technical question

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

hi,

can someone tell me ,

can a condo board in texas governed by 81. make a policy that applies to a single owner?

here is the title of the page i'm looking at

Additional Dedicatory Instruments for the XXXX condominium association.

" Policy regarding owner ABC, unrecorded dedicatory instrument as the term is defined by texas property code 202.001 pertaining to the XXX condominium association and the property subject to the declaration recorded under harris county clerks, documents. No. F2****, as amended and or supplemented.

I know the board can make rules and regulation changes, but there are specific notice requirements.

Background:

This is in reference to accusations made by the former property manager towards an owner. The accusations were untrue. The property manager was using the accusations to deflect attention away from the fact that she actually was not doing her job(with regards to proper, billing, record keeping, documentation)

Apparently the board voted on this motion and dedicatory instrument at a meeting. I was on the board at the time. I specifically recall, at the very end of the meeting. A board member(yes it's JB) brought up a motion to prohibit the owner from entering the office or clubroom. I objected and told the board, "you all can't do that. The accusations were never substantiated. There were several people that refuted the property managers accusation. " I was then frozen out of the zoom meeting, I couldn't hear and couldn't vote and couldn't participate.. I was still logged in, but I was prevented from participating.
After the meeting, I immediately sent an email to the secretary and other board members telling them that whatever happened after I was purposely frozen out is not valid.
They ignored my email. They then proceeded to have the lawyer file with the county this restriction on a single owner.

.
basically, I'm pretty sure this is improper.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By LaskaS on 06/05/2021 10:43 PM

Background:
This is in reference to accusations made by the former property manager towards an owner. The accusations were untrue. The property manager was using the accusations to deflect attention away from the fact that she actually was not doing her job(with regards to proper, billing, record keeping, documentation)

By any chance was the owner, one-on-one with the manager, either (1) actually objecting to the way the manager was doing her management job; (2) actually giving orders to the manager; (3) actually being verbally abusive because the owner did not like how the manager was or was not doing her job; (4) actually disrupting the manager in the manager's effort to get other work done; or (5) actually giving instructions to the manager that, pursuant to the covenants, only the board can give?

Because if so, then to the extent it makes sense for the owner to fight the restriction on the use of the clubroom and office, this is relevant.

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

can i email you augustin.?

the answer to your question.

it's the same mischaracterization of the owners actions that occurred when JB told the board I
"damaged" the common areas.

the owner was also a board member. btw.
so yes, this owner did initially try and work with the manager. The board had approved this. However, within a very short period of time the owner realized the new hire was not actually doing their job... Not just doing a poor job. but literally not doing the record keeping and charge backs . Not properly documenting work requests. etc.

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

in answer to your questions. I can not accurately answer the questions with just yes or no. because the answers require some explanation.

for example.

1. objecting to the way the manager was doing her management job. Yes, the board member complained to the board that she wasn't doing her job. The board member also included the property manager in the emails.
2. giving orders to the manager. ... no, the owner wasn't ordering the manager, however, the owner was working with the manager as they were a new hire. the board had approved this.

3. was the owner/board member actually being verbally abusive., the answer is, the property manager was claiming this, but it was not true. Being critical and concerned about the work of the association not being done is not abusive.

BillH10 (Texas)
Posts: 1,217

Posted:

Laska, what took place next? What did the Board Member who observed the manager's performance of their duties then do with the information?

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By LaskaS on 06/06/2021 3:48 PM
this owner [also a director] did initially try and work with the manager. The board had approved this. However, within a very short period of time the owner realized the new hire was not actually doing their job... Not just doing a poor job. but literally not doing the record keeping and charge backs . Not properly documenting work requests. etc.

-- This list of alleged job deficiencies sounds to me like an attempt to cover up the owner-director's own job deficiency. I do not care how awful the employee is at her job in the owner-director's opinion. What the owner-director should have done is be pleasant and polite to the COA employee and then taken any concerns // to the Board //. Then it is up to the Board to take action or not. If the Board decides to take no action, it is not the owner-director's legal place to do anything more other than maybe talk to an attorney.

