Get 2 months of free community web site hosting from Community123.com!
Monday, December 16, 2019
Get 2 months of free community web site hosting from Community123.com!
Only members have access to all features.
Click here to join HOATalk for Free! Members click here to login and access all features.
Subject: Violation code and they won’t repair
Prev Next
Please login to post a reply (click Member Login on the menu).
Page 1 of 212 > >>
Author Messages
RebecaB
(California)

Posts:5


10/31/2019 11:16 PM  
A licensed chimney inspector came to clean my chimney and he reported that the chase cover is not passing a code and it will be dangerous to use. The problem affects 3 units, as the chase is being used with connection to 3 units. Also it will affect all others, it is an architectural issue.i reported it to the HOA and they sent me a letter to say that it is the homeowner’s responsibility to repair. The repair is about $1,200 for 3 units.
1. What about all others? they probably don't not know and they are using the chimney? Should’t the HOA tell everyone by law?
2. Wouldn’t I need the neighbor’s approval to repair it?
3. What can I do?
Someone told me that if I report this to the city, it will affect refinancing and sale, as there is a violation on the property and it will stay on the records.

I am in Los Angeles.

Thank you,
Rebeca
MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:8768


11/01/2019 4:18 AM  
It sounds like you and your 2 other neighbors who share it need to get together to repair it. Sounds like a shared item that can best be worked out by you and your other neighbors.

The responsibility for the HOA to inform anyone else... Why? Cause they didn't call the inspector did they? They aren't responsible if you can or can not sell your house. The city definitely isn't.

Your solution is to just get together with the other two and handle it. If they don't want to, then you can take it on yourself. Our HOA we just highly recommended you have your chimney inspected prior to setting a fire. We could not ban the use of the fireplace just request you do the right thing.

Former HOA President
LetA
(Nevada)

Posts:840


11/01/2019 5:26 AM  
It sounds like its a limited common element and should be part of the reserve study. How many other units have joined chimneys?

IMHO you already pay assessments that cover shared common element repairs.
LetA
(Nevada)

Posts:840


11/01/2019 5:29 AM  
Posted By MelissaP1 on 11/01/2019 4:18 AM
It sounds like you and your 2 other neighbors who share it need to get together to repair it. Sounds like a shared item that can best be worked out by you and your other neighbors.

The responsibility for the HOA to inform anyone else... Why? Cause they didn't call the inspector did they? They aren't responsible if you can or can not sell your house. The city definitely isn't.

Your solution is to just get together with the other two and handle it. If they don't want to, then you can take it on yourself. Our HOA we just highly recommended you have your chimney inspected prior to setting a fire. We could not ban the use of the fireplace just request you do the right thing.





I disagree Melissa, if the two other unit owners are not aware or just don't care all three unit owners can be overcome my CO poisoning if someone should decide to use the chimney. This is an HOA responsibly and should be given the highest priority to repair. The hoa is just digging their heels in and picking the wrong fight.
TimM11


Posts:324


11/01/2019 6:11 AM  
What do your docs say about who is responsible for it? If they say it's the HOA, then they need to pay for the repair.

It's probably going to be noted by an inspector eventually anyway when one of you who is affected sells your home, refinances (if an inspection is required for that), etc.
SamE2
(New Jersey)

Posts:202


11/01/2019 7:05 AM  
How old is your house/unit? Was it up to code when it was built? If it was up to code when built it probably does not need to be brought up to code until it needs repairing. You had one licensed guy tell you it wasn't up to code I would get a second opinion or review the code myself. Did you have a home inspection when you bought the place? What does he say?
Depending on the age of the place the builder or engineer may have some responsibility. You should check all your documents and see who is responsible for common elements. If it was a clogged drain that was shared between different units who would be responsible? I don't think the HOA needs to warn other units based on the opinion of one vendor but if I was on the Board we would investigate to see if we felt the contractor was right.
SamE2
(New Jersey)

