LuAnn de Lesseps: No Longer a Countess, Still Never a Princess

[jumper sage]

5 hours ago, Jextella said:

I sense that LuAnne hasn't fully recovered from her divorce from the Count

I completely agree!

2 hours ago, KungFuBunny said:

they are trying to protect an asset. I would love to see the divorce settlement wording

Me too.  We have a few attorneys here and I am patiently waiting for a link and recap.  I just hope she didn't spend a boat load of money on that asshole she married.

[AnnA]

10 minutes ago, jumper sage said:

I just  hope she didn't spend a boat load of money on that asshole she married.

I'm guessing she spent a boatload of cash on the engagement party and the wedding.

[jumper sage]

38 minutes ago, AnnA said:

I'm guessing she spent a boatload of cash on the engagement party and the wedding.

Don't forget that cool penthouse.  I could just see her giving him money for the rent/mortgage.

[AnnA]

5 minutes ago, jumper sage said:

Don't forget that cool penthouse.  I could just see her giving him money for the rent/mortgage.

Ugh!   He's disgusting!

[hoodooznoodooz]

5 hours ago, jaync said:

CDAN called it months ago...

(Luann was revealed as the answer today.)

How on earth did CDAN know about it?

If this version is true, it is truly despicable. And what was she thinking, that no one would find out? 

[SuprSuprElevated]

Is it me or does this seem like a tragically bad idea?

[biakbiak]

Given he only has 6 posts, It’s entirely possible she completely forgot she follows him.

[Mozelle]

9 hours ago, Chalby said:

Maybe I am just getting too old for this nonsense. She loves Diana Ross and the party theme was famous celebrity. People are being too flippin' sensitive. Next the media will roast Sonya for appropriation of a ginger. Surely there are far bigger issues that could be focused on, like say... alcoholism...?

This was discussed a lot at the time of the airing, but LuAnn didn't need to put on any bronzer or tanning lotion or whatever the hell on her skin to dress as Diana Ross for Halloween. Like, not at all did it need to happen, and there's nothing sensitive about calling out LuAnn's ignorance there. 

I can't find my exact post from that discussion, but I do remember sharing this picture (below) of a white couple who dressed one year for Halloween as Beyonce and Jay...with nary a swatch of darker makeup on their faces to pull off the look. It can be done, and darker makeup need not be done--at all, ever.

Edited July 18, 2018 by Mozelle

[HunterHunted]

16 minutes ago, Mozelle said:

This was discussed a lot at the time of the airing, but LuAnn didn't need to put on any bronzer or tanning lotion or whatever the hell on her skin to dress as Diana Ross for Halloween. Like, not at all did it need to happen, and there's nothing sensitive about calling out LuAnn's ignorance there. 

I can't find my exact post from that discussion, but I do remember sharing this picture (below) of a white couple who dressed one year for Halloween as Beyonce and Jay...with nary a swatch of darker makeup on their faces to pull off the look. It can be done, and darker makeup need not be done--at all, ever.

This forever and always! I'm a big Drag Race fan and if your drag game is so bad and weak that you need to paint yourself brown, then you aren't a fan enough to pull off a faithful impersonation without a bigoted paint job. Luann's Diana was lazy and offensive; she didn't even have any of Diana's signature looks. I'm not going to ignore her Halloween costume because it's just another thing in a long line of instances when Luann has been offensive to minorities.

[breezy424]

Well, I could be wrong but I missed in that lawsuit that the kids and the count were suing to block the sale of the Sag Harbor house.  From I could understand, they are suing Lu because she didn't set up the trust for the children after the sale of the marital home and broke the divorce agreement.  There wasn't any problem when Lu bought the Sag Harbor house in her name only.  It's about the trust that wasn't set up. 

Now here's my speculation.  Maybe Lu already bought a house in the Catskills and used or planned on using the Sag Harbor house as collateral for a mortgage until she sold that home.  Which is what she did with the original marital home to buy the SH house.

I think everything was cool Fourth of July when they were all together until....something came up about her new/potential purchase in the Catskills.  Maybe she announced that she bought a house.  But whatever it was, questions were raised and the count and kids found out that a trust wasn't set up and that Lu was further violating the divorce agreement by using more than 50 percent of the value of the SH home to purchase a new house.

As for the marital house, there's things we don't know.  We don't know if there was a mortgage so we don't know what the proceeds were on that house.  I checked the county records on line and they don't list mortgages.  They also didn't list the purchase price of the marital house when the count bought it in 2003.