-- I oppose public humiliation like what this COA Board is doing to this owner-director. But I think to fight this at this point is not worth it. In theory the board maybe should have sought a restraining order against the owner-director or possibly fine the owner-director. A restraining order is an ugly thing to have on public record. Would the owner-director rather have this?

-- I think you put people from whom you seek help in a difficult position: Play King Solomon when both sides in this conflict appear to be very much at fault.

-- You may email me. But you know the statutes and your COA's governing documents well. I think you are capable of writing your own letters.

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

augustin, if you refer back to the post about this.

The manager falsely accused the owner of many of the things you asked.

But the two other board members who had interacted with the manager (other then the accused), both stated that the their interactions with the new manager were that she was not fulfilling the job duties. She would often make excuses that were nonsensical. once she realized she could take advantage of the discord that existed amongst the board members and blame the owner/board member who had been working with her. She played that like a fiddle.

Thats when one of the board members, without the rest of the board discussing it first, contacted teh attorney and the attorney got involved.

It was like a runaway train. Had the proper procedure been followed in the first place. Requiring a board vote to decide to contact the attorney for association issues.
But the board member contacted the attorney , his excuse was that the manager had accused a board member of harassment and he contacted the attorney to protect the association.

Im sorry. this is such an ordeal.
The owner first notified the board that the manager did not seem to actually have the skills she claimed she did in the interview. The owner/board member did not think the manager was working out.
No one listened. .
3 months later. everything the owner had said turned out to be true.(regarding the failure of the manager to actually perform the required job duties.)

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

without rehashing the entire thing.

IF THE BYLAWS HAD BEEN Followed , requiring agreement by a majority of the board that the the association should involved the attorney, none of this would have happened.

If the bylaws would have been followed , requiring a quorum of the board being present at a meeting for any valid decisions.

If the bylaws had been followed requiring all board members be notified of meetings.

If the board had made decisions based on the actual facts instead of personal bias..

much of the problems of this board would not have happened.

Instead, time after time, the board has not followed the bylaws. The board member who was the target,always notified in writing that what the board was doing was not following the bylaws and thus was acting outside of their authority.

They dismissed the board member or just didn't acknowledge receipt of the notices.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

LaskaS, this is a lot of he said/she said. You claim the evidence is on the owner-director's side. The manager says xyz. Another director says abc. The original conflict as sometime ago, I believe. You or the owner-director wants "justice." This is justice in a soap opera. The owner-director has not suffered any great harm.

What is one important function of an attorney under the circumstances described here, in my opinion? Using patience, wisdom and billing at a rate of say $400 per hour, I think one important function of a competent attorney in a situation like this is to explain that life is too short.

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

excellent perspective.

I agree, other than he said she said and dysfunction.. the owner didn't suffer harm..

but I'm concerned about this dedicatory instrument that was filed with the county..
it looks to me like some board members got together and approved the attorney filing this with the county.

I believe that was done without proper authority. I was on the board when this was signed. This is the first I'm seeing it.

MelissaP1 (Alabama)
Posts: 13,836

Posted:

And...???

Former HOA President

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By LaskaS on 06/06/2021 8:13 PM
[snip] but I'm concerned about this dedicatory instrument that was filed with the county.. it looks to me like some board members got together and approved the attorney filing this with the county.I believe that was done without proper authority. I was on the board when this was signed. This is the first I'm seeing it.

-- LaskaS, I feel that the Board, the manager and you are in a p-ssing contest: You do something to which the board objects (and the board has a "good-enough" reason). The Board responds, doing something to which you object. The manager is out to get you. You are out to get the manager. More fuel is thrown on the flames by all sides, in a continuous, draining and destructive cycle.