Posts:202


11/01/2019 7:09 AM  
By the way several years ago my HOA told me I was responsible for a shared AC drain that was clogged below my unit. They were wrong it was the HOA's responsibility according to my documents.
JohnT38
(South Carolina)

Posts:139


11/01/2019 7:15 AM  
Regardless of who is responsible for the repair cost, wouldn't it be in the best interest of the Board to notify the other units? If one of them catches fire damage may occur to parts of the structure that the HOA is responsible for. Seems like common sense to me. If nothing else I would let my two neighbors know myself. This is a safety issue for goodness sake!
RebecaB
(California)

Posts:5


11/01/2019 7:41 AM  
Thank you all.
I just bought the place and moved in, it was built in 1990, and I am not sure if this at the time was ok.
The neighbors didn’t replay when I left a letter to let them know, I tried to knock at their doors several times but they don’t open. So I don’t know what else to do.
JohnT38
(South Carolina)

Posts:139


11/01/2019 7:51 AM  
You've done what you can. Have you read your governing docs to see if there is any wording that says owners must make repairs under certain conditions such as when it affects other units? If so, the HOA needs to be involved.
SamE2
(New Jersey)

Posts:202


11/01/2019 10:48 AM  
Did you get a home inspection? If so I'd call the home inspector and ask him about it. Not in an accusatory tone but just trying to find out if it is really a problem. I'm having a problem believing it was an issue when the place was built and everyone involved missed it. Not saying it isn't a problem just saying I wouldn't take the word of one vendor.
RebecaB
(California)

Posts:5


11/01/2019 11:06 AM  
Yes, he says it doesn’t pass a code but he didn’t tell me if the code is new. The point is that it doesn’t pass the code now, and even if I repair mine, the building is “in danger”. So I can’t believe the HOA is not doing anything.
MarkM31
(Washington)

Posts:480


11/01/2019 11:38 AM  
"Doesn't pass code" is an almost meaningless statement. Is it in code compliance for when it was built? If so, there is no safety hazard and nothing needs to be done.

Just what is the safety hazard, and what is the violation?
RebecaB
(California)

Posts:5


11/01/2019 12:45 PM  
True, in my first statement, I explained that the the chase cover is not longer up to code, it doesn’t have enough pace for secondary heat escape making it dangerous for use.
MarkM31
(Washington)

Posts:480


11/01/2019 12:53 PM  
I know what you said.

They've changed code since the building was built. That does not indicate that a correction must be made, or that the application is now dangerous.

What do you mean by "chase cover"?
AugustinD


Posts:2096


11/01/2019 1:12 PM  
Posted By RebecaB on 11/01/2019 12:45 PM
True, in my first statement, I explained that the the chase cover is not longer up to code, it doesn’t have enough [s?]pace for secondary heat escape making it dangerous for use.


I mostly agree with SamE2's first and third posts and MarkM31's post. Call up the inspector and find out if the chase cover met the requirements of previous codes. Until then I am not convinced the chase cover is dangerous. If the inspector says the chase cover was never in compliance, then I think the HOA and you would be out of luck filing a construction defect type of claim against the builder. This is because the passage of some 29 years is well beyond any time limit I have seen from the statutes of limitations on a claim against a builder.

If your covenants are clear that this is the HOA's responsibility to fix, then you can start the dispute resolution process, pursuant to California Civil Code Section 5910. If you think all the HOA's chimneys have the same problem, then this will help your argument. Start by reviewing the "Internal Dispute Resolution" (IDR) information at https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/ADR-Menu
MarkM31
(Washington)

Posts:480


11/01/2019 1:38 PM  
Codes get changed all the time, added AFCI, mixing valves on baths and showers, etc. Even the increased number of required outlets in bedrooms was driven by safety etc. Most of that is driven by safety, but grandfathered applications should not be viewed with alarm.

