Title Officer v. HOA attorney for interpretation of CC&Rs

Danger, Kerry.

Find independent COA attorney.

Your new Board Member is already attempting to manipulate.

I agree with GeorgeS21 and JohnT38. Your vote (or respect or whatever Tom wants to call it) is not for sale at any price.

This question cannot be answered without a definition of “respect.”

Title officers are typically very good at reading weird deeds, so CCR's/Bylaws would definitely fall under this same style of writing. I'm willing to bet he would have a better understanding of the legal language than anyone else you would find, including a lawyer.

Since he is willing to do it for free, I would say "yes". As for "respect" I think you can give the guy respect. Your an adult.

This reminds me of comments that some attorneys have made about Codes of Conduct for board members. Agreeing to abide by particular course of action can make the "business judgement" defense null and void. A director has to judge each situation on its merits without any pre-conceived notions, let alone the pre-conceived notions of someone who will likely have a vested interest in the outcome.

It's good to have opinions, but "Tom" has ties to his previous firm, so he's not impartial. I'd have to say no to this.

We don’t know what @resoect” means. We dont know what - if any - strings are attached.

Who among you has offered knowledgeable advice, only for it to be disregarded? Or not respected ?

This volunteer may just need to know that his time and talent is appreciated.

The OP was neglectful for not asking what he meant. We aren’t mind readers, either.

Reminder: Tom only wants his friend's interpretation to go to me.

Here's Tom's wording, "...will you respect what this man has to say?" I do now see the good points by George, JohnT, PaulJ & Augie. I knew Tom fairly well before he was elected and he is indeed somewhat arrogant. I've been respectful of him, so it's not that he thinks I'll be rude to this man. Tom is trying to back me into a corner betting that my curiosity will get the best of me.

But I hadn't thought of Cathy's point about the "Business Judgement" defense. In the business Judgement rule, we should seek advice from those competent in given fields. We should practice due diligence as our "duty of care" towards the corporation. I simply don't think a title officer has the knowledge of state statutes about HOAs, which in CA are very numerous. I don't think they're the "right" expert from whom to seek this interpretation.

One problem here is that the board has never had this maintenance issue on an agenda to hash out and try to interpret with or without advice from counsel. Imo, by never discussing these CC&Rs regarding WHO is responsible for a huge proposed expenditure, the board has not practiced due diligence.

Our own HOA general counsel told us board members some time ago that of the 1,000 CC&Rs he's been involved in interpreting, rewriting, etc., ours are among the 10 most complicated. And, in fact, HE misinterpreted a maintenance article once too, and had to recant.

Tom does have ties to this guy and Tom also thinks title officers are "experts" at everything--he is attached to that opinion.

I DO have an Interpretation, and I'd actually be thrilled to see something opposing or at least different from mine drawing from our documents. I do have some case law to back me up, but surely am no expert.

I beg to differ on both points.

Kerry, I think you are expert. This includes being expert enough to know that if there is even the smallest bit of room for an alternate interpretation, it is likely that someone somewhere could make that interpretation and even argue it in court (though maybe not successfully). Maybe it is even fair to say there is just enough ambiguity in the covenants (on this point) for a court to rule that the covenants are... ambiguous. What is a board to do? First, consult a lot of experts. Will all these expert opinions be unanimous? Maybe not, especially if a faction at your condominium hires its own attorney to argue whatever the faction wants the attorney to argue.

Here's a thought: Ask the board to survey the community for a possible amendment to the governing documents. See if the community wants to make it as clear as possible who is responsible for the infrastructure in question.