-- When it's personal, this does not feel like soap opera. But to paid professionals (attorneys, judges, those in retail business), it is soap opera. Big corporations pay to get the 'annoyance' to go away and I suppose, maintain good customer relations. COAs are not big business. COAs are run by amateurs. Many (most?) people only learn to walk away from p-ssing contests after they have had the sad experience of giving a few years to fighting.

-- Am I correct in assuming that this dedicatory instrument lists the actual name of the owner-director, so this owner-director has arguably been defamed and on public record? If so, I am unhappy with this action. You may enjoy reading the latter. If so, stop now, and re-read the first statement I made above, about this being a p-ssing contest. Keep this in mind constantly. Second, you are quite capable of formulating your own argument about how you should have had a hearing and so on before any kind of penalty occurred; this penalty (the defaming of your name, I presume, and before the public) is not one your governing documents authorize. I remind you that any letter you write should be emotion-free; just the legal facts; sugary-sweet polite; concise; and without you throwing around insults to various entities. Said insults not only have no power to get you what they want. Said insults are in fact counterproductive. More and more I think one of this forum's purposes is to promote effective communications. For what my opinion is worth, I think you are well down the path to better writing. I hope you stay on it.

-- I do not want to promote p-ssing contests. I have a couple of big fish frying as we speak in the real-life COA/HOA world and volunteer let's-make-retirement-full-of-learning world, where the harm being done is profound in my opinion, and resolution promises to help a lot of others down the road. These hold my interest right now much more, insofar as giving substantive help. You know how to write a good letter and get this defamatory "dedicatory instrument" (such bs) removed. I hope you do it.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

LaskaS, one other thing: Consider contacting the county clerk. Explain that the COA has recorded an "instrument" that names you and is defamatory. Ask if the county clerk has any power to remove such an instrument. I tend to think county clerks may very well refuse to record something that is clearly not lawful or possibly holds the county clerk out to liability. Be polite. You might even ask for a meeting with the county clerk.

It just seems to me that county clerks would not automatically record just anything. E.g. if a county clerk received an "instrument" stating: "John Doe stole $7300 from me, Bob Williams, signed [Bob Williams]," then the clerk would not record it.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

-- Here is a Florida County example of what restrictions the County Clerk places on what the Clerk will record: https://www.mypinellasclerk.org/Portals/0/Recording%20Services/CivilRecordableInstrument.pdf

-- LaskaS, I see a few signs (not direct signs; just hints) that your Texas County Clerk's staff might very well ultimately not put up with an entity (like your COA) using arguably fraudulent means to put a defamatory, retaliatory statement on record about you, using the County Clerk (and so the taxpayer dollar) as a tool for the COA's own desire to punish you, outside of what the Texas COA statute allows for punishment.

-- Now please read again my comments on p-ssing contests.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

One problem: how would a county clerk know something is defamatory? Doesn't a court have to decide whether or not the accusation rises to that level? Of course the accused person would deny whatever it says - that doesn't mean the accused is telling the truth.

I'd assume that a clerk would record whatever document they're given by someone with the authority to transmit the document. I can't see how the recorder is in any position to verify the accuracy of what's in the document, and would probably be in trouble for refusing to do their job because they don't like the contents of whatever it is.

KerryL1 (California)
Posts: 14,550

Posted:

Am I mistaken, Laska? Isn't the person who is an owner and a now-former diecctator you? Didn't you tell us this story a long time ago on this forum??

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 06/07/2021 8:28 AM
One problem: how would a county clerk know something is defamatory? Doesn't a court have to decide whether or not the accusation rises to that level? Of course the accused person would deny whatever it says - that doesn't mean the accused is telling the truth.

-- What this COA apparently recorded with the county clerk is not anything I have ever seen recorded. The COA did it under the guise of a "dedicatory instrument." Pfft. To me, its obvious that the purpose of this recording was to embarrass, humiliate, and defame, all as a penalty for which I think the Board has no authority.

If this were not, IMO, such a p-ssing contest between LaskaS and this COA, I would be looking up Texas statutes regarding fraud in recording "instruments."