An inspector could look at a bedroom and say that there wasn't enough outlets and that was a safety issue, and be factually correct.
RebecaB
(California)

Posts:5


11/01/2019 1:58 PM  
Thank you for you advice, it is really helpful.
it makes me think that the HOA is the one that should be checking if it is a safety issue, not me. The inspectors that came were licensed and very reputable around here and they went to the roof to inspect it. So I passed this information to the HOA because even if I fix the one on my side, the whole 2 buildings would have the same problem.
Aren’t they responsible for ensuring it is safe to use?
AugustinD


Posts:2096


11/01/2019 2:21 PM  
The HOA is not responsible for the safety of everything on the HOA's grounds. For example, suppose the HOA covenants say that a patio is the responsibility of the owner of the unit to which the patio attaches. Someone slips, falls and breaks an ankle due to ice on the patio. Liability for the injury belongs to the owner of the unit, not the HOA.

If you post your covenants (a.k.a. "Declaration"), I think this would be helpful to all readers here. Alternatively, if you have a digital copy, email them to me at [email protected] I will redact the name of the HOA and post the pertinent sections for readers here.

MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:8768


11/01/2019 2:47 PM  
May I mention something kind of obvious? The other 2 neighbors are the "HOA" just like the OP. So if the OP wants the HOA to be responsible, then at some point the 2 neighbors should know about it. The HOA could be making a special assessment to raise money for the repair. Plus if the HOA is to fix it, they may need to involve the other 2 owners in that decision. It does effect their property as well.

When you ask the "HOA to pay" your asking ALL your neighbors to pay. So the 2 other neighbors being in the HOA their dues/assessments will be effected too. So why not talk to them about a solution? It may take a long time for the HOA to react. There is no official timeline a HOA has to respond is there?

Former HOA President
LetA
(Nevada)

Posts:840


11/01/2019 4:58 PM  
Posted By MelissaP1

When you ask the "HOA to pay" your asking ALL your neighbors to pay. So the 2 other neighbors being in the HOA their dues/assessments will be effected too. So why not talk to them about a solution? It may take a long time for the HOA to react. There is no official timeline a HOA has to respond is there?





That's not necessarily True Melissa, if a proper reserve study is conducted, the reserves would cover the replacement cost divided up between the 3 unit owners. That's provided a proper reserve study was conducted and the chimney piece is HOA responsibility.
MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:8768


11/01/2019 5:06 PM  
Uhm who makes up the HOA and contributed to that reserves? A HOA is ONLY funded by it's members for it's members. So even if it's covered by "reserves" it still money out the neighbors pocket. Plus this may not fall under a "reserves" cost. It maybe be considered a "repair". Which would come out of the operating budget.

Former HOA President
GeorgeS21
(Florida)

Posts:1531


11/01/2019 5:06 PM  
Rebeca,

You haven’t answered the question asked several time re whether you have read your CCRs ... it you will provide what they say about who is responsible, it will be helpful.
JohnC46
(South Carolina)

Posts:8911


11/01/2019 8:56 PM  
A chase cover is used for a pre-fab or factory-built fireplace. Unlike a chimney cap that covers only the top of the flue opening, a chase cover fits over the top of the chimney. They're also called “top pans” because they top chimneys that are sided with vinyl, metal, or wood.
RaquelS
(California)

Posts:8


11/08/2019 5:53 PM  
Thank you all. Sorry I didn't come back to the forum. I tried to find more about this code, plus I had issues retrieving my account so I created a new login....anyway.

The problem with the code is that when they built this place, the manufacturer that did all the chimneys, back in 1990, didn't follow the code. So the safety code was in placed then.
I have no idea why this was never addressed before, my feeling is that they know about it but they don't want to deal with it.
Still, there is a safety issue, and HOA told me when I sent the request to them, that using the chimney is not a "mature option" and "that I will be responsible for any damages".
A month later I received a letter from them, stating that homeowners are responsible to fix architectural issues and they don't have anything to do with it.

The inspector told me that in their experience, the HOAs always took responsibility of this problem.

After what the HOA told me, and knowing that there is a safety issue, I am scared to use the chimney.

I do not know the neighbors here, only moved 3 months ago. I tried to connect with them, but they don't want to know also.

