courtesy leters

The HOA establishes their position/opinion on situations in the use of Courtesy Letters and Hearing Notices. If they want to have a Hearing, they send out a Hearing Notice. If the situation is not so important and can be resolved without a Hearing, they send out a Courtesy Letter.
My question is: If a resident complied with the requirements in a Courtesy Letter to avoid a Hearing, is it legal/ethical for the HOA to have a Hearing to determine if there should be fine for the same issue that was already resolved by use of the Courtesy Letter?

RichardB, I find your post interesting in that it handles violations of restrictions in a different manner than our management company. First to answer your question a Hearing would seem to be a waste of time if the violation had already been corrected.

Our procedure is to send a Courtesy Notice which makes the owner aware that they are in violation. The Notice quotes the restriction; provides a photo when applicable; and a time limit for correction. That is all that is needed for about 80% of the violations. We find most homeowners are not aware of the restriction they are violating and they correct it by the specified deadline.

For those owners who do not correct a violation within the time limit, a Violation Notice is sent. This Notice advises they are in violation; states the restriction; that they can be subject to a fine of $XX if the violation is not corrected by a specified deadline; and that they have the right to promptly request a Hearing if they do not think they are in violation. This results in correction most of the time and eliminates almost all need for a Hearing. Prior to setting up this procedure Hearings were held and the violators seldom attended. This simply wasted the time of the Hearing committee.