Following the Spirit of the law?? > HOA Forum

Unanswered

Active Topics

Forums

Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions

Subject: Following the Spirit of the law??

Prev Next

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Author

Messages

GeorgerwilliamsW
(Indiana)

Posts:768

08/03/2008 7:26 AM
Bravo, Tony! Brad, not intending to be disputatious, I think my remarks are mis-characterized. I come back to the words "reasonableness" and "proportionality." I think neighborliness and compassion and maybe even justice, ought to be in the mix as well. The board always has the option to deliberately not take any action. Turing a blind eye is not the same as deliberately choosing not to act.

NicoleO4

Posts:0

08/03/2008 7:38 AM
Ladies and Gents. I am proud to say that the conversation of not inforcing a few of the rules on our "ex board' and "friends" took place during our last executive session. We have an amazing new PC who has been doing this sort of thing for >20 years. She documents EVERTHING. She documented the interaction of "we can't do that to Sue she was an ex board memeber" " she always has had that unapproved item ect." It was written just has happened. Our minutes were approved by the board majority with the 2 idiots who has this interaction not being able to stop it. I know this sounds harsh, but this may be a good thing for them to understand that that you selectively enforce rules. Lesson be learned. What you do, what you say is and SHOULD be documented as it occures in your minutes. I have personally asked our PC atty to make an appointment with us as now the two members who had this well docmented side conversation think we are against them. Let me ask this? DO you think I still have an agenda? No.. My agenda is for this hit and miss of rule inforcement to stop. It's been going on way to much and this incident provides me and th rest with the opportunity to educate these less than knowlegable board members.

NicoleO4

Posts:0

08/03/2008 7:43 AM
Also I really don't need someone to ask me to review my own agenda againor play another game of "gotcha". This is a serious issue in our HOA.. Enough of being my internet psychiatrist... thank you I am personally tired of the personal comments about one's agenda or past poster names. I was here to find interpretation on the "following the spirit of the law"" comment and from there there were a couple of people who suggested I have a personal agenda.. and better yet multiple postings under other names. I personally think that I am not the one with issue here.

BradP
(Kansas)

Posts:1742

08/03/2008 9:46 AM
Posted By GeorgerwilliamsW on 08/03/2008 7:26 AM Bravo, Tony! Brad, not intending to be disputatious, I think my remarks are mis-characterized. I come back to the words "reasonableness" and "proportionality." I think neighborliness and compassion and maybe even justice, ought to be in the mix as well. The board always has the option to deliberately not take any action. Turing a blind eye is not the same as deliberately choosing not to act. George: I agree...but I also think you need to be careful with what you decide to not act on. If you are saying it is ok for her to have boxes down there then in essence you are saying it is ok for everyone, and really where do you drawn the line after that, furniture, mattresses? Sometimes it is better to leave the dog inside the fence. Members are always allowed a hearing after a violation notice to explain or dispute the notice, that is where the boards discretion should come in, not whether or not to send a notice in the first place.

NicoleO4

Posts:0

08/03/2008 11:08 AM
Well.. inforcement of our rules and regulations is not a fun thing. But when you have two ruels that says " nothing but cars or motocycles are allowed in parking spaces" and on that says "No plant boxes are allowed to hang over wrought iron balcony bars" this is pretty clear. When you have an old board member who has lovely planters haning outside the wrought iron balcony railings and has taken up to having storage boxes in his parking space.. its a no no.... Doesn't matter at this point because as stated the interaction of conflict on this took place in executive session. The board members who openly stated they did not want to issuue so and so letter is documented. Our atty is planning on attending our executive session next month to give us a HOA rule enforcement 101 and the fact that if these are not enforced according to DSA here in Ca any individual homeowner can act legally on this... as minut as a box sounds we have bigger issues here.

