Transparency in Community Associations

It's been quite the busy year so far, so I apologize my blog posts have been few and far between.  Trying to make a difference in Florida community associations is a major task, but comes with some rewards. Our firm was again a winner of the Florida Community Association Journal's Readers' Choice Awards.

The topic for today's blog is transparency.  Transparency is a good thing.  Associations should recognize if they want their members to pay their assessments on time, keep their property maintained and volunteer to help the community, then transparency is the place to start.  The Florida Legislature has started pushing for this with the recent legislative updates to the Condominium Act, Chapter 718, Florida Statutes, by requiring condominium associations with 150 units or more to have a website and post a good number of the official records on the website.  This statute has not been enacted in Chapter 720 governing homeowner associations, but maybe we will see this in the future.

Some of the biggest complaints I hear from homeowners are about transparency --  the HOA will not provide them copies of the records, the records are not easily obtained, the HOA is hiding something.  Now I will be the first to admit this is a red flag for me and I suspect something fishy is going on with the money if the HOA is fighting too hard to keep the members from seeing the financials.  I also recognize some board members do not understand their duties, do not know what records to keep or how to keep them, which records can be disclosed and not disclosed, or how to set up a website to store the documents so members can see them without going through the certified letter, return receipt process.  Those are the HOAs I am eager to represent so I can train their board members on the right protocol.  

The homeowners need to understand the HOA has no duty to respond to a request to send copies to them.  There is a duty to provide access to the official records and allow the members to make copies at the inspection.  

Often this request makes even honest board members suspicious.  It's only natural to get defensive when a request is received and perceived as an attempt to catch you doing something wrong.  And board members make mistakes while homeowners tend to accuse them of intentional wrong-doing.  If everyone would just be respectful of each other and act in a civil manner a good number of these disputes would not even be disputes.

My advice is:

• HOAs put your official records on a website if possible or set up one of the free software applications like Google Docs or Dropbox to share documents with members.  Not only is it easier, but it takes out the possibility of confrontations if one side just can't be civil and respectful.

• Homeowners use the certified letter, return receipt in order to obtain access to records so that you document your request and everyone knows the deadline (10 business days from the date the receipt is signed).  Also, make your request clear and if possible exact.  Asking for "all official records" is your legal right, but it is creates some difficulties because the HOA may have boxes and boxes of records which you will have to go through and may be required to pay for a management person to assist in going through with you.  In addition, it comes across as a fishing expedition and like all fishing trips, you may have to keep casting lots of times before you get the fish you want.  If you are looking for a specific financial transaction, narrow down the description of your request.

• HOAs remember you cannot ask the homeowner why they want the document.

• Everyone keep in mind the HOA does not have to produce a document it does not have.  This means no creating special reports if the reports are not used in the normal course of running the HOA.  If there is a document the HOA should have and can reasonably obtain it without any undue hardship, then the HOA should get it after the first request so it is available should a second request be made for that document.

The Marketable Record Title Act ("MRTA")

There's been lots of discussions regarding the Marketable Record Title Act ("MRTA") lately with some of the most back and forth discussions coming from the Real Property, Probate and Trust Law ("RPPTL") section of the Florida Bar.  This piece of legislation is very complicated and it is nothing short of amazing how different facts can produce different legal opinions. 

Recently Chapter 720 of the Florida Statutes, also known as the Homeowners' Association Act ("the Act"), was revised to provide for a more expeditious process to file a Notice of Preservation.  The Notice of Preservation is done before the covenants expire against any lots, which is usually the 30th anniversary of the date the covenants were recorded.  Note the word "usually."  I'll get back to that later.

The Act also contains a section for revitalization of expired covenants, which is a whole different process from preservation.  Once covenants have expired against any lot a homeowners' association is left with only revitalization to try and breathe new life into the old covenants.

The hard part for most non-lawyers to understand is covenants can expire against just one lot, but not all the lots.  It's not as simple as saying the covenants are 30 years old and because no Notice of Preservation was filed, they cease to exist.  Covenants can be preserved in a number of ways, including a reference on a recorded plat by the Official Records Book and Page.  Covenants recorded on a plat in such a way do not expire which is why I used the word "usually" with caution.

Covenants can also be preserved in the chain of title to a lot by the recording of a deed which references the covenants by the Official Records Book and Page within the last 30 years.  This is why a title search is necessary before an opinion can be rendered whether or not the covenants expired against that particular lot.  

Once covenants have expired against a lot the HOA cannot enforce those covenants against that lot or usually cannot collect assessments from that owner. There's that pesky word "usually" again.  The exception to this rule regarding the collection of assessments would be very fact specific and based on a theory of unjust enrichment.  An example would be when an association owns the roads and the lot owner uses those roads to get to and from their home.  It would be unfair for the owner to use the roads but not be required to contribute to the repair and maintenance of those roads, which is called unjust enrichment.  The court would have to make such a determination based on the facts specific to that lot.