A great example of where someone can get into deep trouble when recording something with the county clerk: Placing a bogus lien on a property. Many states have statutes that provide for stiff penalties for filing such a lien.

Quote:

I'd assume that a clerk would record whatever document they're given by someone with the authority to transmit the document. can't see how the recorder is in any position to verify the accuracy of what's in the document, and would probably be in trouble for refusing to do their job because they don't like the contents of whatever it is.

At this writing, I am not persuaded that county clerks do not reject putting certain documents on public record.

Granted I expect the risk of liability is greatest with the entity or person who submitted the document to be recorded.

Perhaps LaskaS should just record her own document, stating the COA's restriction is a penalty without authority in the COA's governing documents or statutes; that (assuming no hearing occurred) no hearing occurred; and so on.

Stupid COA. But again, I chastise LaskaS for not folding her cards. (And your Kenny Rogers meme yada runs through my head every time a hoatalk member starts one of these threads indicating the member just, as you recently put it so accurately, wants ego validation.)

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

One Texas statute on the subject:
https://casetext.com/statute/texas-codes/government-code/title-2-judicial-branch/subtitle-d-judicial-personnel-and-officials/chapter-51-clerks/subchapter-j-certain-fraudulent-records-or-documents/section-51901-fraudulent-document-or-instrument

A Florida statute even makes it a crime to file certain documents with the intent to "harass":
A person who files or directs a filer to file, with the intent to defraud or harass another, any instrument containing a materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation that purports to affect an owner’s interest in the property described in the instrument commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
https://law.justia.com/codes/florida/2020/title-xlvi/chapter-817/part-i/section-817-535/

I would bet many states have a similar statute section.

This COA cannot take away a member's interest in the COA clubroom without giving due process.

Again, I am sure LaskaS is thrilled with my response here. And again, she has to come up with the letter to write the board. She should scour Texas statutes for what a county clerk can and cannot record, and then for what LaskaS can and cannot record in response (if Texas county clerks are so effete that they allow p-ssing contests to start in the records for which I suppose county clerks are some kind of custodian). I am not happy she did not answer my questions near the start of this thread. Once again, I hope she reviews my comments on p-ssing contests.

A Texas county clerk being effete is not what I would expect in Texas. I checked out LaskaS's county clerk. County clerks have a lot of power under statute. What they do is huge. I wonder if a conversation between the county clerk and LaskaS will happen, and if so, what the county clerk will say LaskaS's options are (besides, "Ma'am, an attorney might be able to do lots more than I can do.").

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 06/07/2021 9:56 AM

... snip ...
Again, I am sure LaskaS is thrilled with my response here. And again, she has to come up with the letter to write the board. She should scour Texas statutes for what a county clerk can and cannot record, and then for what LaskaS can and cannot record in response (if Texas county clerks are so effete that they allow p-ssing contests to start in the records for which I suppose county clerks are some kind of custodian). I am not happy she did not answer my questions near the start of this thread. Once again, I hope she reviews my comments on p-ssing contests.
... snip ...

Yeah. Having watched the various installments of this saga play out basically since Hurricane Harvey (2017) - this is the flooded Houston condo, right? - and keeping in mind that we don't have the full story here...

My impression is that the OP enjoys provoking the board and the PM until they finally erupt again and behave badly, at which point it's crocodile tears and playing the victim. Rinse repeat ad nauseam. The OP is the author of her own misfortune, but I have no expectations that anything will change until the board and PM understand the dynamic and modify their own behavior. The board/PM need to remove any opportunity for "victimhood" because that is considered a win for those who act this way. (Which helps explain why they constantly seek validation for whatever narrative they'd got going at the moment, even to the point of bankrupting themselves with constant litigation.)

For what it's worth, when I was on the board we did, in fact, treat the Professional Victims (aka ankle biters, aka Chief Complaining Officers) differently from the rest of the community, although not in ways that violated CC&Rs/bylaws/etc. The goal is to remove the emotional payoff that the victim gets from their alleged poor treatment - otherwise it won't stop.

