HOA Refusal of Magistrates Ruling

I had been taken to court by my hoa regarding violations. I went in front of the board and pleaded my case. With tons of evidence supporting my side. They declined and said I owed. I refused to pay and was taken to small claims (I know I probably should have paid and handled after the fact). Fast forward to court date, I was being sued for $900, the outcome was that I was only to be liable for $50. The day of the case I found out the board put a lion which scared me, so after the case I paid all $900. We received the judgment 5 days later stating I owed 50 and 100 in court costs. The board went to their attorney and are claiming that under the pa uniformed community act that they do not need to abide to the judges ruling and would do a sheriff sale to recoup the other 750 that the judge didn't award them. They are blatantly disregarding the judges verdict and refuse to refund me 750. How can this be legal? Wrote this from my phone, please apologize.

No attorney, for the minimal dollar amount it does not make sense. We are no longer in risk of lien. I understand an attorney knows best but for 750 it seems pointless as the only person to make money at this point would be the attorneys.

I am curious to know how the magistrates ruling can be ignored and deemed invalid when thever hoa attorney claimed pa uniformed act still allows them to recoup all 900.

If that is the case, isn't small claims court moot, the hoa wins no matter what?

So the foreclosure is now moot?

Lions scare me too

It never went as far as a foreclosure or lien, what they stated is that they would continue down that path since the judge did not rule in their favor of all $900.

Another way of stating this is that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has officially determined that you do not owe the HOA $900. There is no legal basis for the HOA to continue to claim that you owe them $900 as the Commonwealth has already ruled on that issue and rejected the HOA's claim.

Larry, thanks so much for your help, what you are saying is what we feel but why would the HOA spend more of the resident's money to have the attorney write this letter over $750? The president of the board holds a grudge against me because I asked her to not run/roll through stop signs in the neighborhood for obvious reasons and because she almost t-boned my wife at one of the intersections in our community.
I attached an OCR version of the letter (It's not perfect, some things got mistyped etc.) Please let me know if their attorney is trying to pull a fast one.

The exact wording was what was what was handed down to us by way of document from the magistrate. We were personally liable for $50 and since the ruling technically favored the plaintiff, we were on the hook for the additional $103.50 in court costs for a total of $153.50.

You are correct about the demand/order.

The outcome was not decided same day, verdict was sent by way of letter after 5 days. It gave no explanation of the findings, just the details of the outcome. I imagine since this was a very highly speculative he said/she said argument, the $50 was to give the plaintiff a small win but that's obviously speculation on my part.

But isn't it best practice in these situations to pay what you owe then deal with the legality second so you do not risk sheriff sale, etc.. Wouldn't I in turn be able to take my hoa to court and attempt to recoup the excess paid but with this time me being the plaintiff?

Regardless of me paying, shouldn't the judgement still hold weight?

Also, isn't it amazing that an hoa board would want to take advantage of an individual like this despite a judges ruling.

Bill

Sorry but you blinked and now you want free legal advice. I say forget it and move on.

As explained by the lawyer's letter they filed a lien and planned to appeal the court's decision IF you failed to submit payment.
You decided to then pay in full and that rendered any appeal unnecessary and the lien unnecessary.

Now you would like the board to abide by the court's decision and REFUND your payment. My opinion, the chances of that happening are slim to none.

If you want to fight this my guess will require a trip back to court. Just how long did these fines accumulate for to reach the $900 level? Why did you not resolve this earlier?

To reverse what has taken place will require a court order. Is that really where you wish to take this?

Larry,

Certainly an interesting argument.

If the OP has documentation that it occurred (texts, emails, letters) then it's a possibility. If it was all verbal, it becomes a we say, you say argument.

Not a good argument Larry.

The way PA HOA statutes work is that a homeowner delinquency creates an automatic lien against the property. The HOA has the option to foreclose against the real estate or get a magistrate court judgment against the owner's personal property (which avoids the delay and cost of a foreclosure against real estate).

The magistrate court does not have the authority to deal with real estate claims/liens. Real estate claims/liens go through the county courts.

