Here I am

Eviction

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

Hot Shot mistake

blower fan

The campers have posted a follow-up video with the Incident Report(Below)from the SO. The report seems to square more with the campers than the "unbiased" story from the other video. The report has no mention of anyone's arm being grabbed, spitting, or flipping the bird to the LEOs. I have no dog in this hunt, but if you read reviews of this facility from well before this incident, there are several reports of law enforcement being called. Not saying that is wrong, or unwarranted, but it does seem to be the owner's MO.

The full narrative text of the Montrose County Sheriff's Incident Report. We have redacted our friend's name for his privacy, and one swear word in case it gets flagged by YouTube: *****

On 07/29/2020, at approximately 1607 hours, WestCo Dispatch Center informed me of a disturbance, at 22045 Highway 550, in the County of Montrose, Colorado. Dispatch advised, an irate male party was being verbally aggressive at that location. Deputies responded to that address, where we contacted Tommy Vail (DOB: 09/06/1951). Tommy stated, he is the owner of the RV Resort at this address, and he had a party violate the resort's policy on receiving mail at the resort. Tommy stated, Jason Epperson (DOB: 11/06/1980) attempted to have mail sent to him at the resort, which is expressly forbidden in the reservation agreement Jason signed prior to his arrival at the resort. Tommy said the office refused the package, but Jason received it outside the gates anyway despite the policy violation. Tommy stated, when he informed Jason of the violation, another party who is travelling with Jason, later identified as XXXXXX XXXXXXXX (DOB: XX/XX/XXXX) became irate and began yelling at Tommy. Tommy stated Robert used swear words, and there were small children around during the confrontation, which Tommy stated he will not tolerate at his resort. Tommy stated he wanted both XXXXXX and Jason's parties to leave the resort due to the policy violation and subsequent disturbance that was created. I then contacted Jason, who told a very similar story to what Tommy had stated. Jason told me, he frequently stays in RV Parks, and in the past there has never been an issue with receiving mail at one. Jason stated he understands he should have read the park policies more thoroughly, but said the section which prohibits mail being sent to guests is in the section titled "Long-term visitors" and Jason was only planning to stay for a few days, so he did not read that part. When the delivery driver called him, Jason went out to get his package and did not think anything more of it. Jason stated he expected the park to be nicer about the violation and give them a warning or have a discussion about it, rather than just sending an e-mail and then asking them to leave. Jason said XXXXXX took offense to the way the complaint was handled, and when he vocalized this to resort employees, he used one swear word. Jason said the response from the park was disproportionate to the offense, and he felt the whole situation was ridiculous. Jason asked what would happen if he refused to leave, and told me the RV he stays in is his "domicile" so he cannot be made to leave unless he is legally evicted. I advised Jason, as he was a guest of the resort and had simply made a reservation, he could not be considered a tenant or resident at the address. As the owner, Tommy, was stating he wanted Jason and his traveling companions off the property, if he refused Jason could be cited for trespassing. Jason stated he disagreed with this, but stated they would leave because he did not want further problems. Deputies spoke with XXXXXX, who advised them, Jason ordered a Macbook, to be delivered to the RV resort. When it arrived, the office refused the delivery, stating it was against policy. At this point, the delivery driver contacted Jason by phone and arranged to meet with him outside the gates to deliver his package. The resort owner found out about the delivery and sent Jason an e-mail stating he was in violation of resort rules, and advising him he needed to leave. XXXXXX heard about the email and became agitated, because he did not feel the response from Tommy was fair and felt Jason should be allowed to remain in the resort despite his violation. XXXXXX stated he confronted Tommy, and said "this is fXXXing ridiculous" and at that point Tommy contacted law enforcement. Deputies asked if any threats were made, and XXXXXX stated no. Deputies asked if it was physical, and XXXXXX again said no. Deputies informed both parties they were being asked to leave, and they stated the process of packing their campers was likely to take several hours. XXXXXX expressed to me that he did not want deputies present around his children, who he stated are home schooled and would be affected by law enforcement being near them. I advised XXXXXX, the park owner had given deputies permission to be on the premises and as long as we were performing duties related to our job, our presence could not be avoided. Deputies remained on scene until XXXXXX and Jason's parties had left the resort. As they left, Tommy advised deputies XXXXXX was recording out his window and yelling profanities at resort staff. Deputies then cleared the call without further incident. BOND AMOUNT: n/a SUPPLEMENT(S): n/a Victim Notification Form? n/a Victim Rights Pamphlet? n/a /s/ Deputy S. Belcher Post# B3088-2486 CASE STATUS: Cleared non-criminal *****
 
The campers have posted a follow-up video with the Incident Report(Below)from the SO. The report seems to square more with the campers than the "unbiased" story from the other video. The report has no mention of anyone's arm being grabbed, spitting, or flipping the bird to the LEOs. I have no dog in this hunt, but if you read reviews of this facility from well before this incident, there are several reports of law enforcement being called. Not saying that is wrong, or unwarranted, but it does seem to be the owner's MO.

