The retirement income we planned — and never received
A personal account of why the transaction mattered, supported by the written agreement and property records.
In our own words
We planned carefully for retirement.
We are a senior couple who planned to supplement Social Security with rental investments. Our first rental property project went smoothl, was completed and provides the planned income we needed.
We intended our second investment — a rental property on land we already owned — to provide the additional planned rental-income supplement needed to retire. Based on nearby comparable properties, we expected approximately $1,900 to $2,300 a month in gross rental income from this investment, and in addition were never compensated for the land we signed over to the developer as agreed in the contract.
The reality is that without this investment, planned as a part of our retirement income, our actual monthly retirement living income is now substantially less than was needed to retire. The already planned retirement happened. The contract was never fulfilled. Instead of the planned living expense income, we instead have experienced over 2 years of ongoing attorney fees and expenses to and try and find a way to recover what we, in good faith, contracted for. The sad truth is we trusted a person that we should not have trusted. We can only hope we can help keep other potential customers from making the same mistake.
The arrangement
On February 6, 2023, we entered into a development contract with Williams Real Estate Enterprise LLC, acting through Ronnie Williams. We agreed to transfer four lots — 33, 34, 35 and 36 — while retaining Lot 37, on which the company was to construct a duplex shell and attached garage.
The signed General Warranty Deed identifies the development contract as part of the consideration for the transfer.
What happened next
The project never became the property we were promised.
According to our firsthand account, construction never began on Lot 37. We were told that a sewer tap had been installed during the permitting process, but we have not observed work that confirms any work on lot 37 was ever actually performed. In addition to signing over the owned land, we wrote two checks totaling $3,247.36 at the developer's request; both cleared, according to our banking records. There was no further meaningful project activity after the January 2024 $2,500.00 requested payment.
The dispute led to litigation and a final default judgment entered on February 6, 2026. As of our October 2026 update, we report receiving no payment toward that judgment.
Our purpose in publishing: to make the agreement, public court judgment and related records available to other consumers, while distinguishing our experiences and opinions from what the court actually decided.