GeorgerwilliamsW
(Indiana)

Posts:768

08/03/2008 12:03 PM
Covenants in Indiana typically enable any homeowner to independently enforce covenants, including suing the association for covenant violations: Enforcement of these covenants and restrictions and of the provisions contained in the Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws of the Association may be by any proceeding at law or inequity instituted by the Association or *by any Owner against any person (including the Association)* violating or attempting to violate any covenant or restriction, either to restrain violation, to compel compliance, or to recover damages, and against the land, to enforce any lien created by these covenants; *and failure by the Association or by any Owner to enforce any covenant or restriction herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter.* < Don't you wish, somehow, that people would use more common sense, and that doing the right thing was easier sometimes?

RobertR1
(South Carolina)

Posts:2513

08/03/2008 12:33 PM
NicoleO4, I am shocked, why would a Board meet with your Lawyer in ES about rule enforcemeny? Better to meet in Open meeting and give everyone a shot at Rule enforcement 101. I know I would still be yapping if the council (members) were not invited to this little Pow Wow. Do you have scheduled Executive sessions. I thought they were called when the board determines in open session that ES is mandated. then....the meeting is adjourned, and re-opened after ES. Don't worry, if I am wrong, I'll get over it.

GeraldT4

Posts:934

08/04/2008 8:19 AM
RobertR1 - Seems by Nicole's post the atty is meeting in ES because the atty was requested to do so. Additionally, admonishment or reminder, if any is for the Board members. While it would be nice if all owners heard the truth at the same time, theirs no guarantee that all owners will be present at the OS, especially those owners that need to be reminded, the offending party. Seems to me the supply of the dysfunction, not the demand, needs to be stemmed. The supply being the incorrect actions of certain BOD members. I personally see nothing wrong with atty and Board meeting in ES to discuss a matter of lack of enforcement of the BOD. If I'm wrong, I too will get over it!! : )

RobertR1
(South Carolina)

Posts:2513

08/04/2008 9:15 AM
Gerald, I have no doubt there is probably a reason for the lawyers request. However I have some reservations if this meets the criteria for a ES according to the documents. Is it proper for a lawyer to call ES or even recommend one. Now the Lawyer can be asked to attend an ES as a provider of information to the subject of the ES. Maybe, anyway? The second point is the intent of the Board to hold the ES. This proposition by the lawyer kind of smells to anyone with a vested interest in the property, I think. Why should the Board expect the ownership to just "don't wory, have faith," we are only going behind closed doors because we don't want you to know what is going on. Also, in my opinion an ES session should never be called, to hide, it should be called because issues of a private nature have to be discussed. Seems that is lattitude a plenty, to sneak in what you want. Too much going on in ES nowadays, that is just a sham because it is a way of getting around responsibility. Tell me folks, how many people are experiencing Boards going into ES and come out and announce, "No decisions have been made so there will be no minutes or no votes announced." This is just a feeling I have that seems to fit the times.

GeraldT4

Posts:934

08/04/2008 11:21 AM
RobertR1, Point taken on lack of transparency amongst Boards. I honestly don't believe it's necessary for the atty to resolve this but it may lend some credibility to the proper director for an ongoing issue of cowardice, or favoritism that seems to be rampant in Nicole's association. What say you if matters get resolved appropriately through an ES discussion and the Board can save face by not appearing to be more inept than they already may be?

RobertR1
(South Carolina)

Posts:2513

08/04/2008 11:53 AM
GeraldT, Very piercing question. I would say more power to them if the associations business gets moved along. Although I believe it would be required that some explanation be given to the members, however "spun" to meet the requirements. Then if six months down the line, the board would perform any other bone head scheme, I would remind them they were lucky to get away with it once, don't push your luck. Which would mean nothing to a Board controlled by a president and a few others than would proclaim in a report to the owners about rule enforcement, that their considered solution to rule infractions is the the Ownerns should; #1 Let it go. I don't remember if I read #2 and the rest.

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions > Following the Spirit of the law??