Get 2 months of free community web site hosting from Community123.com!
Saturday, November 25, 2017
Get 2 months of free community web site hosting from Community123.com!


SBCA: Free education for HOAs and condos on satellite placement issues.
(National Trade Organization)
Helping HOAs, condos and property managers with satellite placement issues since 1986.
Only members have access to all features.
Click here to join HOATalk for Free! Members click here to login and access all features.
Subject: CC&R Enforcement across ownership change
Prev Next
Please login to post a reply (click Member Login on the menu).
Author Messages
StevenF
(Arizona)

Posts:1


04/14/2007 2:28 PM  
Mr. A owned in home in our community and violated Architectural restrictions. This existed for several years and he never received a notice from the HOA. The home was sold to Mr. B who lived there for over a year. Mr. B was served a notice of the violation and asked to correct the problem. Mr. B claimed the notice was not enforceable since the situation existed for for several years, no notice had been given to the previous owner, he had not been enformed prior to closing, and over a year had elapsed before he was noticed. The community is in Arizona. Does Mr. B have a valid reason for ignoring the violation notice? Can the HOA force Mr. B to make the changes? Does anyone have a reference into Arizona (or some other state) case law?
BradD2
(Florida)

Posts:418


04/14/2007 5:33 PM  
They can take it to court but I believe a judge would side with Home Owner B. In situations where things are not explicitely stated in a contract (what this is) a judge looks at what is reasonable. A judge might say that they can sight Home Owner A, but not B as B did not do the work. A judge might say that due to a lack of notification it was approved by default (this would be based on when the HOA learned of the change). Roger should be able to tell you about grandfathering and several other members can speak of AZ law specifically.
MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:6789


04/15/2007 1:07 AM  
Most likely if the original violation was NOT taken care of in the first 30 days to up to a year,(depending on CC&R's) then nothing can be done. Homeowner B is NOT responsible for homeowner A's mistake. Unfornately the HOA does NOT get a second shot in fixing these issues when a new owner takes over. They may inform the new owner that something isn't right and it's NOT been approved but can NOT force them to correct it. In other words, the new owner can keep the violation but not "improve" upon it. They can remove it at their cost if they choose so just to make peace.
We had a home that someone painted "Torquise". Our color scheme is muted pastel colors NOT the bold torquise blue the home had on it. The paint itself was done well but the color is very outstanding. Unfornately, the ACC committee years ago did send notice and confronted the owner about their illegal choice. However, the owner cussed the ONLY ACC member out, and the ACC member quit immediately. Leaving no one in charge of the ACC for a few years. The house eventually sold. The new owner didn't change the color since the paint is still good. I told the new owner that the paint color on their home doesn't match the approved color. I can't force them to change it, but if they need to paint, they will have to get another color approved. Paint colors have to be approved prior to painting each time anyways. So far, the owner's have just "touched up" and the paint still looks good. It just sticks out like sore thumb.

Former HOA President
BruceH2
(Tennessee)

Posts:10


04/15/2007 2:43 AM  
Unfortunately that is what happens when the CCR's are not consistently enforced. If you don't enforce them, they become unenforceable. If you do enfore them, you are the bad guy.
WilliamT
(Arizona)

Posts:489


04/15/2007 5:50 AM  
CC&R's do not become enforceable if they aren't enforced.

This association, according to the original poster, had never sent the seller a notice of violation, therefore, they may not be able to force the buyer to make the change. But then again, they may. It may depend on whether the HOA knew of the violation. If they violation was not noticed until the house was sold, then it is possible that the HOA can go after the buyer, and then the buyer could sue the seller for not disclosing that he had violated an HOA restriction.

The thing to do is to consult with an HOA attorney.

It only costs a filing fee to go to small claims court, and there can be no attorneys (in Arizona). So there is no a huge legal bill. Neither the loser or the winner can appeal the court's decision.

If the HOA chose to go to small claims court, it would be well advised to really know the law, have proper documents, and spend a lot of time preparing to present a cohesive case to the judge in 5 minutes.

