Metro Jacksonville

Jacksonville by Neighborhood => Urban Neighborhoods => Springfield => Topic started by: stephendare on September 04, 2008, 01:42:15 PM

Title: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: stephendare on September 04, 2008, 01:42:15 PM
Tenants at the landmark property located at the corner of Market and 8th all received notice from the bank today that the building had been foreclosed upon and that all further rent or lease payments would be made to the bank instead of Van Horne.

Mack Bisette was at the building a little earlier and informed one of the tenants that he was looking to purchase it from the bank.


Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: uptowngirl on September 04, 2008, 01:46:19 PM
While we should never glory in the downfall of another, I would be happy to see some of these properties land in the hands of someone who could take care of them properly.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: RiversideGator on September 04, 2008, 06:32:26 PM
Interesting.  I have followed this lawsuit also.  Too bad for Van Horne but unlocking some of his properties can only be a good thing for the neighborhood.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: soxfan on September 04, 2008, 07:11:15 PM
This could be good for the neighborhood if someone like Mack Bissette or a Jack Meeks ends up with the properties. If Chris Hionedes collects them, then they could end up boarded up with razor wire around them and rotting...
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: thelakelander on September 04, 2008, 10:13:40 PM
It would be great if who ever gets a hold of that building can lease out the retail spaces.  That whole corner would transform into something positive.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: RiversideGator on September 07, 2008, 12:38:10 PM
Any more news on this?
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: sparhater on September 19, 2008, 03:48:25 PM
Quote from: stephendare on September 07, 2008, 09:02:57 PM
Van Horne's employees are telling tenants of the complex next door that the building is also about to be seized.  Which would be the Collier Building.

Good, since SPAR would not take a stand on these buildings or others with the owner.  I am glad the banks are finally stepping in. I hate to see any vacant buidlings, but I would rather them be vacant then rented to drug dealers or left to slowly crumble, of course they aren't right across the street from any of the LOLAS so why would they care?!
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: willydenn on September 19, 2008, 03:57:13 PM
Quote from: sparhater on September 19, 2008, 03:48:25 PM
Quote from: stephendare on September 07, 2008, 09:02:57 PM
Van Horne's employees are telling tenants of the complex next door that the building is also about to be seized.  Which would be the Collier Building.

Good, since SPAR would not take a stand on these buildings or others with the owner.  I am glad the banks are finally stepping in. I hate to see any vacant buidlings, but I would rather them be vacant then rented to drug dealers or left to slowly crumble, of course they aren't right across the street from any of the LOLAS so why would they care?!

The Halsema building has a lot of potential and could be turned into something great in that part of SPR.  I hope Mac and the rest of SRG can get a hold of it.  I don't think the Collier building provides much to work with, but transforming it would also have a significant impact.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: RiversideGator on September 19, 2008, 05:01:39 PM
Any more information on Van Horne's properties?  Are any others in foreclosure?  Are any for sale by the banks?
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: sparhater on September 19, 2008, 08:16:36 PM
Quote from: RiversideGator on September 19, 2008, 05:01:39 PM
Any more information on Van Horne's properties?  Are any others in foreclosure?  Are any for sale by the banks?

You really want to take on the LOLAS of Springfield? You are a very brave man
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: RiversideGator on September 20, 2008, 12:04:07 AM
I am hardly afraid of a community organization whose stated goal is to improve the neighborhood.  I also favor this.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: 32206livedraps on September 20, 2008, 12:08:39 AM
then someone needs to break the news to them about their goal.  they see to me missing it.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: jbm32206 on September 20, 2008, 07:01:58 AM
I suppose their idea of improving this historic neighborhood is to bulldoze it down and build new, with the hopes that just because they try to replicated the old syle that this 'improving' is preserving or restoring.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: Midway ® on September 20, 2008, 07:04:19 AM
Quote from: RiversideGator on September 19, 2008, 05:01:39 PM
Any more information on Van Horne's properties?  Are any others in foreclosure?  Are any for sale by the banks?

You can probably go to the courthouse to find out. When properties go into foreclosure, that typically requires that legal notice be filed, which is public record and is thus available to all citizens.

