Resources Online For Homeowners

Recently I've been looking for soma additional resources online for homeowners (blogs, columns etc.). Most of the things I've seen online are there to support the HOA Board and HOA Governance guidance. I think that this is a product of the fact that the HOAs have much deeper pockets than the home owners under them. So the lawyers go where the money is and thus that is where most of the advice is.

Thoughts?

HOA's are you and your neighbors. There are no "They or Them". It's made up owners in your specific neighborhood. People think it's an "Industry" but it's not. HOA's are all individual entities. They aren't interchangeable. Do not make a profit (in most cases). Their sole purpose is to maintain common elements so that the homes stay attractive to potential buyers.

HOA's were originally developed as "sales tools" for developers who wanted to sell their developments. What better attractant than telling buyers that they will have "control" by having a rule set in place to keep the neighborhood neat? Also considering that once that developer leaves, the owners are now responsible for maintenance of any common elements put into place.

So you may want to understand what a HOA is. A HOA is ONLY funded by it's members for it's members. So any deep pockets are your own.

I think it has a lot more to do with the fact that the vast majority of non-board member owners don't pay much attention to their HOAs and certainly aren't interested in spending (i.e. wasting) their time on HOA stuff.

Your best resources for homeowners are your Governing Documents (all of them) and your State Laws. Keep in mind that periodically your laws will change and can supersede your CCR's if so noted in the law. An example would be in years past HOA's were trying to hammer owners for flying a US Flag because their CCR's did not allow ... well some of them did not realize their State Laws had been changed and made that provision in their CCR's null and void.

I have a binder with all governing documents and state statutes with tabs separating documents. I have read them many, many, many times. LOL ... State law potentially close to 100 times to point I can quote some sections almost verbatim. Part of that was because in my last HOA the Owners had to sue developers (old and new developer) and had to name the HOA. However, the HOA was under the developer (a.k.a. Declarant) control, so the developer had to pay the HOA legal fees. Because of that I learned and absorbed all I could over the couple of years that snafu took.

I agree ... unfortunately the lawyers go where the money is and they know HOA's are funded by many property owners or developers, plus will get money because fees attached to property titles. You would not begin to believe how many attorney offices I walked out of when I pointed to a certain statute and they stated "developer can do as they want". I knew that was a LIE and that they probably had a bunch of developers as clients. However, if you do homework you can also find attorney's who have high morals and ethics. While we had one who originally was such a person at the end because he was looking to purchase another legal firm he slightly threw us under the bus to collect a smaller amount of money more quickly. LOL ... That is OK he got his just reward ... Instead of practicing law he is now managing a lodge in Alaska (good place for him and not practicing law ... kind of like Russia sending their undesirables to Siberia).

Here is what Wikipedia says... CAI is an Industry representing HOA's but HOA's are NOT Industries themselves!!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeowner_association

The CAI is a lobby organization. Its purpose is to influence legislation to the benefit of the industry it represents. In this context that means the Management Companies and HOA Lawyers. The interests they promote are not home owner interests by definition, regardless of what their marketing material says.

And one can believe everything Wikipedia has posted because it can be edited by anyone and since it's on the internet it must be true.

Granted, Wikipedia can be a tool to (perhaps) point someone in the right direction, but it should never be taken as gospel. From Wikipedias on site (about Wikipedia):

Unlike traditional encyclopedias,[which?] Wikipedia follows the procrastination principle[notes 6][64] regarding the security of its content.[64] It started almost entirely open—anyone could create articles, and any Wikipedia article could be edited by any reader, even those who did not have a Wikipedia account. Modifications to all articles would be published immediately. As a result, any article could contain inaccuracies such as errors, ideological biases, and nonsensical or irrelevant text.

Wikipedians often have disputes regarding content, which may result in repeatedly making opposite changes to an article, known as edit warring[101][102] Over time, Wikipedia has developed a semi-formal dispute resolution process to assist in such circumstances. In order to determine community consensus, editors can raise issues at appropriate community forums,[notes 8] or seek outside input through third opinion requests or by initiating a more general community discussion known as a request for comment.