If the court awards a judgement, then the buyer would have to make the changes, or the association can go back to the court and the judge would force the buyer to comply, or would hold him in contempt of court, which if continues, can amount to jail sentence.

A lein is not a judgement. A judgement is the decision handed down by a judge. A lein is an encumbrance on the title of a property and a buyer would not close escrow, and a lender would not lend money on a property with an outstanding lein. So the lein just prevents the property from being sold until the lein is cleared.

Because in AZ a fine cannot become a lein on a property, here is what can happen if a homeowner continues to violate a covenant, and the association is reluctant to go to court.

The association can continue to fine the homeowner and let the bills pile up. They can send the homeowner a letter informing them that they are considering the option of going to court to get a decision.

The violation and fines becomes a permanent part of the record for that property. When the buyer attempts to sell the home, AZ law requires the seller, if the HOA has fewer than 50 homes, to deliver the HOA governing documents along with a disclosure of any violations the HOA has against the home. If the HOA has greater than 50 homes, they must notify the HOA as soon as they sign the sale contract and the HOA within 10 days must deliver this information to the buyer.

If there is a violation and/or fines against the home, the seller must disclose this. If the real estate agent becomes aware of any violations, and according to Real Estate law here, they need to ask questions, then the RE agent must inform the seller in writing that they must disclose.

So when the house goes up for sale, all the HOA has to do is send a letter to the listing broker informing him/her that there is a deed restriction violation against the home. The listing broker then required by AZ law to inform the seller in writing that this violation must be disclosed. And all of this must take place within a 10 day period, so that will happen long before it's time to close escrow.

The buyer will not close escrow, and the lender will not lend until the violation is cleared. The seller is stuck now and must clear the violation or lose the sale.

If this slipped by the HOA and they didn't know the house was being sold, or the management company forgot to place the notice of violation in the documents, and the house closed, the HOA can force the buyer to comply, and the buyer could sue the seller for not disclosing. The buyer may have a case against the listing and selling real estate brokers also.

The key here is for the HOA to keep writing letters trying to collect from the violating homeowner and be prepared to send that notice of violation to the listing broker when the house is up for sale.

How long can the HOA delay withot going to court? Courts abhor inaction. However, an HOA is not required to take the small claims route where there is no legal expense. And they may deem it not financially prudent to spend the HOA funds in legal fees when they cannot know if they will win. So they could have a very good reason for not suing, and making the election to sit tight until the homeowner decides to sell.

The information I'm sharing here is current. I've been in a real estate sales class recently and this very example was discussed during a class on the disclosure requirements for sellers and real estate agents.

However, I still recommend that this be discussed with an HOA attorney to see what they say about it.
WilliamT
(Arizona)

Posts:489


04/15/2007 5:59 AM  
Posted By BruceH2 on 04/15/2007 2:43 AM
Unfortunately that is what happens when the CCR's are not consistently enforced. If you don't enforce them, they become unenforceable. If you do enfore them, you are the bad guy.




CC&R's do not become unenforceable if not consistantly enforced. Only a judge can say that a covenant is unenforceable and that would be if it is unreasonable in the eye of the judge.

What can happen if they are not enforced consistantly is that the board can be sued for being negligent in their duties.

Consider that you are only the bad guy in the eyes of the few violators. The silent majority is happy that they are being enforced. Since the enforcement of CC&R's is the key to having a good neighborhood as opposed to a junky one, if they are not enforced and the community deterioates the silent majority may become the vocal majority and when that happens, the negligent board is in real trouble. If they're lucky they will just get recalled. If the owners feel the board, by their negligence have caused their property values to decline, then they can sue, and may win.


CharlesW1
(Georgia)

Posts:826


04/15/2007 6:04 AM  
Posted By BruceH2 on 04/15/2007 2:43 AM
Unfortunately that is what happens when the CCR's are not consistently enforced. If you don't enforce them, they become unenforceable. If you do enfore them, you are the bad guy.






BruceH2,

I can certainly agree with you on that statement.
This is my first year as a board member and for several years I have lived in this community and had noticed violations on a daily basis.