I get why posters think that Lu is going to rehab because she doesn't want to deal with reunion but I also think (and I stated this in another post) that this lawsuit may have put her over the edge.  Her primary family unit cut off all ties with her.  Crap.  That's a big deal.  She's probably devastated and feels a whole lot of guilt even if it wasn't her intent to screw her kids.  And yes, she is guilty of not following the terms of the divorce but there's also the possibility she didn't screw her kids because we don't have all the information....starting with what kind of money are we talking about here.

[SuprSuprElevated]

9 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

This forever and always! I'm a big Drag Race fan and if your drag game is so bad and weak that you need to paint yourself brown, then you aren't a fan enough to pull off a faithful impersonation without a bigoted paint job. Luann's Diana was lazy and offensive; she didn't even have any of Diana's signature looks. I'm not going to ignore her Halloween costume because it's just another thing in a long line of instances when Luann has been offensive to minorities.

The "hola chiquita" moment is coming as well.  

[biakbiak]

11 minutes ago, breezy424 said:

here wasn't any problem when Lu bought the Sag Harbor house in her name only.  It's about the trust that wasn't set up

It’s both. If she didn’t set up a trust and chose to buy a new home which she did and was the Sag Harbor house she was required to put the kids on the deed. 

[smores]

Re-reading the documents, it says that the Count handed over an unmortgaged deed to Luann at the signing of the divorce decree.  It further says that Luann was to create the trust when she got the title to the original house.  It then said she was to continue to "fund" the trust with any future homes until the end date of the trust.  She was allowed to use the proceeds of the first house to fund the second, but was required to keep the trust intact.  

Paragraph 69 mentions them wanting to block the sale.

https://radaronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/rhony-luann-de-lesseps-sued-husband-breach-trust-divorce-alexandre-kids-docs-02.pdf

[jumper sage]

1 hour ago, breezy424 said:

I get why posters think that Lu is going to rehab because she doesn't want to deal with reunion but I also think (and I stated this in another post) that this lawsuit may have put her over the edge.  Her primary family unit cut off all ties with her.

I absolutely agree with you.

@smores - I am reading the document.  If you look at paragraph 15 it says that the trust will terminate in September 2016 when Noel turns thirty.  That can't be right.

Paragraph 27 is interesting too.  I think @breezy424 was discussing this.

Paragraph 29 begins with [July 11, 2018 defendant threatened plantiffs............] Not a good paragraph at all, hooboy.

Paragraphs 45 - 49 outline the agreement and the problem and says Luann being the Trustee was derelict in her duties - Hooboy, judges DO NOT like trustees who do not follow the rules.  My brother was the trustee for our mother's estate and the attorneys made a small error and he was called on the carpet by the judge.  It was up to him to point out any errors on the attorney's part.

Paragraph 53 defendant enriched herself - Yikes.

This is a great read.

To me it looks like Luann got her rich husband and then got screwed but still was paid out nicely at the divorce.  She was entrusted to retain assets for her minor children and then converted them for herself and probably thought her loving children would just stand by.  Good for the ex for stepping up and going after her.  It looks like this has been going on for quite some time and it came to a head when she threatened the kids in July of this year.  They are rich by blood she was only by marriage.  You just know the ex paid every cent of their expenses, no questions asked.

When I was a kid we lived in a war zone.  My mom left my dad and he paid any amount of money to not have to deal with us kids.  He didn't even get his own attorney.  He agreed to everything and even paid my mom child support and our expenses directly each Friday (if you are on support through the courts you can get weeks behind) He even paid 100% of our expenses and gave her grocery money too.  It seems he did not like us running down the 7 houses to his house to raid his steaks and such.  Ha ha ha.

[RedheadZombie]

12 hours ago, Chalby said:

I am more concerned with the gal on the right. Who the heck is that? Luann looks incredible here.

Incredibly wasted, that's for sure. 

[Happy Camper]

On 7/16/2018 at 3:00 PM, KungFuBunny said:

Luann was concerned with the picture Ramona posted - the ladies around a dinner table with empty glasses

This is from Victoria's Instagram - I'd be more concerned with this pic. Look at what is in front of Luann

If I were Lu, I would repost this photo with the caption "This is NOT my martini glass, YOU FUCKING BITCH"

Edited July 18, 2018 by Happy Camper

[SuprSuprElevated]

56 minutes ago, Happy Camper said:

If I were Lu, I would repost this photo with the caption "This is NOT my martini glass, YOU FUCKING BITCH"

 

It very well might not be hers, if they all shifted around for the photo.  It's possible.  Doesn't change the fact that she has raced to rehab, and there are stories now emerging about inappropriate behavior, both alcohol fueled and greed based.

