"So do I."
We sat quietly.
Four million dollars was an extraordinary amount of money.
It would change my financial position.
It would allow me to expand my business, protect my family's future, and support projects I'd once considered impossible.
But I didn't feel the excitement I'd imagined a person should feel after receiving such a payment.
The money was compensation for a loss.
Not a prize.
And I would've returned every dollar if it meant walking into the garage and finding the Phoenix waiting beneath its cover.
The insurer's payment didn't erase the responsibility of the parties involved.
The company pursued recovery from responsible third parties through the applicable legal process and insurance arrangements.
Premier Recovery and Disposal faced substantial claims arising from its handling of the unauthorized job.
The HOA's former president faced separate personal exposure connected to the destruction and disputed documents.
The association's own responsibility required examination of whether the president acted within any actual or apparent authority and how the available insurance applied.
The negotiations were complicated.
No one simply handed the HOA a bill and demanded that innocent homeowners pay four million dollars by Friday.
The relevant insurers, attorneys, and parties addressed the claims through formal proceedings and settlement discussions.
The association's new board cooperated with the investigation and sought to protect its homeowners from unnecessary financial consequences.
Premier's owner acknowledged serious failures in the company's verification procedures and eventually agreed to corrective measures as part of the resolution of the business's responsibilities.
The former president continued disputing aspects of the case.
But the available evidence limited the explanations she could credibly offer.
The unauthorized disposal form.
The urgent instruction to crush the vehicle.
The preservation supervisor's objections.
The teenage neighbor's recording.
And the official appraisal completed before the destruction.
Together, those records told a story no one could reasonably reduce to a disagreement about neighborhood appearance.
The criminal case involving the disputed authorization progressed separately.
Investigators examined the electronic records, witness statements, and forensic findings concerning the document that purported to contain my consent.
The former president had the opportunity to challenge the evidence and respond through counsel.
Eventually, the matter reached a negotiated resolution in which she accepted responsibility for specified wrongdoing connected to the false authorization and destruction, with penalties and restitution obligations determined through the applicable legal process.
It wasn't the theatrical courtroom scene some neighbors expected.
There was no dramatic moment where a judge discovered the vehicle was worth four million dollars and immediately sentenced her based on the price.