A new neighbor finds old minutes and has issues with us

It is my third post today... I promise it's the last one. Today

So, we have a new neighbor who discovered that our unit had issues with HOA in the past because we installed the sky lights. Without getting a written approval (learned that lesson, trust me). He did not say a word personally, never asked a single question in person and we got a letter the other day saying that we must provide him with all sorts of proof that we corrected violations according to the city (we did!), HOA (we did). Also that letter says that we still are entitled to fees, fines, penalties and all sorts of punishment by HOA.

By the way, he is on the Board, but a letter was written from him acting as a concerned neighbor, not a Board member. HOA BOD did not know anything about that letter.

To shed some light on this issue: we had a very powerful woman who was our HOA President and who when she got into power, was issuing violation letters to the right and to the left. When she got in the Presidents position she turned our case with sky light to the sky level. We got several letters from a lawyer saying that we had a list of violations that needed to be corrected. It was a long battle for couple of years, but we corrected all we could. We couldn't correct a violation of not getting a written permission. BIG mistake, and at some point even the directors did not remember what the request was about (couldn't find it in the minutes). We got blue-prints of the roof with changes, a city permit and came back to the Board. Then she says that the Architect was our friend, so it doesn't count, and we bribed the city employee. The permit is invalid ???????? Really?

Anyway, sometime later she gets in financial overspending (I posted a thread earlier today) of HOA money and gets resigned due to the resistance of many angry Homeowners. She is banned to participate in HOA decision making process after HOA contacted a lawyer. A newly elected Board consulted a lawyer and my husband signed a piece of paper taking ALL responsibility of ANYTHING that happens to the roof and the sky-lights on ourselves. It was something we did not anticipate but it was the only way to get a burden away HOA and from our back. And the topic is closed. That's what I thought...

Now, this new neighbor found old minutes and starts threatening that we have only until June, 30. After that he is going to take further action....

I don't feel like hiring a lawyer any more... Too much, very expensive. What should I do? I informed the Board, they are upset too.

If any of you know what to do in this strange case, please give me advise.

Thank you!

Nat

If you believe your are right and your bases are covered, then I say call his bluff. Ignore the letter, await further action. Ignore anything from him unless he persues the issue formally with the HOA BOD and/or legally.

If he verbally asks you, just smile and say have a nice day and walk away.

I would arm myself with anything you have on the issue so if it does escalates you will be prepared but...to repeat....do not respond to him.

From your posts, it seems you have major issues with this guy. I do not know why but I suggest you put them behind yourself ASAP. I would suggest you drop any and all issues with him unless you are forced to deal with them. I say forced, not just want to but you are forced to legally or by the HOA.

Natalya,

It's not really different advice but different approaches. John posted that if you have your bases covered (i.e. a copy of the letter) then ignore him until they take action and then produce the letter.

My approach was to prevent further action (and stress) be providing the letter up front.

If you are not sure the person is speaking for the board, tell them that this was settled with the Board on mm/dd/yyyy and the board should have copies of the settlement in the files. Then let him go look for them. I would also mail a copy of that letter to every other board member. (oops, now I gave you three options on how to handle it).

The bottom line is, you need to locate your copy of the settlement because you may need to produce it at some point to resolve this issue.

Tim

Natalya,

Make sure you also have a copy for your personal files.

Association records do get lost. Therefore, it's best if both parties of an agreement keep a copy.

Tim

Is it something the Board has to agree to do - to allow to pursue enforcement of the CCR's by individual Homeowners, or is it written in the governing docs? I've never heard about this one (yet).
I've checked with our insurance agent and explained to her that we installed the sky-lights. Would it be covered if something happens and the building collapses? They assured it is covered and they would pay to rebuild the whole building...
Is liability different from just insuring the property? I am sorry, I am ignorant in this one... Any help would be appreciated...

Thank you

Nat

Keep in mind that I believe personally believe the only difference between your scumbag lawyer and my scumbag lawyer is I pay one of the scumbags.

That said, I have even less respect for those that always threaten legal action and/or those that play lawyer.

I need another drink.....LOL

Natalya's husband has been in EXTREME violation of bylaws and covenants for past 5 years, 3 years since the violations were recorded with the Probate Judge. Without board approval, without city building permits, without a licensed contractor her husband had a contractor cut trusses in the roof of their small condo to install 3 GIANT motorized skylights. The board at that time attempted to rectify the situation and the owners refused to cooperate. HOA's attorney filed a quasi-lien against owners and all future owners to force compliance. 2010 Board (after losing business minded members that were pressing the matter) purposely and intentionally dropped the ball because they "didn't like conflict". 2011 her husband, the bylaws/covenants violator, charmed proxy votes from a complacent group of owners and injected himself into the board of all new board members (except one wuss old member who loves to keep her head in the sand) and charmed them all into voting him President, a role he still holds. BTW, the President and wife are also periodic late payers of monthy dues/assessments (sometimes to the point of liens filed) so they have an extremely vested interest in lowering late fees and in keeping the board in the dark to their violations. Theres way more to the story than can be told here but suffice it to say this small condo community is suffering from a board that has its individual and collective "heads in the sand". If its not resolved, there will likely be a recall vote of the entire board to kick them all out and elect a new board. Also, the board decided to hear the new owner's complaints in a special meeting...the new owner did not call a meeting.