Allegedly.

Edited July 18, 2018 by SuprSuprElevated

[hoodooznoodooz]

10 hours ago, smores said:

Re-reading the documents, it says that the Count handed over an unmortgaged deed to Luann at the signing of the divorce decree.  It further says that Luann was to create the trust when she got the title to the original house.  It then said she was to continue to "fund" the trust with any future homes until the end date of the trust.  She was allowed to use the proceeds of the first house to fund the second, but was required to keep the trust intact.  

Paragraph 69 mentions them wanting to block the sale.

https://radaronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/rhony-luann-de-lesseps-sued-husband-breach-trust-divorce-alexandre-kids-docs-02.pdf

Wow. This is unbelievable. How can a mother be this greedy, insensitive, inconsiderate, stupid and reckless when it comes to her own daughter and son? This disgusts me. 

[Rap541]

Quote

get why posters think that Lu is going to rehab because she doesn't want to deal with reunion but I also think (and I stated this in another post) that this lawsuit may have put her over the edge.  Her primary family unit cut off all ties with her.  Crap.  That's a big deal.  She's probably devastated and feels a whole lot of guilt even if it wasn't her intent to screw her kids.  And yes, she is guilty of not following the terms of the divorce but there's also the possibility she didn't screw her kids because we don't have all the information....starting with what kind of money are we talking about here.

I'd feel worse for Luann if her primary family unit had cut ties with her for no reason. But honestly, as much as I rarely feel sympathy for rich kids, I'm inclined to put my pity on Noel and Victoria and not Luann.  

Boo hoo, Luann. Your kids finally got the message what comes first to you, and it's money, not them. It's bad enough that the kids always appeared to be an after thought, worse that the public has the opinion that the house staff raised the kids, but honestly, I am just not buying that cutting and clever Luann was just so dazzled and bewildered by the legal talk, she just made a mistake and she had NO IDEA she was screwing over her kids. Sorry, I don't buy it.

And funny how we just don't have all the info but apparently we know for a fact that Noel and Victoria are doing this not because its a huge amount of money but you know, because they selfishly want a house on the beach and don't want their mom to sell because they want to continue to have the social standing of having a house in the Hamptons and not the lesser Catskills. Maybe, instead of being selfish shallow greedy monsters (which is possible) Noel and Victoria are genuinely pissed off and devastated that this is how little they matter to their mom. 

[jumper sage]

6 hours ago, Happy Camper said:

If I were Lu, I would repost this photo with the caption "This is NOT my martini glass, YOU FUCKING BITCH"

Why would she call her own daughter a FUCKING BITCH?  She has done enough damage by being in this lawsuit.  One does not run to a rehab if one could sit down with the kids, the ex, and attorneys and say, "I screwed up, I am so sorry, let's fix this....................".

My opinion is this:  When you are a parent you are a parent forever.  It is up to you to set the example.

29 minutes ago, Rap541 said:

Maybe, instead of being selfish shallow greedy monsters (which is possible) Noel and Victoria are genuinely pissed off and devastated that this is how little they matter to their mom. 

Absolutely!  I don't care if it was $5, their father made it clear his half of that house was to be put in trust for the kids.  She is lucky he thought enough to let her keep the house for the family use.  He could have forced a sale and took his half and then put it into a trust.  He trusted her and she blew it.  I don't get the whole threatening the kids/ex this summer.  She must be at rock bottom.

[AnnA]

8 minutes ago, jumper sage said:

 

 

 I don't get the whole threatening the kids/ex this summer.  She must be at rock bottom.

When did LuAnn threaten her kids/ex?

[hoodooznoodooz]

1 hour ago, AnnA said:

When did LuAnn threaten her kids/ex?

See below. It’s in the complaint, I think. 

12 hours ago, jumper sage said:

I absolutely agree with you.

@smores - I am reading the document.  If you look at paragraph 15 it says that the trust will terminate in September 2016 when Noel turns thirty.  That can't be right.

Paragraph 27 is interesting too.  I think @breezy424 was discussing this.

Paragraph 29 begins with [July 11, 2018 defendant threatened plantiffs............] Not a good paragraph at all, hooboy.