The full narrative text of the Montrose County Sheriff's Incident Report. We have redacted our friend's name for his privacy, and one swear word in case it gets flagged by YouTube: *****

On 07/29/2020, at approximately 1607 hours, WestCo Dispatch Center informed me of a disturbance, at 22045 Highway 550, in the County of Montrose, Colorado. Dispatch advised, an irate male party was being verbally aggressive at that location. Deputies responded to that address, where we contacted Tommy Vail (DOB: 09/06/1951). Tommy stated, he is the owner of the RV Resort at this address, and he had a party violate the resort's policy on receiving mail at the resort. Tommy stated, Jason Epperson (DOB: 11/06/1980) attempted to have mail sent to him at the resort, which is expressly forbidden in the reservation agreement Jason signed prior to his arrival at the resort. Tommy said the office refused the package, but Jason received it outside the gates anyway despite the policy violation. Tommy stated, when he informed Jason of the violation, another party who is travelling with Jason, later identified as XXXXXX XXXXXXXX (DOB: XX/XX/XXXX) became irate and began yelling at Tommy. Tommy stated Robert used swear words, and there were small children around during the confrontation, which Tommy stated he will not tolerate at his resort. Tommy stated he wanted both XXXXXX and Jason's parties to leave the resort due to the policy violation and subsequent disturbance that was created. I then contacted Jason, who told a very similar story to what Tommy had stated. Jason told me, he frequently stays in RV Parks, and in the past there has never been an issue with receiving mail at one. Jason stated he understands he should have read the park policies more thoroughly, but said the section which prohibits mail being sent to guests is in the section titled "Long-term visitors" and Jason was only planning to stay for a few days, so he did not read that part. When the delivery driver called him, Jason went out to get his package and did not think anything more of it. Jason stated he expected the park to be nicer about the violation and give them a warning or have a discussion about it, rather than just sending an e-mail and then asking them to leave. Jason said XXXXXX took offense to the way the complaint was handled, and when he vocalized this to resort employees, he used one swear word. Jason said the response from the park was disproportionate to the offense, and he felt the whole situation was ridiculous. Jason asked what would happen if he refused to leave, and told me the RV he stays in is his "domicile" so he cannot be made to leave unless he is legally evicted. I advised Jason, as he was a guest of the resort and had simply made a reservation, he could not be considered a tenant or resident at the address. As the owner, Tommy, was stating he wanted Jason and his traveling companions off the property, if he refused Jason could be cited for trespassing. Jason stated he disagreed with this, but stated they would leave because he did not want further problems. Deputies spoke with XXXXXX, who advised them, Jason ordered a Macbook, to be delivered to the RV resort. When it arrived, the office refused the delivery, stating it was against policy. At this point, the delivery driver contacted Jason by phone and arranged to meet with him outside the gates to deliver his package. The resort owner found out about the delivery and sent Jason an e-mail stating he was in violation of resort rules, and advising him he needed to leave. XXXXXX heard about the email and became agitated, because he did not feel the response from Tommy was fair and felt Jason should be allowed to remain in the resort despite his violation. XXXXXX stated he confronted Tommy, and said "this is fXXXing ridiculous" and at that point Tommy contacted law enforcement. Deputies asked if any threats were made, and XXXXXX stated no. Deputies asked if it was physical, and XXXXXX again said no. Deputies informed both parties they were being asked to leave, and they stated the process of packing their campers was likely to take several hours. XXXXXX expressed to me that he did not want deputies present around his children, who he stated are home schooled and would be affected by law enforcement being near them. I advised XXXXXX, the park owner had given deputies permission to be on the premises and as long as we were performing duties related to our job, our presence could not be avoided. Deputies remained on scene until XXXXXX and Jason's parties had left the resort. As they left, Tommy advised deputies XXXXXX was recording out his window and yelling profanities at resort staff. Deputies then cleared the call without further incident. BOND AMOUNT: n/a SUPPLEMENT(S): n/a Victim Notification Form? n/a Victim Rights Pamphlet? n/a /s/ Deputy S. Belcher Post# B3088-2486 CASE STATUS: Cleared non-criminal *****

This was also posted in the comments on RV Shows "eye witness" account with no response so far. RV show also has not responded to the campers invitation to air his side of the story. Kinda odd.
 
Tom,

Good job finding the SO report... I agree it seems to favor the campers. Before deciding to let this go, I had a thought about calling the campground, but decided it was more than I needed or wanted. It would seem logical if the camper's camping mates were the ones creating most of the problem, it would have been mentioned in the report. And, its quite possible the "unbiased witness" wasn't so unbiased.

Its still surprising the SO enforced the eviction without violence, threat of violence, or a more serious infraction as I have witnessed in the past in MD and in TX. I think I'm more inclined to criticize the SO than any of the parties for enforcing this.

Cheers, Ron
 
Ron, in my 100% volunteer work with sworn deputies, and just to be crystal clear that I was not a sworn LEO, nor claim to be, I can assure you they'd rather have a root canal than respond to a domestic dispute, or some BS call like this. It's a crap job sometimes.
 
