A service of:
Community123.com
Professional websites for HOAs & condos, since 2004
🎁 1st year FREE for HOATalk members! →
← Return to Topics List

Attorney meeting

Started by SheilaH5 • 13 replies • 1747 views

💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

SheilaH5 (Florida)
Posts: 12
Posted:
Our 7 member Board has a Skype meeting once a month with the attorney.
The ex-President, who is now just a director, insists on being the only one talking to
the attorney. The new President doesn’t agree.
In the past the old President would ask members of the Board to write down their questions and
He would put on a head set where by you could hear him ask the question, but could not hear
the attorney’s answers. The President would then write down the answers and give them to his wife to
type up and send a copy via E-mail to the rest of the Board.

The new President wants the entire Board to be able to hear everything that is going on.

I would appreciate your take on this.

JM10 (California)
Posts: 503
Posted:
I feel that while the past system did help coordinate things with one person asking the questions, all of the directors should hear the response and this is possible with Skype. There is no reason for only one person to hear the answer

As most attorneys bill by time, you might agree with a time and also have some opportunity for the directors to ask further questions that might come up.

If one person only is talking, it should be the current president. The secretary should take down the answers or it should be recorded for the secretary to later transcribe.

This is part of an executive session, correct? You don't mention if the wife of the former president is a director and/or if she is the current secretary. If she is neither a director nor the secretary, there is no reason why she and other members should be allowed to be privy to the attorney-board exchanges.
TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,059
Posted:
It does help to only have one speak to the attorney as too many questions can add up the billing hours.
That said, the voice of the Board is the President.

Since you are doing the meeting via skype, I don't see an issue in having other board members present.

When we speak with the attorney, we communicate via e-mail and the board actually discusses all the questions to be asked prior to sending the e-mail. This way, the attorney's response can be sent to all board members.

SheilaH5 (Florida)
Posts: 12
Posted:
Thank you for your reply.

I believe I did not get my point across.

The Past President (because there was reorganization) still thinks he is entitled to..... Everything!
I was trying to point out the unmitigated gall of this person regarding the head sets and being the only
one to hear the attorney's answers.
The new President has a difficult time controlling him with his E-mails and calls to the attorney, which
has put us way over budget.

The current President has asked the attorney not to respond to this person, but he still does so.
The attorney stated that if four members of the BOD want to speak to him, it is the majority and
he has to respond. Is this true?

CarolR11 (Colorado)
Posts: 2,563
Posted:
The Board should vote on who speaks to the attorney. it should only be one person. The board should notify the attorney in writing who that person is. Generally, it's the president. I, too, see no reason why all directors cannot hear the attorney's responses.

Review your contract with your attorney, Sheila, which say say something about who may speak with him, etc.

And I agree with JM- the former prez's wife should not be in attendance at all if she's not on the board or is otherwise invited by a majority of the Board.

I'm curious as to why the (former or current) board president has so much power.

We pay our attorney a $500 year retainer and phone calls to him are free.
CarolR11 (Colorado)
Posts: 2,563
Posted:
The Board should vote on who speaks to the attorney. it should only be one person. The board should notify the attorney in writing who that person is. Generally, it's the president. I, too, see no reason why all directors cannot hear the attorney's responses.

Review your contract with your attorney, Sheila, which say say something about who may speak with him, etc.

And I agree with JM- the former prez's wife should not be in attendance at all if she's not on the board or is otherwise invited by a majority of the Board.

I'm curious as to why the (former or current) board president has so much power.

We pay our attorney a $500 year retainer and phone calls to him are free.
TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,059
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By SheilaH5 on 07/30/2012 6:52 AM

The new President has a difficult time controlling him with his E-mails and calls to the attorney, which
has put us way over budget.

The Board needs to pass a resolution that "the cost of any discussions not receiving prior approval by a majority vote of the Board with the Associations Attorney will be the sole responsibility of the individual initiating the discussion. Said charges will be considered an assessment against the property and subject to all provisions of governing documents regarding assessments (charges, fees, etc.).