At this point I consider the latest installment in this saga to be performance art and not a genuine request for information to help resolve the problems for good. I have zero sympathy for this nonsense. I do sympathize with the board and PM, although I fault them for not understanding what's going on, not having sufficient control of their own behavior, and allowing themselves to be manipulated into acting illegally. The latter is 100% on them. As I'd said early, there are no heroes here, and my real sympathy is with the rest of the community that is paying for this in some fashion.

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 06/07/2021 10:33 AM

Posted By AugustinD on 06/07/2021 9:56 AM

... snip ...
Again, I am sure LaskaS is thrilled with my response here. And again, she has to come up with the letter to write the board. She should scour Texas statutes for what a county clerk can and cannot record, and then for what LaskaS can and cannot record in response (if Texas county clerks are so effete that they allow p-ssing contests to start in the records for which I suppose county clerks are some kind of custodian). I am not happy she did not answer my questions near the start of this thread. Once again, I hope she reviews my comments on p-ssing contests.
... snip ...

Yeah. Having watched the various installments of this saga play out basically since Hurricane Harvey (2017) - this is the flooded Houston condo, right? - and keeping in mind that we don't have the full story here...

My impression is that the OP enjoys provoking the board and the PM until they finally erupt again and behave badly, at which point it's crocodile tears and playing the victim. Rinse repeat ad nauseam. The OP is the author of her own misfortune, but I have no expectations that anything will change until the board and PM understand the dynamic and modify their own behavior. The board/PM need to remove any opportunity for "victimhood" because that is considered a win for those who act this way. (Which helps explain why they constantly seek validation for whatever narrative they'd got going at the moment, even to the point of bankrupting themselves with constant litigation.)

For what it's worth, when I was on the board we did, in fact, treat the Professional Victims (aka ankle biters, aka Chief Complaining Officers) differently from the rest of the community, although not in ways that violated CC&Rs/bylaws/etc. The goal is to remove the emotional payoff that the victim gets from their alleged poor treatment - otherwise it won't stop.

At this point I consider the latest installment in this saga to be performance art and not a genuine request for information to help resolve the problems for good. I have zero sympathy for this nonsense. I do sympathize with the board and PM, although I fault them for not understanding what's going on, not having sufficient control of their own behavior, and allowing themselves to be manipulated into acting illegally. The latter is 100% on them. As I'd said early, there are no heroes here, and my real sympathy is with the rest of the community that is paying for this in some fashion.

I think this also solidifies your seat on Augie's Supreme Court.

JohnT38 (South Carolina)
Posts: 1,631

Posted:

Well said Cathy. I would also add that certain posters here encourage this behavior by doing the ankle biter's research even though they have long ago hinted that they are aware of what the real issue is.

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnT38 on 06/07/2021 11:07 AM
Well said Cathy. I would also add that certain posters here encourage this behavior by doing the ankle biter's research even though they have long ago hinted that they are aware of what the real issue is.

Also well said!

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnT38 on 06/07/2021 11:07 AM
I would also add that certain posters here encourage this behavior by doing the ankle biter's research even though they have long ago hinted that they are aware of what the real issue is.

Man up, won't you? It is I of whom you are speaking.

One of the 'real issues' here is a rogue board. For one thing, it has suspended the use of the clubroom without a hearing. Texas statutes require a hearing.

I understand you support this Board in violating the COA Covenants and Texas statute. This is your right. But since you insist on name-calling, your position ranks you somewhere around worm status.

JohnT38 (South Carolina)
Posts: 1,631

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 06/11/2021 10:22 AM

Posted By JohnT38 on 06/07/2021 11:07 AM
I would also add that certain posters here encourage this behavior by doing the ankle biter's research even though they have long ago hinted that they are aware of what the real issue is.

Man up, won't you? It is I of whom you are speaking.