Fighting Over Your Lawn and the Florida Friendly Landscaping Statute

We frequently hear about disputes with homeowners who are fighting with their association ("HOA") over their right to Florida-Friendly Landscaping ("FFL").  For those of you who are going "what?," several years ago Florida passed several laws to help conserve water and reduce the amount of chemicals applied to landscaping as an initiative to save our aquifers.  The motto of the program is "right plant, right place."  Florida tends to go through cycles of droughts, so having a yard which is 90% St. Augustine grass is not always feasible or environmentally friendly.  This grass is hard to grow in sandy soils and can require watering up to four times a week during the summer.  It also is less tolerant to disease and pests than some of the other alternatives.  For more information on FFL, go to www.floridayards.org.

The purpose of this blog is discuss the litigation aspect of exercising your right to FFL.  Chapter 720 of the Florida Statutes provides a homeowners association may not prohibit a homeowner from implementing FFL.  This does not mean the homeowner can just rip out the St. Augustine grass and proceed with new landscaping.  If the Declarations of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Declarations" or "CCRs") require approval for landscaping changes, then the homeowner must fill out the application and get approval.

The biggest obstacle to implementing FFL is there are some bad, bad associations out there who know most homeowners are not going to spend their life savings and three or more  years of fighting over their grass.  There is no way to estimate how much a case will cost because you never know what the other party is going to do or how aggressive they will fight.  Staying in a case all the way through trial could cost $100,000 or more.  If the homeowner wins, they are entitled to their reasonable attorneys' fees (not 100%), but if they lose they are on the hook to reimburse the association its reasonable attorneys' fees.  Not many people are willing to take this risk or spend the money, especially over grass, so like so many other association disputes, the homeowner backs down.  There are no state agencies to hold the associations accountable, so they get away with breaking the law.

Homeowners sometimes will start litigating, but halfway through they have a change of heart, run out of money, or worse yet, face some type of personal crisis (divorce, death, health issues).  The problem is they have to decide if they can stick it out or pay the association its attorneys' fees.

Stress is another big challenge to defending your right to FFL.  Just like all litigation, it's an emotional rollercoaster.  There are wins and losses in the battle to the finish line.  Sometimes the stress is overwhelming.

So what's the solution?  Better legislation.  That's no easy task!  Until the Florida Legislature decides to put in a monetary penalty enforceable by a state agency into the FFL statutes, we are at the mercy of the Board of Directors of the associations.  There are a number of good associations out there which embrace FFL.  Your homework, if you want FFL, is to talk to your board and write your legislators!  Now get out there and save the planet!

HOA Reform Bill -- Please show your support

You can view the bill in its entirety at:

http://www.hoareformbill.net/PB16SB1122OR.pdf

It is sponsored by Senator Alan Hays.

My Email Regarding HOA Reform Bill and Affordable Legal Representation

I wrote this to Senator Alan Hayes, House Representative Mike La Rosa, Florida Bar President Ramon Abadin and my friend, Jan Bergemann of Cyber Citizens for Justice (www.ccfj.net):

Gentleman,

I am writing to you today, as an attorney who represents both homeowners’ associations and homeowners who are being victimized by their associations. The HOA Reform bill is critical at this point and comes at a time when the president of the Florida Bar, Mr. Ramón Abadin, has pointed out, in the November issue of the Florida Bar Journal, the need for a new business model because the working class cannot afford an attorney and do not qualify for legal aid.  I see this injustice every day in my practice as I have to tell clients the high legal fees and costs they would incur to hire me to protect them from being another HOA victim.  These cases are not the type that are done on a contingency because rarely has someone been physically injured.  I turned down at least one case a day, sometimes as many as five.  Yesterday it was three.   Most firms won’t represent the homeowners because the associations are a “cash cow.” 

The homeowners’ associations are unregulated and the condominium associations have limited regulation with the Dept. of Business and Professional Regulation (“DBPR”) not having jurisdiction over assessments, which is the biggest source of abuse for homeowners.  Even the appellate courts, in a case called Ocean Two Condo. v Kliger, where the Court stated “Because of the statutory lien rights and the power to prosecute the foreclosure action, an association and its attorneys have ample leverage, and the unit owners have very little. Every telephone call, meeting, or hearing regarding the genesis of the dispute and the amount due produces an incremental unit of attorney billings, and every day until resolution of the dispute increases the interest tariff.” 

In my practice I have witnesses law firms that have paralegals do all the work, yet the homeowners are billed attorneys’ fees, not paralegal fees.  I have witnessed a law firm give sales pitches to associations during hiring interviews and state that “95% of the homeowners can’t afford to sue you and the 5% that can will soon learn that money can be used for a vacation, their children’s college, or retirement and will give up.”  Unfortunately, this is true.  I have seen a law firm give homeowners a letter stating they could not call or come to their office to resolve their assessment delinquency, but could fax their credit card or email and then are given the email address of a former staff member.  Once I got involved the charges ballooned from $795 to over $3,600 with the attorney telling me he had to read all those emails the owner sent trying to get a response.  This is outrageous and had I not gotten involved he would have forced the homeowner to pay those ridiculous legal fees.

