My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/12/2004 BOARD OF HEALTH Minutes
>
2/12/2004 BOARD OF HEALTH Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2018 5:19:24 PM
Creation date
3/26/2018 2:08:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
BOARD OF HEALTH
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/12/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
i <br /> 5 <br /> necessary information to Dr. Patel as the buyer. Here he was telling <br /> another perspective buyer about. When Liz Nichols called he would have <br /> told him the same thing if she had stated that she had a perspective <br /> buyer for the property, she was just calling about the septic inspection <br /> and hover long it was good for. Then he would have told her. It nearer came <br /> up that it was ars actual purchase. His notes right in the file, not so much <br /> for D.r. Patel or his representative, But, he did it for Mr. Sedlock. Dr. s l: <br /> knew about this situation even when Dr. Patel carne along but he <br /> obviously chose not to reveal this information. <br /> Dr. Patel understood that Mr. Harrin ton's understanding of the facts is <br /> corrects. However, where they stand they could ask only their attorney if <br /> they were in compliance with Title Vo she confirmed that they were in <br /> compliance with Title 11, what did the board want therm to do The <br /> attorney was from Mashpee and she should know the laws Better than <br /> them. <br /> Mr. Santos asked when the inspection was completed. Was it 2001 o <br /> they did not have ars inspection on change of ownership. <br /> Mr. Harrington confirmed that they did not have an inspection for when <br /> they purchased it. That was the question that was posed to him. There <br /> was a valid inspection. He confirmed that that was correct. However, he <br /> was never asked if the property transferred did it trigger any ether <br /> requirements. Dere he was telling another perspective buyer... <br /> Mr. Santos asked if they didn't have to inspect a property at the time of <br /> transference of property. It didn't make a difference if it was done a year <br /> before or not. <br /> Mr. Harrington confirmed that an inspection-was good for two years and <br /> three for condominiums. <br /> Dr. Patel asked what they needed to do to comply with the regulation. <br /> Nis. Carron interjected that the board didn't even know that transfer of <br /> the property had occurred until Dr. Soliz brought one of these gentlemen <br /> down for the Pool inspection. The board didn't even know that there were <br /> new owners until they showed up at the window in .July. That as-also at <br /> the time Dr. Soliz tried to transfer the motel fee over for the year. <br /> Mr. Harrington confirmed that that was correct, That was all requested in <br /> July. They were net aware of the property transfer. But, the board knew <br /> that the property was for sale and they had had other requests for <br /> information. He just did not believe that they ever posed that question to <br /> 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.