I can recommend any number of competent real estate attorneys who can help you find this information.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: RiversideGator on September 20, 2008, 03:07:54 PM
A masterfully obvious post, midway.  However, if one does not wish to visit the Courthouse but instead wants to know of rumors one would post the sort of thing I did.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: Midway ® on September 20, 2008, 09:12:34 PM
Quote from: RiversideGator on September 20, 2008, 03:07:54 PM
A masterfully obvious post, midway.  However, if one does not wish to visit the Courthouse but instead wants to know of rumors one would post the sort of thing I did.

Apparently not obvious to you at the time of your post, though. I am just trying to be helpful. Why the mean face? ???

Why deal in rumors when you can amble across the street and have facts?

Do you prefer rumors?

As previously posted, this information is also available on-line, for all you couch-potato types.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: RiversideGator on September 21, 2008, 01:55:54 AM
As you may not be aware, the documents in a court file hardly show the entire picture.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: Midway ® on September 21, 2008, 03:19:51 AM
Quote from: RiversideGator on September 21, 2008, 01:55:54 AM
As you may not be aware, the documents in a court file hardly show the entire picture.

Quote from: RiversideGator on September 19, 2008, 05:01:39 PM
Any more information on Van Horne's properties?  Are any others in foreclosure?  Are any for sale by the banks?

oh, ok. I guess those court filings could not answer these questions, then?....Or are you just looking for gossip? Or, perhaps his state of mind? 

Quote
Does anyone know how Van Horne feels about these events? What's his state of mind?

RG wants to know.

There, I've put out the call, replies should be pouring in shortly, you can thank me later.

Your friend,
Midway

Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: Springfield Girl on September 21, 2008, 04:09:25 PM


Good, since SPAR would not take a stand on these buildings or others with the owner.  I am glad the banks are finally stepping in. I hate to see any vacant buidlings, but I would rather them be vacant then rented to drug dealers or left to slowly crumble, of course they aren't right across the street from any of the LOLAS so why would they care?!
[/quote]
As a female I am in the minority of board members, there are four of us. I am also in the minority age wise at 40 something. The majority of members are younger. I in no way resemble a LOLA, (little old lady) and I don't think my fellow board members fit or would appreciate this description either. It would be nice if people would realize that we are not all powerful like some think or complete idiots trying to sabotage the neighborhood as is the opinion of others. We are volunteers that do what we can for the neighborhood we love. It is so easy to sit back and complain and I would say to anyone that thinks they can do a better job please step up to the plate, we could use the help.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: jbm32206 on September 21, 2008, 05:00:32 PM
I'll gladly take your spot, and so would many others.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: jbm32206 on November 14, 2008, 06:42:32 PM
Looks like Van Horn's hurt his tenants too....way to go!  :-\
QuoteFor months, the JEA says it’s tried to contact Craig Van Horn of Symbiosis Investments LLC. It says Van Horn owes them just over $29,000 for water bills on 11 of his properties.

“This is one of those difficult ones for us because we know the tenants have paid their utility bills…unfortunately the person they paid who’s responsible did not pay JEA”, says Gerri Boyce spokeswoman for the JEA. The energy authority says it tried contacting Van Horn 18 times before finally getting a hold of him…It says the only time anyone actually ever spoke to Van Horn was when he told them he was terminating his water connections at all of his properties.

“This one with this many service points I believe is one of the largest”, says Boyce. She says dozens of tenants are affected. Making matters worse, Boyce says private tenants are not allowed to assume individual responsibility for the water lines. She says the as long as the outstanding bill remains in Van Horn’s name, the main water lines cannot go to private citizens.

We tried contacting Van Horn over the phone and at his office. His property manager told us he would try to get Van Horn to call---he never did. Also, the location of his office according to his website was not accurate. “Not only did these tenants lose 30K collectively---when you think about it in the big sense JEA customers have lost 30 thousand dollars”, says Boyce.