The industry not only needs more regulation, but more affordable legal representation. Let’s give DBPR jurisdiction to arbitrate assessment disputes.  This is the biggest source of abuse.  Arbitration is less expensive for the homeowner and the threat of arbitration might help tamper the abuse.

Regulation of the homeowners’ associations is needed to help curtail the abuse of out of control board members.

Right now there is a rise in homeowners’ associations setting up their own corporations to perform work normally performed by vendors.   This results in the board of directors putting their family members on the board of these corporations as paid directors, if not themselves in some cases; the board members receiving free services, the members being denied access to see accounting records of these corporations even though their assessments paid to set up this corporation and bought any equipment, furniture or other assets.  Several times I have witnesses where these corporations are either owned or operated by a board member or have contracts with a board member.  Some associations set up these companies to operate a receivership or rental program to take control of homes in foreclosure, which is needed, but instead funnel the rental income to themselves or the corporation without the association getting a dime.

There is also a rise in the community association management firms setting up their own corporations to perform work normally performed by vendors.  These corporations are then paid top dollar and paid promptly with no one given a chance to dispute an invoice.

There is a rise in the number of cases in which deed restrictions have expired under the Marketable Record Title Act but the HOAs continue to operate as mandatory associations and threaten to foreclose on owners who refuse to pay because they know the chances of the owner affording an attorney are slim.

I have witnessed board members targeting homeowners they do not like.  This targeting sometimes includes criminal activity, which is hard to prove.  Any witnesses refuse to get involved because they know they will be targeted.

The Village Condominium Association in Orlando was taken over by a board member who slowly was able to get rid of anyone who did not agree with him and then proceeded to give himself the management contract, the security contract (with armed security despite not having the proper licenses), and the maintenance contract.  This board member marked all the board members’ assessments as paid each month despite no payment.  He was able to take approximately $40,000 a month from the association (which we documented), depleted the reserves and diverted money from insurance claims to his own pocket. A receiver was eventually appointed to take over and the board removed.

I could write a book on the atrocities committed against homeowners, including cars being set fire, fake bombs on lawns, handicapped owners in wheelchairs being refused to attend meetings and harassed, racial discrimination, sex discrimination, discrimination against veterans.  I have witnessed homeowners being evicted from their homes for past due assessments when their home was in a trust and the association demands the rent be paid to them from the “tenant.”  And let’s not forget the Higgins v. Timber Springs case in which Mr. Higgins was foreclosed upon while on active duty in the military.  Our firm was able to get the foreclosure reversed.  We took the case pro bono, one of the few we could afford to handle as a small firm, because Mr. Higgins could not afford an attorney and was trying to deal with this situation while deployed. 

The sad part is when I have to give these homeowners a quote of the fees to litigate they decide it’s easier to sell their home and move, sometimes to another state.

I apologize this email is so long, because I know your time is valuable, but I appreciate the efforts each of you are making in trying to protect the rights of our citizens.  So many of them lose their homes, not because they can’t afford them, but because they upset their HOA, became a victim, and cannot afford an attorney.  Thank you!

Regards,

Barbara Billiot Stage, Esq.

Fines Authorized by Statute?

The great debate:  Can the HOA fine if the governing documents do not authorize it but Fla. Stat. 720.305(2) establishes procedures for fining? 

Many community association lawyers and community association managers say yes.

My answer is no despite many of my colleagues disagreeing with me. The statute starts out "The association may levy reasonable fines of up to $100 per violation....." which my colleagues have interpreted to mean the association has a statutory right to levy fines. 

My argument is the Florida Constitution prohibits retroactive application of a statute to change an existing contract (Declarations, bylaws and articles of incorporation are contracts) as reinforced by Cohn v. The Grand Condominium. Additionally, S&T Anchorage v. Lewis held an association cannot act in any way not authorized by its governing documents. The exception to the retroactive application is statutes which are public policy (such as the Florida Friendly Landscaping Act), statutes which are remedial or curative (the recall statute) and statutes which are procedural. The fining statute is procedural, but the part that would allow for a statutory right to fine is not nor was it a public policy statute. 

From Haven Fed. Savings and Loan v. Kirian: “Substantive law has been defined as that part of the law which creates, defines, and regulates rights, or that part of the law which courts are established to administer. It includes those rules and principles which fix and declare the primary rights of individuals with respect towards their persons and property. On the other hand, practice and procedure 'encompass the course, form, manner, means, method, mode, order, process or steps by which a party enforces substantive rights or obtains redress for their invasion. 'Practice and procedure' may be described as the machinery of the judicial process as opposed to the product thereof." It is the method of conducting litigation involving rights and corresponding defenses.” 

