Get 1 year of free community web site hosting from Community123.com!
Monday, October 18, 2021











HOATalk is a free service of Community123.com:

Easy to use website tools to help your board
Only members have access to all features.
Click here to join HOATalk for Free! Members click here to login and access all features.
Subject: Suing Board members, Not the HOA Board
Prev Next
Please login to post a reply (click Member Login on the menu).
Page 3 of 7 << < 1234567 > >>
Author Messages
CyrstalB
(Maryland)

Posts:457


05/21/2015 6:52 AM  
"Do you think the Board members should follow the clearly stated rules -- especially when it comes to spending the homeowners' money?

Maybe you don't think that is important." Walt

Dearest Walter,
It looks like you are at the end of your argument on this forum now that you are asking such an inane question. But I won't let the slap of that insult stop me from sharing this advice.

You are falling on a sword that many others have attempted to fall on. An elderly retired lawyer I met at a party once, gave me some excellent advice on determining what to fight and what not fight. He suggested I survey my neighbors by taking the time to knock on doors etc and ask my fellow HOA members if they felt a wrong had been committed and whether or not I should fall on that particular sword. Then and only then will I know if it is worth the bloodshed to move forward.

Turns out that by stepping away from the internet and talking to my neighbors, I was able to see the forest for the trees and leave it alone. I hope that you do the same, for your sake and for the HOA's.
NpS
(Pennsylvania)

Posts:4215


05/21/2015 7:17 AM  
Posted By WalterM3 on 05/21/2015 5:28 AM
I don't think anyone responded to this but a defendant can't join another party as a -defendant-, right? So there was no chance of the HOA being involved in this suit.


Wrong and wrong.

Sikubali jukumu. Read all posts at your own risk.
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


05/21/2015 7:17 AM  
Posted By CyrstalB on 05/21/2015 6:52 AM
"Do you think the Board members should follow the clearly stated rules -- especially when it comes to spending the homeowners' money?

Maybe you don't think that is important." Walt

Dearest Walter,
It looks like you are at the end of your argument on this forum now that you are asking such an inane question. But I won't let the slap of that insult stop me from sharing this advice.

You are falling on a sword that many others have attempted to fall on. An elderly retired lawyer I met at a party once, gave me some excellent advice on determining what to fight and what not fight. He suggested I survey my neighbors by taking the time to knock on doors etc and ask my fellow HOA members if they felt a wrong had been committed and whether or not I should fall on that particular sword. Then and only then will I know if it is worth the bloodshed to move forward.

Turns out that by stepping away from the internet and talking to my neighbors, I was able to see the forest for the trees and leave it alone. I hope that you do the same, for your sake and for the HOA's.




I -have- canvassed door to door. Knock on 20 doors and you may talk to 3-5 people and take a couple of hours to do that. That is not doable.

Going to the courts is something these corrupt Board members can't disregard, blow off or expect resident apathy to shield them from.

The way I see it, they will remain unrepentant and outwardly unconcerned even if they are shown to have acted with malfeasance and bad faith. You make a good point. Apathy may shield them. The responsibility devolves onto the homeowners if they allow such bad conduct from their representatives.

One of the new Board members has told me she thinks they should pay the money back. We'll see.

Walt
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


05/21/2015 7:24 AM  
Posted By NpS on 05/21/2015 7:17 AM
Posted By WalterM3 on 05/21/2015 5:28 AM
I don't think anyone responded to this but a defendant can't join another party as a -defendant-, right? So there was no chance of the HOA being involved in this suit.


Wrong and wrong.




Why?

Walt
LarryB13
(Arizona)

Posts:4099


05/21/2015 11:30 AM  


So the judge says:
"Walter, the defendants have moved for dismissal of your derivative action due to your failure to comply with state law requiring that a minimum of 5% of the members join the action. They allege that the minimum number of members of your association would be 12. It appears that no other members have joined you. Can you give some reason why this action should proceed without compliance with the statute?"

And Walter says,
Posted By WalterM3 on 05/21/2015 7:17 AM
"I -have- canvassed door to door. Knock on 20 doors and you may talk to 3-5 people and take a couple of hours to do that. That is not doable.

"Going to the courts is something these corrupt Board members can't disregard, blow off or expect resident apathy to shield them from.

"The way I see it, they will remain unrepentant and outwardly unconcerned even if they are shown to have acted with malfeasance and bad faith. You make a good point. Apathy may shield them. The responsibility devolves onto the homeowners if they allow such bad conduct from their representatives.

"One of the new Board members has told me she thinks they should pay the money back. We'll see."


What will be the judge's response?

I am putting my money on, "Motion granted. Case dismissed."

But what do you think the judge will say, Walter?
TimB4
(Virginia)

Posts:17766


05/21/2015 12:31 PM  
Posted By WalterM3 on 05/21/2015 7:24 AM
Posted By NpS on 05/21/2015 7:17 AM
Posted By WalterM3 on 05/21/2015 5:28 AM
I don't think anyone responded to this but a defendant can't join another party as a -defendant-, right? So there was no chance of the HOA being involved in this suit.


Wrong and wrong.




Why?

Walt




GEORGIA CODE
Copyright 2014 by The State of Georgia
All rights reserved.

*** Current Through the 2014 Regular Session ***

TITLE 9. CIVIL PRACTICE
CHAPTER 11. CIVIL PRACTICE ACT
ARTICLE 4. PARTIES

O.C.G.A. § 9-11-19 (2014)

§ 9-11-19. Joinder of persons needed for just adjudication


(a) Persons to be joined if feasible. A person who is subject to service of process shall be joined as a party in the action if:

(1) In his absence complete relief cannot be afforded among those who are already parties; or

(2) He claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and is so situated that the disposition of the action in his absence may:

(A) As a practical matter impair or impede his ability to protect that interest; or

(B) Leave any of the persons who are already parties subject to a substantial risk of incurring double, multiple, or otherwise inconsistent obligations by reason of his claimed interest.

If he has not been so joined, the court shall order that he be made a party. If he should join as a plaintiff but refuses to do so, he may be made a defendant or, in a proper case, an involuntary plaintiff. If the joined party objects to venue and his joinder would render the venue of the action improper, he shall be dismissed from the action.

(b) Determination by court whenever joinder not feasible. If a person, as described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) of this Code section, cannot be made a party, the court shall determine whether in equity and good conscience the action should proceed among the parties before it or should be dismissed, the absent person being thus regarded as indispensable. The factors to be considered by the court include:

(1) To what extent a judgment rendered in the person's absence might be prejudicial to him or to those already parties;

(2) The extent to which, by protective provisions in the judgment, by the shaping of relief, or by other measures, the prejudice can be lessened or avoided;

(3) Whether a judgment rendered in the person's absence will be adequate;

(4) Whether the plaintiff will have an adequate remedy if the action is dismissed for nonjoinder; and

(5) Whether and by whom prejudice might have been avoided or may, in the future, be avoided.

(c) Pleading reasons for nonjoinder. A pleading asserting a claim for relief shall state the names, if known to the pleader, of any persons, as described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) of this Code section, who are not joined and the reasons why they are not joined.

