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

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

ChuckH6 (California)
Posts: 5
Posted:
Hello,

I purchased a house in a Planned Unit Development in September 2016. During an inspection, and midway through escrow, I noticed the back patio concrete had been heaved up and broken apart, as had the concrete driveway, in the front of my house. The culprit was a tree, the only tree in the area, which was planted feet from my property line and adjacent to my property in an HOA “common area”. Roots from this tree, had travelled, in some cases 60 feet to do their damage.

After the house closed I notified my HOA that this tree had damaged my property and was a present threat to do continued damage. I requested it be taken out. The HOA removed the tree within a few months and at their expense. However, I learned during this process that the HOA, is of the opinion that they have no responsibility for the damages to my property caused by this tree. This is direct contradiction to what the CCRs say and what basic tree law states from the California Civil Code.

The HOA believes they are absolved from any liability because the previous owner, a 100 year handicapped woman, failed to notify the HOA, of the damage, in a timely manner. The underlying message being, that had the HOA been notified, they would have taken immediate action to mitigate damages. Not necessarily the case as you will read…

To add some context to this scenario the HOA, several years ago, partnered with one property owners on the very same issue. In other words, the HOA split the costs to repour a driveway and “block” the tree roots from encroaching under the driveway ever again. The participating owner told me she split the totals costs of same with the HOA. Why she split the costs is beyond me, when it was 100%, the responsibility of the HOA, to maintain that tree.

On another corner and across the street from me is a property that in 5 to 10 years, will have the same damage as my property and for the same exact reason. This particular house has the same sized tree, in the same location [relative to her house], and is exhibits roots traveling above and below ground, entering her backyard and drive way areas.

The conclusion drawn hear is the HOA does not appear to be too concerned about mitigating tree root issues throughout the development. They do not seem to believe that roots from trees in common areas are their responsibility to manage.

Is my legal right to seek remedy for damages by the HOA now invalidated in anyway because the damage occurred prior to my ownership of property? Are my rights invalidated because the previous owner did not notify the HOA of damaged occurring over the past few years? How can I be sure the previous owner did not notify the HOA and they HOA stonewalled her until she passed?

Can anyone speak to the timing issue here? I have not read any tree law or CCRs that exempt HOA’s from responsibility/liability just because they weren’t notified of damages caused by roots from their trees. The CCRs has no such contingencies.

Thank you

MelissaP1 (Alabama)
Posts: 13,836
Posted:
Hate to say it but the HOA did their part. They removed the tree. The damages it caused is your issue. The HOA expense is you and your neighbors expense. So if your so gung-ho to force the issue, you can expect to face a special assessment or higher dues if the expense of the repairs are high.

Now if during the removal of the tree caused the damage, then the you may have a case. They would be responsible if when removing the tree it lifted the concrete or fell. This isn't the case. The tree was removed and the leftover damage was already in existence.

Think it's just best you take the job on yourself than keep running to the HOA. It's most likely your best option.

Former HOA President
TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,062
Posted:
I haven't read the applicable statute. However there is a VA Court case that supports that position. Problem is with the board saying it's not their responsibility, you will likely need to go to court to force their hand.

For your legal questions, consult with a local attorney.

I suspect you negotiated a lower price for the property because of the damage. Question is do you want to spend the money you saved in repairs or on an attorney?
ChuckH6 (California)
Posts: 5
Posted:
Basic tree law as found in California Civil Code clearly demonstrates that the HOA is at fault. I am not sure where you are getting your information but roots below the ground are just as much a part of the tree, and in need of management, as are its branches. The tree is/was clearly in an common area. If the roots caused the damage and the roots came form the tree and the tree is in a common area then how could it be anyones fault but the HOA?
ChuckH6 (California)
Posts: 5
Posted:
Actually Tim I really didn't get much of a discount if any at all. You wouldn't happen to have a link to that VA case would you?
LarryB13 (Arizona)
Posts: 4,099
Posted:
Before playing lawyer I would advise any Californian with a tree problem to carefully read
http://www.treelaw.com/articles/clm.3.02.html

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,062
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By ChuckH6 on 12/04/2016 8:31 PM
Actually Tim I really didn't get much of a discount if any at all. You wouldn't happen to have a link to that VA case would you?