Paragraphs 45 - 49 outline the agreement and the problem and says Luann being the Trustee was derelict in her duties - Hooboy, judges DO NOT like trustees who do not follow the rules.  My brother was the trustee for our mother's estate and the attorneys made a small error and he was called on the carpet by the judge.  It was up to him to point out any errors on the attorney's part.

Paragraph 53 defendant enriched herself - Yikes.

This is a great read.

When this first surfaced, I thought Lu was just lazy and saw no need to address the trust in a timely manner. But it’s looking more and more like she’s been depleting their funds. 

How horrible for Victoria and Noel to realize just how selfish and greedy their mother is. 

[smores]

12 hours ago, jumper sage said:

I absolutely agree with you.

@smores - I am reading the document.  If you look at paragraph 15 it says that the trust will terminate in September 2016 when Noel turns thirty.  That can't be right.

Paragraph 27 is interesting too.  I think @breezy424 was discussing this.

Paragraph 29 begins with [July 11, 2018 defendant threatened plantiffs............] Not a good paragraph at all, hooboy.

Paragraphs 45 - 49 outline the agreement and the problem and says Luann being the Trustee was derelict in her duties - Hooboy, judges DO NOT like trustees who do not follow the rules.  My brother was the trustee for our mother's estate and the attorneys made a small error and he was called on the carpet by the judge.  It was up to him to point out any errors on the attorney's part.

Paragraph 53 defendant enriched herself - Yikes.

This is a great read.

To me it looks like Luann got her rich husband and then got screwed but still was paid out nicely at the divorce.  She was entrusted to retain assets for her minor children and then converted them for herself and probably thought her loving children would just stand by.  Good for the ex for stepping up and going after her.  It looks like this has been going on for quite some time and it came to a head when she threatened the kids in July of this year.  They are rich by blood she was only by marriage.  You just know the ex paid every cent of their expenses, no questions asked.

When I was a kid we lived in a war zone.  My mom left my dad and he paid any amount of money to not have to deal with us kids.  He didn't even get his own attorney.  He agreed to everything and even paid my mom child support and our expenses directly each Friday (if you are on support through the courts you can get weeks behind) He even paid 100% of our expenses and gave her grocery money too.  It seems he did not like us running down the 7 houses to his house to raid his steaks and such.  Ha ha ha.

It looks like the 2016 is a typo.  Noel would be 30 in 2026, and in the doc it has (sic) after it, so I think someone just accidentally put the wrong year in there.  

[hoodooznoodooz]

4 minutes ago, smores said:

It looks like the 2016 is a typo.  Noel would be 30 in 2026, and in the doc it has (sic) after it, so I think someone just accidentally put the wrong year in there.  

No one proofread this. I think in the first paragraph it says Alexandre de Lessep. 

[AnnA]

2 hours ago, hoodooznoodooz said:

See below. It’s in the complaint, I think. 

Thank you

[jumper sage]

1 hour ago, hoodooznoodooz said:

No one proofread this. I think in the first paragraph it says Alexandre de Lessep. 

Her ex is Alexandre de Lesseps, her son is Noel Alexandre de Lesseps, her daughter is Victoria Diana de Lesseps.  These 3 are the plantiffs.  Her ex, the dad, has instigate the action because it arises from their divorce settlement.

1 hour ago, smores said:

It looks like the 2016 is a typo.  Noel would be 30 in 2026, and in the doc it has (sic) after it, so I think someone just accidentally put the wrong year in there.  

Definitely a typo.  In 2016 Noel turned 18.  Interesting mistake though.  I find it interesting that Wikipedia has already added the lawsuit to Alexandre de Lesseps page.

[biakbiak]

4 minutes ago, jumper sage said:

Her ex is Alexandre de Lesseps, her son is Noel Alexandre de Lesseps, her daughter is Victoria Diana de Lesseps.  These 3 are the plantiffs.  Her ex, the dad, has instigate the action because it arises from their divorce settlement.

The poster was noting that they forgot the S at the end of Alexendre’s name in the first paragraph of the document to illustrate that someone did a bad job proofreading.

[AnnA]

6 minutes ago, jumper sage said:

Her ex is Alexandre de Lesseps, her son is Noel Alexandre de Lesseps, her daughter is Victoria Diana de Lesseps.  These 3 are the plantiffs.  Her ex, the dad, has instigate the action because it arises from their divorce settlement.

Definitely a typo.  In 2016 Noel turned 18.  Interesting mistake though.  I find it interesting that Wikipedia has already added the lawsuit to Alexandre de Lesseps page.