One of the 'real issues' here is a rogue board. For one thing, it has suspended the use of the clubroom without a hearing. Texas statutes require a hearing.

I understand you support this Board in violating the COA Covenants and Texas statute. This is your right. But since you insist on name-calling, your position ranks you somewhere around worm status.

You missed my point entirely and I don't support rogue Boards. Not everything can be answered or addressed by a legal citation. There is much more at play here.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnT38 on 06/11/2021 11:13 AM
You missed my point entirely and I don't support rogue Boards. Not everything can be answered or addressed by a legal citation. There is much more at play here.

If I missed your point, it's because you attacked LaskaS as an "ankle biter" while failing to call out the board for serious violations of the covenant and state law.

I can only guess that your point is that Boards should be allowed to ignore the covenants and state law when they feel a COA/HOA member is not abiding by the covenants and state law.

JohnT38 (South Carolina)
Posts: 1,631

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 06/11/2021 11:28 AM

Posted By JohnT38 on 06/11/2021 11:13 AM
You missed my point entirely and I don't support rogue Boards. Not everything can be answered or addressed by a legal citation. There is much more at play here.

If I missed your point, it's because you attacked LaskaS as an "ankle biter" while failing to call out the board for serious violations of the covenant and state law.

I can only guess that your point is that Boards should be allowed to ignore the covenants and state law when they feel a COA/HOA member is not abiding by the covenants and state law.

This person is the classic definition of an ankle biter. While you always focus on the legal side I actually pay attention to the legal and the human side. You can defend this person all you want legally but Laskas is getting poor results because he or she doesn't know how to deal with people in a respectful, calm way and when he/she doesn't get their way they end up pissing people off. I absolutely believe that some of the points LaskaS has raised are valid. However, I also believe that this need for conflict will mean that you'll be providing free legal support forever. If you are OK with that then knock yourself out. As I said before, there is much more at play her than you seem to want to acknowledge.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

JohnT38, if you gave suggestions on how a board should respond to LaskaS and people you think are like her, then I think this might be more helpful to future readers.

Background:
https://www.hoatalk.com/Search/ForumSearch/tabid/87/forumid/1/postid/289011/view/topic/Default.aspx

https://www.hoatalk.com/Forum/tabid/55/forumid/1/postid/293024/view/topic/Default.aspx

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

My wife recently retired as the Personnel Director of the second largest city in the United States. So I will give her the benefit of the doubt of being a relatively smart person. She was also president of an HOA board for three years.

I poised the question of if you needed to find out about how to run the association, where would you turn. Her answer was the governing documents. She also knew the hierarchy of the documents. Our documents were created in 1999, so before new election laws took place in 2006 and new rules that were added in subsequent years. Bylaws were restated in 2010 to eliminate the need for quorum among other things. She would not have been looking at Civil Code or Corporation code to see if items had been updated since the governing docs were created.

The point is people have no clue where to look. This is NOT their full time job, this is strictly a volunteer position for which they don't get paid. Many have never read the governing docs, many show up to board meetings completely unprepared.

Anyone can google a topic and pretty much find some kind of answer, but I would rather have experience guide me. Unless you have a majority on a board supporting the proper way to do things, you are wasting your time. You can write all the letters you want to a board or PM, but unless you actually have support, you will get laughed all the way to the bank.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

I'm not John, but I have posted a number of times that we modified how we dealt with the "ankle biters". We followed due process to the letter - because it's the law, because it's the right thing to do, because it provides written documentation that the owner is not being "victimized" by the board, because the conflict could end up in court, but most of all because it formed part of scripted responses that we used.

The most important thing that the board needs to do is remove the emotional payoff that these folks get from the conflict. Our responses were always in writing, brief, factual, and boring as heck. No back and forth, no discussing other issues. No unscripted responses ever, we stayed on message - to the point that I limited any in-person contact with the person to "hey, how are you, oh is that the time, gotta run", said with a smile because these folks can take offense at the wrong facial expression - you would not believe the nonsense they blow up over.