(d) Exception of class actions. This Code section shall be subject to Code Section 9-11-23.
TimB4
(Virginia)

Posts:17766


05/21/2015 12:36 PM  
Posted By WalterM3 on 05/21/2015 7:17 AM

I -have- canvassed door to door. Knock on 20 doors and you may talk to 3-5 people and take a couple of hours to do that. That is not doable.




Why is it not doable.

The fact that it takes time you may not want to spend on the issue would, in my opinion, not be a reason why something is not doable. You have probably spend the amount of time that would be required to do such an action on this site trying to convince those who have nothing to do with the issue and are not affected by any actions you or your Board make that you have a valid case.

The people you need to convince are other members of the Association and the court.
NpS
(Pennsylvania)

Posts:4215


05/21/2015 12:41 PM  
Posted By WalterM3 on 05/21/2015 7:24 AM
Posted By NpS on 05/21/2015 7:17 AM
Posted By WalterM3 on 05/21/2015 5:28 AM
I don't think anyone responded to this but a defendant can't join another party as a -defendant-, right? So there was no chance of the HOA being involved in this suit.


Wrong and wrong.


Why?


First, because that would give the complaining party the unfair power to pick and choose who becomes part of a lawsuit.

Second, because there are often situations where the legal system has pre-determined that a case cannot proceed without the participation of some person or another - go look up the term "necessary party" for clarification.

Third, because any person who becomes a party to a lawsuit has the right under various circumstances to file an "impleader" that brings another person into the suit as a party. Go look up "impleader."

Fourth, your claim of "no chance" that the HOA will become involved fails for the above reasons.

Sikubali jukumu. Read all posts at your own risk.
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


05/21/2015 12:44 PM  
Posted By TimB4 on 05/21/2015 12:31 PM
Posted By WalterM3 on 05/21/2015 7:24 AM
Posted By NpS on 05/21/2015 7:17 AM
Posted By WalterM3 on 05/21/2015 5:28 AM
I don't think anyone responded to this but a defendant can't join another party as a -defendant-, right? So there was no chance of the HOA being involved in this suit.


Wrong and wrong.




Why?

Walt




GEORGIA CODE
Copyright 2014 by The State of Georgia
All rights reserved.

*** Current Through the 2014 Regular Session ***

TITLE 9. CIVIL PRACTICE
CHAPTER 11. CIVIL PRACTICE ACT
ARTICLE 4. PARTIES

O.C.G.A. § 9-11-19 (2014)

§ 9-11-19. Joinder of persons needed for just adjudication


(a) Persons to be joined if feasible. A person who is subject to service of process shall be joined as a party in the action if:

(1) In his absence complete relief cannot be afforded among those who are already parties; or

(2) He claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and is so situated that the disposition of the action in his absence may:

(A) As a practical matter impair or impede his ability to protect that interest; or

(B) Leave any of the persons who are already parties subject to a substantial risk of incurring double, multiple, or otherwise inconsistent obligations by reason of his claimed interest.

If he has not been so joined, the court shall order that he be made a party. If he should join as a plaintiff but refuses to do so, he may be made a defendant or, in a proper case, an involuntary plaintiff. If the joined party objects to venue and his joinder would render the venue of the action improper, he shall be dismissed from the action.

(b) Determination by court whenever joinder not feasible. If a person, as described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) of this Code section, cannot be made a party, the court shall determine whether in equity and good conscience the action should proceed among the parties before it or should be dismissed, the absent person being thus regarded as indispensable. The factors to be considered by the court include:

(1) To what extent a judgment rendered in the person's absence might be prejudicial to him or to those already parties;

(2) The extent to which, by protective provisions in the judgment, by the shaping of relief, or by other measures, the prejudice can be lessened or avoided;

(3) Whether a judgment rendered in the person's absence will be adequate;

(4) Whether the plaintiff will have an adequate remedy if the action is dismissed for nonjoinder; and

(5) Whether and by whom prejudice might have been avoided or may, in the future, be avoided.

(c) Pleading reasons for nonjoinder. A pleading asserting a claim for relief shall state the names, if known to the pleader, of any persons, as described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) of this Code section, who are not joined and the reasons why they are not joined.

(d) Exception of class actions. This Code section shall be subject to Code Section 9-11-23.




What are you not getting here?

Proceedings in the magistrate court shall not be subject to Chapter 11 of Title 9, the "Georgia Civil Practice Act."

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

MAGISTRATE COURTS MAY FOLLOW CIVIL PRACTICE ACT. --The language of O.C.G.A. § 15-10-42, that magistrate courts are not subject to the Civil Practice Act, O.C.G.A. Ch. 11, T. 9, must be read to permit, rather than require, magistrate courts to follow the provisions of the Civil Practice Act, or any other appropriate rules and regulations relating to pleading, practice, and procedure, where to do so would 'administer justice' under O.C.G.A. § 15-10-44. Howe v. Roberts, 259 Ga. 617, 385 S.E.2d 276 (1989).


Walt


WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


05/21/2015 12:49 PM  

Have any of ya'll ever been to Magistrate's Court or Small Claims or whatever it is called in your state?

I have won two cases in Magistrate's Court. Neither was open/shut on the facts as this one is. And that is what is looked for in Magistrate's Court.

Proceedings in the magistrate court shall not be subject to Chapter 11 of Title 9, the "Georgia Civil Practice Act."

You shouldn't need a lawyer in Magistrate's Court. The administration of justice is the aim. You guys can roll up your pedant's pedigree. You don't know what you are talking about.

Walt
GenoS
(Florida)

Posts:4276


05/21/2015 12:57 PM  
Is this thread still going on? Is there any way to mark threads "hidden" on the forum?
TimB4
(Virginia)

Posts:17766


05/21/2015 1:02 PM  
Posted By WalterM3 on 05/21/2015 12:44 PM


What are you not getting here?

Proceedings in the magistrate court shall not be subject to Chapter 11 of Title 9, the "Georgia Civil Practice Act."

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

MAGISTRATE COURTS MAY FOLLOW CIVIL PRACTICE ACT. --The language of O.C.G.A. § 15-10-42, that magistrate courts are not subject to the Civil Practice Act, O.C.G.A. Ch. 11, T. 9, must be read to permit, rather than require, magistrate courts to follow the provisions of the Civil Practice Act, or any other appropriate rules and regulations relating to pleading, practice, and procedure, where to do so would 'administer justice' under O.C.G.A. § 15-10-44. Howe v. Roberts, 259 Ga. 617, 385 S.E.2d 276 (1989).




What are you not getting.

Per your own citation, It's the court's option, not yours. The court isn't required but they do have the option (as it is permitted). Therefore, it is possible.

To simply dismiss that possibility and say it won't happen would not be prudent.


Again, I honestly don't care one way or the other if your legal action is winnable or not.

You are the person who came to this site asking for opinions. I've offered mine. Others have offered theirs. Based on your responses, or the simple refusal to respond, you have given me the impression that you came here not for opinions but for support for your opinion (and chose to dismiss those opinions that are contrary to your own).