It is uncertain if Van Horn has made any payment arrangements with the JEA. The energy authority tells us if he doesn’t pay, that money will have to be eaten up by it’s operating budget.
http://www.cbs47.com/content/topstories/story.aspx?content_id=ca9f487f-c4cb-4a3d-999f-b218ca94a295 (http://www.cbs47.com/content/topstories/story.aspx?content_id=ca9f487f-c4cb-4a3d-999f-b218ca94a295)
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: jbm32206 on November 14, 2008, 07:00:09 PM
Doesn't it though....
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: uptowngirl on November 15, 2008, 06:52:27 AM
Hoe did JEA let it go for so long? Or is this just one month worth of water bills? I know one month when I was out of town I paid my electric water bill two weeks late and they had already sent me a notice they were going to turn it off in three days time!!! What the hell???!!!
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: jbm32206 on November 15, 2008, 07:05:20 AM
Not sure how long it's been going on, but it's clear that he's taking the money and not paying the bills. How low can someone get...what makes it worse, the tenants can't have the bills changed into their names, because he owns the properties.
Quote“This one with this many service points I believe is one of the largest”, says Boyce. She says dozens of tenants are affected. Making matters worse, Boyce says private tenants are not allowed to assume individual responsibility for the water lines. She says the as long as the outstanding bill remains in Van Horn’s name, the main water lines cannot go to private citizens.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: alta on November 15, 2008, 11:51:25 AM
Say goodbye to Van Horne.  His falsely built empire is crumbling.  He's probably been using the money to take European vacations.  There are two sides to every story.  I had a similar incident as uptowngirl several years ago before I went to auto pay when I forgot to make my payment.  The next bill had a notice to cut off my utilities.  This story sounds a little suspicious.  I wonder if the tenants there didn't pay either because they were aware about the landlord.  Only time will tell.     
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: downtownparks on November 15, 2008, 12:41:55 PM
I think he was robbing Peter to pay Paul. I would be mildly surprised if he has pocketed any of the money, I think he was shifting things around in order to try to keep something afloat, so save, as Alta put it, his crumbling empire. He failed.

Lets hope who ever comes in and buys up the remnants have a better plan in place.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: jbm32206 on November 15, 2008, 01:30:23 PM
First of all, the responsibility falls clearly in Van Horns lap. He was paid by the tenants, and he didn't pay his bills. I don't see where there's any mystery to it...he screwed up, he's losing his property and he screwed the tenants along the way.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: alta on November 15, 2008, 02:04:43 PM
Utility bills should be the responsibility of the tenant. Stupid rules enacted by our all knowing goverment agency that the citizens have no authority to inflluence. The tenants and JEA have nobody to blame but themselves. If JEA is so concerned about people like Van Horn not paying the bills then change the policy.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: jbm32206 on November 15, 2008, 02:18:00 PM
I have to disagree, how is it the tenants fault, when they've paid the money to the landlord (Van Horn) and he didn't pay JEA? It's not up to JEA either...it's all Van Horn's responsibility, which he failed to take care of.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: alta on November 15, 2008, 03:39:18 PM
The tentants don't make policy to pay their bills.  JEA can change the policy to have the tenants pay them for their own utility bills. 
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: jbm32206 on November 15, 2008, 03:57:13 PM
Yes, JEA could and I agree that they should...but that still doesn't mean the tenants were at fault in this situation.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: thelakelander on November 15, 2008, 09:12:47 PM
You can't fault the tenants or JEA in this case.  If that's the deal the parties originally agreed on and the landlord fails to uphold his end of the agreement, then its all on him.  I feel for the tenants who have had their lives turned upside down with this situation.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: downtownparks on November 15, 2008, 10:14:01 PM
Agreed. The landlord didnt keep his end of the deal.
Title: Re: Van Horne loses the Halsema Building.
Post by: alta on November 15, 2008, 10:27:10 PM
If he has any assets left hopefully JEA is able to get their money back.  I am by no means defending Van Horn.  I would be very skeptical if I was told I was paying a rent payment that included all my utilities.  It doesn't make business sense for the owner since utility cost are variable.  If I was a renter I also don't want to be paying for someone next door that is running their water and electricity all day and night.  The ownership of this building is changing so hopefully JEA can come up with a common sense approach to getting the utilities back on so these people aren't uprooted.