💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

MarianneG (Indiana)
Posts: 170
Posted:
We are re-doing our Covenants and it has been suggested that we use the title, "Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Protections." So, instead of using "Restrictions" use the term "Protections" in the title since in fact, the documents protects both the homeowners and the association. Just interested if there are any thoughts on this suggestion.
TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,061
Posted:
You should check with your Associations attorney. Their might be laws regarding the title when attaching it to the deed.
JanetB2 (Colorado)
Posts: 4,219
Posted:
I agree with Tim you are in essence restricting the deed. CCR is a term utilized in the HOA world ... individuals do not reference the documents in HOA's as CCP.
MarianneG (Indiana)
Posts: 170
Posted:
The question is before the attorney, but we haven't received an answer as yet.
SteveM9 (Massachusetts)
Posts: 3,699
Posted:
Your going to pay an attorney to give you advice on what to name it? LOL. You guys need help.

Name it the same name it was before. Case closed.

If everyone's deed refers to everyone must follow the HOA's "Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CCR), it needs to be named Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CCR). By changing the name you are creating more legal problems because the deeds dont refer to it.

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,061
Posted:
Steve actually brought up a good point.

If you physically change the name of the document one could argue that it's not an amendment or a restatement of the existing document. As a new document, it wasn't attached to my deed when I purchased - I don't agree with it - therefore, I don't have to comply with it. Oh did the creation of this new document legally abolish the old document? Going on the same argument - the Association would have released me from my obligation to it.

I'm not saying that it's an argument that could be 100% won. However, does the Association want to take the chance and incur the legal fees if a group of property owners wanted to get together and argue it in court?

My advice - Stick with the original name.

Tim
EllieD (Vermont)
Posts: 446
Posted:
Are you a HOA Association or a Condominium?
MarianneG (Indiana)
Posts: 170
Posted:
WOW. I didn't expect to get such a strong outpouring -- just asking for some general reactions to the word "protections" in place of "restrictions."

Here's the scoop. We are re-doing our original Declaration (which was one God-awful mess of gibberish) in order to make it more readable and therefore more useful for the homeowners. We are an HOA, and it is committee of homeowners who have worked on the document a little over a year. The suggestion of using "protections" instead of "restrictions" came to us from a homeowner, who ostensibly got the idea from an attorney. The word "protections" is certainly more friendly than the negative word "restrictions" IMHO. However, the points raised here are cetainly well taken.

We are in the final stages of completion, and as I said earlier, the question of using one word in place of another in the name of our document is before our association attorney along with some other minor, clean-up questions.

We are amazed at the mistakes and inconsistencies we found as we re-did our document. Some of it is pretty important - like whether we are operating on a fiscal year or calendar year basis, the date and instrument number of the original recording of the plat, the lot numbers of homes in the community. We've been able to find and clear up these kinds of mistakes as we carefully, systematically worked on the document. It has been well worth the effort.
TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,061
Posted:
Marianne,

I congratulate you on taking on that task. My Association re-worked our governing documents back in 1992/3. Like you it was a 1 to 1 1/2 year task. That Board even hired outside assistance (not an attorney) for it.

Well here it is almost 20 years later and over the past two years I've taken the time to really compare the documents. I'm surprised at the number of conflicts I am finding between the them. Instead of trying to re-work the whole thing, we are amending the documents as we find the conflicts.

My suggestion is to have a fresh set of eyes - people who haven't worked on it yet - take a look to see if there are conflicts between the documents. As you discovered here, the changing on one word can cause a whole different meaning.

An example of issues I've discovered:

One document says Directors are elected by a majority of the membership. Another document says they are elected by a majority of votes cast.

CC&Rs specify that only a 10% penalty and costs of collections can be added to late assessments. Bylaws adds interest and a Resolution adds an administrative fee. Per our Attorney - interest and an undefined admin fee are not costs of collection. I'm figuring out how to explain that one to the membership without causing issues from people who were charged admin fees and interest on top of penalties.

Tim
EllieD (Vermont)
Posts: 446
Posted:
MarianneG,

Google: “CC&R”. I got 726,000 hits, including definitions of what CC&Rs are.
Google: “Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions”. I got 4,320,000 hits.

Google: “CC&P”. I got 30,700 hits, quickly scanning I found nothing relating to a HOA.
Google: “Covenants, Conditions and Protections”. I GOT ONE (1) HIT ONLY, and that was to your posting here.
MarianneG (Indiana)
Posts: 170
Posted:
We have heard back from the atty, and as many of you have suggested, he recommends we leave the word "Restrictions" in the title, which is what we will do.

Thanks, Tim. I also am very glad we took on this monumentous task. First a group of homeowners reviewed and made changes, then the BOD reviewed and suggested changes, and just recently the atty has reviewed and given his legal advice. I have a background in technical writing and editing, and I know that it is a rare document that is absolutely perfect in every way. Over time other changes will undoubtedly need to be made, but for now, our new document (which still needs to be presented for a vote by the membership) is far superior to the document the developer provided us.
MarianneG (Indiana)
Posts: 170
Posted:
Also to you Tim -- Congratulations for keeping on top of your documents. It is very easy to miss the conflicts that exist between and within documents.
SteveM9 (Massachusetts)
Posts: 3,699
Posted:
MarianneG,
Just curious, how much have you budgeted for this project of rewriting the CCR, lawyer, filings, copies to homeowners, copies to mortgage companies, etc.
MarianneG (Indiana)
Posts: 170
Posted:
SteveM9. There is no budgeted amount of $$ for the new document. We are authorized a "Contingency Fund." Every month, X dollars from each homwowner assessment goes into the contingency fund, which can be used for expenses beyond the budget. I am assuming that the BOD will use the contingency fund to pay the costs of attorney and printing of the final. Our costs will be minimal. I have typed the document on my personal computer and have used my own paper and ink, which I'm glad to donate because this kind of work is fun for me.

The attorney charges $220/hour and anticipates he will spend from 2.5 hours to 3.5 hours on our Covenant so the attorney's fee will be somewhere between $550 and $770. At this point, I don't know how much time he has spent and how much time he will yet need to spend to answer some final questions. I have been quite impressed with this attorney, who is a specialist in HOA issues. When we first contacted him, he said he would review our document without any charge to us and would give us his estimate of his charges. His costs to us began only after we contracted with him to review the document.

Printing charges will not be significant either. There are only 115 homes in our development so at a minimum we need to have 115 copies printed. At .09/page for 30 pages, the cost will be $310.50. I'm sure the BOD will want some extra copies printed so the print costs will be a bit more than $310.50.

I guess I should also point out that the homeowners who worked on re-stating the Covenant also donated their time, which was pretty significant. We reduced an unbelievably confusing document from 40 pages to 28 pages (in all 30 pages because we added 2 pages of Table of Contents). Essentially we removed all referecnes to the developer and replaced them with the name of our HOA. We moved like items together under one heading. For example, information about our Common Areas was spread throughout the original. We moved all info about Common Areas under one heading to make it easier to read. We simplified the language. We noted and corrected errors and inconsistencies. The attorney gave us language to strengthen collection of unpaid assessments and about violations of covenants. I'm very pleased with the outcome.

Is your community thinking of re-doing some of your documents, Steve?

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

  • ✓ Ask follow-up questions
  • ✓ Share your experience
  • ✓ Get expert advice
  • ✓ Access 350,000 discussions
Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here