Critics have stated that Wikipedia exhibits systemic bias. Columnist and journalist Edwin Black criticizes Wikipedia for being a mixture of "truth, half truth, and some falsehoods".[20] Articles in The Chronicle of Higher Education and The Journal of Academic Librarianship have criticized Wikipedia's Undue Weight policy, concluding that the fact that Wikipedia explicitly is not designed to provide correct information about a subject, but rather focus on all the major viewpoints on the subject and give less attention to minor ones, creates omissions that can lead to false beliefs based on incomplete information.[152][153][154]

Journalists Oliver Kamm and Edwin Black noted how articles are dominated by the loudest and most persistent voices, usually by a group with an "ax to grind" on the topic.[20][155] An article in Education Next Journal concluded that as a resource about controversial topics, Wikipedia is notoriously subject to manipulation and spin.[21]

LOL ... I reject it also!!! In my state if an owner sues and wins they can get their attorney fees AND the HOA cannot assess their property for the HOA attorney fees. Of course it can also work the opposite that if loose the owner could be on the hook for all parties attorney fees. However, this throws the "suing HOA is suing yourself" out the door. It also tends to make people (at least those with any brains) think twice about doing anything that could cause a lawsuit. They need to calculate a high probability of winning

Melissa ... PLEASE explain how in my State an Owner who WINS a Lawsuit and is reimbursed their legal fees AND will not pay the HOA legal fees is suing the themself??? What is their potential out of pocket ... OH ... That's right ZERO!!!

You ARE the HOA. Mind blown?

You still are the HOA. Whether you win or lose. You win as a member. You lose as HOA. Which means if the judge says to pay all that member's costs, then you have to pay your fair share to the HOA to pay that member. It's NOT free and zero costs.

A HOA is ONLY funded by it's members. They don't have a money tree or "deep pockets". They have just what they collect in via dues as income. That is the HOA's ONLY income everything else is not considered income. If you were sued and the other party won, where would that money come from to pay them? Out of your wallet. So if someone sues the HOA and wins, it comes out of their wallet. That wallet has only the money of which you and your neighbors put into it.

Even in your own statements it proves the math. That you win against your HOA, they have to pay you if a judge determines. Well where do they get that money to pay you? Let me know I'd love to get into those "deep pockets".

May I have my thread back?

I agree with Carl (on this point). Please give him back his thread!!

I can also agree that there is an "HOA Industry" comprising entities that profit off of the needs of an HOA.

But I disagree that AN HOA is within that Industry. HOAs rely on them. Let's take high rise window washing firms. They are a part of this larger "industry" and our high rise HOA must use them to wash our windows.

We are not members of CAI, but its Board Members Tool Kit is an excellent resource for HOA boards members and interested homeowners too.

Doesn't matter what its budget is; a big HOA with a $1m budget has no "deeper pockets" than a smaller HOA. What is your reasoning, Richard?

I have never found a better source for association education, experiences, etc. and all of it real life, then on this chat. Yes there are more Pro then Con types here but there are both.

WHATEVER

I'm talking about "deep pockets," Tim. Our HOA with over a $1m budget has no "deeper pockets" than one with a $100k/ann. budget. All dues go to over our expenses including contributions to reserves.

We have nearly $4m in reserves. This fund, in CA, may NOT be used for anything except what's in the reserves study. Now we can "borrow" from it with a lot of hassle and by showing Owners how we'll pay it back. Knock wood, we have had no Owners sue us (though one may be pending).

We have no slush fund, or whatever, setting there to combat lawsuits or to spend on capital improvements. Everything that comes in, is earmarked.

Perhaps I misunderstand Richard's definition of "deep pockets." The word "experience" doesn't answer my question of why our HOA has "deeper pockets" than, say, yours.

Tell me about it! Mine has shallow pockets! In the last year we have spent 20K in well repairs and upgrades. We take in 24K a year if everyone pays. Add on all the other normal fees and bills and you can see that we are no danger of being called deep pocketed!

However, I can see one point of a view in calling a large HOA "deep pockets" compared to us. We need to raise 41K to repave the streets. I'm sure an HOA that has a budget of 1M a year could come up with that money a lot faster than we can. Let's say you need 50K and you have 500 units. That's a 100 dollar per unit assessment. For me to come up with half that would require 1250.00 per unit assessment.

The "deep pockets" is in the number of units and the amount that can be successfully assessed (collected) when needed for an emergency.