My colleagues disagree and until an appellate court rules on the subject we will not know who is right. Does your HOA want to foot the bill for an appellate case to figure this out? My suggestion is err on the side of caution.

Correct Mailing Address is Critical to Association Living!

Questions about past due assessments, collection fees and liens almost always include a statement the inquirer did not receive notice.  Not having your correct mailing address on file with the association puts the liability on you. Just like not signing for the certified letter is on you and the association will receive it back marked "UNCLAIMED."

If you are going to dispute any charges, here is my advice:

Pay off the lien first and then bring a separate action for recovery of any fees if the association violated your due process rights. Never risk the loss of your property to prove a point or fight over improper fees.

Hire a HOA/condo lawyer  to audit the fees and bring any possible action.  You need someone who is experienced not only in this area of the law, but the industry practices.

Tenants Attending HOA Meetings!

A common question I run into involves HOAs and condo associations (COAs) denying tenants attendance at meetings.  This is a big mistake for the associations.

The problem started with revisions to the Florida Statutes. Years ago Chapter 720 (HOAs) and Chapter 718 (COAs) used to provide rights for the members or "their authorized representatives" to attend meetings.  Over the years revisions to the statutes removed that language and the HOAs now erroneously believe they can ban non-owners from meetings.

This thinking runs afoul of the Fair Housing Act because Fla. Stat. 720.305(1) requires members, their tenants, guests and invitees to all comply with the governing documents and Chapter 720.  The FHA requires associations to provide those governed by the HOA access to attend meetings

HOA Rant

There is a great article posted on CyberCitizens for Justice yesterday.  It's a rant from Lindsey Nesmith in an article she wrote which printed in the Florida Weekly.  My hat is off to Ms. Nesmith for saying the obvious, but what many of us are afraid to say.

You can read the article at:  http://www.ccfj.net/HOARANT.html

How An Association Can Get Into Trouble Over Assessments - BOARD MEMBERS PAY ATTENTION!

With the volatile economy more and more associations are changing property management firms and law firms, but there are some problems which can arise and the association would probably be on the losing end of litigation.

Many owners contact me because their associations have made these changes and now they are unable to pay their assessments because the information regarding where to send payments is not timely distributed to the members.  When a member's check or electronic payment is returned, this is a refusal of a tendered payment, which is not permitted by Florida law.  Should the association attempt to lien and foreclose, the member not only has a valid defense, but could also bring a counter claim for breach of contract.

It is imperative for associations to notify their members immediately of any changes to make sure payments are not being rejected.

Pre-Suit Mediation or Not?

A homeowner asked the question on www.avvo.com if moving from the community would mean he no longer needed to provide his HOA with an offer of pre-suit mediation.

Moving would not circumvent the pre-suit mediation requirement because the suit would, I assume, be based on acts that occurred while you were a homeowner.  Pre-suit mediation is not just for homeowners either.  It covers members, vendors, invitees, licensees, and guests.


Not all disputes require pre-suit mediation.  FS 720.311(2)(a) provides:

Disputes between an association and a parcel owner regarding use of or changes to the parcel or the common areas and other covenant enforcement disputes, disputes regarding amendments to the association documents, disputes regarding meetings of the board and committees appointed by the board, membership meetings not including election meetings, and access to the official records of the association shall be the subject of a demand for presuit mediation served by an aggrieved party before the dispute is filed in court.

A dispute over a financial obligation or enforcement of a settlement agreement are not subject to pre-suit mediation.  Also, any dispute in which a party seeks an emergency injunction is not subject to pre-suit mediation.  It is important to note that what you may think is an emergency is usually not one in the eyes of the court.

I don't recommend going to pre-suit mediation without a lawyer.  The HOAs usually have veteran lawyers who are very good at bulldozing over unrepresented parties.

Revitalization Question

Today I answered a question on www.avvo.com regarding the revitalization process and I think it is important to post the question and my response in this blog for those who do not or have not visited the Avvo website.

Question:

Our HOA's CC&R's have expired and an attempt is being made to revitalize the Declaration. In the interim, I am told we are a voluntary association and a not-for-profit corporation governed under FS617. 

Can the previous Board simply "take over" the corporation and run it without ratification by the owners? There is no confidence in the current Board and their continuing possession of documents, control over Management Company and bank accounts is regarded as hostile. Do owner/shareholders have a right to reorganize under any law?

Response: 

Here's a crash course on the Marketable Record Title Act (MRTA) and revitalization process governed by Fla. Stat. 720.403 - 720.407: 

1. It is possible for the Declarations to be valid against some lots, but not all. The Declarations can be preserved by being specifically referenced in a deed by the Official Record Book and Page Number or by reference to a plat that has the deed restrictions recorded on the plat. An analysis of each lot is required to determine if the deed restrictions have been extinguished by MRTA against that lot because the last reference is more than 30 years old. 

