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

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

MargaretH2 (Georgia)
Posts: 1
Posted:
Good evening,

I am on the architectural control committee of my HOA. We recently underwent to turnover for HOA control from the builder to the homeowners. When the declarant (builder) was in control, many of the deed restrictions were not enforced. Now that the turnover is complete, we want to bring or neighbor hood into compliance. Can we make homeowners who are in violation but were not made to comply by the previous declarant ( possibly for several years) come into compliance or can we only apply the restrictions from this point out?

MH
TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,061
Posted:
Margaret,

The answers to those questions will depend on the language within your governing documents.

Did the Declarant have the authority to waive any restriction (I have actually seen documents that contain such language)? If the Declarant did, then you can't enforce.

Did the member request prior approval and receive prior approval? If they did, then even if there wasn't authority to waive a restriction, the Association could find itself involved in legal action to force the Association to pay to bring the issue into compliance. This would be because the member acted in good faith and it was the Association, by approving the changes that would have caused damages to the member.

Was the Association aware of the issue previously, and if they did, how long ago? A member may be able to use a legal defense of laches to win any legal action to enforce a restriction that the Association was aware of but took no action to enforce when they were aware of it.

My suggestion would be to:

1) Start architectural files for each property (so the Association is organized)
1) identify the issues
2) Search all available documentation (past minutes, etc.) to see if approval was granted.
3) Ask the members if they have documentation of approval (if they do, accept it)
4) Grant authorization where it is likely authorization would have been approved
5) Where there are a lot of the same violation, consider changing the rules/documents to permit such items rather than forcing the members to remove what is obviously something many members desire.
6) Start enforcement on those who were unable to provide authorization and the issue likely wouldn't have been authorized in the first place.
LarryB13 (Arizona)
Posts: 4,099
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By TimB4 on 09/20/2014 2:06 AM

6) Start enforcement on those who were unable to provide authorization and the issue likely wouldn't have been authorized in the first place.


Not a good idea.

The declarant himself sat on his butt while his buyers violated his own CC&R's. The other owners who were present at the time also failed to make any meaningful objections. This raises a whole lot of contractual issues as it appears that all parties acquiesced to different terms than those that were recorded. Yes, it is legal to constructively alter a contract.

Then toss in the part about "possibly for several years." The statute of limitations may bar any action. It's a case of you snooze, you lose.

Before trying to enforce the CC&R's under these circumstances you would be best to consult with the association's attorney and your own. The reason for consulting with your own personal attorney is that you seem to be pursuing an agenda that the rest of the community does not support, as evidenced by their failures to object. A court could easily find you personally liable for all costs associated with the litigation.

Proceed with caution.

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,061
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By LarryB13 on 09/20/2014 2:49 AM
Posted By TimB4 on 09/20/2014 2:06 AM

6) Start enforcement on those who were unable to provide authorization and the issue likely wouldn't have been authorized in the first place.


Not a good idea.

Larry,

I expect that after going through steps 1-5 there will only be a few, if any, issues that would require enforcement.

My Association had a similar issue but it was due to poor record keeping. The Association didn't have the documentation it should have. Therefore, we searched Association records and cleared up a few of them. Contacting the individuals explaining that the Association doesn't have documentation of the exterior changes and asking that they provide a copy of the approval letter, correct the issue or simply submit a new request cleared up a lot of them. Amending the documents, corrected a few more.

NpS (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 4,216
Posted:
I have seen language in CC&Rs that say non-enforcement is not a waiver of the right to enforce. Under those circumstances, a new board could get tough where an old board hadn't.

Sikubali jukumu. Read all posts at your own risk.
JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By NpS on 09/20/2014 6:44 AM
I have seen language in CC&Rs that say non-enforcement is not a waiver of the right to enforce. Under those circumstances, a new board could get tough where an old board hadn't.

I agree but the OP's question was Declarant granted/allowed or maybe even ignored variances. My belief is most of the violations will remain especially if the Declarant simply says yes I knew about them.

One of the problem areas is when the ACC turns down a request for something others were allowed under the Declarant. Same as when a new BOD gets tough.

NpS (Pennsylvania)
Posts: 4,216
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By JohnC46 on 09/20/2014 7:09 AM
Posted By NpS on 09/20/2014 6:44 AM
I have seen language in CC&Rs that say non-enforcement is not a waiver of the right to enforce. Under those circumstances, a new board could get tough where an old board hadn't.


I agree but the OP's question was Declarant granted/allowed or maybe even ignored variances. My belief is most of the violations will remain especially if the Declarant simply says yes I knew about them.

One of the problem areas is when the ACC turns down a request for something others were allowed under the Declarant. Same as when a new BOD gets tough.

Never simple. Every new Board has to pick its battles carefully.

Sikubali jukumu. Read all posts at your own risk.
LarryB13 (Arizona)
Posts: 4,099
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By NpS on 09/20/2014 6:44 AM
I have seen language in CC&Rs that say non-enforcement is not a waiver of the right to enforce. Under those circumstances, a new board could get tough where an old board hadn't.

The problem is that the new board will be limited by state law, both statutory and common law, as to what they can do about violations that occurred in the past and have been allowed to continue without objection from either the association or any homeowners. The non-waiver clause would not prevent enforcement of current and future violations but would not likely overcome state law regarding enforcement barred by the statute of limitations.

CyrstalB (Maryland)
Posts: 457
Posted:
When a builder goes against his own covenants without making the amendments to the documents, could he not be held accountable?

He has the votes to amend, but if it's not done properly and recorded etc, (which they usually aren't?) why couldn't he be held accountable like a homeowner? Probably a silly question....
JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265
Posted:
Cyrstal

I am not nor do I play a lawyer.

A Declarant, as well as an Association, generally can offer a waiver. Really no way to stop them especially after the fact. In the case of an association, one could recall the BOD but one cannot recall the Declarant.

I suppose if one saw something they did not like, they could go to court to get an injunction to stop the work.

🎯 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