As I said, I honestly don't care one way or the other what happens within your Association or how the Boards actions or your response to those actions may or may not affect your Association.

You asked for assistance. I (and others) have tried to provide that assistance.

You are free to use all, some or none of the assistance that was offered.


I truly wish you luck in your cause (because I know that from your perception you believe you are doing the right thing).


I'm done with this thread.
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


05/21/2015 1:20 PM  
They can't leave it alone. It would have more pith if more people would focus on the clear corruption and malfeasance than on how well they know Lexis-Nexis.

Walt
MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:10521


05/21/2015 1:36 PM  
instead of focusing on the clear abuse of our court system? Some people shouldn't throw mud if they are covered in it themselves... Done with this thread myself... No need to keep having someone keep wanting to "brag" about their actions as if it is justification for their actions...

Former HOA President
NpS
(Pennsylvania)

Posts:4215


05/21/2015 2:08 PM  
Posted By WalterM3 on 05/15/2015 12:40 PM

Okay, I have filed in Magistrate's Court (Small Claims) an action, not against the Board, but against the corporate officers, for malfeasance.

I engaged one of those online lawyer services, and he confirmed I can sue in a "derivative action" on behalf of the HOA members to get a judgment not for me, but to force the Board members to repay money to the corporation for 1) using funds wrongly and 2) without getting a majority vote in writing as required by Georgia law, as detailed below.

STATEMENT OF CLAIM

A derivative action is being brought by the plaintiff on behalf of the Homeowners Association for harm done to it by the defendants. One thousand, one hundred and forty dollars ($1,140.00) of the Association, funds were disbursed in September 2014 in order to have the Association attorney analyze and attend a deposition for a trial between two members of the Association. The deposition was pursuant to a suit between two HOA residents over a claim of defamation. It had nothing to with HOA affairs.

1. The four defendants were the officers of the corporation on the dates when the services were rendered by the attorney and the invoices from the attorney have those dates, September 3, September 4, September 5 and September 8, 2014.

2. No regular meeting of the Board of Directors was held during that time.

3. No Board meeting being held, per the Association Bylaws and the O.C.G.A. § 14-3-704 - Approval of action without meeting, an Action Without Meeting is required. A majority of the Board Members must approve the disbursement in writing.

4. The Association Bylaws require that Actions Without meetings be decided BEFORE the action. "Action Without A Meeting. Any action by the Board of Directors or by any committee appointed by the Board of Directors required or permitted to be taken at any meeting may be taken without a meeting if, prior to such action one or more written consents describing the action taken are signed by no less than a majority of the members of the Board of Directors or of such committee, as the case may be." (HOA Bylaws Art IV, Sec 7).

5. No Actions Without Meetings were recorded throughout years 2013 and 2014 per communication with the management company representative.



THEREFORE Plaintiff asks for relief in this action on two grounds:

1. The money was spent for the personal gain of two of the defendants.
2. The money was not disbursed with the concurrence of a majority vote of Board members in writing as required by law.

Defendants must make restitution by a payment of one thousand, one hundred and forty dollars ($1,140.00) to the general account of the HOA.

-------------------------------------------------------

What do ya'll think?

Walt


SOOOOOOOOOOO Walter
Under GA procedural law for magistrate courts, your defendants have 30 days from date of service to file their answer. Now you be sure to provide us with their full answers - not your abbreviated version. I for one would like to hear what the other side has to say.

Sikubali jukumu. Read all posts at your own risk.
JonD1


Posts:0


05/21/2015 6:26 PM  
Posted By BanksS on 05/21/2015 6:50 AM




You are not brought in for a deposition as 1) a private citizen or 2) a board member or president
they are one and the same. And for a $1,400 fee to assure the HOA is not dragged into a civil dispute I would advise and require a lawyer protecting the interests of the HOA BE PRESENT.

While you might disagree you should consider the possibility you are wrong too.

Anyone who assumes the role of board president must realize they are no longer simply a private citizen representing their own views and interests. They in fact speak for the board and the community. As in any corporation officers and board members involved in legal matters should always have counsel.

When in doubt bring a lawyer






Hmm Jon, got a chuckle out of this one. While you may be very important in your role as president of your condo association, in reality you are just a small fish in a big pond.

I still hold to my opinion that board members should not use the HOA attorney for a private issue among neighbors. I would not take it as far as Walt because that is a consequence of living in a common interest community. Board members are imperfect just as all of us are and make mistakes just as all of us do. Would not be worth the hassle for the amount of money he is seeking.




As usual Banks you swallow hook line and sinker the opinions, views and perceptions of Walter the anti- HOA, anti- board zealot.

Walter has not provided the details as to why the board president had the HOA lawyer attend her deposition.
He either does not know the details or simply failed to provide them.

And as NPS stated neither Walter or YOU know the ex-president's plan to defend Walter's claims or the plans of the HOA. Only when a response is submitted will that become clear.

Because Walter says so does not make it so. And corruption is a far cry from acting in good faith. How the ex-president benefited directly from this is a mystery to me.

But you are free to jump on the crazy train this time too in the hopes Walter's effort might heal the damage done to you by your HOA when they sued you and you felt paid with time, effort, money and humiliation. But as Tim observed Walter's matter means little in his world nor will it change what happened in yours.

As far as legal representation for the deposition of board members and others you have an opinion.

Tim says it prudent.
Larry seems to agree.
I agree completely.

So far it seems you and Walter alone see it differently. As usual you find yourself in limited company.

I honestly tried to explain my views and reasoning why the ex-president should have had representation.
I have 28 years serving on our board you as I recall you have none. But of course you know best. Because you failed in your battle with your own HOA and it is CLEAR that still stings badly.

You have proven your need to come here and prove some point based on very little. And when your response
includes stories about big fish, little fish and the size of ponds you are operating at a level I choose not to lower myself to.

Yes Banks you are a big fish in Iowa for sure. Just keep telling yourself that and one day you might even come to believe it..... Proving yourself on an anonymous website Banks is of little value nor does it heal the scars of personal experience by blindly supporting opposing views based on one side or version.

Folks like Walter have come and gone here over time. Mike the idiot from Mass. Ott who sued and accomplished nothing. Amin??? who found corruption and theft and decided HOAs were a cancer. Frank who thought his long marriage and clean driver's license qualified him to serve on his board. Ans now Walter who demands the resignation of the board members he has targeted and when they refuse now sues to get his way.

Lets wait and see.......

Feel free to jump on this train ride lets see just how far it takes you. But in the end no matter what happens in Georgia changes nothing that took place in Iowa.

Little Fish OUT






BanksS


Posts:0


05/22/2015 6:50 AM  
Posted By JonD1 on 05/21/2015 6:26 PM
Posted By BanksS on 05/21/2015 6:50 AM



As usual Banks you swallow hook line and sinker the opinions, views and perceptions of Walter the anti- HOA, anti- board zealot.

Walter has not provided the details as to why the board president had the HOA lawyer attend her deposition.
He either does not know the details or simply failed to provide them.

And as NPS stated neither Walter or YOU know the ex-president's plan to defend Walter's claims or the plans of the HOA. Only when a response is submitted will that become clear.