2. Revitalization can be used to breathe new life into the Declarations if they have ceased to govern one or more lots. 

3. The Declarations have no force and effect against those lots where the deed restrictions have expired and there is no duty to obey the restrictions or pay assessments. If the Declarations are revitalized they are not retroactive -- meaning the HOA cannot go back and collect assessments for the period of time between expiration and revitalization. 

4. It takes at least a majority of the homeowners to approve revitalization. It could be more if the Declarations require more than a simple majority to approve amendments to the Declarations. 

5. Revitalization is a very strict process which requires the HOA to appoint an organizing committee and to have a court reporter present at a meeting to vote on revitalization. While written consents can be used to gather the votes, if the bylaws and articles of incorporation do not provide for written consent the HOA is required to hold a meeting so homeowners can vote in person or by proxy (if proxies are allowed). 

6. If revitalization is approved by the homeowners the HOA has to apply to the Dept. of Economic Opportunity (DEO) for revitalization and, if granted by DEO, re-record the Declarations, index them against each lot and deliver a copy of the revitalized Declarations to each homeowner. The revitalized Declarations cannot be more restrictive than the original Declarations, although there are a few exceptions in the statute. 

To answer your question, in the interim the HOA still has bylaws and articles of incorporation which must be honored, including having elections and annual meetings. 

The revitalization statute was recorded in 2004. My opinion is this statute presents a constitutional issue on property rights and contract impairment for anyone who purchased their property before the statute was enacted. Statutes cannot be applied retroactively to change existing contracts and the Declarations, bylaws and articles are contracts between the HOA and the homeowner. This issue has not, to my knowledge, been litigated. 

If you feel your HOA is not following the procedures for revitalization properly you should consult with a HOA lawyer for an opinion. If revitalization is granted by DEO and you feel the HOA did not follow the procedures in the statute and any requirements in the Declarations, bylaws and articles (which is required by the revitalization statute), you have a very short period of time to petition DEO for an administrative hearing to challenge the revitalization.

I'm Back....And the Topic Today is Conducting Board Business in HOAs & COAs

It has been a while since my last blog.  I attribute this to the summer peak in business.  I don't know if it's the hot weather, adults dealing with children home from school for a couple of months, or the people from the North leaving the state and not being around to keep an eye on their association, but business is always brisk in the summer with associations behaving badly.

The topic for today is a change in the law stipulating to how board members can conduct board business. It is one I think will generate more litigation because board members can discuss board business by email and leave the homeowners out of the discussions. A new provision in the Florida Statutes allows board members to conduct and discuss board business through email, but any voting must be done at a meeting.  What we are now seeing is board meetings that last 15 minutes and under because the board members walk in and sit down, make a motion to vote on a topic, second the motion, vote and done.  Homeowners are not even aware of what the issues are much less get a chance to speak on the matter.

I recently read meeting minutes where the board voted to approve a contract with XYZ Landscaping.  No mention of two other bids or voting to see which landscaping company they should vote on -- it was already a done deal and they were just ratifying their decision. What does it matter anyway, right? With no state agency regulating HOAs there is no penalty for cheating unless the homeowner has deep pockets to sue.

HOA Emergency Powers - Legislative Update FS 720.316

There is trouble brewing on the horizon and it doesn't come from a hurricane, but the effects will be felt after a hurricane or some other natural disaster passes through.  I'm talking about the provisions in House Bill 807, which is now state law (FS 720.316) effective July 1, 2014, which give homeowner associations emergency powers in case of a natural disaster.  Those powers include levying special assessments, borrow money or pledge assets as collateral without a vote of the membership.  You want to know why I think it's a bad idea? Subsection (2) of the law states the authority granted in subsection (1), which I stated above, is "limited to that time reasonably necessary...."  Any time you see the word "reasonable" in a statute it will take a judge, at least two lawyers and close to $200,000 or more in legal fees and expenses to determine what is "reasonable."

Why would the Florida Legislature think giving HOAs a free pass on this is a good idea?  Do they really think life in a HOA is perfect for most people and all will be okay? These are the same people who could not get a bill passed to allow for a state agency to regulate HOAs -- they should know giving them more power will only add to the corruption and abuse that goes on in an unregulated industry.  My only guess is someone spiked the refreshments on Capitol Hill. This is why my friend, Jan Bergemann of CyberCitizens for Justice, thinks the HOA statute is the "Attorney Employment Act."  It will surely keep me busy for years to come.  

Let's revisit this after a hurricane hits Florida.  I would like any HOA or member of a HOA hit by a hurricane to let me know how this new law worked out for you.  Please prove me wrong.

