Violation Reporting/Handeling

The right of due process gives an alleged violator the right to face their accuser. The question becomes, is the initial complainer the accuser or does the Association (after an investigation) become the accuser? That question, you will have to answer yourself as an argument could be made either way.

Our policy is:

Written Complaint received
Investigation done by Architectural Committee
Written response to complainant.

If violation exists:

1) Informal notice (written or verbal) - x days to comply (typically 30 but could be less depending on violation).
2) Formal Notice (written sent via 1st class mail) - x days to comply
3) Notice of Hearing (written - via certified mail) before the committee - 30 day notice.
4) Hearing held - right to face accuser, submit mitigating circumstances, etc.
5) Result of hearing - sent within 7 days via certified mail

APPEAL
1) Request for appeal/review of Committee Decision sent to board
2) Board investigates to see if violation exists
3) Notice of Hearing before the Board (written - via certified mail) - 30 day notice.
4) Hearing held - right to face accuser, submit mitigating circumstances, etc.
5) Result of Hearing - sent within 7 days via certified mail

Options Available:

1) Impose fine
2) Suspend voting rights
3) Suspension of amenities (not practical for us, as we have limited amenities)
4) Enter property to repair and charge homeowner as assessment

Typically the issue is resolved when the committee holds a hearing. We have never had the issue not be resolved once it came to a hearing before the board. (Usually they find out we are serious and correct the issue prior to the BOD hearing).

The argument points, as I understand them, are:

1) The initial complainer is the accuser because they started the process.

2) The Association is the accuser because, similar to contacting the police, the member contacted the Association to investigate. If a violation exists, the Association (similar to the police) are the one's pressing the issue.

3) Both are witnesses to the action and both become the accuser.

To me, it boiled down to a "did I (board member), during the course of my investigation (based on a complaint) see the violation/condition?" If so, then I am the accuser.

If i get a complaint that I cannot personally verify (condition doesn't exist by the time I get there, etc.), then I will typically let the complainant know that there is little I can do without either evidence or giving out their name, and I might possibly have a friendly chat with the accused without names, if i think a chat might calm the issue. That all depends on the person(s) involved, and their history of receptiveness.

Ex: Hey Tom, must have been a wild party the other night. I personally didn't hear the fireworks at 2 am, because I was out of town, but a couple other homeowners let me know about them. Think that maybe next time you have a party, you could tone down the loudness after 11 or so? Your neighbors would appreciate it, I am sure, and you wouldn't be violating the covenants and all.

(if it turns ugly)
Well, that is your opinion about them, but regardless, it seems there were fireworks, and that is a violation, so... be careful with your noise, because your opinion of them won't help you if you get a violation notice.

Personally, I like having the complainer as the accuser because it keeps petty things from getting out of control.
Many are willing to complain and point fingers if they are insulated from being seen.
Letting the individual know that they may be called upon as a witness can limit the petty stuff.
Granted, it might prevent the bigger stuff from being reported but the annual inspection typically catches those anyway.

If we think the issue is more of neighbor vs. neighbor, our documents specify the following:

"Other than alleged covenant violations or alleged violations of the Design Guidelines, disputes between owners regarding activities within the private lots or living units or the appurtenant common areas, the Association will generally not become involved in the disputes or act on a complaint unless two or more persons have complained in writing."

Tim

I copied what you wrote for future reference. Thanks.

I some have concern about a violation reporter having to face whom they accuse. Personally I would try and prevent this if at all possible.

Once a complaint is received and investigated the appropriate committee should respond in several ways:

1. First, notify the violation reporter that the issue will be looked at.

2. Treat the report with benign neglect....LOL

2A. If no evidence is found, notify the reporter that no evidence was found and or there is no violation and unless more information is received, no additional action will be taken.

2B. If the violation is verified then the appropiate committee should take action and as such, they then become the formal complainer.

Personally I like the idea of a specific committee looking into allegations verus the BOD. Reason being that if one disagrees with the committee, then they can appeal to the BOD. This makes one feel they are not being railroaded by one group.

Due process is important.

A dispute between HOA members is like a dispute between neighbors in court. So a HOA hearing should function like a court.Trying to avoid being in the middle of personal dispute may be difficult.

We were threatened several times with fines by our HOA, but when we asked who made those complaints, they were silent. If someone is unwilling to go on record, then that's unfortunate but everyone needs to be willing to speak for his/herself.

If the HOA becomes too involved then there can be a conflict of interests. In that case a director should recuse his/herself.

The violator also has the right to be a complainant. But like the court a board should take complaints in the order they come.

Thanks for the input - I guess I should have done a better job explaining our development.
1. We are a single family home development of 90 homes today on 1/3 acre lots with around 20 more planned when the builder gets the sewer permits and the market lets them build

2. We have no facilities just common grass/meadow areas and a retention water basin

3. Dues are $90 a year

4. We are self ran - BOD and ARC are elected homeowners - there is no property management co etc

The only money we get (I know about) from the developer is $90 per lot they still own.

Sidewalks are unit owners to maintain

So far the township has done three streets (4 when they build the horseshoe for the last 20)

I see on the CCR we have the common area, basin and storm water management system

The Association shall have the duty, obligation, and the sole and exclusive power and right:
4.4.1 To operate, maintain, repair, restore, manage, administer and improve the Open Space, pursuant to the Article 7 herein, including inter alia, all roads, stormwater management systems and their associated basins and other improvements located thereon;

There is a reserve fund

No sidewalks on/in common area

I agree which makes me wonder...