Arch. Comm denies approval for deliquent owners

My board and architectural committee are denying approval to any request to any owner who is delinquent. I don’t know how delinquent you have to be, they won’t tell me. This is a punishment for not paying the maintenance on time. They have determined they are poor and therefore can’t afford to paint, so it’s okay to do this, let the house fall down. They don’t want to know that maybe Uncle Joe may pay for the paint. I know, no logic.

This is not a case of the 90 days late and suspending their right to vote or use the common elements. I really have no problem with that; it’s the law and the HOA can legally do that. Also, these homes are not in foreclosure. But if the agent of the bank wants to paint, they have had a problem with that also – they worry do they really have the authority to paint.

Even when I read FS 720 & the new changes on June 1, I do not see any authority for a board to deny arch approval for painting of you home just because you are delinquent. There is nothing in our documents, I’ve checked. Does anyone know where the authority is to do this?

The authority is coming from the committee itself. They made a rule of thumb that people who can afford paint jobs can afford to pay their dues instead. It is one of the world's falacies we suffer with everyday. It is in murky moral terriotory to be sure. However, unless you can make them see the other side of the coin, it's most likely going to stay one of their tactics in their arsenal to get money owed to them.

The logic is kind of simple. If you see someone who is in foreclosure suddenly sporting a new car, your first assumption is why aren't they paying their house payments instead? It doesn't matter if they won the car in a contest or they inherited it. The fact they have a new car with money owed seems out of line.

The HOA is pretty limited on how it collects it's money. Liens/foreclosures is the legal measures it takes to get people to pay their back dues. Liens can stay attached until that person sells their home. Which means they can rent or keep that property for untold years. The logic the committee may be implementing is in addition to the lien. If the person wants to sell their property it has to be in "good shape" to attract best price/buyers. A neglected run down property that needs a paint job really hurts the owner. As denying them approval to fix the property, puts pressure on them to pay up.

If you see it another way, then explain it to the committee. Show them what you believe to be true versus the tactic they are using. Point out falacy and hope for the best.

Thanks, I started this more privately with the board; it has now expended to the public forum. I have demanded from the HOA that they stop or provide me with the legal backup for this. We are in a bitter battle over this. Some neighbors are aware, but they just like to be spectators to the event and score the rounds.
As I say, I have belly flopped into a "Pool of Fools" again.
And just to let everyone know, I am not delinquent, I just don't think the policy is a good one and certainly illegal.

I see the 'spirit' of the idea of such conditions but they are beyond the scope of Florida's laws regarding delinquency of payment(s) and committee/BoD authority, maybe not so in Co.

The HOA has no authority to tell HOs how to prioritize their spending.

Thak you. It's not much fun. I'm being told to leave things alone. I'm really getting a lot of flack over this. Just very hard to back off when I see something unfair and then illegal.

Brenda,
Sorry, when you go to the first link enter in search non-binding arbitration decisions. This is what you will need of you are governed by 720.

Donna,
Please supply a/the link to the following language (in Fl. state statutes) which support the claim:

"loss of ARC reviews and approvals are no different than your loss of voting privledges as well."

Hi Brenda,

I personally think it is a stretch for your association to deny ARC approval (or ARC denial of an application) based on the possible suspension of voting rights and use of the common grounds recently written into legislation. The operative word here is "possible".

No where do the statutes say other "member/owner" status or rights are removed or suspended because of the new laws. No where does it state that you would cease to be a member of the association nor lose ownership of your property. In fact it does state your association "MAY" suspend common area usage. It also states IF THE GOVERNING DOCUMENTS SO PROVIDE, voting rights MAY be suspended. Has your association adopted such a rule?

You do not lose your right to attend or speak at a meeting of the board or members. Yes, you may not vote. You do not lose your right to inspect or copy association records. You may display a flag etc etc.....

If your association documents address owner/member obligation to maintain or keep in good repair their parcel/property and outlines ARC involvement in any instance, it would be a blatant conflict with your docs to not permit compliance by any member/owner by virtue of a policy or association rule.

Chapter 720 states:

720.3035 (4) Each parcel owner shall be entitled to the rights and privileges set forth in the declaration of covenants or other published guidelines and standards authorized by the declaration of covenants concerning the architectural use of the parcel, and the construction of permitted structures and improvements on the parcel and such rights and privileges shall not be unreasonably infringed upon or impaired by the association or any architectural, construction improvement, or other such similar committee of the association.

and..........

(5) Neither the association nor any architectural, construction improvement, or other such similar committee of the association shall enforce any policy or restriction that is inconsistent with the rights and privileges of a parcel owner set forth in the declaration of covenants or other published guidelines and standards authorized by the declaration of covenants, whether uniformly applied or not. Neither the association nor any architectural, construction improvement, or other such similar committee of the association may rely upon a policy or restriction that is inconsistent with the declaration of covenants or other published guidelines and standards authorized by the declaration of covenants, whether uniformly applied or not, in defense of any action taken in the name of or on behalf of the association against a parcel owner.

HTH
My 4 cents...inflation ya know!

Ann

Peter,

Sorry for the delayed response. I said that

"I would like to hope that your documents spell out what specifically are loss of HOA privledges.You lose your right to vote if you are delinquent so loss of ARC reviews and approvals are no different than your loss of voting privledges as well"

Wishful thinking says that if you lose all privledges other than ingress and egress, that would also include rights to get approval for an ARC application. Cannot pay your dues but going to apply for a change of the property does not seem to be sensable to me. This is my humble opinion. I guess that no one would want to live in my HOA world?

Hi Joyce ... This thread is from 2011.