I am OK paying for my part, but since 3 units share the chase, I don't want to pay for it alone, so I am stuck.

How can I get the HOA to address this problem and inform everyone? Should I call the city?

I don't know how to move forward

Thank you.

RaquelS
(California)

Posts:8


11/08/2019 5:53 PM  
Thank you all. Sorry I didn't come back to the forum. I tried to find more about this code, plus I had issues retrieving my account so I created a new login....anyway.

The problem with the code is that when they built this place, the manufacturer that did all the chimneys, back in 1990, didn't follow the code. So the safety code was in placed then.
I have no idea why this was never addressed before, my feeling is that they know about it but they don't want to deal with it.
Still, there is a safety issue, and HOA told me when I sent the request to them, that using the chimney is not a "mature option" and "that I will be responsible for any damages".
A month later I received a letter from them, stating that homeowners are responsible to fix architectural issues and they don't have anything to do with it.

The inspector told me that in their experience, the HOAs always took responsibility of this problem.

After what the HOA told me, and knowing that there is a safety issue, I am scared to use the chimney.

I do not know the neighbors here, only moved 3 months ago. I tried to connect with them, but they don't want to know also.

I am OK paying for my part, but since 3 units share the chase, I don't want to pay for it alone, so I am stuck.

How can I get the HOA to address this problem and inform everyone? Should I call the city?

I don't know how to move forward

Thank you.

GenoS
(Florida)

Posts:3383


11/08/2019 6:59 PM  
I'd start by calling the local Fire Marshal and asking for assistance.
AugustinD


Posts:2096


11/08/2019 7:10 PM  
Posted By RaquelS on 11/08/2019 5:53 PM
I don't know how to move forward


Despite repeated requests, you have neither posted nor quoted the relevant covenants. Do you know what "covenant" means? Do you have a copy of them? Until you provide these covenants to the forum, I doubt the advice here can help you move forward.
MarkM31
(Washington)

Posts:480


11/08/2019 7:47 PM  
Posted By RaquelS on 11/08/2019 5:53 PM


The problem with the code is that when they built this place, the manufacturer that did all the chimneys, back in 1990, didn't follow the code. So the safety code was in placed then.

The inspector told me that in their experience, the HOAs always took responsibility of this problem.




Where did the information that this was never an acceptable assembly come from?

The inspectors opinion on who normally takes responsibility is of no value.

Who is this inspector anyway? What is he doing and who asked him to do it?
SamE2
(New Jersey)

Posts:202


11/09/2019 5:23 AM  
Is the manufacturer still in business? If they are give them a call and see if they will do anything for you. As others have said the answer to who is responsible is in your condo docs. It
GeorgeS21
(Florida)

Posts:1531


11/09/2019 6:29 AM  
Raquel,

It’s been a week since we asked you to review your CCRs to determine responsibility for the components in question.

Please do this ... without this information, much of the discussion is moot.
RaquelS
(California)

Posts:8


11/09/2019 7:38 AM  
Thank you all.
The issue is that it seems there is a safety code that is broken, and since this is a community, the HOA should check on it to ensure safety. If it would only affect me, I will fix it for unit.

It is mot my responsibility or my job to do this alone, since it affects everyone. But I can't use the chimney knowing it could be a safety problem, it doesn't feel right.

GeorgeS21
(Florida)

Posts:1531


11/09/2019 9:05 AM  
Raquel,

What do your governing documents say about responsibility?
MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:8768


11/09/2019 9:44 AM  
So your saying you want to invite your neighbors into your home to see the safety code violation and have them pay for it? If you want the HOA to pay for it, then that's what your asking for. Have you even submitted anything to the board or MC? Have you talked to the other neighbors who are effected? Seems you can keep seeping in your tea or you can start spilling it.

Former HOA President
SueW6
(Michigan)

Posts:626


11/09/2019 10:25 AM  
Perhaps your “violation” is just not being up to today’s code. Still working, not modern .