"Jason asked what would happen if he refused to leave, and told me the RV he stays in is his "domicile" so he cannot be made to leave unless he is legally evicted."

Looks like they were ready to play "victim" using this poorly written Colorado law by saying "we get mail here". Imagine how expensive, and long timeline, it is for the park owners to evict someone. They got caught at playing this game and are being a sore looser. Snowflakes also tried to use their kids to ask the police to leave, seriously? Maybe the RV park sues them for defamation.

There are other arrangements that can be made to get a package like picking it up at a shipping center. Regardless the bad law is the real problem forcing RV parks to stop getting anything in for renters. Also consider the nightmare of junk mail from old cheap mailing lists sold that keeps krap showing up years after renters leave or die.
 
"Jason asked what would happen if he refused to leave, and told me the RV he stays in is his "domicile" so he cannot be made to leave unless he is legally evicted."

Looks like they were ready to play "victim" using this poorly written Colorado law by saying "we get mail here". Imagine how expensive, and long timeline, it is for the park owners to evict someone. They got caught at playing this game and are being a sore looser. Snowflakes also tried to use their kids to ask the police to leave, seriously? Maybe the RV park sues them for defamation.

There are other arrangements that can be made to get a package like picking it up at a shipping center. Regardless the bad law is the real problem forcing RV parks to stop getting anything in for renters. Also consider the nightmare of junk mail from old cheap mailing lists sold that keeps krap showing up years after renters leave or die.

T,

I noticed that too and figured there is a lot in this story missing, as Mark mentioned. Like you say, this could have been avoided, and FWIW, seems when delivery occurred outside of RV park, it technically wasn't delivered to the premises, so the domicile law shouldn't have come into play. This story is fraught with suspect information and missing information.

All I can say, if I were at that park and needed to receive a pkg, I would have spoken to the park mgt and figured out the right way to do it to not have a problem, including options you mentioned. As I mentioned in previous post, good communications works, period dot.

Cheers, Ron
 
Never been to that park, plan to, or have any dog in the fight.
It may have been updated after "the incident" but the rules link posted earlier, when clicked on Complete Rules Here at the bottom, includes quote below. Probably should be on page 1...

"SUBJECT # 4 - Long term Campers, Lodge and Cabin Occupants: Campers cannot use the park address as residence or for mail or package delivery. The office will return them to the Post Office. (Has to do with legal requirements)."
 
Once upon a time in a universe far, far away, one had his mail sent “General Delivery” (held at the Post Office). Were he to receive a box (distinct from letter) he likely ALSO had with him a telegram or registered letter detailing the transaction & contents pertinents.

(Yes, there’s a similarity to a Bill of Lading. Back before your National Identification Card — mark of the beast — this was sufficient).

When we traveled in the 1960s, this is how it was done. (Same for the rare long distance telephone call: one used the Bell System public phone, not that of the park owner).

One of the older jokes (pre-RV & Interstate) was that the railroad train on which you arrived was also carrying your mail.

The US Post Office is the single agency authorized under the Constitution. To promote the general welfare, the safety of written communications and small package deliveries. Has it’s own police FOR THIS REASON: to avoid disputes by the states among themselves, and to foster closer ties in a continent-sized country across tremendous distances.

Federal jurisdiction. First Amendment, all the way.

Back before Congress was bribed in the 1960s to allow UPS & FedX to steal profit-making package delivery — which wholly underwrote the unprofitable aspects of the USPS — subsidized rail or air got packages/letters moved efficiently. Cheaply.

An “air mail” letter stamp was practically next day delivery. (Read that again). The “profit” of the USPS is (was) a bookkeeping entry. So how do you like paying billions in profit to anti-American corporations?

The park owner has NO PLACE in responsibility for anyone else’s mail or packages. He IS NOT party to the transaction. Long-term rental is still one-month at time. Eviction is overnight. He is liable for the premises, NOT the renter.

3-nights or 367-nights, “legal address” has big consequences for screw-ups.

The big downtown hotels of yesteryear were something of a middle ground. Some had decades-long tenants. An RV park is or isn’t (by choice) a long-term residence (as distinct from a mobile home park). Financing, taxes, insurance, zoning, code inspections, etc, then differ.

That said, many RV parks try to accommodate long-term renters. Those disabled or working on contract need a little help where use of “office hours” is untenable when one can’t drive or is at work. (But let me tell you it IS stupid to be nice as one DOES NOT WANT “prosecutors discretion” involved; thus, have renter ask their church to receive & deliver = run off the the worst of the long-term disabled leeches).

As to the package recipient meeting the driver on the street “solving” the problem of the park being OUT OF the chain of liability, it’s still his address used.

The rental agreement is a STATEMENT of who is responsible for what on the legal premises. Now he must prove it was NOT delivered to him (his premises).

How the world works is in accommodation to black-letter law.
Granted.

Let’s play, Who Goes to Prison?: “Okay, John Doe received a SUPER SIZE box of marijuana brownies with our address used”.

Ever had a low-life ex-neighbor try to pay you to receive his mail? Ha!

That’s the equivalency.

Your property now forfeit.
.

.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top