Taking your board of directors to court

Suing your HOA is suing yourself and your neighbors. Who do you think just paid out that insurance claim and for what? Something that could be done INTERNALLY. The power is all in the documents NOT court papers. Hope your HOa will be able to keep insurance or rates are still affordable. Expect a raise in dues or a special assessment to cover all the damage that was done in what I call a "Piric victory". That is all HOA battles ever become in the end.

I agree with Mellissa. Expect your insurance rates to go up. You successfully sued yourself and your neighbors.

That's Meliss'a montra over and over we get it... sit back and take it. Be the victim... it's easier.

If any cost's go up it is not the fault of those who stand up for their rights but rather those who opress or continue such action(s) in the face of others who speak out/up.

Displaced blame... the core of scapegoating and demonizing.

Why do people think justice is free?

If you want something better than you have it will likely cost more.

Our society is going down the tubes because so many people value money more than most anything.

The OP gives the impression all went their way when IMO the jury is still out.

Just what was the final outcome of the legal process? The OP says some legal fees were paid by the insurance company well how much and exactly why? As already pointed out this should serve as reasoning for increased insurance premiums for the rest of time.

Just wondering if the Board was found to be at fault what punsihment were they (the members) subjected to? Has a new Board been put into place and if so what kind of job do you see them doing going forward? If the Board was allowed to stay in place then just what was accomplished?

I read all of the sins this Board was "believed" to have done and if I might say so some of them are rather frivolous in reagrds to what some Boards have been found guilty of doing. Not having an agenda? If found guilty just how much jail time are we looking at????

And now the mediator will come to some arrangments to allow both sides to think they in fact accomplished something.

I too agree this sort of percieved misbehavior might have been handled in house using the election process and if necessary the removal of the Board members. To go outside the system and into the legal system can prove costly and many times in the end neither party really wins.

I would like to know if this Board is still in office? What if anything was proven to be the case or did the Board admit to? Not what was "believed" to be the case.

What seems to be the case here Ca. politicians (and we all know how well they have handled things there) decided to set rules such as meeting announcements, agendas, prohibiting discussions outside the meetings,
many of which are simply designed to give property owners a role and voice in the process. Some abuse these rules on both sides when the letter of these laws is not followed. My question is what benefit has this brought to the property? Isn't that or shouldn't that be the bottom line? So you might have a agenda. You might now not discuss non-agenda items. And the noisy wheels on the property get to have their say at the meetings.

I hope the OP details the end determination of the mediator or the court on this matter so when the dust settles we can see just what actually took place. My guess some ruling like "just don't do that again".

I do believe that everyone understands that legal action should be considered as a last resort and, whenever possible, disputes should be resolved at the lowest level possible.
It appears that the lowest level in this instance was the court system.

The OP said:


Did the Board members not understand their requirements after the first time in court?
What about the second time?
Do they understand it now?

Why did the membership allow this to continue after the first time in court?
What about the second time?
Will they do anything about it now or will they still take the attitude of "if you leave me alone, I'll leave you alone"?


The Authority is in the documents.
The power is in the membership.

If the membership doesn't want to exercise their power, by volunteering to serve, attending meetings to see what is happening, casting a vote when the decision is theirs to make, then there is danger of those who are willing to serve and vote abusing the authority granted to them by the documents.


Always a concern whenever any insurance claim is filed (be it homeowners, auto, liability, D&O, etc.)


Assessments typically always increase.

Depending on a persons perspective some will blame the individual filing the legal action.
Some will blame the Board for failure to comply with State laws and the governing documents.
Some will blame the membership for failure to speak up and take action earlier.
Some will just blame inflation.

JM, expecting that you tried to resolve the issues at the lowest level, congratulations for winning the good fight. Hopefully things will change for the better and not for the worse.

Tim

Peter

Allow me to clarify.

Yes I could have legally fought it but I saw the hand writing on the wall and at the level I was at, we all wanted it to go away and not hurt my career. We did agree that I would get "lost" for 90 days and then resign.

It was a valuable lesson for me.

I see many that won every battle they ever fought but lost every war they engaged in and they still do not know why. I learned early on, win the wars.

Nothing personal.

You made a choice.

No different than one choosing to challenge what they believe is an injustice. For some it's more important than money.

Go ahead and challenge the validity of what is posted but for me it is more philosophical than factual.

Double post as I tried to be less pointed the second time around.

So the courts in CA. would have the time to take up violations of Davis Sterling as legitimate issues. Here in NY the legal system is burdened enough without legal arguments over a missing agenda at an HOA meeting.