BUT - If he has said (in writing!) that the current setup is “dangerous” then go to the city hall and ask for an official inspection by the code enforcement officer.

The city can then communicate with your neighbors if it’s “dangerous.”
GenoS
(Florida)

Posts:3383


11/09/2019 11:47 AM  
Posted By GeorgeS21 on 11/09/2019 9:05 AM
Raquel,

What do your governing documents say about responsibility?

This is a key question. Usually there is some language about "party walls" in the governing documents when there are attached residences, duplexes, or townhomes. I've also seen "party roof" provisions in some CC&Rs where roofs are shared. Sometimes the walls and/or roofs will be designated common or limited common areas which can put the maintenance and repair responsibility on the association as a whole.

There's probably a 90% chance that the answer to the problem is contained in the governing documents.
JohnC46
(South Carolina)

Posts:8911


11/09/2019 12:18 PM  
Posted By SueW6 on 11/09/2019 10:25 AM
Perhaps your “violation” is just not being up to today’s code. Still working, not modern .

BUT - If he has said (in writing!) that the current setup is “dangerous” then go to the city hall and ask for an official inspection by the code enforcement officer.

The city can then communicate with your neighbors if it’s “dangerous.”




I agree.
AugustinD


Posts:2096


11/09/2019 3:05 PM  
Posted By SueW6 on 11/09/2019 10:25 AM
If [the inspector] has said (in writing!) that the current setup is “dangerous” then go to the city hall and ask for an official inspection by the code enforcement officer.


I think city "code enforcement" staff enforce only the city's municipal code. I do not think chimney yada code enforcement is in the city's purview. It might be in the state's purview. The OP could try calling the California Building Standards Commission. See phone number at https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC
JohnC46
(South Carolina)

Posts:8911


11/09/2019 4:34 PM  
I am thinking the chimney cap might have been conforming at one time and what the inspector said is that type is no longer allowed which does not mean it must be replaced. Thus my advice to have the fire marshall look at it to clarify.

MarkM31
(Washington)

Posts:480


11/09/2019 8:07 PM  
Posted By JohnC46 on 11/09/2019 4:34 PM
I am thinking the chimney cap might have been conforming at one time and what the inspector said is that type is no longer allowed which does not mean it must be replaced. Thus my advice to have the fire marshall look at it to clarify.





I brought that up earlier, and the OP was specific that the "inspector" said that the assembly never could have met code when the building was built in 1990.

After a lifetime of construction including a lot of supervision, I personally would need a lot more proof than just a statement by the "chimey chase inspector" that the assemble was not code compliant at the date of construction. How did the building even get a certificate of occupancy?

Not knowing the inspectors bone fides I am no way convinced yet.
GeorgeS21
(Florida)

Posts:1531


11/10/2019 5:57 AM  
And, we still don’t know who is responsible.
MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:8768


11/10/2019 9:02 AM  
But George we do know who doesn't want to be responsible...

Former HOA President
NpS
(Pennsylvania)

Posts:3921


11/10/2019 9:22 AM  
Posted By MarkM31 on 11/09/2019 8:07 PM
I brought that up earlier, and the OP was specific that the "inspector" said that the assembly never could have met code when the building was built in 1990.


In the late 80s and early 90s, there was a housing boom. Inspectors couldn't keep up.

Also, the first International Building Code (which everyone relies on today) wasn't even published until 1997.

Whatever the code was in the 90s, no one had a good handle on it.


Sikubali jukumu. Read all posts at your own risk.
MarkM31
(Washington)

Posts:480


11/10/2019 10:32 AM  
Posted By NpS on 11/10/2019 9:22 AM
Posted By MarkM31 on 11/09/2019 8:07 PM
I brought that up earlier, and the OP was specific that the "inspector" said that the assembly never could have met code when the building was built in 1990.


In the late 80s and early 90s, there was a housing boom. Inspectors couldn't keep up.

Also, the first International Building Code (which everyone relies on today) wasn't even published until 1997.

Whatever the code was in the 90s, no one had a good handle on it.