Then the next time he does it, present him with the bill.

LarryB13 (Arizona)
Posts: 4,099
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By CarolR11 on 07/30/2012 9:26 AM
We pay our attorney a $500 year retainer and phone calls to him are free.

We had one of those guys for awhile. The advice we got for free over the phone was worth just exactly what we paid for it.

Those $500-a-year attorneys always remind me of the sign in the pizza shop: "We have no quarrel with those who charge less because they know what their product is worth."

Or as English writer John Ruskin (1819-1900) aptly said, "There is hardly anything in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and sell a little cheaper, and the people who consider price only are this man's lawful prey.”

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265
Posted:
Shelia

Two things. First, I see no reason for meeting with the association attorney once a month, but that could well be a local issue(s).

Secondly, Mr. Ex-president is not longer in charge (his day has come and gone) and the quicker you wrest that power away from him, the more the BOD will be in charge instead of him.

Your present BOD President is a pussy.

Hope this helps.

CarolR11 (Colorado)
Posts: 2,563
Posted:
Jeez, Larry! Your response is insulting to me and to the other members of our hardworking board. And I can't imagine why. Your reply has nothing to do with the OP's dilemma.

We've engaged our HOA attorney for about 4 years now, did a rigorous search, interviews with a few firms, etc., to find him. Got references., etc., and he's served us very, very well. We renewed his firm's contact last week. His written opinions are not free. His work revising our Bylaws & CC&Rs, in progress, is not free. His firms charges for his time, of course, and a different rate for their paralegal's time, etc.

WE'd fired our previous attorney--hired by the developer-- once we became a majority on the board. Our new and current attorney is the person who alerted us to seeking a construction defect attorneys as the statutes of limitations clock was ticking. Our previous attorney hadn't breathed a word about that.
SheilaH5 (Florida)
Posts: 12
Posted:
I wish we had an attorney on retainer for 500.00 a year!

We pay 350.00 per hour. The Skype calls are 200.00 a year for ½ hour each month.
Just to let you all know, Mr. Past President did not bother to show up today for the Skype
meeting. I guess he’s sulking in a corner somewhere.
KevinK7 (Florida)
Posts: 1,343
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By TimB4 on 07/30/2012 1:01 PM
Posted By SheilaH5 on 07/30/2012 6:52 AM

The new President has a difficult time controlling him with his E-mails and calls to the attorney, which
has put us way over budget.

The Board needs to pass a resolution that "the cost of any discussions not receiving prior approval by a majority vote of the Board with the Associations Attorney will be the sole responsibility of the individual initiating the discussion. Said charges will be considered an assessment against the property and subject to all provisions of governing documents regarding assessments (charges, fees, etc.).

Then the next time he does it, present him with the bill.


I would go further and increase the threshold to more than a majority vote.
DaveD3 (Michigan)
Posts: 796
Posted:
Has this one guy been contacting the attorney completely on his own, without agreement from any other board members?

Regardless, I agree with the above. Majority vote of the board required to go to the attorney for any reason, the president is the official voice of the HOA, and anything done otherwise constitutes a personal consultation that is not the board's responsibility.

While the president is the voice, everyone should hear both the question and the he response. It's quite possible for the president to ask a leading question on a topic in order to gain support of his own viewpoint and creatively restate the attorney's answer to suit.
ChristineS5 (Washington)
Posts: 5
Posted:
In Washington State, if it's a Board meeting where an attorney is present, ALL members are allowed to attend. The only exception to when the board can meet in closed session with an attorney is the announce they are meeting in closed session AT an open meeting, to which members are allowed to attend. Then AFTER the closed meeting, the Board has to come back and generally tell the members what the attorney discussion was about.

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

  • ✓ Ask follow-up questions
  • ✓ Share your experience
  • ✓ Get expert advice
  • ✓ Access 350,000 discussions
Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here

Terms of Use and Privacy Statement