Libel...one commenter (another thread re Natalya) mentioned that there had to be "no truth to the accusations" to be libel. There is an extreme amount of documented proof that the covenants and bylaws were violated. No owner of a condo in this development owns the roof and trusses (among other elements of the building). He knew that and yet proceeded to put in 3 very heavy skylights that required the cutting of trusses and has had to arrogance to ignore the Board and the city building inspectors for 3 years. And the chutzpah to then get him elected to the board to continue to non-compliance and to lower late fees for his own financial gain.

Would you want this guy on your HOA board?

BTW Natalya - if there is an attorney letter that resolved it all the Board would have had to accept it and approve it and would have had to satisfy the recorded Violation of Covenants, and there would have had to be a final inspection and documents by the City building inspector, and it would have all been in recorded minutes, there would be files containing all that documentation and there would be board members that would remember it. Can you produce all that? If it all exists why dont you provide all that documention to the present board and to the new owners who are questioning all these issues?

My thinking is that the HOA board - as a voting body - could revisit this skylight issue and not one person making demands of their neighbor, even if the neighbor is a director. They have no individual power and yet demand you prove to them the issue is settled? This is how new HOA board members often act, however.

Tell them to get lost. This is a board matter if the board doesn't think it's settled. If the board is satisfied, that's it.

You are welcome to request the Board to attend the Board's meeting on Tuesday! Wow what are you going to do with your concrete proof?

Then take it before your board for consideration as a possible issue.

If the board can't prove it didn't reach a satisfactory agreement over the skylight violations - it's not on the property owner to prove it in lieu of the board's lack of documentation - then you have a stalemate and then proceed to burn emotional energy.

There's something here that's not matching up and smells of a personal feud of some sort. It's up to you to sleuth this out and demanding the "plaintiff" prove an allegation won't work. I'm surprised this property owner is even discussing this with you, but that's their right.

There's no fued, absolutely none. The skylight offender had a long history of offenses dating back at least 5 years of boards made up of different people from year to year. The problem has always been this owner being non-compliant with many boards, including being seriously past due on dues/assessments resulting on several liens over the years til they finally decide to pay and then start all over again. And there is a couple much more serious issues (besides bylaws/covenants violations) that I won't share here but suffice it to say that you nor your community would want him in your community either. Nope...no fued. Just tired of the years long bulls___. This time it WILL be resolved properly and completely.

I can sympathize but recognize, from these limited postings, that the person in question serves as the HOA board president. Therefore, there is a tremendous disconnect between yourself, the anonymous neighbor and the greater community that accepts the board president in his official capacity.

The bottom line is that the property owner who is worried about the structural integrity of the roof and shared wall needs to represent his/her own interests in some capacity. If it's factual reassurance, then so be it. But this story began with Bama finding old meeting minutes, perceiving a violation and demanding answers years after the board consideration of skylights and legal handling of the unapproved installation. The story is morphed into an anonymous neighbor who has expressed concerns to Bama - concerns raised in conjunction with the recently-discovered meeting minutes.

If the desired result is a new board president, then seek it at the next election without the political moves.

If the board has settled the issue in years past, then the issue is settled. The board can actually revisit the issue and vote to accept the skylight installation in reaffirm the legal letter holding the skylight owners responsible for future roof repairs resulting from the installation. Ignoring the issue for several years makes it very difficult to revisit but doesn't prevent the condo board from actively enforcing future acts of "I didn't know we needed HOA approval" projects.

Funny, Larry.

May your HOA never have problems like this.

God Bless

Tim your thoughts and perspective is "right on" EXCEPT the lien recorded as public record three years ago REQUIRED the involvement and input and final inspection of a licensed and certified structural engineer...not just a final inspection from a city inspector alone. So a 3 year old legal document REQUIRES this. No embellishments. No "changing the rules".

Kelly

Personally I would not trust city inspectors that far. If I had concerns/questions, I might well want a certified/licensed engineers opinion in addition.

Saw a similiar issue when in an HOA of stand alone homes one person wanted to put an inground simming pool in. The pool company said no problems, they would pull the permits and do it. Someone on the ARC got a bit nervous as we lived on the coast, the water table was only a few feet below the surface, and there were reported cases of inground pools popping out of the ground.

The ARC requested an opinion of a certified/licensed engineer and a waiver of responsibilty and the homeowner would have to pay for it all. The homeowner agreed. The certified/licensed engineer report said it could be done but it required a few safeguards the pool company had not included.

The story might be anti-climatic as the homeowner decided not to got through with it but based on what the pool coampany said about permits and inspections, the city would approved and passed it.