And speaking of new laws....we now have a challenge under the Florida Constitution for retroactive application of a new law to an existing contract.  The law doesn't say it is intended to be applied to existing associations.  In the section authorizing special assessments, it comes slightly close. In subsection (1)(j) with "Notwithstanding a provision to the contrary, and regardless of whether such authority does not specifically appear in the declarations..."  Wait a minute -- the first part says the HOA can't do it if there is a provision in the association documents prohibiting it, but the part after the comma says the HOA can regardless of what's in the governing documents!  More billable hours for all attorneys! 

This one really disappoints me......

HOAs - Don't Mess with the Disabled!!!

It's that time of year when all the community association law firms start blogging about the legislative updates to the Florida Statutes that will be enacted July 1, 2014.  It's interesting to read the various blogs because they always include what the writer interprets the meaning of the new statute will be and, if you read more than one blog, you get a more than one interpretation (flag on the play -- litigation imminent!).

Here's one that should be real clear and I credit John and Kim Whitt for standing firm and seeking justice. They proposed to our elected leaders to add two words to Fla. Stat. 720.303(2), which requires meetings to be open to all members. Those two words "and accessible" make a world of difference to people like John who is confined to a wheelchair.  Common sense and compassion for other human beings would lead you to think this is not necessary; after all, the Fair Housing Act requires HOAs to provide reasonable accommodations for those who request it in order to attend meetings. Well, no one goes around accusing HOA board members of using common sense with any regularity.  In fact, all I hear all day is about conduct that is not only senseless, but unreasonable, offensive, insensitive and ruthless.  But I digress.  While those two words didn't make it into the statute, a version of it did:  "A meeting of the board must be held at a location that is accessible to a physically handicapped person if requested by a physically

handicapped person who has a right to attend the meeting."

This was no simple task and I congratulate the Whitts and our political leaders for accomplishing this. At this point I bet you're wondering what led to this.  I am here to tell their story -- the real story.  Not some version with a spin on it to make the people think it was an innocent mistake.

John and Kim Whitt are wonderful people.  They are nice people.  They are not troublemakers.  When they bought their home in 2009 in a beautiful, rural community in Pasco County life for them changed. The community is comprised of 45 or so well-kept spacious homes on spacious lots, many of which are adjacent to wetlands.  Everyone's dream home, right?  The Whitts were eager to be involved in the community and to get to know their neighbors.  One obstacle faced them.  The HOA held it's meetings, as it did for a number of years, in a vacant lot with a cattle grate, livestock fence and extremely soft soil.  The meetings are held in a far back corner under trees with roots that made it impossible and still make it impossible for John to attend the meetings.  John asked the board if the meetings, not all, but at least some, could be held somewhere so he could attend and even offered his house.  He was refused.  A former board member, who is a contractor, offered to install a concrete pad a no charge to accommodate John's request.  The board voted against this. Of course in their version they offered to install the concrete pad and John refused, but that's just the usual HOA spin on facts to try and get people to believe they meant well.  John even offered the HOA to remove him from membership and the deed restrictions so the HOA would not have to comply. It's not like he was going to start a pig farm at his beautiful home.  Pig farms are prohibited by zoning ordinances in this area, but more on that later.  The HOA spins the tale the Whitts never wanted to be part of the community and when their request to be excused was denied they resorted to pushing the access to meetings as the issue.

Here we are five years later. The Whitts sued the HOA, but lost. I won't rant about that until I'm ready to relinquish my license to practice law.  The former board member/contractor and two other couples who own homes in the community sued the HOA because the deed restrictions had expired while the Whitts were litigating and were not properly amended to extend them.  They won on summary judgment.  No HOA.  The HOA is appealing, but going through the revitalization process as the same time. They are promoting revitalization by claiming if the deed restrictions are not revitalized they will be a community with pig farms.  I don't think any of the owners have a pot-bellied pig, much less a pig farm, which is illegal in this particular area anyway.  On top of that, the HOA has held the Whitts out in ill will to the neighbors every chance they get, blaming them for the high legal fees they incurred with a huge unpaid balance.  No one really knows what that balance is because not only will they not show the owners the amount due and the balance changes frequently.  If they think the HOA won, how come they owe so much money in legal fees?  

The Whitts may have lost the case, but evidently a lot of people, including members of the Florida Legislature and some decent people in their community, thought they shouldn't.  They were successful in getting the statute amended despite the HOA attorney saying they wanted to create the "Homeowners Association with Disabilities Act."  They have suffered for it.  Homeowners in their community who do not even know them despise them based on the tale the HOA spins about this -- a HOA that has been ruled to not have deed restrictions.  

And just for giggles -- the HOA now claims it is still a mandatory association without deed restrictions because the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws are still valid.  

Covenant Violations and the Fining Process - What Your Rights Are as a Homeowner

This is the time of year where our firm gets a lot of calls about covenant violations, mostly lawns that took a beating during the winter months.  The Florida climate, which goes from almost freezing to tropical in a 24-hour period, tends to be harsh on lawns, but I digress.  That's a blog about Florida-Friendly Landscaping.