I felt that nothing was being done or (now found out) these violators were ignoring the violation notices mailed by our PM, not doing anything to comply! I felt as if the board, PM were just making “scare tatics”

Too make a LOOOOOOOOONG story short. The current board of which, I’m the vice President, has and will continue to enforce all governing documents and we are not being liked at all.

I hear this from most of the homeowners that are found in violation. “I’ve been doing that for years, now you are going to tell me I’m in violation of our governing documents?” Or “why am I being fined and so and so isn’t?” I'm sure you have heard a lot of these yourself? How about this one?

I couldn’t believe my ears, when he said, in court, that he didn’t know that he and his wife had resided in an HOA, nor did he know that there were yearly HOA assessments.” It was rather humorous, as I’m sure you can certainly imagine! LOL. Yet he admitted to the judge and too all that were present, that he and his wife lived in the community since 2001 (which he paid his assessments, not on time, but he did pay them acknowledging that they were living in a mandatory HOA.

The lien had expired several years ago, from which it had been filed, so the board paid another $75.00 and placed a second lien on his property to assure that we would at least collect “if” he had sold within the next four years. THIS HAD GONE ON LONG ENOUGH! We were expecting to collect a relatively large sum of money(several years of unpaid assessments,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007, late fees, interest, court cost, costs for filing the liens, etc) to the tune of roughly 3 or 4 grand. We paid ($150.00) fee to file suit, a few months ago. We of course won, but chances are we will never collect unless he sells!

Never the less, we certainly are making a name for ourselves, we would prefer it to be more positive (if you know what I mean) but it wouldn’t be so difficult if the previous boards would have enforced the governing documents, in the past years.

Chuck W.

Charles E. Wafer Jr.
WilliamT
(Arizona)

Posts:489


04/15/2007 6:10 AM  
I think it's important to remember that a deed restriction violation is against the property, and stays with the property. The owner of the property, whether he/she caused the violation or not, is responsible.

That's why an HOA can go against the new buyer and the buyer can sue the seller for not disclosing.

The strategy of the HOA not suing, and taking the path of continuing to send letters can be a powerful tool because of the disclosure laws.

Then if for some reason the disclosure doesn't get to the buyer in time, and the HOA has to go agaisnt the buyer, it forces the buyer to sue the seller. A buyer will have a much easier time suing and getting a judgment against a seller, and possibly the real estate brokers, for non disclosure than the HOA would.

Where it's possible that the HOA could lose in court just by being in front of a judge who happens to be anti HOA's, a judge is not going to be sympathetic with a seller for not disclosing a material fact such as a deed restriction violation.

Even if the judge were to think that the deed restriction was not valid, the seller still broke the law by not disclosing, and that is what the judge would have to rule on. He can not rule on the legality of the deed restriction because that's not what the seller is being sued for. The seller is being sued for non-disclosure of a violation of the deed by the HOA.

The HOA completely avoids the litigation this way.

But again, legal advice is suggested.
MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:6789


04/15/2007 8:41 AM  
This isn't a matter of disclosing. Since the previous owner was NEVER given notice they were in violation. No proof that the previous owner was ever given a notice means there is NOTHING to disclose to the new owner. You can NOT make the new owner responsible for the old owners mistakes. That is why it is VERY true that if you don't enforce a CC&R's in the timely manner the CC&R's dictate, you can NOT go back!
This is also true if the previous owner owed money or were behind in dues. The HOA can NOT force the new owner to pay what the previous owner owed. If the HOA did not put a lien on the property prior to the sale, then they are out the money. I've heard of HOA's trying this tactic before and they get in big trouble for it. Which means ALL the owners get in trouble.
A HOA is NOT a separate "entity". It is YOU and your neighbors. So please stop treating it like a "They" situation. YOU have a say in what is going on as well. YOUR vote put the board into office. If YOU did NOT vote, then you are responsible for NOT participating and getting what you get. A non-participator in their HOA is just as bad as a bad decision made by their HOA board.
Sorry went off in a tangent there... Just get soo frustrated when people forget that the HOA is run by HOMEOWNER's and NOT judges, lawyer, real estate agents, or a relative of a owner....

