OMBUDSMAN EXPERIENCES in any states

Virginia has an ombudsman.

They are very limited in scope and power.

In VA, they only deal with alleged violations of Statute (HOA not corporate or any other statute).
They do not deal with alleged violations of governing documents.

See their site here:

Office of the Common Interest Community Ombudsman

There is a process submitted to California legislators to create a division withing the Bureau of Real Estate and funded by HOA's. It would handle mediation, but also help underfunded HOA/Condo's.

Ombudsman are usually as useless as tits on a bull. They are created to make people feel good but rarely are they properly funded and staffed. Especially would be true in CA as the state has enough financial problems as is.

thank you all.....

1. Yes California is Big with everything. Today Senior communities (Over 55) have limited funds, fixed incomes, and with the higher costs of living in Cal., IDR, ADR, any legal costs are just moot.

2. Construction of a workable Ombudsman seems the only path for those who can't afford an attorney OR proving that they don't have the money to get public Attorney or ProBono.

3. I understand that one vote in the legislature stopped by Arnold Schwarzenegger stopped it.

4. I continue to work on this issue to help those who really have no voice for their investments.

Any other thoughts would be appreciated.

Thank MarkW18

What else are you doing? I think this is critical especially today.
I live in the IE and would love to collaborate with you.

Even with an ombudsman, the HOA member who cannot afford an attorney would still be up against the HOA that can easily afford an attorney. Worse, a HOA member who cannot talk to an attorney would be ignorant of the law; more likely to bring up issues that have zero legal teeth; and waste taxpayers' money.

I think the better solution is to continue to expand free legal clinics, as part of the decades old "access to justice" movement. Granted this often still results in unversed members of the public clogging up court dockets with unwinnable cases.It appears the California legislature circa 2006-2008 lacked sufficient votes to override Governor Schwarzenegger's veto. See https://www.caionline.org/Advocacy/StateAdvocacy/PriorityIssues/Ombudsman/Documents/Ombudsman_Report.pdf

Do tell.

Then CAI's opposition compels me to support these efforts.

Read the facts that CAI reports separate from its editorializing.

I think your analogy is perfect.I will always welcome more hard evidence of CAI people being jerks.

That's why I usually focus on CAI's educational programs because the political stuff varies by state. I guess I'm lucky - as far as I know the CAI chapter in my area doesn't have a lot of money to hire a full time lobbyist.

That said, I would like to see some sort of alternative dispute resolution program. the local BBB had one (don't know if it still exist) and it could be used in disputes between member companies and their customers. People from the community could volunteer as mediators and got six weeks of training.

Something like this could be used with a licensing board and/or the consumer protection agency in the attorney general's office or another agency. The cost of the program could be funded with some tax money and perhaps an affordable fee paid by the consumer and company, with the loser being required to reimburse the winner. I would also require both sides to agree the the decision is final - if it ends up in court, the case can be used as evidence.

Finding out how to pay for an ombudsmen program is one of the major hurdles to overcome, so if you're talking to your local representative, you better have some ideas ready. You may also need to have some ideas on what type of disputes should be heard. sometimes the HOA did everything right and the homeowner is simply wrong, but won't take no for an answer.

Until such a probe is set up, most peop!e will have to address HOA issues the long way - read your documents, attend meetings once in a while, come up with suggestions and volunteer to help instead of just complaing, get your neighbors involved and perhaps run for a position yourself. If you win, you could use resources like this website to get some ideas you might adapt to your community, along with those TWO resources. If you don't like CAI, Google HOA attorneys in your area. Some have websites that have lots of useful information.

Respectfully, before trusting that a volunteer with six weeks of training could get things right, I would take my chances with the other routes the typical state and HOA/condo Declaration offer, which almost always end with the opportunity to choose to file in court. In the United States, unless statute or contract says otherwise, judges apply what is called "the American Rule," where each side pays her or his own attorney's fees. The legal conventional wisdom behind this is that imposing attorney's fees on the losing side will deter people from getting justice. Also a HOA attorney who knows (1) he or she is right on the law and facts, and (2) his or her pro se opponent has to pay the HOA attorney's fees, will run up the bill.

Under these terms, I would not choose this hypothetical ombudsman.

I would support the above. I think probably every judge and her sister does too. (Every attorney in my town will tell her or his client, headed to court, that one of the first things the judge will say is, "Are you open to mediation?") As I think you know, it is not uncommon for Declarations to require either mediation or arbitration before the parties go to court.I am going to split the hairs on this one a bit. What I think is common is for people not versed in the law, and angry with whomever, to make threats and have no idea of what is necessary before a viable claim may be made with a court.I think folks coming here are either trying to see what their options are, or if what they are considering is reasonable, practical and supported by law. I know there's often an appearance that certain folks come here just to have their position validated. But if their minds were truly 100% made up, they would not be coming here.I think a lot of people need to stop, shut up, and hit the books. (Easy to say from the vantage point of superior dinner table conversation when growing up. I know many people do not know how to teach themselves. Also this site sees a fair smattering of immigrants whose first language is not English. Increasingly I find myself shaking my head and thinking they have zero chance of prevailing in a situation where they should prevail, because they cannot make themselves understood.) As you know well, folks do not read the HOA governing documents; google; and ask questions.

Is this going to change? Surely people's compliance with and understanding of their legal obligations (to the covenants or whomever) has improved in the thirty+ years since the internet exploded. The net is a resource superior to any encyclopedia and, let's face it, even the old school style of law library.[wink; smile] I was thinking the reason CAI opposes ombudsman programs is because yes, as you indicate, ombudsman programs likely reduce the demand for HOA attorneys. Supporting the bank accounts of HOA attorneys has been said to be a raison d'etre of CAI. I know CAI publications are not all worthless. But I believe that CAI does have an agenda, and it does not at all emphasize following the law or building good neighborhoods.Your point is valid but, as you seem to understand, I think "the American Rule" covers this already: Just paying one's own attorney is expensive enough. If one wins, as I wrote in my previous post, most of the time one still pays one's own attorney fees. What the movies show are the big tort lawsuits (a.k.a. plaintiff's lawsuits or liability lawsuits or similar) where sometimes, the attorney's win their fees completely separate from what their clients are awarded. This is deceiving. Many big tort lawsuits result in the prevailing side's attorneys not being awarded their fees. Instead, the attorneys get a percentage of what the judge/jury awarded the attorney's client.You, others and I know the courts are terribly backlogged. I think the reasons for this are multiple: Too many attorneys looking for their big payday or just looking to put food on the table? Too many pro se folks? Though it's relatively recent that people have been going pro se in large numbers. Too little support from governors and legislators being unwilling to pay for more judges and courthouses? Too much poverty resulting in necessarily more crime (just to survive), resulting in an overabundance of criminal cases? The late Justice Scalia making too many wisecracks, wasting precious court time and taxpayer resources, while other Justices were trying to get their questions in? I can count on one hand the veterans here I believe are competent to adjudicate pursuant to the law (which of course implies being reasonable). I think this small handful might even be an improvement on the typical judge, mediator or arbitrator.I agree that when one has to go through a form of "see it, do it, teach it," then one is less likely to be a "HOA/condo vocational dissident," CCO (chief complaining officer), a non-team player, or similar.