There are several things the homeowner should know about the fining process because if you know what the law provides, it is less likely you will be taken advantage of by your HOA.  Remember -- knowledge is power.

A board of directors cannot impose a fine against a homeowner.  The HOA is required to have a committee of at least three (3) members, who are independent and are no relation to the board of directors, the property manager, officers, agents or employees of the HOA.  The committee should be comprised of an odd number to avoid a tie vote.  The odd number of members is industry standard and not part of the statute.  The committee has to agree by a majority vote to impose a fine, which cannot be retroactive, and the board of directors cannot override the vote to impose a fine, but can override the vote to withhold a fine being imposed.

The HOA is required to give the homeowner notice of a hearing to be held to vote on the fines.  The HOA is required to give the owner at least 14 days notice. Now here's where many HOAs get it wrong.  The statute, Fla. Stat. 720.305(2)(b) states "A fine or suspension may not be imposed without at least 14 days’ notice to the person sought to be fined or suspended...."  The statute does not say mailed at least 14 days in advance, IT REQUIRES THE NOTICE TO BE GIVEN TO THE OWNER AT LEAST 14 DAYS IN ADVANCE.

The statute also provides this is a hearing, not a meeting.  The HOA should not be noticing the hearing to the membership to attend as a lynch mob.  Hearings do not require notice.  The only people that should be present are the homeowners, the committee and if the HOA is going to present the case to the committee, a representative of the HOA.  This is usually the property manager or a board member.  The representative of the HOA should not be sitting in on deliberations and voting by the committee.  This would prevent the committee from making an independent decision.

If you find yourself in front of the committee, bring a recorder.  You have the right to do so, although the committee will probably say you don't.  Even board meetings are cut short and adjourned because board members tend to think you have no statutory right to record meetings.

You are entitled to obtain a copy of the minutes from the hearing.  The committee should create minutes and record the vote, listing the vote of each committee member.

If a fine is imposed, you should pay it and then challenge the decision.   Never risk your home.  If you pay the fine, the risk to your home is removed and you can challenge the decision without worrying about losing your home to a foreclosure.  Unpaid fines in excess of $1,000 can be the source of a lien and foreclosure.

Now, off topic, if you have one of those troublesome lawns that doesn't thrive no matter what you try to do to save it (you know, those St. Augustine lawns), then look into Florida-Friendly Landscaping (FFL).  You still have to submit an application to the ARC or ACC or whatever your HOA calls it, but by law the HOA cannot prohibit you from implementing FFL.  Check out the website by the University of Florida's IFAS extension at floridayards.org. 

As far as other violations go, please do not make improvements to your home without filing the ARC/ACC application and please do not store boats, trailers, RVs, 4-wheelers, jet skis and other recreational items on your property.  These are the biggest sources of fines in HOAs.

Associations -- There is a Better Way!

It's no secret I have been an advocate for homeowners embroiled in disputes with their associations.  I originally went to law school to practice employment law.  I changed directions when I bought my home in a HOA and my welcome to the neighborhood consisted of a volley of "f-bombs" from someone claiming to be the HOA president.

In the past couple of years I have changed direction in my practice of community association law.  Not only did I realize individual owners suing an association is difficult for my clients, both emotionally and financially, but creates a hostile environment for everyone that often lingers even after the dispute is resolved. I now focus my attention on representing the associations.  I figure I can make a difference by helping associations proactively avoid litigation rather than helping the owners litigate.  Not all disputes can avoid litigation. There will always be those one or two homeowners in every community that will be stubborn or even aggressive and want to fight, but litigation should be a last resort.

Let's face it -- if your association has a bad reputation it will affect property values and the resale of homes. Desirable associations attract home buyers.

The ingredients for a good association are education, communication, the right CAM and the right lawyer.

Most homeowners do not intentionally violate the covenants.  Just because the homeowner received a copy of the governing documents, doesn't mean they understand them.  If they did, most members who are past due in their assessments would realize the association can lien and foreclose on their home and would keep the assessments current.  I come across homeowners every day who believe if the bank is foreclosing the association cannot foreclose.  They are surprised when their homes are sold by the association with a bank foreclosure pending.

There is a simple fix to this.  The association should have a website the provisions of the governing documents can be explained, broken down in individual topics, and then promote this website regularly. Make sure new owners receive the web address right away.  Encourage members to review the website before undertaking improvements to property.  There are a number of services out there which help those technology-challenged individuals build a website.  If a website isn't feasible, create a newsletter!  Now you have education and communication!

Another point about communications -- confrontational notices do not work.  It is human nature to become defensive when being harshly reprimanded.  I believe the first notice to a homeowner should be a gentle reminder and an invitation to discuss the issue at a meeting if necessary.  The old saying "you catch more flies with honey" is true. You will get more owner cooperation if you acknowledge they either did not know better or forgot and have a chance to remedy the situation.  Threatening to send them to the association lawyer if they do not obey demands only ends up costing the association and owners more money for legal fees.