Carole said she loves to mess with WIkipedia late at night.  

Wouldn't it be a hoot if she added the info on the lawsuit?

[hoodooznoodooz]

1 hour ago, jumper sage said:

Her ex is Alexandre de Lesseps, her son is Noel Alexandre de Lesseps, her daughter is Victoria Diana de Lesseps.  These 3 are the plantiffs.  Her ex, the dad, has instigate the action because it arises from their divorce settlement.

Definitely a typo.  In 2016 Noel turned 18.  Interesting mistake though.  I find it interesting that Wikipedia has already added the lawsuit to Alexandre de Lesseps page.

I meant that they omitted the final S in Lesseps.

[HunterHunted]

3 hours ago, smores said:

It looks like the 2016 is a typo.  Noel would be 30 in 2026, and in the doc it has (sic) after it, so I think someone just accidentally put the wrong year in there. 

3 hours ago, hoodooznoodooz said:

No one proofread this. I think in the first paragraph it says Alexandre de Lessep. 

1 hour ago, jumper sage said:

Her ex is Alexandre de Lesseps, her son is Noel Alexandre de Lesseps, her daughter is Victoria Diana de Lesseps.  These 3 are the plantiffs.  Her ex, the dad, has instigate the action because it arises from their divorce settlement.

 

 

1 hour ago, jumper sage said:

Definitely a typo.  In 2016 Noel turned 18.  Interesting mistake though.  I find it interesting that Wikipedia has already added the lawsuit to Alexandre de Lesseps page.

 

1 hour ago, biakbiak said:

The poster was noting that they forgot the S at the end of Alexendre’s name in the first paragraph of the document to illustrate that someone did a bad job proofreading.

 

Pleadings can be amended. I don't think there was enough wrong with the initial complaint to be detrimental to the cause of action.

[hoodooznoodooz]

2 hours ago, biakbiak said:

The poster was noting that they forgot the S at the end of Alexendre’s name in the first paragraph of the document to illustrate that someone did a bad job proofreading.

Thank you, @biakbiak. I used to proofread at a law firm, so this offended me on so many levels. ? 

[UsernameFatigue]

On 7/17/2018 at 2:09 PM, jaync said:

CDAN called it months ago...

(Luann was revealed as the answer today.)

Can you post what this refers to? I can't find a blind item that relates to this. It is interesting though that someone obviously knew what was going on three months ago - I am just wondering who?
But in the end I don't have a lot of sympathy for Lu. Maybe because she reminds me of my husband's ex who has stolen from her kids, her parents, her ex, among others. She is a narcissist who doesn't have a maternal bone in her body, and she and Luann are very much alike. Charming, charismatic, and ultimately only in love with themselves. 

[hoodooznoodooz]

25 minutes ago, UsernameFatigue said:

Can you post what this refers to? I can't find a blind item that relates to this. It is interesting though that someone obviously knew what was going on three months ago - I am just wondering who?
But in the end I don't have a lot of sympathy for Lu. Maybe because she reminds me of my husband's ex who has stolen from her kids, her parents, her ex, among others. She is a narcissist who doesn't have a maternal bone in her body, and she and Luann are very much alike. Charming, charismatic, and ultimately only in love with themselves. 

Can you see the quote in jaync’s post?

April 12, 2018

This loooooong time A list reality star all of you know has been raiding the trust funds of her kids to maintain her standard of living.

Edited July 19, 2018 by hoodooznoodooz

[snarts]

Vulture's review of Luann's cabaret show  Interesting that the count & kids were also there that night. 

[UsernameFatigue]

1 hour ago, hoodooznoodooz said:

Can you see the quote in jaync’s post?

April 12, 2018

This loooooong time A list reality star all of you know has been raiding the trust funds of her kids to maintain her standard of living.

Yes, and I am still confused. Who is CDAN who called it? I thought if I googled the quote I may get clarification but no such luck. Also went back to April 12th on this thread but nothing that refers to it. So sorry, I sill am wondering where it came from. 

[jumper sage]

3 hours ago, hoodooznoodooz said:

I meant that they omitted the final S in Lesseps.

Oh, I didn't catch that myself.  Good thing I am not a proofreader.

[hoodooznoodooz]

15 minutes ago, UsernameFatigue said:

Yes, and I am still confused. Who is CDAN who called it? I thought if I googled the quote I may get clarification but no such luck. Also went back to April 12th on this thread but nothing that refers to it. So sorry, I sill am wondering where it came from. 