Because Walter says so does not make it so. And corruption is a far cry from acting in good faith. How the ex-president benefited directly from this is a mystery to me.

But you are free to jump on the crazy train this time too in the hopes Walter's effort might heal the damage done to you by your HOA when they sued you and you felt paid with time, effort, money and humiliation. But as Tim observed Walter's matter means little in his world nor will it change what happened in yours.

As far as legal representation for the deposition of board members and others you have an opinion.

Tim says it prudent.
Larry seems to agree.
I agree completely.

So far it seems you and Walter alone see it differently. As usual you find yourself in limited company.

I honestly tried to explain my views and reasoning why the ex-president should have had representation.
I have 28 years serving on our board you as I recall you have none. But of course you know best. Because you failed in your battle with your own HOA and it is CLEAR that still stings badly.

You have proven your need to come here and prove some point based on very little. And when your response
includes stories about big fish, little fish and the size of ponds you are operating at a level I choose not to lower myself to.

Yes Banks you are a big fish in Iowa for sure. Just keep telling yourself that and one day you might even come to believe it..... Proving yourself on an anonymous website Banks is of little value nor does it heal the scars of personal experience by blindly supporting opposing views based on one side or version.

Folks like Walter have come and gone here over time. Mike the idiot from Mass. Ott who sued and accomplished nothing. Amin??? who found corruption and theft and decided HOAs were a cancer. Frank who thought his long marriage and clean driver's license qualified him to serve on his board. Ans now Walter who demands the resignation of the board members he has targeted and when they refuse now sues to get his way.

Lets wait and see.......

Feel free to jump on this train ride lets see just how far it takes you. But in the end no matter what happens in Georgia changes nothing that took place in Iowa.

Little Fish OUT









Jon,

You are so creative. Have a blessed day! - Banks
LarryB13
(Arizona)

Posts:4099


05/22/2015 8:21 AM  
Posted By JonD1 on 05/21/2015 6:26 PM
As far as legal representation for the deposition of board members and others you have an opinion.

Tim says it prudent.
Larry seems to agree.
I agree completely.


When Walter first posted I was left with the impression that the attorney was asked to sit in as a spectator at a deposition relating to litigation between two homeowners that did not involve the association. With no more information than that, I expressed an opinion that it did not sound like a wise expense.

Only after a lot more posts was it that Walter admitted that the litigation was between two former board members, one of whom was suing for defamation, and that the reason the association's attorney was present was to advise the current president, who had been subpoenaed as a witness by one of the combatants.

What a difference it makes to have a few more facts! That swung my opinion from this being a needless expense to being a prudent, necessary, and normal expense that could have easily made the difference between the association remaining on the sidelines and getting sucked into some really stupid litigation.

I hope this resolves any doubts that anyone may have on my opinion of the wisdom of this expense.
JohnC46
(South Carolina)

Posts:11507


05/22/2015 10:15 AM  
Banks

As much as some mainly come down on the pro-HOA/BOD side, you have to admit that you as often come down on the anti-HOA?BOD side.


BanksS


Posts:0


05/22/2015 10:38 AM  
Posted By JohnC46 on 05/22/2015 10:15 AM
Banks

As much as some mainly come down on the pro-HOA/BOD side, you have to admit that you as often come down on the anti-HOA?BOD side.





Yes, you are probably right and it comes from a very, very bad experience. I will try to be more objective.
BanksS


Posts:0


05/23/2015 5:51 AM  
Posted By BanksS on 05/22/2015 6:50 AM
Posted By JonD1 on 05/21/2015 6:26 PM
Posted By BanksS on 05/21/2015 6:50 AM



I honestly tried to explain my views and reasoning.













So do I.

I do apologize for being snarky but I have a very different perspective than you. I see serving as president of your condo and being a private citizen as separate. I will share with you an example of why. I am the elementary school secretary in a small school in a small town in rural Iowa. I often run into students and their parents at the grocery store, movie theatre, dr. offices, etc. They know me as the secretary at their child's school. They do not know me as president of my HOA (I'm not but you see where I am going with this). Sometimes the parents in my school get involved in custody issues with their ex-spouse. As secretary, I keep the attendance records of the students. I have been asked to testify at custody hearings about the attendance of their child. I am there as the secretary of the school and my role as HOA president does not come into my testimony. There is no connection between the two.

You are important in your role as condo association president but outside of that realm, you are Jon private citizen. That was my meaning behind the small fish in a big pond.

I did not read Walt's posts that carefully. The HOA president was prudent in seeking the advice of the HOA attorney because as it turns out it involved the HOA. But there are instances in one's life where it would not be appropriate as in the example I just shared.


MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:10521


05/23/2015 7:40 AM  
Just to clarify... A HOA President represents the HOA as a "WHOLE". So basically imagine IF a HOA was a person, it would be the HOA President. If HOA was a thing, it would be the CC&R's/Rules etc... If HOA was a place, it would be your neighborhood...

HOA's since they are corporations (in most cases) MUST be represented by a lawyer in court OR someone the HOA approves to represent. The other option is akin to representing oneself in a court of law. An option, I am sure many here would NOT support. If someone is going to represent me in court, I'd prefer a licensed professional...

Considering the issue may have involved a HOA situation, then the President would had to have legal representation provided by the HOA. Even if it is advice that it is or is not a HOA matter. The President/Board has the responsibility to prevent damages to it's members including legal liabilities.

Now there is a line between "President of HOA" and "John/Jane Doe Citizen". That line can be blurred but it is usually can be separated by proper legal advice if need be. For example: If I as President got into a disagreement with my next door neighbor over a fence. The fence is on my property line. (Not common property). Then I as "Private Citizen" can sue my neighbor to move it and have it surveyed. However, I as "President of the HOA" could NOT use the HOA attorney. It's NOT a HOA issue. It is ONLY a HOA issue if the fence installed did not meet the requirements, was not approved, or was in bad condition. The HOA then could sue/lien for the fence removal. That would use the HOA attorney.

Basically, remember your HOA President does have 2 hats. One Private and one Public. You can have a "beer" with your neighbor who is President of your HOA during a backyard BBQ. You can't have a "Beer" with the HOA President, if you are complaining about how the backyard BBQ is serving Alcohol and violating noise rules...

Former HOA President
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/05/2015 4:34 AM  


Got this last night in an e-mail:

"Walt,

From whom do you want the money and to whom do you want it to go?

Diane"

------------------------------------------------

To which I replied:

Diane,

I don't care where the money comes from. With the exception: Obviously the HOA cannot pay itself.

When I receive confirmation that $1,140.00 (what I am asking for in the suit) is deposited into the general fund of the ... Homeowners Association, Inc,(whatever that is called) I will agree to have this case [number] dismissed.


When I have that confirmation I will further agree to not pursue any action in any court against anyone who served on the Board of Directors during 2013 and 2014 based on any information I have developed regarding malfeasance or other actions for which Board members are not indemnified in the Covenants.