The HOA can pursue both paths - personal property through the magistrate court and real property through the county court. The only thing that the HOA cannot do is collect the same amount from both courts. You can't recover the same amount twice. But you can make claims in both courts on the same dispute.

The HOA's lawyer is correct that the $50 award in the magistrate court would have only wiped out $50 of the county court lien. The HOA's lawyer is also correct that the HOA could have appealed to the county court.

But none of that mattered because the OP agreed to pay the full amount before the magistrate court issued the $50 award. The award had no effect because he had already agreed to pay the full amount. That's on the OP, not them.

The OP did not say "I'm paying this under protest." If he did that, things might have gone differently.

The OP was not under duress either. The HOA lien against his house was automatic (even though unrecorded). The lien was in effect as soon as he had an unpaid balance. The HOA could have foreclosed against that lien at any time. You can't claim duress when someone threatens to exercise a right they already have - That's tough negotiating, not duress.

Based on the above, no basis for an unclean hands argument.

Everything the OP says about the reason why they went after him could be true, but after he agreed to pay in the way that he did, he gave up any claims he had against the HOA.

Tough lesson. But nothing to be gained at this point.

I paid the $900 to wipe out the balance, not to say that I agreed with the fines/fees that were assessed to me.

So lets think, what options did I have.

1.) I don't pay, lien put against me and according to NpS even if ruled in my favor I can still have my home sheriff saled.

2.) I do pay and this is assumption that I agree that their fines/fees to me are correct.

Every place I see says to pay first, take care of the situation to secure your home and then deal with getting your money back.

Also, if what is being said is true, why even go to the magistrate if they hold no bearing? If the judge ruled I was liable $0 and I never paid the $900 after court, it sounds like the lien against my home would have stood and I could have had my house sold from under me.(I know this is dramatic but it's to prove a point)

Unfortunately, you didn't understand the process and you jumped before you needed to.

Re your item 1, if the HOA had filed to foreclose on your real property, it would have been at least 6-9 months before the court issued a writ of foreclosure and another 3 months for the sale of your house to be properly advertised and scheduled. So your house couldn't have been sold at a foreclose sale for at least 1 year after the HOA filed a foreclosure action in the county court (not the magistrate court). You would have had a full year from the county court filing to resolve things. There was no urgency to settle things before the magistrate court decision came out.

Re your item 2, yes it's always a good approach to pay (or assure that the full amount requested is being set aside). As I said above, you could have written at the time you made payment that you were paying "under protest". Alternatively, you could have put the money in an escrow account but not given it to the HOA. Either way, you would have put yourself in the best position to dispute the fees. Since I don't know what documentation you supplied along with your check, I really can't comment beyond what I've said already.

The reason they went to magistrate court is because it's quicker and cheaper for them.

Think of a magistrate court like a traffic court. They handle minor disputes. If the judge had given an explanation of how she came up with the $50, I might agree with you. But she didn't.

If you go back and read the HOA lawyer's message, it says that the HOA didn't appeal the magistrate court's award because the OP paid in full and they didn't have to. I might not like that reasoning if I was in the OP's shoes, but it is a valid legal argument IMO.

The two-door solution as you put it comes about because the magistrate court has no authority to make decisions involving real property - only the common pleas court can do that. The HOA goes to the magistrate court because its less formal and cheaper - it's their choice where to go first. As I said before, the HOA can't collect twice for the same amount, but they can collect partially in one court and partially in another.

You have concluded that the OP only owes $50 - and that would have been true if the OP waited for court to award the $50. But that's not what happened. Before either side knew what the magistrate judge would decide, the OP agreed to pay in full. And he did. When they made that agreement, the court case was over - it was settled. Have you ever heard the phrase "settled on the courthouse steps." It means that the parties reach an agreement before the court decides - and whatever is decided between the parties negates anything the court says later.

I'm sure there's a back-story that hasn't been shared with us. We don't even know why the HOA assessed $900. We do know that there's bad blood. And the real question for the OP is whether it's worth his while to try to go back to court again to try to recoup. IMO no. But it's his choice. I'm just responding to the facts presented - giving more weight to things that are documented - and less weight to facts/claims that seem to be based on emotion more than anything else.