The hardest part of this is to avoid any hint that you're agreeing with the person that they're being victimized. It's what they live for. Maintaining this disciplined approach is difficult when you're dealing with a situation when the person's complaints are actually valid. Hence the importance of the written scripted responses.

Unfortunately the board and PM in question here is doing everything wrong and are actually making things worse for themselves. I feel for them, this is hard to deal with, but... they gotta get a hold of the situation and stop allowing themselves to be baited into responding improperly.

Also unfortunately, now that I've seen this particular situation play out repeatedly and I know what we're dealing with, I recognize that any responses on this web site that confirm the board is behaving badly are actually providing the same validation that a professional victim is seeking. We're contributing to making it worse, which is why I've chosen to butt out on the most recent complaint beyond commenting on another thread that this is what we were dealing with. And I'll try to zip lip in future.

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 06/11/2021 1:04 PM
I'm not John, but I have posted a number of times that we modified how we dealt with the "ankle biters". We followed due process to the letter - because it's the law, because it's the right thing to do, because it provides written documentation that the owner is not being "victimized" by the board, because the conflict could end up in court, but most of all because it formed part of scripted responses that we used.

The most important thing that the board needs to do is remove the emotional payoff that these folks get from the conflict. Our responses were always in writing, brief, factual, and boring as heck. No back and forth, no discussing other issues. No unscripted responses ever, we stayed on message - to the point that I limited any in-person contact with the person to "hey, how are you, oh is that the time, gotta run", said with a smile because these folks can take offense at the wrong facial expression - you would not believe the nonsense they blow up over.

The hardest part of this is to avoid any hint that you're agreeing with the person that they're being victimized. It's what they live for. Maintaining this disciplined approach is difficult when you're dealing with a situation when the person's complaints are actually valid. Hence the importance of the written scripted responses.

Unfortunately the board and PM in question here is doing everything wrong and are actually making things worse for themselves. I feel for them, this is hard to deal with, but... they gotta get a hold of the situation and stop allowing themselves to be baited into responding improperly.

Also unfortunately, now that I've seen this particular situation play out repeatedly and I know what we're dealing with, I recognize that any responses on this web site that confirm the board is behaving badly are actually providing the same validation that a professional victim is seeking. We're contributing to making it worse, which is why I've chosen to butt out on the most recent complaint beyond commenting on another thread that this is what we were dealing with. And I'll try to zip lip in future.

Well said.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 06/11/2021 1:04 PM
The most important thing that the board needs to do is remove the emotional payoff that these folks get from the conflict. Our responses were always in writing, brief, factual, and boring as heck. No back and forth, no discussing other issues. No unscripted responses ever, we stayed on message - to the point that I limited any in-person contact with the person to "hey, how are you, oh is that the time, gotta run", said with a smile because these folks can take offense at the wrong facial expression - you would not believe the nonsense they blow up over.

I support all of the suggestions given above.

Quote:

Also unfortunately, now that I've seen this particular situation play out repeatedly and I know what we're dealing with, I recognize that any responses on this web site that confirm the board is behaving badly are actually providing the same validation that a professional victim is seeking.

Hmm. I expect my responses are providing a large degree of validation to LaskaS. For the archives, I would hope that two messages of this thread (and others like it) are that:

1.
Boards need to figure out how to deal as professionals, who recognize that folks are going to complain and that the Board has an obligation to respond pursuant to the covenant and state law, using boilerplate responses that do not eat up their precious time.

and

2.
If a COA/HOA member is serious in wanting change (or a professional, lawful response from the Board), then they themselves had da-n keep their noses clean. LaskaS is on a tear of condemning the board and manager for xyz, but she herself has committed violations of the covenants, with an inappropriate, 'holier than thou,' 'it's just logical for me to violate the covenants to get xyz done' attitude.

Quote:

We're contributing to making it worse

I think this depends on the meaning of "it."