I have it at work and will provide it tonight when I get there.
AugustinD
Posts: 5,144
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By ChuckH6 on 12/04/2016 8:28 PM
Basic tree law as found in California Civil Code clearly demonstrates that the HOA is at fault. I am not sure where you are getting your information but roots below the ground are just as much a part of the tree, and in need of management, as are its branches. The tree is/was clearly in an common area. If the roots caused the damage and the roots came form the tree and the tree is in a common area then how could it be anyones fault but the HOA?

My HOA (not in California) is dealing with this big time, with the only difference being that the roots have gone into a number of sewer lines and caused backups. The HOA and certain members are fighting about who should reimburse whom for the repairs to the sewer pipes. Have been for over a year.

I have researched how this has been handled. My take is that "notice" of when the damage was first observed is a big deal. I believe there is an expectation by the courts that HOAs and others with risky trees can only do so much, lacking notice. I think Members do have a legal obligation to stay vigilant for encroachments on their property. If your HOA was given notice of problems the tree roots were causing and had failed to remove the tree, and more damage ensued, then this would be one thing, and case law says the HOA likely would be responsible for paying for repairs of all. But the courts have been far more generous to the tree owner when the lawsuit is in consequence of the first time damage was noted.

Splitting the costs of repairs for first-time occurrences seems fairest to me.

I do applaud your HOA for instantly taking out the tree. The tree doing most of the damage at my condo remains. (But not if I get on the board with a like-minded majority. How fast I will motion for three bids to take out this tree, and maybe a few others for economy, will make people's heads spin.)

Do quote the California Civil Code on the point.
JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265
Posted:
Aug

I wonder who poured some Round-up Tree and Root Killer around the base of that tree?
AugustinD
Posts: 5,144
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By JohnC46 on 12/05/2016 9:08 AM
Aug
I wonder who poured some Round-up Tree and Root Killer around the base of that tree?

lol here. You're funny

I'd say more but things are getting kinda thug-gish around my HOA lately. My neighbors and I have to restrain ourselves from crossing legal lines. Meanwhile, the board, with all their legal authority, have at it, backed by a thug (afaic) HOA attorney who incites violence towards members (in two cases now), reveals private members' information, and harasses.
ChuckH6 (California)
Posts: 5
Posted:
AugustinD,

I am agreement with you. Also, you seem to get the fact that my issue isn't as much as who is responsible but timing / first notice and how that plays into this. I appreciate your feedback. I like the idea of splitting the costs too.

I believe that the woman who was in the house before (100 years old, wheelchair bound, etc) did not help the situation... :/

Thank you,

Chuck
AugustinD
Posts: 5,144
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By ChuckH6 on 12/05/2016 9:22 AM
AugustinD,

I am agreement with you. Also, you seem to get the fact that my issue isn't as much as who is responsible but timing / first notice and how that plays into this. I appreciate your feedback. I like the idea of splitting the costs too.

I believe that the woman who was in the house before (100 years old, wheelchair bound, etc) did not help the situation... :/

Thank you,

Chuck

Chuck, yes the timing is key here. You can google on tree root case law. The cases do not have to involve a CIA but instead, any neighbor-to-neighbor situation of tree root encroachment. I think it's interesting that the law has evolved from about 50 years ago. And there is a well-established timeline for the case law on this. Over about 50 years ago, when one neighbor's tree's roots or branches damaged another's property, the courts offered only self-help as a remedy: The second neighbor could cut the roots or branches, but the tree owner had no other duty. With the advent of suburbia and city growth, this has changed. The courts now do tend to impose a duty on the tree owner, though usually (not always) requiring notice be given before they impose costs of repairs on the tree owner.

I think you're really stuck with a bad situation with the former owner perhaps not being in full command, yet with the law expecting her (or any POA she had appointed?) to have informed the board.

I also agree with the comments above about how this damage should have been factored at least a little into the price you agreed upon.

I will be updating the thread I started on my own HOA's tree root situation every so often.
Thank you for relating this interesting situation at your own HOA. I hope you'll keep this thread updated, too.
TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,062
Posted:
Chuck,

Sorry for the wait, I was a bit busy last night at work. Keep in mind that the following info likely has zero direct affect on CA courts. The Courts may take it as advisory vs. using it as precedence.