Former HOA President
WilliamT
(Arizona)

Posts:489


04/15/2007 9:33 AM  
Actually it is a matter of disclosure. And a very serious matter of the Arizona real estate law of disclosure.

An HOA in most cases is a non-profit corporation.
It is administered to by a Board of Directors who make decisions based on their best judgement of the needs of the community.

The homeowners elect the directors and by a specified percentage may remove them from the board. They can even sue them if they feel they have been neglect in their duties and have caused damage to the community, or to individual homeowners.

The Directors and the Association are governed by Federal, State, and Local laws,(including the real estate disclosure laws) plus the Bylaws and CC&R's.

When a homeowner in an HOA sells his home in Arizona, the law requires that he disclose any material fact that would affect the buyers decision to purchase the home.

The homeowner is required by AZ law to comply with the deed restrictions. If the property is in violation of the deed restriction, that violation stays with the property. It does not disappear when the home is sold. The homeowner cannot plead that she was not aware of the violation, because she is assumed to know the deed restrictions that she agreed to when she purchased the home. She cannot plead that she had not received a notice from the HOA that she was in violation.

If the homeowner has violated a deed restriction and has been notified by the HOA that the property is in violation, that owner must disclose that fact to a buyer, or he is in violation of the AZ real estate disclosure law.

If the HOA is not aware and has not sent a notice, that does not excuse the violation. The homeowner is in violation, and they know it, so they must disclose, or the buyer can sue.

Once the house has closed escrow, the association has no further dealings with the seller and must deal with the new homeowner.

It does not matter if the association was aware of the violation at the time of sale. If the association becomes aware of the violation after the sale, they can require the new owner to comply. That's because the deed restriction is on the property and the violation is on the property, not the owners. If a buyer moves in with a property in violation, that new buyer is responsible. The violation does not disappear. The buyer may be required to comply, and can then sue the seller for non-disclosure.

Arizona real estate law requires a real estate sales agent to inform the owner/seller in writing of any fact that should be disclosed. AZ real estate law requires sales agents to ask questions to determine if there is something that must be disclosed. If they don't ask questions and something is not disclosed that should be, then the agent and broker can be liable.

If an HOA is aware of a violation and notifies the sales agent/broker than that broker is required by AZ law to notify the seller, in writing, that the violation must be disclosed.

It is not correct that if a violation is not corrected in a given amount of time that it disappears. There is no law in Arizona that states that.

These laws are available on the internet for anyone to read.

Collecting money from a new buyer that the seller owed is not the subject of my response. Any money the seller owes must be collected from the seller, not the buyer.

It is a property that is in violation of the deed restriction that I'm discussing. The violation stays with the property and the buyer is responsible. His recourse is with the seller for not disclosing.

Again, anyone in this situation should consult with an attorney to verify what I'm saying. I only share my knowledge or opinion of a subject. I do not give legal advice, nor do I advise anyone to take a specific action.
BradP
(Kansas)

Posts:2640


04/15/2007 9:44 AM  
OK, so Mr. A bought his home and like a good homeowner should have read all the deed restrictions and covenants and go with the property. To that extent it sounds like he never asked permission for the changes made and made changes against the property that were against those restrictions and as a good homeowner should know this. To say just because he didn't receive a notice means he didn't know he was in violation is a lame excuse. Depending on what you do most of us know what we can and can't do, we put it in our newsletter every time, you must ask permission, sooner or later they will see it.

To the point at hand, in theory they could go after Mr. B for the violations, and I think Mr. B could go after Mr. A for not disclosing to him that he did not ask for and have permission to do this. Remember...ignorance of the law is absolutely no excuse. Mr. A should have read his contract and not violated, and since he did violate it that should have been disclosed at selling. I don't want anyone to tell me he didn't know, unless they know Mr. A personally no one can say that.

