Dear Editor:

When I was young, I lived near the park, within walking distance to the Freezer Fresh Drive-in.  Not to date myself too badly, but I spent a lot of dimes on small ice cream cones and I have fond memories of this place from my childhood.  Today, I represent the land contract purchasers of the Freezer Fresh and I want to set a few facts straight that were not provided in the Letter to the Editor posted on March 20, 2024, Freezer Fresh Drive-In Owner Explains Closure.

It is apparent that Mr. Parkison, the owner of the property and the author of the Letter, has a substantial misunderstanding of the law relevant to land contracts.  My clients have paid more than $50,000.00 toward the purchase price, well in excess of 20% of the total amount due.  Further, my clients made all of the monthly payments until Mr. Parkison attempted to terminate the land contract and demanded that they vacate with 3-day’s notice, at which time he refused to accept further payments.  Mr. Parkison claimed that he did so because they didn’t pay the real estate taxes on-time.  While being a few days late on the tax bill may have obligated my client to pay a penalty, it did not give Mr. Parkison the right to immediately terminate the land contract.

The law provides that when a land contract buyer defaults, forfeiture of the buyer’s interest “may be enforced only after the expiration of thirty-days from the date of default.”  During that 30 days, the buyer has the right to avoid forfeiture “by making all payments currently due.”  Then, after the expiration of that 30-day period, Mr. Parkison is required by law to send a “written notice” which “specifies the terms and conditions which have not been complied with,” at least 10 days before the land contract can be forfeited.  This notice is required to be hand-delivered, or delivered to their residence or the Freezer Fresh property.  Mr. Parkison has not done this.

Even if Mr. Parkison had followed the proper notice procedure, he still would not have the right to terminate the land contract and re-take possession.  The law also provides that once the buyer has paid twenty percent of the purchase price, which my clients have, the seller “may recover possession of his property only by use of a proceeding for foreclosure and judicial sale.”   In such a foreclosure, Mr. Parkison would only be “entitled to the proceeds of the sale up to and including the unpaid balance due” on the land contract.  Any excess funds would be paid to my clients.

Mr. Parkison has also violated the law by failing to record the land contract.  Although the seller is required to record it, I have now done so to protect my clients’ interest in the property.  In addition, the land contract provides that Mr. Parkison may enter the property in the case of emergency or suspected abandonment only after he is unable to make contact with the buyer.  Thus, his admitted entry into the property before following the procedure outlined above, without my clients’ consent, constitutes an illegal trespass.

Mr. Parkison and I agree that “unlawful entry” is a crime, but we disagree on who the criminal is in this scenario.

My clients have the right to sell the Freezer Fresh Drive-In and payoff the remaining balance on the land contract.  In fact, my client began the process of finding a buyer to ensure the opening of the Freezer Fresh for the 2024 season, and they intended to open it themselves if it was not sold in time.  However, Mr. Parkison has thus far refused to permit a sale, going so far as to post his own “Not For Sale” sign on the premises to deter any potential buyers.

As was reported, my clients are preparing to move out-of-state for an unexpected job opportunity.  Notwithstanding their plans, they full expected to find a new owner to carry on the long-standing tradition of the Freezer Fresh and they will continue to attempt to do so.  They are saddened that this situation has shed such a negative light on the community, unnecessarily.

I am hopeful that we can get this worked out so we can find a new buyer to open the Freezer Fresh, soon.  As Mr. Parkison noted, it has been a local landmark for 73 years.  It would be a shame if his interference with a sale would bring it to an end.

Kind regards,

Robert A. Franco

Attorney at Law