Home Page News Article on Ivy Falls

Did you all read it? I love it. Seems the BOD and owners just decided to stop being an HOA. No owners vote, no legal procedures, nothing. They just stop doing it.

Now it seems some want to reactivate it. I see no reason why they cannot reactivate it as it was not legally terminated.

Comments?

The devil is in the details. I personally have never seen CC&R's that give the Board the power to dissolve a HOA, not saying they don't exist, just that I've never seen them. Most CC&R's that I've seen require between 90 to 100% of homeowners voting yes to dissolve. If it were improperly dissolved then yes a group of homeowners could resurrect it although not being an attorney nor versed in GA laws I don't know what would be required. I would guess the first step would be asking a court to appoint a receiver until a proper vote for a BOD could be held.

If it were improperly dissolved and there has been no insurance on any common property such as a retention pond, I would say the people who improperly dissolved the HOA left themselves and their fellow homeowners open to massive litigation if someone were killed or injured. Even if the Corporation that is the HOA were administratively dissolved, the deed restrictions would remain in place and any homeowner could enforce on another homeowner through the civil courts.

From the article, it appears the HOA was terminated by a board motion and vote, which would not be adequate under most governing documents. The facts in the article are very sketchy, they don't say if the HOA has common elements, but if so, were they deeded to anyone else? What are the dues needed for?

As far as "restarting" the association, I would think that any homeowner or group of homeowners could organize an annual (or maybe special) meeting to elect a new board. If they got a valid quorum, then I'd call the board valid. If a few HOs just got together and declared themselves as the new board, then I'd say no.

These sound like typical know-nothing HOA directors.

The part of the article that mentioned publishing a notice suggests that the former BOD was trying to dissolve the corporation. Publishing a notice when dissolving a corporation is required in some states.

Under most state laws a small group of members (20% usually) could lawfully revive the corporation without giving too much notice about what they are doing. At some point, and after giving all members notice, they should have held a special meeting to elect a new board before trying to collect assessments or levy fines.

A small group of members could have called for a meeting but they would not have much authority to do anything until there was an election.

Since the article seems to rely heavily on the input from one of the former board members who voted for the clumsy attempt to end the HOA, I would have to question the accuracy of her contentions that the new group has no authority. The article did not report as to whether any elections took place and one should remember that the writer may not be knowledgeable on the topic of HOA's, leading to the omission of significant facts.

The new group apparently has the assistance of an attorney - something the old board never sought out. While attorneys are not always right, I will give this one the benefit of a doubt when challenged by anyone on the old board. My instincts tell me the new board is far more likely to be on sound legal footing than the old board ever thought of being.