Being a winner of a hotly contested lottery to purchase a brand new affordable three bedroom house at Southside was the beginning of a two year headache for Coreen Tucker.

The Southside resident is facing eviction proceedings by the Bermuda Land Development Company (BLDC) after two years of what she called the company's "mismanagement" in dealing with her complaints about the property.

Coreen Tucker is also blaming her lawyers for shoddy practice and has formally complained to the Bar Association.

"What I would like for people to get from this story is they need to be cognizant of the fact that the legal arena is not representing them in their best interests - I can tell them how not to buy a house."

In 1999 Mrs. Tucker won a lottery to purchase one of the first houses completed at Southside to meet Island residents' demand for affordable housing. She managed to get a $250,000 mortgage and has been faithfully repaying the bank for the past two years.

The sale was not closed, however, because she had complaints that the BLDC had not completed their side of the contract.

One of the several issues was that the house, like others in the Southside neighbourhood was not fenced or kerbed off.

"The main issue was this Belco transformer hutch sitting on my property," she told The Royal Gazette. "We were told by the previous management that this transformer hutch was going to be removed. Because of that we agreed to pay the price."

As a result of the dispute, her conveyance lawyer did not pay BLDC any of the funds for the house - something she only found out in January this year.

When new management took over, BLDC could not confirm whether the hutch would be removed or not, she said.

And while BLDC estimated the cost of removing the hutch at $100,000, she - through her lawyers - managed to get an estimate of between $16,000 and 20,000 from Belco.

The hutch was at the front of the house and she suggested as a compromise that BLDC create an entrance to her house on the other side. "We were told to get estimates. Which we did, but then it just went to sleep. I haven't heard anything more about it."

To make matters worse last Christmas, there was nearly a disaster when a large Mack truck was improperly parked in a neighbour's yard and ploughed into the building, almost entering her living room.

Insurers started negotiating a settlement with BLDC which claimed ownership of the house, and came up with a $48,000 estimate to repair the damage.

BLDC made an offer to close off the deal with Mrs. Tucker with a three quarter downpayment, saying the final $63,000 (which included an insurer's estimate to repair the damage caused by the truck) would remain in escrow until they take care of the outstanding items on the house, according to Mrs. Tucker.

But she turned it down, saying they should come up with a discounted price for the house and she and the insurer would take care of the rest.

When an architect requested the building's plans on her behalf the BLDC refused, saying Mrs. Tucker owed the company money.

Thatis when she contacted her lawyer he told her that he had not transferred any of the money to the company.

"That really took me back because I had expressly suggested he send three quarters of the money and hold the rest back until it had been finalised," she said.

She was dropped as a client when she started asking questions and said she was seeking a second opinion, she claimed.

She fired a second lawyer who advised her to accept the same deal being offered by BLDC after negotiating an extra $35,000 held back in escrow.

Mrs. Tucker says she doesn't trust the company to be conscientious about fixing the outstanding items on the house, since they had not done so for two years.

She is also upset that the company has not shared with her the details of the insurer's estimate of the damage caused by the truck.

"The insurance company offered $48,000 but BLDC has never revealed what it covers," she said. "I'm not sure that all of the damage has been accounted for because they have never revealed anything to me in terms of a structural report. Even if I was a tenant - as a landlord you're going to go down to the tenant and say `is this everything that has to be covered?' And I am not signing anything that says I agree to any money until I see what it covers."

Further, she says, she has no idea whether the insurance estimates includes relocation costs while the work is being done.

She said BLDC had been incommunicative throughout the dispute - a sign of "mismanagement and an inability to interact with people".

Meanwhile, BLDC has sent her a notice to quit the premises by March 31 or face court action.

"I'm going to fight," she said. "This is my chance to have the perception of owning a piece of the rock. The opportunities for home ownership are dwindling - even for two income households."

She added: "I'm not moving and if they don't come to their senses, that's where we'll end up (in court)"

Neither the woman's lawyer nor BLDC officials could be contacted by presstime last night.