Crazy Days and Nights. 

[Happy Camper]

18 hours ago, jumper sage said:

Why would she call her own daughter a FUCKING BITCH?  She has done enough damage by being in this lawsuit.  One does not run to a rehab if one could sit down with the kids, the ex, and attorneys and say, "I screwed up, I am so sorry, let's fix this....................".

My opinion is this:  When you are a parent you are a parent forever.  It is up to you to set the example.

Absolutely!  I don't care if it was $5, their father made it clear his half of that house was to be put in trust for the kids.  She is lucky he thought enough to let her keep the house for the family use.  He could have forced a sale and took his half and then put it into a trust.  He trusted her and she blew it.  I don't get the whole threatening the kids/ex this summer.  She must be at rock bottom.

I guess if you don't watch RHOC, you may not get it. It was not directed toward her daughter. It was a joke based on a funny Shannon/ Kelly moment.

[zenme]

On 7/15/2018 at 9:34 AM, Taralightner said:

 And, while married, Lu never worried about a penny- when shopping Victoria asks how much a dress costs and Lu says, “well that doesn’t matter so much.” So, I’m sure there’s enough money, just don’t know how it compares to the Morgan fortune. 

Hmm. Victoria must've asked that question for a reason.  Lu's response was for the cameras?

[jumper sage]

4 hours ago, Happy Camper said:

I guess if you don't watch RHOC, you may not get it. It was not directed toward her daughter. It was a joke based on a funny Shannon/ Kelly moment.

I don't watch RHOC.

[Happy Camper]

6 minutes ago, jumper sage said:

I don't watch RHOC.

Now I understand why my comments were misunderstood. 

:-)

[AnnA]

14 hours ago, hoodooznoodooz said:

Crazy Days and Nights. 

I didn't get CDAN either and I still don't.

[hoodooznoodooz]

57 minutes ago, AnnA said:

I didn't get CDAN either and I still don't.

Sorry. I don’t understand. Please clarify, and I will try to help you out, AnnA. (love your palindrome!)

[OnceSane]

1 hour ago, AnnA said:

I didn't get CDAN either and I still don't.

It's an acronym for the gossip site.

CDAN=Crazy Days And Nights.

[UsernameFatigue]

1 hour ago, AnnA said:

I didn't get CDAN either and I still don't.

CDAN stands for Crazy Days and Nights, which I did not know but hoodooznoodooz clarified for me. If you google Crazy Days and Nights you will see it is a site that posts many blind items and eventually posts who the item is referring to. On April 12th they posted a blind item about a HW who was stealing from her kids' trust to fund her lifestyle. They just revealed that the item was about Lu.

I would love to know how they knew this, and why it took the count and the kids filing a lawsuit three months later for it to become public knowledge. 

[Mindthinkr]

Google AGC Blinds. Hit the July 2018 option and you’ll get all the gossip.  Then when you go back to it and hit Updates it automatically takes you to the CDAN updates. 

[hoodooznoodooz]

3 minutes ago, UsernameFatigue said:

CDAN stands for Crazy Days and Nights, which I did not know but hoodooznoodooz clarified for me. If you google Crazy Days and Nights you will see it is a site that posts many blind items and eventually posts who the item is referring to. On April 12th they posted a blind item about a HW who was stealing from her kids' trust to fund her lifestyle. They just revealed that the item was about Lu.

I would love to know how they knew this, and why it took the count and the kids filing a lawsuit three months later for it to become public knowledge. 

Right? I am gobsmacked that they could know something as private as this. Was Lu doing this and confiding in someone? It boggles my mind!

[bosawks]

Since Lu wasn't at the reunion to explain "Rehab! Part Deux", what's the over/under on how long it will take her to blame Ramona's group selfie as the origin story for her return?

[biakbiak]

4 minutes ago, bosawks said:

Since Lu wasn't at the reunion to explain "Rehab! Part Deux", what's the over/under on how long it will take her to blame Ramona's group selfie as the origin story for her return?

That doesn’t seem like something she would do given that it was in January and it would go against her entire narrative of the past six months.

[HunterHunted]

36 minutes ago, hoodooznoodooz said:

Right? I am gobsmacked that they could know something as private as this. Was Lu doing this and confiding in someone? It boggles my mind!

Or her kids might have let it slip. She put the house on the market in June. It usually takes a little while to get a place ready for sale. She might have been talking to realtors as early as April. At which point, the kids might have started having discussions with her about the trust.