Sincerely,

Walt

-----------------------------------------------

Two of the defendants were served by the sheriff on May 20. The other two I am having served by a private process server.
TimB4
(Virginia)

Posts:17766


06/05/2015 7:19 AM  
Walt,

Is Diane your attorney or a member of the Board?
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/05/2015 7:29 AM  


Diane is a former Board president who is acting as intermediary between me and the defendants, who refuse to contact me in any way.

One of my neighbors is retired now but he for years managed all litigation for Conrail in the NE United States. He tells me he talked to a Board member yesterday saying that he had never seen a better case than mine.




Walt
LarryB13
(Arizona)

Posts:4099


06/05/2015 12:31 PM  
Posted By WalterM3 on 06/05/2015 7:29 AM
One of my neighbors is retired now but he for years managed all litigation for Conrail in the NE United States. He tells me he talked to a Board member yesterday saying that he had never seen a better case than mine.


As Abraham Lincoln once said, "The problem with the internet is that you cannot verify who said what."

Somehow, I find it hard to believe that an experienced lawyer would retire to a totally dysfunctional HOA in Georgia and hang out with you. But if you would have sought his help you could have saved yourself that $50 fee the online lawyer charged you.


GenoS
(Florida)

Posts:4276


06/05/2015 12:39 PM  
I'm stealing that Lincoln quote.

And not only a lawyer but a railroad lawyer. And not just any railroad but CONRAIL. Heh.
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/05/2015 12:51 PM  
Posted By LarryB13 on 06/05/2015 12:31 PM
Posted By WalterM3 on 06/05/2015 7:29 AM
One of my neighbors is retired now but he for years managed all litigation for Conrail in the NE United States. He tells me he talked to a Board member yesterday saying that he had never seen a better case than mine.


As Abraham Lincoln once said, "The problem with the internet is that you cannot verify who said what."

Somehow, I find it hard to believe that an experienced lawyer would retire to a totally dysfunctional HOA in Georgia and hang out with you. But if you would have sought his help you could have saved yourself that $50 fee the online lawyer charged you.






He's not a lawyer. He was retired when his girl friend got a job in Athens, GA. He moved down here then.

The fact is that these four Board members disbursed the monies in question in total disregard for their positions as corporate officers and the laws of Georgia.

Taking them to court is kinda like watching the reaction of an earthworm as the sprinklers come on.

Walt
LarryB13
(Arizona)

Posts:4099


06/05/2015 1:22 PM  
According to one section of your CC&R's that you previously quoted, your HOA is required to provide legal counsel for all officers and board members. Even if you somehow prevailed in your People's Court (and you won't), the HOA will be on the hook for additional thousands in legal fees for defense.

WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/05/2015 1:26 PM  
Posted By LarryB13 on 06/05/2015 1:22 PM
According to one section of your CC&R's that you previously quoted, your HOA is required to provide legal counsel for all officers and board members. Even if you somehow prevailed in your People's Court (and you won't), the HOA will be on the hook for additional thousands in legal fees for defense.





I think I have posted this at least ten times:


"The officers and directors shall not be liable for any mistake of judgment, negligent or otherwise, except for their own individual willful misfeasance, malfeasance, misconduct, or bad faith."

Not following the clearly stated rules in the Bylaws shows malfeasance, misconduct AND bad faith.

Walt
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/05/2015 1:32 PM  
Posted By LarryB13 on 06/05/2015 1:22 PM
According to one section of your CC&R's that you previously quoted, your HOA is required to provide legal counsel for all officers and board members. Even if you somehow prevailed in your People's Court (and you won't), the HOA will be on the hook for additional thousands in legal fees for defense.





The other problem the defendants have is that to engage the lawyer would cost more than the whole suit, which is only $1,140.00. And since all records of the Association must be made available to the members of the Association, people would know that the defendants did that. And the members are pretty tender when it comes to wasting the Association's money.

This has already been discussed in the 'Hood. If the defendants use Association money to defend their malfeasance it might even spark a recall.

Walt
TimB4
(Virginia)

Posts:17766


06/06/2015 2:29 AM  
Walter is correct in one thing. It may be less expensive for the Association to settle vs. fight.

Now, since Walter indicated to the Board that he doesn't care where the money comes from, it's possible that the Associations insurance will pay in order to avoid legal costs. It's also possible that the Directors will pay, make a claim to the Board and the Board pay them back.

With Walter indicating that he didn't care where the money came from, the door is now wide open for lawyers to do lawyerly things and discover the legal loopholes created by Walters oral contract to drop the case and not pursue additional legal action once money (that he doesn't care where it comes from) is deposited in the Associations account.
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/06/2015 3:05 AM  
Posted By TimB4 on 06/06/2015 2:29 AM
Walter is correct in one thing. It may be less expensive for the Association to settle vs. fight.

Now, since Walter indicated to the Board that he doesn't care where the money comes from, it's possible that the Associations insurance will pay in order to avoid legal costs. It's also possible that the Directors will pay, make a claim to the Board and the Board pay them back.

With Walter indicating that he didn't care where the money came from, the door is now wide open for lawyers to do lawyerly things and discover the legal loopholes created by Walters oral contract to drop the case and not pursue additional legal action once money (that he doesn't care where it comes from) is deposited in the Associations account.




I feel like Ripley in 'Aliens'. Did IQ's just drop sharply while I was away?

You've misspoken which I guess is not a big surprise. I do care where the money comes from. The Association cannot pay itself. How could I dictate that the four defendants each pay 1/4, or any other arrangement? What if someone just gave them the money? What if one of them was willing to pay the whole $1,140.00? All I can insist on is that the Association gets repaid the money improperly disbursed by the defendants while they were the officers of the corporation/association. That mut happen before I will agree to a dismissal before trial.

If they make a claim later and are paid by the Association, I will know that because of the Open Records provision in the law. And all the members of the HOA will know that.

"Art. IX Section 9. Inspection of Books and Accounts. All Members of the Association and all holders, insurers or guarantors of First Mortgages shall, upon written request and pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 14-3-1602, be entitled to inspect current copies of the Articles of Incorporation, the Declaration, these By-Laws, the Rules and Regulations of the Association and all books and records of the Association during normal business hours at the office of the Association or other place designated reasonably by the Board of Directors as the depository of such items. Copies of the Articles of Incorporation, the By-Laws and all amendments thereto, shall be furnished to any Owner upon request and upon payment of a reasonable charge therefor."

The point is that they will have been shown to have violated the law. That will definitely happen if there is a trial.

Walt
JonD1


Posts:0


06/06/2015 5:23 AM  
Walter it would seem is on a crusade. A crusade to prove just how right he is and how superior his thought process is.
What Walter fails to consider is that HIS crusade is only important in his limited world. Unlikely, anyone else is on the edge of their seats
In anticipation of the outcome. And the thought of some mass reaction by the owners at the conclusion of this matter is far fetched at best.
Perhaps a draft Walter for board President movement will rise up? Unlikely.


This is small claims court not the U.S. SUPREME COURT. In my view all the posts made by Walter are nothing more than chest pounding on his part to
Impress everyone and prove his mental superiority. I for one am not impressed. Just a pitiful demonstration of how a "right fighter" will go to any lengths
to prove THEIR point no matter the cost or damage to any other party. And then hide behind the ridiculous notion they did it for the common good.

