Friday, August 28, 2009

60 days for man convicted of embezzling $44K

Jail time for man convicted of embezzling $44K: "Weinrich was the subdivision’s homeowners association board president when other board members found something was fishy with the books. It came to light that Weinrich had set up a secret HOA checking account and was paying his credit cards with those checks, his attorney Mark Krumbein said."
---------------
60 days in the can plus pay back the $45K he stole. Too lenient? Too harsh?

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Much too lenient, in my opinion. What about the lives this man has more than likely affected? Hopefully, he did not take the opportunity to violate innocent homeowners. It doesnt say, but I suspect he did not fine, lein, foreclose upon any property owner. I can't believe he didn't have help and guidance. My experience is when a board member is stealing like this, they are going to try to assess for the stolen moneies anyone they can, ususlly the most vulnerable within the group.
The good fact is that there is a DA out there, WARREN COUNTY, OHIO, who obviously listened to the victims and was willing to prosecute! Where I am for the DA won't even listen!

Don Nordeen said...

I wonder what CAI recommends in the way of controls for boards to implement that doesn't involve CAI financially.

Anonymous said...

In Texas, CAI promotes closed meetings and closed records to ensure that the vendors (which CAI represents) can continue to profit from the graft and corruption in HOAs. The very act of concealing the records generates litigation for the benefit of CAI attorneys.

Beth said...

Yep, I'm with Don and Anon, wondering if CAI will change recommendations to minimize this sort of thing.

When I was on our hoa board, I couldn't convince the board to pay for an audit, even, because they didn't want to spend the few hundred dollars. I argued, "Even if we don't pay for it this year, let's plan to pay for one periodically, say every 3 or 5 years," and no one would agree. The prop mgr argued against audits, saying that we didn't need them unless we thought someone was stealing, and of course we had no reason to think anyone might steal, right?

The whole setup gives me the willies.