Common Expenses

Several of our buildings contain a single, common water softener that is connected to all units within those buildings. The association has contracted for a service company to deliver and replenish the salt for the water softeners in these specific buildings. The cost is considered a common expenses and all association members share those costs.

Most buildings, however, do not have a common water softener. In these buildings, each individual unit has its own water softener within the unit, and the unit owner is responsible for purchasing his own salt and replenishing the water softener himself, within his unit.

From a legal standpoint, shouldn't ALL unit owners have the ability to receive the benefits of the water softener service provider. Why should this service be provided only to those buildings with a single, common water softener?

Would it make a difference if the "common" water softeners are located areas that are designated as Limited Common Areas? (there is a current dispute regarding whether the areas may be LTC's)

Thanks,
Water softener costs aren't specifically identified as a Limited Common Expense in our docs, however, it appears the common water softeners are located in areas that have been designated as Limited Common Areas.

I guess my question is...
Is it legal for these buildings to receive water softener services as a shared/common expense, while other buildings (with their own individual water softeners) are not receiving these same services?

i hope that makes sense

While I might not agree with Janet's strident...."DO NOT"....I believe what she says is fair, so be fair.

Those in the buildings served by the "group" water softner should be paying for this service and those not serviced by such, should not be sharing the cost of such as such is not available to them.

Legal lingusitics aside, fair is fair.

Janet,
I can't thank you enough...you've been a great help!

JanetB2

Per our State Statute we could either choose to assess based on those owners benefited or not.

We have a number of styles of buildings.

Per our Declaration - lets say some maintenance item only benefits the “A” type buildings, but for us the Owners in the “B” type buildings are also assessed.

This is allowed per state statute:

(c) To the extent required by the declaration:

(2) a common expense benefiting fewer than all of the units or their owners MAY be assessed exclusively against the units or unit owners benefited;

My point is - shouldn’t JimM20 check his documents to see if assessing according to benefit is allowed.