the financial aspect of LCAP forced it to leave it's caretaker role behind.

Moose's chapter really can't talk to LCAP as if they are in a caretaker role and simply want to run their house again.

EM, I would love to talk to you over the phone soon about the legal web that is now Gamma Zeta, illegally operating corporations, the actual title of GZ and so on. You would probably find it interesting.

PM me if you want to talk. I would be more than willing to fill you in on everything, but with pending legal action, it wouldn't be appropriate on this board.

I suggest that someone contact IHQ and find out the true facts first.

GammaZeta I do know the true facts about how your house was turned over to IHQ and the Chapter was closed but I will not divulge where I got them from. It is in print in minutes for the GHZ!

If you take umbridge to my "Caretaker" view, I would be in hopes that someone on site can fill us in!

Moose, have the situation checked out by your Zeta and let us know if you can!

GammaZeta · #5 03-23-2007, 02:43 PM

No Tom that is incorrect.

The chapter house of Gamma Zeta is still in possession of LCAP, not HQ. Check it out at www.hampshiredeeds.com.

Also, the chapter was NOT closed. There was no disciplinary action taken, there was nothing from HQ, we never had our charter pulled. What happened was that due to several factors in regards to the chapter house (which I've already talked about in length), everyone but 2 brothers decided to move out of it.

The rent was astronomical, the conditions horrible, lack of assistance from the landlord, thefts and stolen property and so on. That is why we moved out.

We could have continued to operate as a fraternity if we wanted to without the house, or rented another house. But it was determined by the chapter that we would cease operation.

Maybe I can clarify the "caretaker" aspect as I view it. I don't view it as being a caretaker of the property for the CHAPTER (the current LXA's at the university) and the chapter's interests, but as a caretaker for the property representing the FRATERNAL and LCAP interests.

I think that the caretaker role that is currently portrayed is one of looking 10 and 20 years down the road and not of the current chapter. I'm not saying its bad or good. We've closed down a lot of smaller chapters. Why? We are in a rebuilding phase. The smaller chapters are sacrificed in hopes of focusing on the larger.

So, it is possible that LCAP may not have the interests of the chapter at heart if it conflicts with the general fraternity.

And Tom, I think you may be confused, the GHZ officially closed the chapter after we moved out and disbanded.

Tom Earp · #6 03-24-2007, 03:01 PM

That was just an over view as LCAP is part of IHQ.

Since no one has emailed IHQ, I did and am going to wait to see what I hear back. If not, I will ask another person at IHQ.

Maybe this will settle the discussion.

GammaZeta · #7 03-24-2007, 05:40 PM

Well Tom, I think you will get the answer that puts HQ and LCAP in the best light, even though it may not be the correct or true answer.

Sure, LCAP will say they are the caretaker for the chapter, and so on. But car salesmen always say they only want what is best for you. Ever buy life insurance? Do you really think the insurance salesmen has YOUR interest in mind?

Plain and simple. If there is a decision that has to be made by LCAP that will either benefit the chapter, or benefit HQ, but not both, who do you think LCAP is going to go with?