As I did point out above, we legally can borrow form reserves, but it takes quite a lot of rigor and a clear plan is required to be sent to owners to pay back reserves. So we have more available to borrow--from banks, too. We borrowed from a bank nearly $1m before our construction defects litigation was settled in '10 to replace a defective cooling tower on each of our high rise roofs.

At the time, we had about $1.3m in reserves. Collateral was our monthly assessments. Luckily our settlement covered all of our defects. I suppose our ability to borrow could be called "deep pockets."

We have 200+ condos. Buildings are 16 y.o. WE have 80+ components listed in our reserves study. We have some very big ticket reserves items like major repairs of our elevators coming up in a few years for over $1m. We have some aging balconies that'll cost maybe $130,000 to only partially replace their bases, waterproofing & tiles. We have $300,000 worth of exterior caulking around our window curtain systems (unitized window systems) due in a couple of years. Our buildings' exteriors are being painted for $780,000. So....it's pretty easy to see with just these few examples that our reserves are constantly being consumed. We contribute about $52,000/mo. and currently are about 70% funded.

I was on the receiving end of a lawsuit by my HOA. My HOA has some shallow pockets but pursued a expensive suit anyway. The result was. a special assement of $700 per owner. Prior to the special assessment, the HOA funds were at 0. This was partly due to legal expenses and partly due to some maintenance of the sewer system. The board borrowed money from a member to keep things going.

My husband and I made 3 offers to settle but the HOA insisted we pay their attorney fees. We just would not do that because it was the HOA's neglect that caused the conflict in the first place.

In Iowa attorney fees are rarely granted. One has to prove a party did something purposeful to cause the opposing party harm. In one particular case My attorney actually did win attorney fees for his client because the opposition fabricated some documents and they got caught. Those are the types of cases that are awarded attorney fees. I'm speaking in Iowa of course.

Moral of the story is to make every effort possible to work out a problem with an owner and don't assume if you win a lawsuit you will also get your attorney fees. Lawsuits can create a real negative environment for your neighborhood that is long lasting. Not to mention the financial consequences.

Just sharing my story.

i think there are some boards who allow the assertive loudmouths to take over and the others passively sit back and let things happen.

Let's try this: There are plenty of blogs & columns to read. See, for example, the "News" portion of this site. Among these, many are written by HOA attorneys.

Those who possess reading comprehension levels above the 8th grade should be able to discern which replies to questions (often the format) seem to "favor" Boards; which seem to favor "the industry," and which seem to favor HOA Owners.

Do keep in mind that Q & A-type columns written by attorneys may want to get business from disgruntled Owners too. They won't fare very well if their replies always favor or benefit solely boards.

As interested as you are, Carl, get on a list of management companies and HOA laws firms to attend the often-free seminars & roundtables, etc. that they sponsor. CAI seminars too. It's up to you to wear your critical-thinking hat to determine what's ideology and what's useful to Owners. I guarantee you can learn a lot.

For the first time in my HOA's 16 years, two owners potentially may sue our board--over the same topic. Both individuals, whom I happen to know, have far "deeper pocket" than the amount the HOA COULD borrow from our reserves.

Carl,

To help homeowners, it's important that they know their governing documents. Any article that explains what these mean and how to decipher them is good info (regardless if your a member of the Board or simply a member of the Association).

Most of the issues I have seen is where a member fails to follow the governing documents and crys foul when the Association attempts compliance.

The second highest issues is where members request documents (for whatever reason) and the Association fails to provide access.

For the second set of issues, it's important that the membership (and Board for that matter) understand that in addition to property laws, corporate laws typically apply as well (as most Associations are incorporated - but check to be sure). Unfortunately, in these situations, if the Board is refusing to adhere to the statutes and provide access to the documents, the only real recourse is through the courts (as it's a civil matter).

Sheila, what part of what I've posted up to now in this forum implied that I was not willing to be involved or had read the governing documents? I am "stepping away from my computer and smartphone" and asking questions. It's part of the reason I'm here.

Again, from experience, they would NEVER tell a group. But, the same law firm, that you always reference, as of October 2016, had prepared a law suit agaisnt me personally because two of the five Board members had formed an Executive Session to do so. They felt they didn't need a majority for the Board to proceed.

Research WITTENBURG v. BEACHWALK HOMEOWNERS ASSN. It cost that association over $200K and they lost. Look who the defendants attorneys are. There were many discussions about that case at certain CAI meetings.