No doubt Waltr views himself as a big powerful man in his community. I would guess the views of others to be quite different.

If a successful outcome in this matter in fact means so much to Walter that is a sad comment on his world and priorities.

MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:10521


06/06/2015 8:05 AM  
JonD... Ever watch the movie "Hot Fuzz"? Simon Pegg and Nick Frost? We all got to see what happens when people do something for the "Greater good"... Funny movie but speaks volumes of small communal living....

Former HOA President
GenoS
(Florida)

Posts:4276


06/06/2015 12:29 PM  
I feel bad for people who will, in the future, come here expecting to find useful and relevant information about "Suing Board members". An admin ought to post a message right at the top of Page 1 of this thread to alert those future visitors that this entire thread is devoid of any useful information.
MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:10521


06/06/2015 2:12 PM  
People who read this post and still want to sue and NOT listen to experienced knowledgeable people deserve what they get. Unfortunately, their actions will bring innocent victims with them in doing so. If no one asked you to be their "hero", then your only in it for yourself...

Former HOA President
BanksS


Posts:0


06/06/2015 2:26 PM  
Posted By GenoS on 06/06/2015 12:29 PM
I feel bad for people who will, in the future, come here expecting to find useful and relevant information about "Suing Board members". An admin ought to post a message right at the top of Page 1 of this thread to alert those future visitors that this entire thread is devoid of any useful information.



Maybe true but isn't it delicious? Life would be so incomplete without HOATALK and some of the regulars who offer up their knowledge, wit, and sarcasm. Thanks Internet friends. Even you JonD.
CyrstalB
(Maryland)

Posts:457


06/07/2015 6:09 AM  
Posted By BanksS on 05/22/2015 10:38 AM
Posted By JohnC46 on 05/22/2015 10:15 AM
Banks

As much as some mainly come down on the pro-HOA/BOD side, you have to admit that you as often come down on the anti-HOA?BOD side.





Yes, you are probably right and it comes from a very, very bad experience. I will try to be more objective.


Your insight which is based upon that experience is very helpful, no matter which side you land on. It keeps it real.
LarryB13
(Arizona)

Posts:4099


06/07/2015 9:00 AM  
Posted By GenoS on 06/06/2015 12:29 PM
I feel bad for people who will, in the future, come here expecting to find useful and relevant information about "Suing Board members". An admin ought to post a message right at the top of Page 1 of this thread to alert those future visitors that this entire thread is devoid of any useful information.


Geno,

I cannot agree with the idea that there is no useful information in this thread. The problem is that it is buried in page after page of the OP's repetitive posts.

Despite having represented myself in civil courts for the last four decades, it was not until this post that I learned what a "derivative" action is. (It is a suit by members seeking damages on behalf of the corporation.) I was also unaware until now that the law requires a certain percentage of members to participate to have standing. The OP has yet to understand this and seems to feel that the courts will allow him to proceed even though he lacks the standing required by his state's statutes.

Of greater importance is the lesson to be learned from having an association comprised of ignorant and dysfunctional owners. The OP was once on the board and one can only imagine how detrimental his input would have been.

The OP's current crusade arises from the fact that two other former board members are engaged in a costly defamation lawsuit and both are apparently ignorant of New York Times v. Sullivan, which sets the bar so high as to be nearly impossible to prevail.

Perhaps most important is the detrimental impact that the OP's lawsuit will have on his association. His CC&R's unequivocally require the association to provide the officers and board members with counsel. The OP is suing because the association paid for legal counsel for the President when she was subpoenaed to appear as a witness in the fore-mentioned defamation lawsuit. The OP, who seems to feel that the $50 he paid to someone online posing as a lawyer was a lot of money, is appalled at the $1,140 paid to the association attorney, even though anyone who has hired an attorney should know this is a reasonable amount for the hours put in. The association will now have to shell out thousands more to defend against the OP's unmerited lawsuit and it is unlikely that they will recover their costs from the OP. The OP has apparently named all the board members and officers in their individual capacity as defendants; the long-term effect of this will be that no one will want to serve on the board as long as the OP resides in their community.

The OP is a very disruptive individual who has a history of failure and demonstrated gross ignorance. He lives in an association populated by at least some similarly dysfunctional homeowners from whom he takes comfort. His present childish course of action is causing an additional rift in his community and will impose additional financial burdens upon all other members.

The lesson here may be that the OP is the most dysfunctional member of the most dysfunctional HOA ever. No matter how bad things get in your association you can take some comfort that you are not a member of the OP's association.
JeanI
(Louisiana)

Posts:105


06/07/2015 1:43 PM  
You are being very harsh in your criticism of individual board members and the type of individuals who seek out those positions. I look upon my role as a board member as one of service to the community. Individual I have no power. The Board votes on all issues and I am one among equals, no member is more powerful than the other. Board membership is time consuming and in many instances overwhelming. We are volunteers who devote many hours to serving the community and many times members are not appreciative of our efforts. However, we work for the good of the entire community and know we cannot please everyone--a thick skin is helpful when rendering this service. I am sorry that you find your board abusive and dictatorial but I hope that is characteristic of only a few dedicated board volunteers. JMI
GenoS
(Florida)

Posts:4276


06/07/2015 1:48 PM  
Posted By LarryB13 on 06/07/2015 9:00 AM
The lesson here may be that the OP is the most dysfunctional member of the most dysfunctional HOA ever. No matter how bad things get in your association you can take some comfort that you are not a member of the OP's association.

Well, OK, if someone managed to actually learn something then I'll retract what I said about "devoid of any useful information". Maybe signal-to-noise ratio would be a better yardstick. It's like the old saying, you can lead a horse to water...
JimR26
(Alabama)

Posts:27


06/07/2015 3:28 PM  
Very interesting discussion. Many HOA members have discussed with me their trials and tribulations to view documents held by the HOA board. HOs need to come forward and sue the Board. Hopefully insurance companies see this as willful. Without transparency, corruption can and will run rampant.

“Withholding information is the essence of tyranny. Control of the flow of information is the tool of the dictatorship.”
― Bruce Coville

Good luck ... I hope you bring the bastards down! HOA boards need to clean up their act.
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/07/2015 5:28 PM  
Posted By JimR26 on 06/07/2015 3:28 PM
Very interesting discussion. Many HOA members have discussed with me their trials and tribulations to view documents held by the HOA board. HOs need to come forward and sue the Board. Hopefully insurance companies see this as willful. Without transparency, corruption can and will run rampant.

“Withholding information is the essence of tyranny. Control of the flow of information is the tool of the dictatorship.”
― Bruce Coville

Good luck ... I hope you bring the bastards down! HOA boards need to clean up their act.




Thanks. I have proof of pervasive and arrogant corruption. I guess a lot of the people who post on this site don't want that discussed.

Walt
NpS
(Pennsylvania)

Posts:4215


06/07/2015 6:53 PM  
Posted By WalterM3 on 06/07/2015 5:28 PM
Posted By JimR26 on 06/07/2015 3:28 PM
“Withholding information is the essence of tyranny. Control of the flow of information is the tool of the dictatorship.”
― Bruce Coville

Good luck ... I hope you bring the bastards down! HOA boards need to clean up their act.