I am NOT saying NEVER sue your HOA. You would be surprised to find out that I did indeed after quiting being President and was a board member I did hire a lawyer and brought him to a meeting. The new board was going in the wrong direction from the get go and had tried to make an illegal and unnecssary special assessment for a pool repair. They did get their votes but only after lying to everyone and dragging my name through the mud. My phone rang for a year with apologies from members and stories they were told. (Dooozies).

However, I was NOT alone in my fight. I had a group of almost 20 members on my side fighting the good fight. If your going to sue your HOA sue as a GROUP NOT an individual. That is truly how you change your HOA internally. It is majority rules. Plus it's a fight worth winning if many agree NOT any...

Wow...a bit surprised by all the replies.

So here's my explanation. First, this began when my husband was refused entry to a meeting. First lie, it was an executive meeting. That wasn't true for two reasons: not declared an executive meeting, no agenda and nothing discussed in the meeting according to the minutes would have dictated an executive meeting. So here is the first instance of false light. The board told people we were attempting to gain entry into a meeting (true) that was an executive meeting (false). This is also a violation of corporate law because they issues a false statement.

After that, we asked via email, in person and then by notes on the community board (that were ripped down every two hours) when the next meeting was. We were told when the meeting was AFTER the meeting via the minutes to the previous meeting (which according to the 30-day availability state requirement were already several days late). The meeting minutes were taped to our doormat. At that point, we were threatened with fines (for the "When is the next board meeting" 8.5 X 11 signs).

We then filed a request for resolution (having failed to get on the agenda or even get the agenda). This was ignored by the board. We also informed all members by notices posted on their doors and mailed letters. We were threatened with fines for these actions.

We filed in small claims court. The judge cautioned the two board members who showed up and asked them why they didn't just inform all members via email regarding the meetings.

Everything listed could be proven, including the stolen property. Some of this was proven in small claims court, but in California before going to limited/unlimited civil court, we are required to meeting in arbitration/mediation. Mediation is also required for our HOA, but the board also refused (and only a member and not the board can refuse according to California state law). So we cannot say these acts were proven in court as we have not gone to court.

Why are agendas important? Because members receive it and can decide if it is important for them to be at the meetings to discuss. Also it prevents the board from having a discussion about topics without notifying members/in secret. California finds this point very important as it is part of the open meetings act in the Davis Stirling Act. In California, we require the same in our public legislative bodies. This is one reason I find the remark that we were suing ourselves to be incredibly stupid. Citizens regularly sue the government (or at least the ACLU does) to insure that the government (state or national) obeys the law. If people hadn't been willing to sue themselves in that respect, there would still be certain people required to sit at the back of the bus and other denied the right to vote. Most of what we were taking issue with were a matter of civil law which is supposed to guarantee our civil rights in the state of California. Other members had the opportunity to do something, but it is not surprising that they did nothing to act. We made an effort to keep them informed. They had choices to make and we cannot make those choices for them.

Why is false light an important issue? When we put up the posters, the board informed the other members of the meetings and were sending them newsletters. No one but the board knew that we were not receiving the same information as the other members. So our questions seemed out of place. The board conducted many informal discussions about matters and took polls, but we were not allowed to participate. Moreover, because the call for nominations for new board members went out in those newsletters, it also seemed as if we did not care who was running and had no desire to run ourselves. This makes our actions seem inexplicable and a bit crazy. Thus false light. In one email exchange, you could easily see a person's attitude change. When a member asked about the newsletters for us, he was told that we had already been sent the newsletters. This was not true, but he didn't know that and for that reason, he asked why we just didn't bring that matter to the board instead of asking him. Of course, we had already asked the board three times (verbally and twice in writing).

In order to change rules, BTW, in California there is a requirement that opposing points of view be allowed access to common areas and all HOA media which would include the community board and newsletters. This is the same for elections. Freedom of speech, another civil right, is protected in California through this civil code.

If you don't understand the importance of false light, you probably have problems understanding the complexity of this case and shouldn't comment. False light, slander and libel are different but related issues. When an election is involved, such issues become important.

In order to hinder our attempts to sell our property, the board refused to put the commercial sign issue on the agenda (they later wrote that they deliberated about it, however, the issue was not recorded on any agenda or in any meeting minutes so we know they had secret meetings), attempted to fine us despite having no written rules in place months later, and eventually stole not one, but three signs. The police were called and the police forced a board director to return all three signs. They refused to cooperate with our real estate agent and harassed them, thus providing us with two more witnesses.