Sure they had a handle on it, I'm not sure why you would make a blanket statement like that.

The late 80's and early 90's also saw black monday, the first Gulf War and "...it's the economy, stupid..." all of which indicate that everything wasn't the boom you say it was.

I was around then, and inspections were the same as now.
MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:8768


11/10/2019 10:48 AM  
Codes change. What was good then isn't good now. It also can fall under "grandfathering".

A member in our HOA died tragically. Her alarm system had gone off a few times falsely. Our police department has a law about responding to false alarms till they start charging. She contacted the Alarm company. (I saw the truck in the driveway that day). Apparently after they left, she climbed into her attic to address the system. On her way down, she got caught in the wire near the attic exit. She came tumbling down, broke an ankle and apparently found dead 2 days later.

It was then determined that the wire was installed per code BUT until she died the code wasn't amended. Which now includes wires can no longer be 3 feet of an attic entrance which includes alarm system wiring.

Now how many people still have wires within 3 feet of their attic space? Is it not up to code? It isn't up to today's standards but an inspector back in the 2000's it was very much okay.

So I think the item of the OP's not up to code maybe cause it could be broken or not updated. I still think they need to contact their effected neighbors to agree to a fix or do it themselves. The HOA did not build the home just manages it.

Former HOA President
AugustinD


Posts:2096


11/10/2019 10:53 AM  
Posted By NpS on 11/10/2019 9:22 AM
the first International Building Code (which everyone relies on today) wasn't even published until 1997.

Whatever the code was in the 90s, no one had a good handle on it.


I think not. From wikipedia:

"The Uniform Building Code (UBC) was a building code used primarily in the western United States.

History
The UBC was first published in 1927 by the International Conference of Building Officials, which was based in Whittier, California. It was intended to promote public safety and provided standardized requirements for safe construction which would not vary from city to city as had previously been the case.Ώ]

Updated editions of the code were published approximately every three years until 1997, which was the final version of the code. The UBC was replaced in 2000 by the new International Building Code (IBC) published by the International Code Council (ICC). The ICC was a merger of three predecessor organizations which published three different building codes.ΐ]"

-- from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Building_Code

The 1991 UBC appears at https://digitalassets.lib.berkeley.edu/ubc/UBC_1991.pdf . See Chapter 37 on pdf pages 691-700. Regarding chimneys, the UBC frequently points out that chimneys must comply with both the UBC and the Uniform Mechanical Code.

The 1991 Uniform Mechanical Code appears here: https://archive.org/stream/gov.law.icbo.mechanical.1991/icbo.mechanical.1991_djvu.txt

"Chase" does not seem to appear in the two 1991 codes. It is possible that more command of vocabulary is needed to interpret the two 1991 codes with regard to "chase cover."

I am not ready to say that builders and inspectors did not have a good handle on the code back then.
MarkM31
(Washington)

Posts:480


11/10/2019 11:24 AM  
As stated, it is impossible to figure out the danger of the chase cover. Could be a fire issue or a back draft issue.

Or an inspector talking out his rear. The inspector should be able to state in his written report which part of which code this assembly fails.
NpS
(Pennsylvania)

Posts:3921


11/10/2019 12:09 PM  
Not sure why you took offense Mark.

Maybe the code was articulated better and inspections were carried out better in your neck of the woods than in mine.

Then again, the push between 1994 and 1997 to develop a more substantial and universal code shows a widespread realization that there were problems in the existing code system that needed fixing.

Either way, I do agree with your prior post:

Posted By MarkM31 on 11/01/2019 11:38 AM
"Doesn't pass code" is an almost meaningless statement. Is it in code compliance for when it was built? If so, there is no safety hazard and nothing needs to be done.

Just what is the safety hazard, and what is the violation?




Sikubali jukumu. Read all posts at your own risk.
JohnC46
(South Carolina)

Posts:8911


11/10/2019 2:33 PM  
Posted By GeorgeS21 on 11/10/2019 5:57 AM
And, we still don’t know who is responsible.