Thanks. I have proof of pervasive and arrogant corruption. I guess a lot of the people who post on this site don't want that discussed.

Walt


"From a pig, expect a grunt."
- Willie Von Heisterman

Sikubali jukumu. Read all posts at your own risk.
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/08/2015 5:55 AM  
Posted By NpS on 06/07/2015 6:53 PM
Posted By WalterM3 on 06/07/2015 5:28 PM
Posted By JimR26 on 06/07/2015 3:28 PM
“Withholding information is the essence of tyranny. Control of the flow of information is the tool of the dictatorship.”
― Bruce Coville

Good luck ... I hope you bring the bastards down! HOA boards need to clean up their act.


Thanks. I have proof of pervasive and arrogant corruption. I guess a lot of the people who post on this site don't want that discussed.

Walt


"From a pig, expect a grunt."
- Willie Von Heisterman




I am a grunt.

MOS 0311

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MOS 0311 is the United States Marine Corps (USMC) Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) code for Rifleman. It is the primary infantry MOS for the Marine Corps.



The riflemen employ the M16A4 service rifle, the M4 carbine, the M203 grenade launcher, M249 squad automatic weapon (SAW), as well as the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle the AT-4 and LAW rockets. Riflemen are the primary scouts, assault troops, and close combat forces available to the MAGTF. They are the foundation of the Marine infantry organization, and as such are the nucleus of the fire team in the rifle squad, the scout team in the LAR squad, scout-snipers in the infantry battalion, and reconnaissance or assault team in the reconnaissance units. Non-commissioned officers are assigned as fire team leaders, scout team leaders, rifle squad leaders, or rifle platoon guides. The mission of the Marine Corps rifle squad is to "locate, close with and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver and to repel enemy's assault by fire and close combat."

I graduated Infantry Training School on 4/12/74.

Walt
MelissaP1
(Alabama)

Posts:10521


06/08/2015 6:02 AM  
Ha... Ha... Haa! Sometimes you just have to laugh... Maybe it is and maybe it isn't about the poster..:-) ya got to give up giving attention to those who only seek it for themselves... Sad... So sad on how this will end for all and how one will never get it...

Former HOA President
NpS
(Pennsylvania)

Posts:4215


06/08/2015 7:10 AM  
Posted By WalterM3 on 06/08/2015 5:55 AM
M16A4 service rifle, the M4 carbine, the M203 grenade launcher, M249 squad automatic weapon (SAW), as well as the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle the AT-4 and LAW rockets.

"locate, close with and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver and to repel enemy's assault by fire and close combat."


All vital tools and skills when dealing with your HOA Board ... lol.

Sikubali jukumu. Read all posts at your own risk.
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/08/2015 7:14 AM  
Posted By NpS on 06/08/2015 7:10 AM
Posted By WalterM3 on 06/08/2015 5:55 AM
M16A4 service rifle, the M4 carbine, the M203 grenade launcher, M249 squad automatic weapon (SAW), as well as the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle the AT-4 and LAW rockets.

"locate, close with and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver and to repel enemy's assault by fire and close combat."


All vital tools and skills when dealing with your HOA Board ... lol.




Actually they are.

Walt
JonD1


Posts:0


06/08/2015 7:15 AM  
Not sure why Walter felt the need to post about his military service. This is an HOA issue not a combat situation. The folks Walter seems to be attacking are not the enemy but rather homeowners who volunteer their time to serve. Seems Walter might be confusing the two. In my view attack, battle and destroy are not actions required when you disagree with the actions of an HOA board.

Let's hope Walter has the ability to see the difference. That time Walter now brings up is long over. Time to close that chapter and not allow what was to affect what is today.

Not sure if the battle Walter has taken on today is actually worth fighting....
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/08/2015 7:29 AM  
Posted By JonD1 on 06/08/2015 7:15 AM
Not sure why Walter felt the need to post about his military service. This is an HOA issue not a combat situation. The folks Walter seems to be attacking are not the enemy but rather homeowners who volunteer their time to serve. Seems Walter might be confusing the two. In my view attack, battle and destroy are not actions required when you disagree with the actions of an HOA board.

Let's hope Walter has the ability to see the difference. That time Walter now brings up is long over. Time to close that chapter and not allow what was to affect what is today.

Not sure if the battle Walter has taken on today is actually worth fighting....




I just hope you keep bumping the thread.

The HOA president is claiming all issues along this line have been addressed.

This is what I sent out to 100 homeowners today; the June monthly meeting is tonight:

​"I am the one who first inquired about irregularities in the administration of ... HOA affairs.

If there has been a "line item review", the Board needs to share it with me.

Because my requests for explanation of these outlays have been repeatedly rebuffed since March by the Board of Directors, there is now a law suit in the courts involving several former and current Board members.

Since I first started on this quest to monitor HOA administration, I have developed another outlay that was not properly documented. That was the $690.00 paid out for pressure washing of the parking pads in May, 2013. I recently obtained this invoice under an Open Records request. There is no mention of this activity in the April, 2013 Minutes. No 'Action Without Meeting' was captured as required by law. The requirements for accountability in our Bylaws was ignored.

My evidence shows that the money was improperly disbursed.

This brings the total of monies of which I find evidence of improper disbursement during 2013 and 2014 to $5,047.50. You can review the attachment, which includes this pressure washing invoice."

Of course I am not including the invoice here.

I am only seeking $1,140.00 in my small claims suit because a discrete group of Board members were responsible, two of them are still on the Board, this money clearly was not disbursed according to the laws of GA and it was less than a year ago.

Walt
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/08/2015 7:34 AM  
Posted By JonD1 on 06/08/2015 7:15 AM
Not sure why Walter felt the need to post about his military service.




Because whatshisname made a joke about grunts. I are one.

Walt
JonD1


Posts:0


06/08/2015 8:21 AM  
Walter you seem to have your very own understanding of right, wrong, and corrupt behavior.

So now $690 was spent on power washing the property and you view due to procedure not being followed to the letter of the law that becomes a problem for YOU. Was the power washing needed? Or do you even care? Just another point of attack and a chance to demonstrate you new life's work.

Funny how you provided just a portion of your letter to the owners. My guess if the full content resemmbles that which you have posted little will be accomplished.

My observation you have taken this matter to the extreme. And just so you know, there are no HOA police or criminal penalties in place for those who spent money to power wash your property without telling you so at a meeting.

If that is your new discovery of corruption don't count on it turning the tide of battle in your favor....
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/08/2015 9:02 AM  
Posted By JonD1 on 06/08/2015 8:21 AM
Walter you seem to have your very own understanding of right, wrong, and corrupt behavior.





The law does.

From our Bylaws which come from Georgia statutes:

"Section 7. Action Without A Meeting. Any action by the Board of Directors or by any committee appointed by the Board of Directors required or permitted to be taken at any meeting may be taken without a meeting if, prior to such action, one or more written consents describing the action taken are signed by no less than a majority of the members of the Board of Directors or of such committee, as the case may be. Such written consent or consents shall be filed with the minutes of the proceedings of the Board of Directors or of the appropriate committee and such consent or consents shall be treated for all purposes as a vote at a meeting . Action taken under this provision is effective when the last Director or committee member signs the consent, unless the consent specifies a different effective date."