We also believe that the board violated other civil codes, etc., but cannot prove it. What we could prove was in a folder two-inches thick.

The important issue is that when you are a member of a common interest development you need to take an active interest in what is happening. If you do not, if you stand by and allow such violations, then you are part of the problem. Yet if you really thought about it, as a member of any community, you do have an interest in what happens. No man/woman is an island.

Our association only had ten units. Three units were involved as board members. We were a fourth unit. You do not state what percentage of people 20 members are, but this is also not relevant.

Two units were willing to help us, but they had no cause for action as they were not being discriminated against. In fact, as none of the other units were subject to the majority of the issues, they had no cause for action. As for the majority rules, that only pertains to certain issues. If the majority of HOA members wants to break the law, then they should not rule and they are by no means right in a moral or legal sense. As a minority (in a legal sense), that's insulting to hear.

Minutes should include which director votes for what for reasons of legal liability. If the majority of the directors vote to do something that violates state law, the CC&R or federal law, then in a subsequent court action, should the corporate protection be lifted due to negligence or willful misconduct, and the directors be liable as individuals, then the director who was in the minority would not be subject to legal penalties.

Larry,
No that is not what I was saying. There are ways to handle these things internally and that should be the first step. Lawsuits against the association should be a last course of action because innocent people are going to be affected with higher insurance costs and HOA fees which in turn affects everyones ability to sell their property.
Also, lenders now look at legal action against the association when considering whether loans in a particular community are a good risk, so these types of actions can affect more than what might first be apparent.
You might not want to live in our association, but thankfully most of our owners would disagree with you.

JM10:

Thanks for the detailed responses. Sounds like you have some legitimate concerns. But just because I am curious I will ask again after all of this has this Board been removed? Has the court or the mediator forces their removal?

And if so will YOU and others be willing to take on that role?

What consequences have been handed to the Board members other than the insurance carrier having to pay the legal costs?

I would also ask how did these folks get to be Board members? And the other owners are where in all of this.

I will speak for myself alone while I might agree with you the behavior of this Board is questionable for me taking this matter to court was not MY first avenue of action. I have a long history of working to change things on the property where I live. And my unanswered question for you going forward what have you really won?

Sometimes as others have suggested we get so involved in a matter we can't see the forrest for the trees. When this mediator or the court makes a FINAL determination please provide us with those details so we might then judge the true outcome.

Fred also makes an excellent point in all of this. You seem to claim some financial damage has been done to your property in all of this but in your efforts to right a wrong you may have damaged yourselves. Fred is right the presence of ongoing legal action will prevent or make very difficult obtaining financing for your property.

IMO looking for justice from an outside source such as governement or the legal system should be a last resort. It might prove costly and in the end unsatisfying. And in some cases the two parties loose and the lawyers and court systems profit.

IMO when you have lawyers and politicians join forces to set up systems of operation one think you can be sure of they won't work and it will cost you more money. In my life I have had the misfortune of dealing with several courts on several different matters. Most courts are nothing more than paper pushing money making enterprizes. And lawyers in general are lacking in morals or decency with regard for nothing else but the almighty buck.

Now if you look no further than our nations capital and the statehouses around the country and observe where we find ourselves today I rest my case.

I wish you luck and look forward to how this unwinds for you.

Are you assuming insurance gets cancelled because state laws or HOA laws get violated? Insurance is in it for the money. They just won't pay out on claims that may be result of violating the rules. Does NOT mean they cancel a policy because of it.

Does your insurance drop you every time you get a ticket or in an accident? They can but most likely they will just charge you more money and put you at a higher risk bracket. Let the legal system enforce the laws and the insurance process the damages from the results of those violations.

You're just now realizing that?

It's funny to watch folks pose all these specific solutions and get all worked up about issues where there is little to no KNOWN facts. And even then you don't know if the 'facts' are truthful.

As I said before I usually try to respond philosophically rather than factually. Unless I have actually experienced some of the situations or conditions (a successful recall comes to mind) you have to take it at face value.

Don't take it too seriously, it's just an anonymous chat room about HOA living.

Are you being facetious? You're comparing auto insurance to homeowners insurance and in this case common interest development (i.e. non-profit business) insurance. They are not the same things. Although if you did have too many tickets within a given period or if you commit fraud/misrepresentation of a material fact, your auto insurance might be able to cancel. It would depend upon your insurance contract. Below are two issues from our condo insurance policy.