I can cite one more. In 2003, the same city said a building permit and city inspection were not needed for a deck as long as the deck was not attached to the house nor the deck floor was less than 36in off the ground. People were building decks about 1/4 inch away from their homes.

In 2005 an HOA ARC was trying to quantify their rules on decks and a homeowner raised a question on permit/inspection issues. The person on the ARC was me and ihad built a deck as described above. The president of the ARC called and questioned the city building permit department head. The reply was well it used to be that way but now if one can step from their home to the deck, a permit/inspection is required. When asked if the rules/laws had changed, the reply was that no rule/law changes had been made, but we interpert them different now.

Never trust a government bureaucrat.

John, you hit the nail on the head.

The recorded public record legal document, "Violations of Bylaws and Covenants" (written by an attorney and highly detailed, is legally binding and unresolved) spells out every detail of the violations and every detail of what is required to remedy them.

And please know there's much more to the story than can be told here. Way more.

And, trust me, if the new owner who discovered the problem and addressed it with the offending board president was wrong, the president would have immediately produced a legal document showing it was resolved and that it was also recorded with the Probate Judge and it would have been designed to recind, amend, or replace the original "Violations" document. He has not produced such and no such "other document" has been recorded at the courthouse.

It is NOT "much adieu about nothing". It's a very serious matter and certainly the business and duty of the sitting board to resolve.

I assume that this document is the one you have described elsewhere as a lien.

Liens are not judgments. They are unproven allegations that may be quashed by court order or released by the entity who filed the lien. Liens are not legally binding on anyone but do serve as a notice that there is a dispute of some sort.

I recently learned that a lien against me was recorded in 1972 by the State of Arizona over an alleged non-payment of worker's compensation premiums. I do recall being notified of the lien 40 years ago and I also recall paying the amount due immediately, but the lien remains. Funny thing is I have bought and sold several homes since then and no lender has ever raised the issue of that 40-year-old lien.

I am not interested in what Bama has to say. His accusations are irrelevant and not constructive. He is obviously from the past Boards and I don't care who he is.
I've never seen Bama doing anything good for our Community. He is milling gossips with a little bit of truth then has a nerve to say it was ALL truth. He mentioned "God bless" in one of his posts. I assume he knows that he will be judged by God for every lie he said.
I will be back to this Forum. I am glad I found it, posted my questions and so many of you made things clear. Thank you to all who made it easier for me to understand.

BamaJ and Natty--please take your personal disagreement off this board

This whole thread took an amusing turn. One side of me says "mind your manners" and the other side says...fascinating (if only I could look like Mr. Spock when saying this).

Glen...Peyton Place is in every HOA, community, city, state in America. To think otherwise is naive for anyone to expect. There are degrees of conflict and unfortunately in a lot of HOAs, including this one, it boils to the surface and sometimes spills over. Just take at look at this board and take a minute to google HOA problems, lawsuits, conflicts, etc. It is certainly NOT unique to Alabama or the South. Nor does Alabama have a "corner on the market" of serious bylaw/covenant offenders who seriously compromise the community, the HOA, the bylaws/covenants, the financial stability of their HOA.

In this case the unauthorized and potentially dangerous structural changes and the installation of a heavy load of three oversized mechanical/electrical skylights caused the following:

1. First and foremost, the worry that the cut trusses, the weight of the combined windows concentrated in one area, and the electrical work (all none of which had been permitted or inspected), being unsafely done and potential harm to human life

2. The fact that the tiny 920 sq ft roof with seven openings would add to the cost of re-roofing/re-shingling/re-flashing FOREVER and the knowledge that with so many openings that statistically (one, two, three, four or all five or somewhere in between) skylights will leak (a little or a lot) and cause interior damage...all of which spells greater expense to the HOA FOREVER...regardless if the current owner owns the unit or any and all future owners.

3. The very real concern that the insurer would not cover the unit in the event of fire or other failure because the agent knows the whole sordid story and coyly plays the "what if" game by saying he cannot "predict the future". One can read through that statement easily.

4. The last and least concern and worry was the fact that the giant skylights were not approved by the board. That fact is minor and "unfixable".

So the only thing that the HOA board should do at this point is to make sure:

1. A bona fide inspection is/was performed by a certified, licensed, bonded and insured structural engineer and he gives his written findings that the architectural "fix" has made the roof safe and get a PE stamped document stating same.

2. The City performs their final inspection that they say they did not perform and get a document stating same.

3. An HOA attorney prepares AND records a legal document signed by all parties to pass 100% of any liability, future repair expense and other related expenses to the current owner and all future owners for perpetuity.

4. To re-shingle the unit that needed it in 2008 (when all other buildings were re-shingled because of hail damage) and has not been done to date.

5. To collect all expenses related to the matter at that time and keep a special file on the unit to ensure all future boards know that it is a "special circumstance unit" that must have all extra expenses passed along to the owner.

Those are the business-minded, fair and ethical steps that a dutiful, responsible board who is looking out for the safety and financial well-being of their HOA and its members.

Not too much to ask. Not too much to expect.