ChristineP1
(South Carolina)
Posts:12
 |
| 06/16/2008 11:35 AM |
|
| Our ARB meetings are closed and the minutes are always posted months later. We just received March. By the time we found out about a pool being placed beyond the width of the home it was already done. By the time we found out we had a guest house it was 3/4 completed. (Covenant states 1 small accessory building not accessory dwelling building. No fence, playground equipment, etc may be placed beyond the width of the home.) The pool is on the side of the home with a fence. What options do we as homeowners have to have the construction corrected? Our board says it done........ Our ARB gave approval...... |
|
|
|
|
KirkW1
(Texas)
Posts:1110
|
| 06/16/2008 12:53 PM |
|
Your first step should be to read through your governing documents. Chances are the ARB meetings are supposed to be open. Failing that, then check state laws. Many state laws also require open meetings. Not that either of these will always get a board to open up, but it should.
Then you have two additional routes in which you can take. The more costly is to file a suit to force the meetings to open up. The other is to start getting support from your neighbors that these meetings need to open up. Get enough support and you can replace board members with ones who will open up the meetings. If the will is strong enough, you can recall your Board of Directors. Just be sure the ones who are elected will make things better. |
|
|
|
|
BrianB
(California)
Posts:1731
|
| 06/16/2008 1:35 PM |
|
as homeowners, you could file suit against the HOA and get a court judgement to enforce the covenants, and have the HOA pay the owners for redoing their construction. It will be expensive.
Then, the HOA could take the ARB and the Board members personally to court, and try to get a judgement against them for personal liability, and force them to pay the cost of the construction "re-do" rather than the HOA.
both options are expensive, and have lots of legal costs.
|
|
|
|
|
BradP
(Kansas)
Posts:1742
|
| 06/16/2008 2:18 PM |
|
Christine:
Ok...I am assuming the ARB is a committee...all committees serve at the pleasure of the board and the board is responsible for oversight of these committees. If when you say the meetings were closed was the board there or was it just committee members?
In my mind your Board needs to take responsibility for this committee and reign them in. If the board is part of the problem then the membership needs to look at procedures for recalling and replacing the board members.
As for the two structures that are built and were approved...My advice would be to let them go and learn a valuable lesson as a community. I see no good reason to waste even more association money in a legal battle.... |
|
|
|
|
ChristineP1
(South Carolina)
Posts:12
|
| 06/18/2008 2:38 PM |
|
| Can the breaking of the covenant have a legal impact to the association? I thought the covenants were your legal, binding constituion. How can you legally go against what was filed in court even if the ARB erred in granting approval. |
|
|
|
|
SusanW1
(Michigan)
Posts:2114
|
| 06/18/2008 3:41 PM |
|
Why do you say the committee "errored"?
They either have the power to grant variances, or they do not.
They did - now you need to know WHY.
These meetings should be open to all residents, especially if it concerns a variance request that impacts other homes. |
|
|
|
|
ChristineP1
(South Carolina)
Posts:12
|
| 06/19/2008 7:02 AM |
|
The ARB Board has approval for small property line easements but no power against the covenants. The guest house is not allowed in our file court documents of covenants but hence they gave approval. They also granted a pool being placed past the width of the home along with fencing and our guidelines states everything is to remain behind the home.
|
|
|
|
|
ChristineP1
(South Carolina)
Posts:12
|
| 06/19/2008 7:05 AM |
|
| BOD members were not present and they were not involving themselves with what the ARB was granting. They just removed the president and keep telling us it's done. By removing the president are they not admitting to error. |
|
|
|
|
SusanW1
(Michigan)
Posts:2114
|
| 06/19/2008 9:12 AM |
|
You are going to have to get in front of the Board and ask for a complete report as to why this was allowed to happen. Someone has to be accountable for the decisions made. Insist on copies of any minutes taken in Committee OR the Board regarding this decision. Get onm the angenda to speak. Don't be confrontational, just ask for the information.
Do the CCRs specifically discuss pool dimensions, guest houses, and lot lines? Perhaps the committee thought that this decision was within it power.
This is a slippery slope to be on: guest houses for mother-in-law or grandchildren and a large pool are what the retirees want now. Better decide NOW what you want the entire HOA to look like in the next 5 years!
|
|
|
|
|
ChristineP1
(South Carolina)
Posts:12
|
| 06/19/2008 9:22 AM |
|
| Thanks so very much for your inpt. We are 80% built out w/444 sites. Many have been turned down for guest homes. All pools are located behind the homes except for this one. Residents have met with 2 members of the board not wishing to involve the entire community at that time trying to fina a resolution that would be good for the community. We waited for the monthly meeting and nothing was ever said. When asked to the Pres after the meeting have you consulted with the attorney on these issues. NO and I am not it's done stop before you become hated in the community. Our next step is to present it at the next meeting or to call for a meeting. We feel bad about the construction but we don't want this to be a problem with another issue in the future. To us our BOD has sanctioned the construction as water under the bridge. |
|
|
|
|
MaryA1
(Arizona)
Posts:2156
|
| 06/19/2008 11:13 AM |
|
Christine,
In your last msg you said the s/d is 80% built. Are you still under declarant control? If so, that might be why the A/C guidelines are not being followed. Oftentimes the builder will allow all sorts of things to be done that is in direct conflict with the gov. docs. Their main goal is to please their customers! |
|
|
|
|
ChristineP1
(South Carolina)
Posts:12
|
| 06/19/2008 11:17 AM |
|
| No this community was established in 1985 and the current lots are all owned by individual. Several lots have sold by individual owners for over $800,000. |
|
|
|
|
TonyM3
(Arizona)
Posts:131
|
| 06/19/2008 11:30 AM |
|
| I'd be cheaper to change the docs to reflect what the community really wants. That is to use their entire lot, not just the back. |
|
|
|
|
DonnaS
(Tennessee)
Posts:2791
|
| 06/19/2008 11:42 AM |
|
Christine,
This is one of those nagging situations that someone, usually a committee or a Developer, has caused by their not being able to read or interpret documents, or they chose not to. Now the gates are open and you cannot change what has been done. To force this homeowner to change structures that are already done, would force the Association into litigation, very very expensive litigation. I think that almost all Judges would force a negotion to resolve this.
What can you do? Probably the least painful for the members, Board, the homeowner and the committee would be to modify or change the building requirements thru an amendment change and hope that it gets adopted in.
But I would put your ARC on notice. Being a committee member on this particular committee is very important and it' decisions reflect on the judgement of the Board if they cannot follow the guidelines of the documents. |
|
|
|
|