However, I think the right thing would be to grant a variance or grandfather this change in, unless their attorney has a different opinion I would be surprised if it would stand much of a chance in court. But, not knowing what the change was, the dates and how it all went down all we can do is speculate.

We talk a lot on here about boards not enforcing stuff consistently. In my opinion when you buy the home it is your responsibility as a homeowner to read your contract and live up to it. Don't break it, claim ignorance and cry when you have incurred costs. And I disagree with you Melissa, an HOA is run by a Board of Directors that is voted on by the homeowners, the homeowners don't run it. Just like shareholders don't run a company, and residents of a city don't run a city and U.S. citizens don't run the US. We all vote on our representatives and it is their ideas and thoughts that often get pursued.
WilliamT
(Arizona)

Posts:489


04/15/2007 10:53 AM  


We paid ($150.00) fee to file suit, a few months ago. We of course won, but chances are we will never collect unless he sells!

Chuck W.


Chuck, you should check the language of the judgment and research your state laws.

In AZ when you win a financial judgment, it is a general judgment and you can go after the personal property of the loser, including a garnishment of wages, plus put the lein on the house. You are also entitled to your states legal interest on the amount owed you, and that amount is usually 10% annually. The interest either begins from the date owed, or the date of the judgment, I'm not sure which.

If the loser does not pay on the judgment you can probably take them back to court and the judge mwy hold them in contempt for violating the court order to pay.

Research your laws, or contact a collections attorney to find out.


MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:6789


04/15/2007 11:18 AM  
Charles is right that they may not collect for a very very very long time. Yes, there are time limits where the court judgement has to be paid which is about 7 -10 years AFTER the reward. Then if it isn't paid the HOA has to go back to court then. A lien can run for years and stay on the property until it is sold. A homeowner can simply rent that home out and never sell it.
I know from FIRST HAND experience that getting paid from a judgement is nearly impossible. I had a renter who didn't pay rent for 5 months. I had them evicted. I also went to court and won my judgment against them. However, the renter has never given a permanent address as to serve the paperwork. He's got a post office box which is NOT legal to deliver to. It has to be a mailbox at a residence. That's because the police/sheriff's department has to have PHYSICAL address in order to execute the seizures or papers. My renter doesn't use his mailbox and location changes constantly. I've also got to pay out $350 to collect the articles that are worth the amount he owes me. (A motorcycle or dump truck). Try collecting a motorcycle! (Even title companies don't try that).
A judgement does NOT mean immediately payment. It just means there is a court ruling that says that individual owes money. It ends up costing more money in trying to collect that money from the person owed than they may get back.
So Charles I can sympathize with you. I finally had to foreclose on one home due to 2 years back dues owed. That still didn't give us the money for almost a year and the money could have gone to the bank instead of us. We have liens that have been out there for almost 10 years!
Suing your HOA is suing yourself and your neighbors. So if your really want to pursue legal actions or collect dues, make sure everyone understands your using EVERYONE's money to do so. If they don't like using liens or foreclosures, then the board's hands are tied to do anything. Liens and foreclosures are the ONLY legal instruments available to collect money. (Lawsuits are NOT the best way to go. Person can sell property and move never to be seen again)

Former HOA President
BobA


Posts:0


04/15/2007 1:20 PM  
If your cc&r's state no outbuildings allowed (sheds) and the BOD did not enforce this when they recieved a complaint about one being put up, can they enforce this covenant on another homeowner? Wouldn't this be considered selective enforcement.
TracyT
(Maryland)

Posts:228


04/15/2007 2:19 PM  
Our CCR says something to effect that failure of one BOD to enforce is no way a waver for another BOD to so do. Also, in MD it is law to provide governing docs prior to contract acceptance - disclosure of rules. When you go to settlement the mortage company requires signature that you agree to abide the rules.

Mr. A may or may not have known he made a violation but the BOD never followed-up. How was Mr. B to know there was a problem at the time of contract/settlement? (other than he should have it picked this up during contract review). At this point Mr. B bought the home as offered and agreed on at contract.

