HOA Justice Now

Exhibit O – DBPR Financial Oversight Failures & Accounting Irregularities

Last Updated

Purpose:

To demonstrate how financial irregularities at Omega Villas persisted during Juda Eskew’s tenure as accounting vendor, and how DBPR complaints highlighted systemic failures but did not result in corrective enforcement. This exhibit connects direct accounting discrepancies with regulatory inaction.

Exhibit O – Budget & Financial Irregularities (Expanded 2024 Findings)

🔑 Juda Eskew & Accounting Failures (Observed as a Sitting Board Member, 2024)

1. Owner & Board Access Blocked (2024)

  • In 2024, while serving on the Board, I personally experienced how Juda Eskew restricted access to digital financial records.
  • When I began pulling detailed reports, access was suddenly cut off — limiting not only owners but also interfering with a duly elected Board member’s ability to review the books.
  • This action directly conflicted with F.S. §718.111(12), which guarantees the right of inspection, and in my opinion appeared to limit transparency or reduce financial visibility.

2. Misclassification of Recertification-Linked Expenses (2024)
From my review as a Board Member, I observed expenses that should have been clearly tied to the 40-Year recertification project instead logged under “routine” or operating accounts. This obscured the full scope of project costs and hindered clarity. Examples include:

  • 🌳 Tree trimming/removals – booked as landscaping, though tied to City permit closure conditions connected with recertification.
  • 🏚️ Foundation stabilization/repairs – categorized as general maintenance, despite being structural compliance work.
  • 💧 Sprinkler & sidewalk repairs – misclassified as ordinary expenses, even though they resulted from contractor-caused damages during recertification work (these costs should have been charged back to Austro, not owners).
  • 🌱 Bushes & tree plantings – logged as landscaping, though in reality they were City-mandated conditions for fence/recert approvals, not elective beautification.

3. Consequences for Owners & Governance

  • Masked the true financial burden of recertification, enabling special assessments to be justified without transparent accounting.
  • Shifted costs for vendor-caused damages (sprinklers, sidewalks) onto owners, rather than pursuing contractor accountability.
  • In my view, this contributed to a climate of financial opacity.

🔥 Retaliation & Smear Campaigns Against Whistleblowing (2008–2009 and 2024)

In addition to blocking financial access and misclassifying recertification expenses, the Association’s communications included materials that, in my opinion, were intended to discredit those raising concerns.

  • 2024 Letter to Owners
    • While serving as a duly elected Board Member, the Association circulated a letter to the entire community seeking to discredit me.
    • This letter contained statements I believe were inaccurate or misleading.
    • In my opinion, this was an apparent attempt to intimidate or discourage further inquiry.
  • Historical Pattern (2008–2009)
    • The same tactic was used over 15 years ago. In 2008–2009, when I first raised concerns over unlicensed contractors, missing permits, and fines, the Board and its advisors again responded by attacking me personally in writing.
    • Instead of addressing construction defects and City citations, leadership chose to weaponize letters to the community, creating division and targeting the whistleblower.

Impact
This pattern — spanning from 2008 to 2024 — demonstrates that when challenged on governance or financial transparency, the Association does not engage in reform. Instead, it engages in retaliatory communications, character attacks, and misinformation campaigns to deflect scrutiny.

⚠️ Impact Statement:
As both a homeowner in 2008–2009 and a sitting Board Member in 2024, I experienced the same retaliatory tactic: letters circulated to owners with incorrect to potentially false claims to discredit me for exposing misconduct. This is not coincidental. It represents a consistent culture of retaliation that enables financial irregularities or questionable expenditures.

⚠️ Impact Statement:
As a sitting Board Member in 2024, I directly witnessed how Juda Eskew’s practices combined access obstruction with possible misclassification. By burying recertification expenses and contractor-caused damages into routine accounts, the accounting function, in my opinion, served to protect the Board and Austro Construction instead of owners. This appears inconsistent with fiduciary-duty obligations.

2024 Letter to Owners

Historical Pattern (2008–2009)