"...one or more written consents describing the action taken are signed by no less than a majority of the members of the Board of Directors..."

Any monies disbursed must be agreed to by a majority of the Board. The law further requires open records that can be consulted by the home owners, the banks, and others.

I have evidence that this didn't happen with over $5,000.00 of the home owners' money. You can't examine records that don't exist. I can't understand why so many people see this corruption as no big deal.

Walt



JimR26
(Alabama)

Posts:27


06/08/2015 10:14 AM  
Walt:

The regulars posting on this site who continue to dis you, know the HOA rules and they know how to skirt the law and get around them. There is nothing wrong with you. As you can see from this site you will have lots of adversaries and this gives you the practice you need to "combat" your corrupt HOA board. Dig in, stand strong! If you are right, you are right. Make a strong presentation to the court. More people need to stand up until HOA boards stop their corruption and bully tactics. I bet you'll never buy in an HOA again; neither will I. Good luck.
WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/08/2015 10:32 AM  
Posted By JimR26 on 06/08/2015 10:14 AM
Walt:

The regulars posting on this site who continue to dis you, know the HOA rules and they know how to skirt the law and get around them. There is nothing wrong with you. As you can see from this site you will have lots of adversaries and this gives you the practice you need to "combat" your corrupt HOA board. Dig in, stand strong! If you are right, you are right. Make a strong presentation to the court. More people need to stand up until HOA boards stop their corruption and bully tactics. I bet you'll never buy in an HOA again; neither will I. Good luck.




A neighbor of mine makes the point that many of the people on the Board are the kind of person, who as children, got their caps thrown out the school bus window. They never fit in. But being on a Board of Directors! That makes them important!

But their life experience ill-equips them to be in an organization or make decisions. And then they fail (in my case) to maintain even a low baseline of competence. Not one of them has apologized or attempted an explanation of why the very simple rules in the Bylaws were not followed. Since they couldn't own up to their lackadaisical, arrogant, incompetent actions as Board members like adults, they can tell it to the judge.

I would never have made myself subject to the rules of a corporation had I understood who typically runs HOAs.

Walt
LarryB13
(Arizona)

Posts:4099


06/08/2015 10:39 AM  
Posted By WalterM3 on 06/08/2015 10:32 AM
A neighbor of mine makes the point that many of the people on the Board are the kind of person, who as children, got their caps thrown out the school bus window. They never fit in. But being on a Board of Directors! That makes them important!

But their life experience ill-equips them to be in an organization or make decisions. And then they fail (in my case) to maintain even a low baseline of competence. Not one of them has apologized or attempted an explanation of why the very simple rules in the Bylaws were not followed. Since they couldn't own up to their lackadaisical, arrogant, incompetent actions as Board members like adults, they can tell it to the judge.


Gosh, Walt! Didn't you tell us that you used to be on the board?



JimR26
(Alabama)

Posts:27


06/08/2015 11:27 AM  
A neighbor of mine makes the point that many of the people on the Board are the kind of person, who as children, got their caps thrown out the school bus window. They never fit in. But being on a Board of Directors! That makes them important!

But their life experience ill-equips them to be in an organization or make decisions. And then they fail (in my case) to maintain even a low baseline of competence. Not one of them has apologized or attempted an explanation of why the very simple rules in the Bylaws were not followed. Since they couldn't own up to their lackadaisical, arrogant, incompetent actions as Board members like adults, they can tell it to the judge.

I would never have made myself subject to the rules of a corporation had I understood who typically runs HOAs.

Walt


HEY ... I'm down here.

Walt ... I apologize if my copying above makes it more difficult to read this post. I'm not a regular poster. The fact that these people are dissing you so often tells you exactly what you need to know; they are scared. The more scared the become the more they make extraneous attacks, like the idiot who commented negatively on you being a grunt. Thanks Walt for being a grunt. I appreciate it.

The board members posting do not want any community member to become more involved. Anyone who shows an interest is pushed aside and labeled a trouble maker. I've found a website in Co which seems to be more inclined to help the HO. No, I don't remember what it's called. Texas has a good one too.

My board does not follow the ByLaws. CC&Rs & Rules are enforced against those they don't like ... they do not honor the State Statutes and start smear campaigns at the drop of a hat. Like what you see on this website. Some of these posters just might be plants for the CAI. Only they know, but really who would make over 10,000 posts to any website, repeating themselves in the same vein with every posting? They attack any HO who doesn't sit on a board.

Best of luck. I won't be back on this topic. It's difficult to read the mob mentality and bullying from this site. Occasionally I stick my nose in where likely doesn't belong. They all should adopt a tagline that reads "WALT AND EVERY OTHER HO IS WRONG AND WE ARE RIGHT!" Then they could go out and get a real job.



WalterM3
(Georgia)

Posts:371


06/08/2015 11:50 AM  
Posted By LarryB13 on 06/08/2015 10:39 AM
Posted By WalterM3 on 06/08/2015 10:32 AM
A neighbor of mine makes the point that many of the people on the Board are the kind of person, who as children, got their caps thrown out the school bus window. They never fit in. But being on a Board of Directors! That makes them important!

But their life experience ill-equips them to be in an organization or make decisions. And then they fail (in my case) to maintain even a low baseline of competence. Not one of them has apologized or attempted an explanation of why the very simple rules in the Bylaws were not followed. Since they couldn't own up to their lackadaisical, arrogant, incompetent actions as Board members like adults, they can tell it to the judge.


Gosh, Walt! Didn't you tell us that you used to be on the board?







It might have escaped your notice but I take issue with that type of behavior.

The truth is that, for some people, being a board member is a very satisfying position with a number of rewards and perks. The types of people that are attracted to, and truly enjoy, these volunteer positions, too often, turn out to be the neighborhood authoritarians, the control freaks; every neighborhood has them. Abrasive and or adversarial personality traits are not uncommon. These people are the lynchpin of the HOA system; management companies and association attorneys depend upon their willingness to engage in conflicts with homeowners to generate a steady flow of income. And, backed up as they are by an institution that would make any third world totalitarian dictator emerald green with envy, they generally prove to be quite up to the task.

http://www.thehoaprimer.org/commonlies.htm

For some people.

I take issue with all that.

Walt
JohnnyC2
(Georgia)

Posts:12


06/20/2015 1:45 AM  
It seems Walt is basing his suite entirely on the following statement in his covenants.

"The officers and directors shall not be liable for any mistake of judgment, negligent or otherwise, except for their own individual willful misfeasance, malfeasance, misconduct, or bad faith."

As a sitting director on a POA in Georigia we have that very same statement in our covenants and I guarantee he will not be able to prove that this was more than a mistake/negligent judgement. Especially since the board members were conducting board business when the charges occurred.
Please login to post a reply (click Member Login on the menu).
Page 3 of 7 << < 1234567 > >>
Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions > Suing Board members, Not the HOA Board



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.
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