3. All Policies In Effect For More Than 60 Days
a. If this policy has been in effect for more than 60 days, or is a renewal of a policy we issued, we may cancel this policy only upon the occurrence, after the effective date of the policy, of one or more of the following:

(3)A judgment by a court or an administrative tribunal that you have violated a California or Federal law, having as one of its necessary elements an act which materially increases any of the risks insured against.

(4) Discovery of willful or grossly negligent acts or omissions, or of any violations of state laws or regulations establishing safety standards, by you or your representative, which materially increase any of the risks insured against.

HOAs are a complete scam. There are no Open Meeting Laws, Election Laws or chain of custody of ballot laws that apply.
The most sociopathic and con artist members of the community quickly figure out that they can "get elected and stay elected"...forever.
Lawyers who "specialize" in HOA law encourage these misanthropes to cheat us and stay in power....it is money in the bank.
The equity in our homes and the money in our bank accounts fuel this corrupt system. The state of Nevada is currently embroiled in the largest corruption investigation in their history...focued soley on HOAs...no suprize!
In a recent case in Virginia the HOA bankrupted and destroyed itself after being sued by a homeowner who had had enough.
Lets hope the tide is turning and we start putting the thieves in jail, boot their tolieteer lawyers out and safeguard our investments from the turncoat neighbors who are nothing but modern day Quislings....selling us out to this repugnant system designed to steal from us.

I live in my home because...well it is my home. The fact that HOA boards do not comply with the law, and act as preditors to my vulnerable neighbors does not make me want to...leave. It makes me want to destroy the thing that is ruining my community.

That is like saying if you don't like politicians, then run for office. No thanks. I want to put the bad ones in jail and have law enforcement on their asses all the time. I want to be left alone to live my life without worrying about criminals taking my money or home.
In any case, there are no open meeting laws, election laws, chain of custody of ballot laws...it goes on and on.
Why would anyone want to get "involved" with such a corrupt system.
I want it crushed. I am suing my HOA and will have their power to levy fines against homeowners forever stripped in my state of Massahcusetts.
I am prosecuting this case entirely pro se, so I don't play into the pathology of throwing my money at lawyers.
I am doing far more for my community with this extreme effort than any of the con artists have done for my community in its entire history.
When I am done, I plan to have their power to make law (rules, regulations, change the documents with impunity) without the written consent of a supermajority of residents.
Then I plan to mandate the auditing of HOA financial records every year....done with court orders of course because these con artists make no promise they won't break.
Thank you very much, but this is the best use of my time and will ensure all of my neighbors a safe and sound community.

A recent decision in Virginia bankrupted and disolved the HOA which destroyed itself rather than obey the law. That case was over the issue of fines. The HOA lost all the way down the line and now must sell off the common property to pay the homeowner plaintiff's expenses for the lawsuit(s).

Listen to how 2 of the best neighbors/homeowners you could hope to have slapped their HOA out of existence.

http://onthecommons.us/

It is the current interview with the "Farrans".

I hope to have as much success here in Massachusetts. Perhaps it will inspire other homeowners to slap this repugnant thing that is ruining our communities, harming our neighbors and destroying our property values out of existence.

Yes I both read it and listened to the Farrans.

And that is why I think they are so awesome.

They spent years in court and thosands of dollars doing the right thing. The entire community, including the defenseless elderly who seem to be favorite targets of these repugnant HOAs, now can live peacefully because of their sacrifice.

All

In this particular case, Farran versus Olde Belhaven Towne Owner’s Ass’n, the homeowners pursued a suit against their HOA for a number of grievances, the list of which included allegations that the HOA mismanaged the finances set aside for community betterment and that it arbitrarily denied homeowner’s request to build a deck. In the end, the court agreed with the owners and found in their favor. In response, the HOA argued that, though it had lost the suit, it was not required to reimburse the owners for the legal fees they incurred in defending their rights in court. In fact, the HOA asserted that Virginia Code § 55-515 protected it from that responsibility because it was not the HOA, but rather the owners, that brought the suit to begin with. Ultimately, it was this assertion that the Circuit Court found issue with. Stating that its decision was supported by the Supreme Court case of White v. Boundary Ass’n 271 Va. 50 (624 S.E.2d 5), the court upheld the homeowners right to recover the money spent in their suit against the HOA.

I do not believe this decision is a major one for nor against HOA's.

Tim

Of the many things I have learned on this chat is concerning fines.

1. Some sort of "wording" has to be the Covenants allowing such. It might not even be the word fine but more in "legalese" form.

2. There has to be procedure/schedule for such. Do not be capricious.

If the above is met, then generally fining is just fine....LOL