Depending on what the violation is, you might tell Mr. B that when it is time for repair/replacement the improvement must be brought into compliance. Someone else mentioned grandfathering which might work or possibly have the docs changed.
WilliamT
(Arizona)

Posts:489


04/15/2007 3:31 PM  
Posted By BobA on 04/15/2007 1:20 PM
If your cc&r's state no outbuildings allowed (sheds) and the BOD did not enforce this when they recieved a complaint about one being put up, can they enforce this covenant on another homeowner? Wouldn't this be considered selective enforcement.




Do you know that the BOD did not enforce, or attempt to enforce, the violation?

Was the board trying to enforce but the owner kept refusing to comply?

Yes the BOD can enforce the covenant on another homeowner.

If they were being selective, then the other homeowner could take legal action against the BOD.
WilliamT
(Arizona)

Posts:489


04/15/2007 3:42 PM  
Mr. A may or may not have known he made a violation but the BOD never followed-up. How was Mr. B to know there was a problem at the time of contract/settlement? (other than he should have it picked this up during contract review). At this point Mr. B bought the home as offered and agreed on at contract.

Depending on what the violation is, you might tell Mr. B that when it is time for repair/replacement the improvement must be brought into compliance. Someone else mentioned grandfathering which might work or possibly have the docs changed.


Mr. A is presumed to know that he was in violation because every homeowner is presumed to know what is in the deed restrictions. Ignorance of the restrictions is not a defense.

He cannot say "no one told me so I didn't know".

If no one told Mr B, then he may have no reason to suspect there was a violation. However, the violation stays with the deed and Mr. A becomes responsible. Mr. B is also supposed to read the Declaration prior to signing acceptance of the deed. The law would presume that he understood what he was supposed to read, and it would become incumbent on Mr. B to ask the question if the addition was in compliance. In AZ the real estate agent should also have asked if the building was in compliance.

The Association can go after the new owner, and the only recourse for Mr. B is to go after the seller, and if it's in AZ go after the listing sales agent and broker.

If the board wants to drop the issue they could vote to grandfather the unit without setting a precedent. However, this would send a messge to the rest of the community that they can use the same strategy and get away with it.
JM2
(Oregon)

Posts:439


04/16/2007 9:15 AM  
Hi Everybody:

There is something that most of you have not looked at; that is the opportunity for an Estoppel Certificate from the HOA. Chances are it's in your documents. It is simple a certification from the HOA that everything is in compliance. If I was selling a house in an HOA I would get one (many HOA's don't charge, and those that do, it's most likely minimal), and if I were buying a used home in an HOA I would definitely require one as a condition of the sale.

That said, the new owner signed on that he understood the HOA requirements when he purchased; which means that he should have been asking about any changes that didn't look like they conformed to the HOA docs, or asked about any changes made, did they have HOA approval?

Ultimately it's up to a judge to decide if it goes to court.

J. Patrick Moore, CMCA
BradP
(Kansas)

Posts:2640


04/16/2007 10:50 AM  
JM2,

Never heard of that before. Sounds like it should be in everyone's documents. I agree with you, don't plead ignorance, cause it can still land you in jail.
WilliamT
(Arizona)

Posts:489


04/16/2007 7:40 PM  
Posted By JM2 on 04/16/2007 9:15 AM

That said, the new owner signed on that he understood the HOA requirements when he purchased; which means that he should have been asking about any changes that didn't look like they conformed to the HOA docs, or asked about any changes made, did they have HOA approval?

J. Patrick Moore, CMCA




Unfortunately, most homeowners don't know to ask if something was approved by the HOA. That's why the AZ law places the ultimate responsility on the seller to disclose.