Here is the info:

Fancher v. Fagella The case I mentioned

If a Tree Falls and my neighbor hears it. . . Who pays? 2008 article from our Association attorney

Virginia Supreme Court, 4-3, decides about liability for trees falling 2012 article about the ruling


Va. High Court Breaks New Ground on Tree Liability
2007 Washington Post article about the ruling.

MILTON SMITH AND MRS. ETTA SMITH,v.,ROBERT L. HOLT. 1939 case which created the original basis for the law.

Hope it helps.

Tim
ChuckH6 (California)
Posts: 5
Posted:
Thank you Tim
BobD4 (up north)
Posts: 1,002
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By ChuckH6 :the HOA, is of the opinion that they have no responsibility for the damages . . .. This is direct contradiction to what the CCRs say and what basic tree law states from the California Civil Code. . . . The HOA believes they are absolved from any liability because the previous owner, a 100 year handicapped woman, failed to notify the HOA, of the damage, in a timely manner.
1- Is my legal right to seek remedy for damages by the HOA now invalidated in anyway because the damage occurred prior to my ownership of property?
2 -Are my rights invalidated because the previous owner did not notify the HOA of damaged occurring over the past few years? I have not read any tree law or CCRs that exempt HOA’s from responsibility/liability just because they weren’t notified of damages caused by roots from their trees. The CCRs has no such contingencies.
3 How can I be sure the previous owner did not notify the HOA and they HOA stonewalled her until she passed ?

4 - Can anyone speak to the timing issue here ?

ChuckH6Cal : The above & some of the excellent California based commenters here, have a lot better view of your issues than mine. But let me respectfully address them as numbered above if they can help a solution including your getting legal help or ADR.

For want of a better term it may be worth labelling as “legacy” or “historical “ the nuisance damages for which your HOA claims it is NOT responsible. Your HOA claims such on the grounds that those legacy damages allegedly preceded their being notified formally & immediately abating.

1 - whether double dipping/double compensation sought ? Several noted this aspect above.

In my jurisdiction I am certain upfront this would trigger a motion to dismiss outright any claim for legacy/historical damages. The argument : “IF you as potential purchaser failed to notice the defects during diligence & didn’t get a discount, how could the HOA be expected to notice them ? OR IF you did notice them and got any sort of discount for such, aren’t you now seeking double-discounting ? Why didn’t you withhold some of the purchase price ? Or did you already get compensated ?”

2 - Were you able to locate in your CCRs or California case law anything that directly addresses the HOA’s defence ?

Sounds like Augustin’s state above applies that defence for root nuisance tree owners ( I found SPECIFIC judicial statements of such in my non-U.S. jurisdiction, another Canadian one and in English jurisprudence )

The argument may go that tree root damage is at neither civil blame extremes of absolute liability or conversely Act of God but somewhere in between. A prudent range of management dependent on knowledge triggering reasonable responses. Like a tree branch falling from a oerfectly healthy looking tree but blameworthy only AFTER prior knowledge of the risk or disease etc

3 - You may want to try to apply records access provisions of your CCR and of Davis Stirling ( but is it 3 year retentions ? ). An issue might be litigation concern & the privacy of the former owner (deceased ?)

4 The ‘timing issue’ : I can only speculate why some jurisdictions allow IMMEDIATE ABATEMENT to exempt the nuisance tree owner from legacy root damage prior to formal notice or knowledge.

Abating nuisance faces a reasonableness standard. ie knowledge of harm. IF legacy damage instead is recoverable by a victim despite a quick abatement, does such tend to declare open season on trees & fail to discourage litigation ? or dis-incentive the abatement ?

There may be a desire to preclude court-congesting claims about legacy damage where such likely occur somewhat ‘out of sight’ from the tree owner ( the victim’s private ownership would deter random entry to inspect ).

Maybe it’s an attempt to sweep the whole complex mess out of courtrooms ? or encourage ADR & insurance & at least diligent planting decisions at day 1, regular ongoing inspections & immediate interactions between adjacent owners BEFORE damage worsens.

Hope this may help.

🎯 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