Roof repair and water leak

I live in a condo assocation that is not run by a management. Over the summer, I had roof repairs done, and water entered into the closet downstairs causing mold. I showed the president the receipt, "repair roof leak and flash around chimney". I then requested he come over and look at the mold in the closet. He said I was still responsible get rid of the mold, even though this was caused by a roof leak. I turned this went to small claims court, and the president transferred my case to Civil court since he is denying my allegations. I also had water damage in the garage where the drywall is falling off, and I had a building inspector for the damage in the garage. I got a report back saying the attic is not properly ventilated, and that vents need to be installed on the roof for proper air-flow, and that is what is causing drywall failure in my garage. The president of the board is saying I am responsible for fixing the problems in my condo. That is why I am sueing the board. Who is right, or wrong?

The homeowners assocation got billed for the roof repairs. We are not responsible for the common areas, they are. I showed the bylaws to a lawyer, and he said I have two options against them. I can send a certified letter to their lawyer asking to cover the expenses of the damages I have in here, or drop the suit and start all over again. The lawyer I spoke with also lives in a condo assocation and does not understand why they are giving me a hard time. I was also thinking of sending that inspection to the city building commissionar on the major defaults I have in my garage. I do not understand why I should be responsible for the damage in the garage, or the mold and drywall I had removed in the condo. I cannot replace the drywall in the garage (and some are still falling off), or sell the place until I get it fixed.

I definately have all the photos, all the receipts, the date of when they fixed the repairs. I did work with the board member and requested he come over and look at the mold. I further went to a meeting and showed him the receipt on when the roof leak and flash around chimney was repaired and he told me I couldn't prove it was a roof leak. I kept the drywall with the water stains on it from the garage for further evidence, and when I showed the lawyer the photos, he could see water stains around the installation inside the drywall where it had to be cut out. Depends on the suit, I might have a case, or not.

Would you rather live in a moldy home or one you had fixed? You can cure the mold problem with a water and bleach solution sprayed on your walls and repaint. Some company's may have you rip out the dry wall altogether and replace. However, a quick and easy solution is to apply the bleach. NOT all mold is bad mold or toxic.

Honestly, I think your better off fixing the issue than suing. The inside of your walls may be your responsibility. Plus this is more of an insurance claim against the HOA than a lawsuit. A lawsuit may just get paid out of the HOA's insurance anyways.

Suing your HOA is suing yourself and your neighbors...You want to pursue this then understand the ramifications and costs of pursuing. Is it a "Peric victory" or just something that happens in life?

All this sounds contrary to what I have heard and read. Our bylaws state the interiors are the owner's responsibility and I believe the Adam Kessler website has a reference to this thing which states that the interior is homeowner responsibility too. More importantly, the homeowner is required to carry HO6 insurance if he has a mortgage that is overseen by Fannie Mae, right?

I agree with you, and hence the requirement to spell out requirement of HO6 insurance by each homeowner in the governing documents. However, the fact stands that if the governing docs spell out that interiors are not covered, then it's hard to help the homeowner without causing a precedent of the same. If the governing docs do not spell anything, then doesn't the Davis-Stirling take effect which also requires that the homeowner is responsible for his/her own interiors (?).

Janet,

Your response is an excellent example why old threads should not be reactivated.

The original thread was indeed from an individual in Ohio. That post was made in November 2006

Then in February 2012, Sara reactivated the thread with a similar issue.

Unfortunately, especially when over 5 years has passed between the initial post and the reactivation, people respond to the thread and may make comments to old advice based on newer laws. This can make the whole thread difficult to read, understand and follow.

John, Robert and Melissa were replying to Sara's posting.

Tim