Something that all HOA's should consider:

If an HOA does not enforce a covenant on one or two people, and they enforce the same covenant on a third, then that is "selective enforcement", and that can be a defense in court. If a homeowner is being sued and can prove that his violation was enforced while similar violations were not, then the judge would most likely rule in the homeowner favor because an HOA is not allowed to selectively enforce a covenant. They must enforce it evenly among all residents.
JosephW
(Michigan)

Posts:882


04/16/2007 8:26 PM  
Tracy is probably correct. Most documents and some state laws state that the failure to enforce a provision of the documents in the past does not negate the ability of the association to enforce it in the present or the future. Because the documents run with the property they don't "lapse" if not enforced. Most court rulings I've sen back that.
The best way to handle this type of problem where a new board is going to enforce the documents after a period of non-enforcement is to send out the notices of violation, with a reasonable grace period to correct them. Then file a document with every deed at the county that it is the responsibility of the buyer to check with the association to make sure the home and property are in compliance with the documents and that any violations run with the property and will become the responsibility of a new owner if not corrected prior to sale. (Also included with this paper should be a similar notice about assessments)

A number of management companies and some associations now provide, at resale, a cerificate, along with the statement of paid dues and assessments, that essentially states that the property does not have any outstanding violations. Some states require this, others don't, but if you have a large document attached to the deed, warning everyone, it often gets the attention of the closing agents.
Joe

Joseph West
Official HOATalk.com Sponsor
Community Associations Network, LLC
www.CommunityAssociations.net

*See legal notice below (end of page) or go to www.hoatalk.com/legal
CharlesW1
(Georgia)

Posts:826


04/17/2007 6:24 AM  
Posted By WilliamT on 04/15/2007 10:53 AM


We paid ($150.00) fee to file suit, a few months ago. We of course won, but chances are we will never collect unless he sells!

Chuck W.


Chuck, you should check the language of the judgment and research your state laws.

In AZ when you win a financial judgment, it is a general judgment and you can go after the personal property of the loser, including a garnishment of wages, plus put the lein on the house. You are also entitled to your states legal interest on the amount owed you, and that amount is usually 10% annually. The interest either begins from the date owed, or the date of the judgment, I'm not sure which.

If the loser does not pay on the judgment you can probably take them back to court and the judge mwy hold them in contempt for violating the court order to pay.

Research your laws, or contact a collections attorney to find out.






WilliamT,

I’m not 100% sure, on what has taken place. I do know that the board/PM had to return to court because the HO didn’t do what the judge had ordered him to do.

I believe I do recall hearing something about going after their personally property and even garnishment of wages, (that’s a whole separate post) We had to pay to have an investigator find where he was working when we knew, but that didn’t matter! So in order to pursue we had to pay it, so we did. I’ll have to ask the president to see what she knows.

Appreciate the suggestion though.
Thank you as always
Chuck W.







Charles E. Wafer Jr.
JM2
(Oregon)

Posts:439


04/17/2007 8:34 AM  
Hi Joe (and everyone):

Joe wrote:
"A number of management companies and some associations now provide, at resale, a cerificate, along with the statement of paid dues and assessments, that essentially states that the property does not have any outstanding violations. Some states require this, others don't, but if you have a large document attached to the deed, warning everyone, it often gets the attention of the closing agents.
Joe"

There have been a few times when I've been trying to work with a homeowner and they haven't responded, and the lot goes up for sale, that I've contacted the seller's real estate agent to let them know of a violation that's existing, that needs to be disclosed. Sometimes that will help to make things happen....

J. Patrick Moore, CMCA
BobA


Posts:0


04/17/2007 10:28 AM  
Yes this Bod (with the majority of the directors will be on the BOD for the next tw0 years unless removed)has not attempted to enforce this. They put out a newsletter and said in the newsletter that anybody with a shed they are in violation and they need to remove them. That is all they did.
DennisW8
(California)

Posts:4


08/31/2017 4:59 PM  
Recently my wife and I purchased a manufactured home in a gated senior HOA community in Oceanside, California. The first day we moved in we were confronted by an HOA representative who stated that there were building violations that needed to be addressed by us concerning the previous owner's patio deck repairs. We were never informed about this when we were in the process of buying the house. No member of the HOA and no real estate agent told us about patio repair violations. We later found out that the previous owner was well aware of these violations and waited until a week before closing to tell the HOA that he believed all of the violations had been removed. The HOA did not respond to his claim and still no one told us, the buyers, about these violations. Are we responsible for the previous owner's violations that we knew nothing about? Shouldn't the HOA have contacted the seller's real estate agent as soon as they saw the "for sale" sign go up? What about the real estate agent who is selling property in an HOA community but did not bother to consult the HOA before selling the house to us?
GenoS
(Florida)

Posts:1633


08/31/2017 5:13 PM  
DENNIS....