George is correct. We are discussing two issues:

1. Does the cap need to be replaced?
2. If the cap needs replacement, who pays? The BOD's first opinion was the homeowners, which I disagree with but another subject.
MarkM31
(Washington)

Posts:480


11/11/2019 8:05 AM  
Posted By NpS on 11/10/2019 12:09 PM
Not sure why you took offense Mark.



No offense taken, I just thought your statement was inncorrect
RaquelS
(California)

Posts:8


11/11/2019 11:06 AM  
I am trying to find the documentation about whos responsibility it is.
I would have thought that the HOA would look into it, at least to find out if this code is "dangerous" or not. Before talking about who pays for what, we need to know if we should be concerned about this code.

It is not my responsibility to find out what this code means for the community, as it affects a lot of people.
And if the HOA is not doing it, who else is going do it?


AugustinD


Posts:2096


11/11/2019 11:26 AM  
Posted By RaquelS on 11/11/2019 11:06 AM
It is not my responsibility to find out what this code means for the community, as it affects a lot of people.


RaquelS, If your HOA's covenants say that infrastructure serving less than the whole community is the responsibility of the owners of the affected buildings and not the HOA, then I think it is at least partly (and maybe entirely) your responsibility. The HOA may actually have a strong legal case against you for not remedying an allegedly unsafe condition that may be your legal responsibility, not the HOA's.

You seem to be assuming that all the chase covers on the HOA grounds are unsafe. I would not assume anything.

I did a lot of reading about chimney "chases" and "chase covers" yesterday. A chimney "chase" is that part of the chimney structure between the roof and the top of the chimney. The "chase cover" is supposed to keep rain, animals et cetera out of the chimney. If the slope of a chase cover is inadequate, pooling can occur, leading to corrosion of the cover sooner rather than later. This is a concern. I still do not see the secondary heat escape concern. But I am no chimney expert, either.
GeorgeS21
(Florida)

Posts:1531


11/11/2019 11:33 AM  
Whose responsibility comes first.

Do your due diligence then get back with us.
RaquelS
(California)

Posts:8


11/11/2019 12:06 PM  
How can it be my responsibility if the fix involves other people, and those don't even open the door or answer? what else can I do?
GeorgeS21
(Florida)

Posts:1531


11/11/2019 12:45 PM  
Your governing documents will provide the answers and likely best direction.

What do they say? If you can excerpt them, here, it will be helpful.
AugustinD


Posts:2096


11/11/2019 12:46 PM  
Posted By RaquelS on 11/11/2019 12:06 PM
How can it be my responsibility if the fix involves other people, and those don't even open the door or answer? what else can I do?


If your covenants say the responsibility is yours and your two neighbors' (and not the HOA's), and the two neighbors are unresponsive, then some covenants further state that you can take legal action against the two neighbors to make them do what the covenants say they should do.

If you take no more action, and the allegedly deficient case cover causes some tragedy, then I suppose the insurers will duke it out.

JohnC46
(South Carolina)

Posts:8911


11/11/2019 2:00 PM  
Raquel

What type units are you? Also, who would be responsible for re-roofing the units/building? What if he chimney collapsed? If the HOA is responsible for such repairs, I cannot see how they would not be responsible for replacing a defective chase.
GeorgeS21
(Florida)

Posts:1531


11/11/2019 3:19 PM  
But, we don’t know who is responsible for what as the OP has not provided this information.
RaquelS
(California)

Posts:8


11/11/2019 8:14 PM  
In the HAO rules and regulations, it says:
ACTIVE COMMITTEES:
SAFETY & SECURITY COMMITTEE - MONITORS SECURITY AND SAFETY ISSUES
RaquelS
(California)

Posts:8


11/11/2019 8:17 PM  
and they just worked on the roof, for about 2 months we has people on the roof.
I have just moved here in Aug 2019. So I am very new to all this.
Please login to post a reply (click Member Login on the menu).
Page 1 of 212 > >>
Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions > Violation code and they won’t repair



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