Thanks everyone for the responses. If I don't get the money back its not the end of the world. Ando yes, there is obvious bad blood but I was able to prove to an impartial judge that a particular board member is finingredients me with no evidence or merit and that is why they were awarded so little. Technically out of the 90p, only 300 were fines, 200 were late fees and another 400 for the most company to show up in court and spend 2 hours. This is the first time our hoa has had this happen and all because I asked our board president to slow down and please be aware at stop signs.

DOH



We are all SO glad the case was settled.

When we contestep an assessment we got an attorney who suggested paying under protest to prevent the HOA from proceeding since they were very aggressive and litigious. I assume their attorney is trying their best to win by creative interpretation and figure you will eventually give up. My HOA actually had a tactic like that and their attorney would send out letters demanding payment or else face paying their legal fees and then they would state e at images for their costs. For our disputed $100 assessment they said we would potentially owe over $3000. Many of my neighbors submitted. We did not.

You may have to go the distance with this one and bring suit. I am not sure if your state would allow recuperation of your legal costs as well.

That is the thing about the hoa, its easy for them to go the distance knowing it isnt their own personal money being spent. When I submitted the payment after the court date I stated that "I want to resolved the matter of the lien to avoid a sheriff sale." Since the only way to do that is pay the fine, I'm not sure what else I could have done. I did not state I am paying out of protest but I never stated that this payment was for the fines on my account.

Never did I state that this FULL payment was to pay my fines, it was to get rid of the lien since it seems based on the pa law the magistrate has no right to get rid of a lien. If they had correspondence where I was negotiating a lower price that is one thing. But why would I not have done all of this before the court date if I was going to settle? I would have saved the 100 in court costs and 300 in management fees? It should make it clear this payment was strictly to get the lien off my home.

BillB23 (Penn) Respectfully there are several things I think you may be aware could have helped.

If you are doing a settlement, trade your bucks for a hardcopy waiver or settlement that EXPRESSLY cancels all future or collateral claims by the other party. (see :professionalism below )

( These disputes, respectfully, can quickly go into a Twilight Zone. Disputants need to try to brutally look at the 'bigger picture' early in the game. Don't leave bad news/downsides to be discovered late in the game.

Hire or acquire competent legal advice - not from dubious sources - even if only for guidance initially. "If you think professionals are expensive, just hire an amateur"

Do records access requests before there are credible grounds to refuse in anticipation of being sued.

Look receptively at ADR - including even local volunteers - early in the game.

With storm clouds a-brewing, cancel any automatic payments; go to cash or cheque exchanged by hand for receipts.

The excellent commenters at this site have lots more to suggest. . .)

Don't disagree with you. But I read the HOA lawyer's email. He's playing hardball with you because the board instructed him to play hardball. And you are correct - It's on the HOA's nickel.

You may not have said that the funds were to pay the fine, but you did say that you wanted the lien removed - and the lien was there only because of the fines. You can argue the point - but realize that the HOA attorney is going to counter-argue. There is no clear-cut answer in your favor. It could go either way. More time and money wasted.

I'm not suggesting that you remain silent about the self-serving acts of retaliation against you. I'm saying that at this point you shouldn't expect to achieve vindication through the legal system. The same energy that you put into continuing this legal dispute could go toward getting a board seat for yourself. Then do what you can to get the thug voted out.

Lacking any real details as to the origin of the charges imposed on Bill at this point hard for me to determine were the fault lies and on whom.
Bill suggests this has to do with his traffic enforcement efforts.
What were these charges for?
Did the rest of the the board condone this too. And the HOA attorney?
Were there multiple violations? Repeated violations? And how long did the behavior continue or were the violation notices ignored?
At this point Bill would like a refund. Seriously?
Bill suggests he would like to put this all behind him then do so.

To pursue this without representation would be foolish. If Bill had such he may have avoided submitting payment for fear of foreclosure.
At $250 per hour you can cover legal expenses for LESS THAN 4 hours to reach the $900 level of his payment.
Hardly putting anything behind you.