The right CAM is important.  Identifying the right CAM is not so easy and there is no one size fits all.  Some associations need the CAM to be very involved and some only need a CAM to collect assessments, pay bills and send out violation notices.  The right CAM will meet your expectations and work well with the association.  The wrong CAM will partner with the lawyer to increase billable hours for both of them by fueling disputes.  The wrong CAM will control the association funds and keep board members out of financial decisions.  The wrong CAM will make board decisions without the board members being involved. The wrong CAM will think it's their job to run the association, not the board.  

The same applies to the lawyers.  The right lawyer will answer the board's questions and encourage the resolution of disputes early.  The wrong lawyer will lead the board to believe they have the ultimate power and cannot lose a dispute. The wrong lawyer will bully and abuse homeowners.

Associations should be proactive when dealing with violations and collections.  Identify the problem areas and work on them proactively.  Make sure your owners know not paying assessments means they risk losing their home and usually quickly.  Let them know the association doesn't want their home, but has a duty to collect assessments from everyone.  Let them know financial hardship is not a defense the courts will entertain.  Offer a payment plan to help out those who are already past due, but be aware that if the association lawyer handles the payment there are outrageous fees to set it up and process payments.  The association can facilitate the payment plan so it stands a better chance of success.  If your association has authority to impose fines, make sure the members know about the process and don't try to rig it by appointing members to the fining committee who are friends and supporters of the board or biased against the owner.  Make it a fair hearing before the fining committee or the association will most likely end up in litigation.  Make sure all members are aware of the process for applying for approval to implement improvements to their property.  Communicate on a regular basis those items that require approval as well as those that do not.  

There is a better way to have an association and not make everyone in it miserable.  It's not easy because most members of the association don't care to be involved or hear about it, but it is possible.

Community Association Managers (CAMs)

Laws Regulating CAMs

Fla. Stat. 468.431 requires a CAM to be licensed when "the association served contains more than 10 units or have an annual budget or budgets in excess of $100,000." The management firm is required to have a license as well. CAMs are limited in what duties they can perform by statute as well as an advisory opinion issued by the Florida Supreme Court. 

The advisory opinion has designated activities which would constitute the unlicensed practice of law, such as drafting amendments to documents, drafting proxies, preparing liens, advising anyone how the law applies to a set of facts or circumstances, interpreting statutes, administrative code, the governing documents of an association or contracts, drafting contracts or drafting legal notices. CAMs are licensed and regulated by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation ("DBPR"). Effective July 1, 2013 laws were enacted to create more regulation of CAMs and penalties for violating the regulations. A CAM can be subject to penalties for any violation of Chapters 718, 719 and 720 of the Florida Statutes.

But the Real Problem Is.....

There seems to be a rise in the number of complaints I hear from associations who state their CAM who make decisions without consulting the Board of Directors ("BOD") or take actions against homeowners without BOD approval. I frequently come across liens and foreclosures for trivial amounts against homes which the BOD will claim they did not authorize. I often expect the BOD is not being honest and is throwing the CAM under the bus, but there have been some instances I have investigated where the lien or foreclosure is not in any meeting minutes and the CAM made the decision on their own. I have heard from several associations the CAM handles all the finances, including which bills to pay and when. I have even come across associations claiming the CAM will not let them have access to the association funds. Even more troubling is when the CAM is making board decisions without input from the BOD. The courts have judicially dissolved associations which delegate the board duties to a CAM. It rarely happens, but has happened. Or worse yet, the court can appoint a receiver, which makes assessments skyrocket. Board members need to know their fiduciary duty is to operate and manage the association, including making financial decisions and signing checks. If no one is watching the checkbook except for the person who gets paid regularly with checks, you are not doing your duty! Don't get me wrong -- there are some wonderful CAMs out there, but the BOD should know what their CAM is doing because the association is responsible for the CAMs actions.

Single Biggest Mistake Is.....

Whenever there is a turnover of board members due to an election or other events, the CAMs are naturally concerned because the new BOD can terminate their contract. All too often I come across CAMs who will continue to work with the former BOD to try and oust the new BOD. I have seen CAMs sabotage records and meetings and provide former board members with privileged documents. I have seen CAMs try to circumvent the election process. Associations need to know if their CAM is engaging in this behavior the association needs to replace the CAM because the potential risk of litigation against the association is high in these situations.

Conclusion

Board members need to communicate with their CAMs at the slightest hint of these problems. Sometimes the BOD is sending mixed signals and the CAM needs clear instructions. Anytime there is a change in board members, the board should meet with the CAM to discuss expectations. If something does happen, the board should provide the CAM with a letter outlining the situation and an opportunity to cure the situation. The BOD-CAM relationship is supposed to be a partnership and not a battle of egos.