📎 Attachments

  • O1 Attachment – Budget Important Issues Noticed (expenses tripled in 2023, unexplained legal fees) Link
    • 📄 O1A Attachment – Email Requesting Removal of Defamatory Website Content (March 21 2024)
      Supporting File: Email to Jay & Eric about Defamation Info on Website 3-21-24.pdf
      This correspondence documents a formal request to remove allegedly defamatory or misleading statements that remained posted on the Omega Villas official website months after the Association’s “Response to Misinformation” letter (Nov 2023).
      The message was addressed to Board representatives Jay Pietrafetta and Eric Richards and referenced specific statements that, in Mr. Martin’s opinion, misrepresented his actions as a Board Member and whistleblower.
      Its inclusion demonstrates that corrective requests were made in good faith, through direct communication, before this documentation was ever made public.
  • O2 Attachment – Potential Retaliation: Coercive actions against whistleblowers and homeowners (718.111(1)). Exhibit G2
  • O3 Attachment – Budget Workshop 2 Email Chain (Sept. 24–25, 2024)
    PDF Link – “Budget workshop 2”
    • Confirms meeting notices circulated, but no construction budget attached or provided.
  • O4 Attachment – Board Meeting Video Links (confrontations with Juda Eskew, access removal, budget questions) Link
  • O5 Attachment – Juda Eskew Accounting Discrepancies & Transaction Support Requests (6.28.24)
    Email to Juda Eskew showing: (1) removal of accounting notes from the General Ledger between March and June 2024, (2) revocation of owner access to Client Portal records, and (3) requests for transaction support on large Hollander, Goode & Lopez invoices. These issues highlight accounting irregularities and lack of transparency in project finances. Link1, & Link2
  • O6 Attachment – Juda Eskew Financial Irregularities
    • During a September 2025 Board discussion, multiple directors raised serious concerns about the performance of Juda Eskew & Associates, the Association’s longtime accounting firm. It was revealed that only the executive officers (President, VP, Treasurer, Secretary) are provided monthly financial reports, while other elected directors are denied equal access and told to “use the portal if they have time.” Several board members also noted missed statutory deadlines for mailing annual election ballots and candidate packets, resulting in disenfranchisement of candidates and late distributions to owners. These failures were reported to the Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR Case #2024039084).
    • Supporting File: Juda Eskew Complaint – Case #2024-039084 10-16-24.pdf
      • This email, sent to casestatus@myfloridalicense.com on October 16 2024, confirms that the DBPR complaint against Juda Eskew & Associates LLC had reached the Department’s final legal-review stage.
      • The correspondence summarizes continuing accounting-access restrictions, missing ledger notes, and financial-record uploads delayed until October 15 2024—nine months after the fiscal year began.
      • It also documents notice to multiple oversight bodies, including the State Attorney’s Office, DBPR Office of General Counsel, and State Representative offices, establishing that regulators and law-enforcement channels were informed of potential financial-transparency failures.
      • 📄 Supporting File 1: FL DBPR Case # 2024039084 – Juda Eskew & Associates Email ( Aug 13 2024 )
        Email to DBPR investigator Niyati Bhatt referencing ongoing case # 2024039084.
        The correspondence documents that video evidence and multiple vendor investigations had already been submitted to the Department, showing that the accounting firm restricted access to ledgers and removed transaction notes.
        This establishes that state regulators were formally notified of potential accounting misconduct and record alteration as early as August 2024.
    • Additionally, ledger reports provided by Juda Eskew show that transaction notes tied to legal fees — including entries involving Attorney Rhonda Hollander — were removed after questions were raised publicly. This pattern of concealment, combined with selective financial access and missed statutory deadlines, demonstrates a serious breakdown in fiduciary responsibility and transparency. One board member further noted the possibility that Juda Eskew’s continued engagement may indicate overlapping financial relationships or dependencies tied to the $4.85 M Banco Popular loan. Video Link
  • O7 Attachment – Budget Red Flags & Legal Expense Abuse (2023–2024).
    • Further evidence of financial abuse is attached as O8. Association expenses nearly tripled in 2023, excluding loan draws, with unexplained legal charges such as $4,522.50 for ‘modifying meeting materials’ and $2,388.79 for undefined correspondences. Legal spending that coincided with disputes over record requests and owner complaints. Link
  • O8 Attachment – Exhibit 1B Video Evidence Index
    • Exhibit O documents serious irregularities in the Association’s budget and financial management. Association expenses nearly tripled in 2023 compared to historical averages, even when excluding the $4.85M construction loan account. Within this inflated spending are unexplained and, in my opinion, retaliatory legal charges — including thousands of dollars billed for “modifying meeting materials,” “undefined correspondences,” and legal actions directly targeting whistleblowing and emergency repair efforts. These findings raise major concerns about fiscal accountability, the misuse of Association funds, and the potential concealment of true costs from owners. Link
  • O9 Attachment – DBPR Complaint Confirmation (6.11.24) Link

🧾 Exhibit Summary

  • Absence of a Construction Budget
    • Despite the $4.85M contract with Austro, no construction budget was ever produced or approved by the Board.
    • Owners were not provided with a line-item breakdown of project costs, nor was a budget circulated as required under Florida Condominium Act §718.112(2)(f) (requiring annual budgets including reserves for capital expenditures).
    • Without a project budget, the Association lacked a control mechanism to:
      • track authorized vs. actual spending,
      • identify change orders or scope deviations,
      • prevent unauthorized assessments or reallocations.
      • The lack of a construction budget opened the door for scope manipulation and cost-shifting, later documented in Exhibit Q.
  • Runaway Budgets: 2023 expenditures nearly tripled prior years, with no adequate disclosure to owners.
  • Retaliatory Legal Fees: Ledgers show charges tied to retaliation against whistleblower complaints.
  • Ledger Manipulation: Transaction notes were stripped between March–June 2024, after Shawn Martin confronted the Board.
  • Withheld Access: Juda Eskew removed Board Member financial portal access, creating a transparency vacuum.
  • Regulatory Failure: Multiple DBPR complaints filed, confirmed, and acknowledged; yet no enforcement actions were taken.
  • Pattern Evidence: This supports the broader RICO narrative by showing how patterns of opaque accounting practices and potential regulatory inaction.
  • All descriptions in this exhibit are based on publicly available records, official correspondence, and my direct observations while serving as a Board member. They are provided for informational and public-interest purposes consistent with Florida Statutes §768.295 (anti-SLAPP) and §718.1224 (owner protections).

Disclaimer:
All materials presented are based on verifiable public records, first-hand experience, and opinion protected under the Florida and U.S. Constitutions.
This content is intended for informational and public-interest purposes only and should not be construed as a statement of criminal liability.
Names appear solely for context regarding public or quasi-public condominium activities.