The thread you posted in is 10 YEARS OLD

Please start a new thread for your questions. And Welcome to the forum.
TimB4
(Virginia)

Posts:14861


08/31/2017 6:54 PM  
Dennis did start a new thread as suggested.

Please respond to Dennis on that thread:

http://www.hoatalk.com/Forum/tabid/55/forumid/1/postid/233116/view/topic/Default.aspx
JanetB2
(Colorado)

Posts:3642


09/01/2017 12:13 AM  
Posted By WilliamT on 04/15/2007 5:50 AM

This association, according to the original poster, had never sent the seller a notice of violation, therefore, they may not be able to force the buyer to make the change. But then again, they may. It may depend on whether the HOA knew of the violation. If they violation was not noticed until the house was sold, then it is possible that the HOA can go after the buyer, and then the buyer could sue the seller for not disclosing that he had violated an HOA restriction.


LOL .. I would contend that is incorrect. In most states HOA information MUST be disclosed. If my Title Insurance Company determines that there is an HOA for the property they will request and obtain information such as whether there is outstanding assessments or other items against the Property Title. WHY ... because that is their JOB! They are supposed to make sure that there are no encumbrances against my future property title that has not been properly filed or disclosed. If I purchased in your HOA and you thought for one minute you could come after me or my family personally for something YOU had the responsibility of obtaining from a prior owner ... It would be Katie Bar the Door!
JanetB2
(Colorado)

Posts:3642


09/01/2017 12:17 AM  
Ooops ... sorry responded to an old thread.
Please login to post a reply (click Member Login on the menu).
Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions > CC&R Enforcement across ownership change



Get 2 months of free community web site hosting from Community123.com!



News Articles Provided by: Community Associations Network
News, articles and blogs about condos/HOA's

Only members have access to all features.
Click here to join HOATalk for Free! Members click here to login and access all features.







General Legal Notice:  The content of forum messages are from the posting member and have not been reviewed nor endorsed by HOATalk.com.  Messages posted by HOATalk or other members are for informational purposes only, are not legal or professional advice and do not constitute an attorney-client relationship.  Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.  HOATalk is not a licensed attorney, CPA, tax advisor, financial advisor or any other licensed professional.  HOATalk accepts ads from sponsors but does not verify sponsor qualifications nor endorse/guarantee any sponsor's product or service.
HindmanSanchez Legal Notice:  (For messages posted by HindmanSanchez) This message has been prepared by HindmanSanchez for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Members of HOATalk.com should not act on this information without seeking professional counsel. Please do not send us confidential information unless you speak with one of our attorneys and get authorization to send that information to us. If you wish to initiate possible representation, please contact an attorney in our firm. Our attorneys are licensed to practice law in the state of Colorado only.

Legal Notice For Messages Posted by Sponsoring Attorneys: This message has been prepared by the sponsoring attorney for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Readers of HOATalk.com should not act on this information without seeking professional counsel. Please do not send any sponsoring attorney confidential information unless you speak with the sponsoring attorney or an attorney from the sponsoring attorney’s firm and get authorization to send that information to them. If you wish to initiate possible representation, please contact an attorney in the firm of the sponsoring attorney. Sponsoring attorneys that post messages here are licensed to practice law in a specific state or states as indicated in their message signature or sponsor’s profile page. (NOTE: A ‘sponsoring attorney’ is an attorney that is a HOATalk.com official sponsor and is identified as such in the posted message or on our sponsor page.)

Copyright HOA Talk.com, A Service of Community123 LLC ( Homeowners Association Discussions )   Terms Of Use  Privacy Statement