|
| Tuesday, February 07, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
| Author |
Messages |
|
SunL
(California)
Posts:2
 |
| 08/07/2010 5:00 PM |
|
We just moved to a new community which has a HOA that maintains a pool and a cabana. There are some earlier residents who closed home before march 2010 and pay a HOA dues of $35 and all the newer residents are paying $95. In the recent HOA meeting this issue was raised and I was told that there was a HOA meeting before March that had a vote for a HOA raise since the pool and the cabana were coming up. The HOA members had voted against an increase of their HOA dues and had an agreement reached with the home builder to supplement their extra payment of $60. The condition also made new home owners moving in after March 2010 to pay the HOA dues of $95 with the builder NOT supplementing it.
There are many home owners who have moved after March and being asked to pay more than twice than some earlier residents and its becoming a big issue here. The HOA facilities are used by all the members irrespective of what they pay. There has not been any progress from either HOA or the home builder to resolve this.
Is there any legal ramifications to this kind of discriminatory behavior among home owners? What all do we need to resolve this issue and not face any discrimination? |
|
|
|
|
TimB4
(Virginia)
Posts:3246
|
| 08/07/2010 5:47 PM |
|
Sun,
It depends on the paperwork that outlined the agreement. I would suggest requesting a copy of that agreement from the Board.
Tim |
|
|
|
|
SunL
(California)
Posts:2
|
| 08/07/2010 6:10 PM |
|
Tim, Thanks for the reply.
I have already asked for it. But is there anything which we can do to get this resolved. The HOA had sent a letter that cant do anything about this to have the same dues for all HOA members and also mentioned that cannot have a re vote to bring this issue.
Is there any legal route that we could take? |
|
|
|
|
GlenL
(Ohio)
Posts:3526
|
| 08/08/2010 3:56 AM |
|
| Sun, you all are paying the same it is just that the developer is supplementing some of the owners. This will more than likely continue until turnover to homeowner control, when the developer goes away so will his supplement. If you really want to kick over an ant hill, file a complaint over the matter with HUD. I'm not saying you will get anywhere with it but it most definitely will get the developers attention. |
|
Too bad the only people who know how to run the country are busy driving cabs and cutting hair. - George Burns |
|
|
BruceF1
(Connecticut)
Posts:1405
|
| 08/08/2010 7:26 AM |
|
I might agree with Glen, that everyone is paying the same except that some have an agreement whereby the developer will subsidize part of the fee, but there might be another way of looking at it.
It may be in the declaration, and also in the laws of some states,that while under developer control, the developer cannot subsidize the HOA. It might be argued that by subsidizing certain homeowners the developer is, in effect, subsidizing the HOA and it may be illegal. You would have to check your documents and your state laws to be sure. |
|
|
|
|
JackB8
(Virginia)
Posts:105
|
| 08/08/2010 9:57 AM |
|
| Was this improvement done before the builder turned the developement over to the HOA? If so, there should have been no vote because the improvement was made by the builder and should have been paid for by the builder - in my opinion. If the HOA had control, I think you are talking about a capital expenditure which in most associations requires a majority vote of the owners.. Without majority consent, those improvements should not have been made. If the board approved the improvement against the wishes of the majority, the board members who participated might be(are probably) subject to legal action. I don't think we are talking about discrimination here as much as we are a violation of your covenants by the board. The homeowners who are paying $95 a month need to get together and hire an attorney and so do the homeowners who voted against the improvement and were told they would be paying only $35 (unless the builder promises to continue the payments. Unless I miss my guess the builder would probably been better off paying for the improvements himself because surely the supplemental payments are in the long run probably going to equal more than the cost of the improvements. Both of these groups of homeowners need to get an assurance from the developer that he will make the promised supplemental payments as long as you have an HOA or he needs to be sued to produce such a promise. I think a judge would rule that since the improvement cannot be taken out, the HOA is stuck with the builder supplements continuing or all residents paying the same amount. As far as disciplinary action against the board, seems to me you need to remove and replace the board. Going to your insurance company and filing a claim is probably a waste of time because it sounds like the board botched this up and might just come back to haunt you because any settlement you get will probably result in an increase in your premium. |
|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
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.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|