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 06/11/2021 2:22 PM

Posted By CathyA3 on 06/11/2021 1:04 PM
The most important thing that the board needs to do is remove the emotional payoff that these folks get from the conflict. Our responses were always in writing, brief, factual, and boring as heck. No back and forth, no discussing other issues. No unscripted responses ever, we stayed on message - to the point that I limited any in-person contact with the person to "hey, how are you, oh is that the time, gotta run", said with a smile because these folks can take offense at the wrong facial expression - you would not believe the nonsense they blow up over.

I support all of the suggestions given above.

Quote:

Also unfortunately, now that I've seen this particular situation play out repeatedly and I know what we're dealing with, I recognize that any responses on this web site that confirm the board is behaving badly are actually providing the same validation that a professional victim is seeking.

Hmm. I expect my responses are providing a large degree of validation to LaskaS. For the archives, I would hope that two messages of this thread (and others like it) are that:

1.
Boards need to figure out how to deal as professionals, who recognize that folks are going to complain and that the Board has an obligation to respond pursuant to the covenant and state law, using boilerplate responses that do not eat up their precious time.

and

2.
If a COA/HOA member is serious in wanting change (or a professional, lawful response from the Board), then they themselves had da-n keep their noses clean. LaskaS is on a tear of condemning the board and manager for xyz, but she herself has committed violations of the covenants, with an inappropriate, 'holier than thou,' 'it's just logical for me to violate the covenants to get xyz done' attitude.

Quote:

We're contributing to making it worse

I think this depends on the meaning of "it."

You are definitely speaking to the wrong audience.

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 06/11/2021 11:52 AM
JohnT38, if you gave suggestions on how a board should respond to LaskaS and people you think are like her, then I think this might be more helpful to future readers.

Background:
https://www.hoatalk.com/Search/ForumSearch/tabid/87/forumid/1/postid/289011/view/topic/Default.aspx

https://www.hoatalk.com/Forum/tabid/55/forumid/1/postid/293024/view/topic/Default.aspx

So I read some of the posts, and now the $64,000 question, what the hell happened between then and now?

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

some of you are super duper mean.

I don't think that standing up to a board that doesn't think they have to follow the declaration or state law is playing a victim.

The current board is basically absentee owners who rubberstamp everything JB wants. why have a board if only one person is going to be able to contribute ideas.

JB has now been acting property manager going on 8 months. It was supposed to be month or two max fill in ,until the board found a qualified, experienced manager.

In that 8 months. the common areas of the property and not been maintained. JB thinks the association funds are some kind of ira. He is not spending the budgeted allocated funds as they are required to be spent.

I came here recently because I knew what the board was doing wasn't right, I just didn't know the exact statute.

For what it's worth, The charge was removed from my account.

I dont' think you all understand, I'm not complaining about the subjective choices the board has a right to make when implementing the proper maintenance and upkeep of the common areas. I'm complaining that there is NO MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP.

The board meeting is next week. The remaining resident owners are finally coming together to demand the board give some kind of schedule and timeline for what is going on. There is literally zero transparency. Owner who ask are dismissed or ignored by JB.

Simple fixes are allowed to go unrepaired which then result in long term damage that costs significantly more time and money . IT"S MISMANAGEMENT 101.

Now, Let me be clear, my one violation of rule.. which i have acknowledged and I stopped went sent a letter. THAT DOES NOT diminish the failure of the board to properly manage the property and common areas... I don't care about me. I want the property to be restored correctly , in a timely manner with actual planning and a detailed scope of work created, then sent out for bid, then the work done and someone has to check the work!.. We need resident owners to participate. I finally have 6 that are willing to step up and work together to see that the property common areas are properly restored.

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

Augustine,, I just saw your comments regarding the my initial question. thank you for that info..

yes,, this has become a pissing contest. However.. I resigned, i was out of it.. all i wanted was for the association to fulfill their obligations.. But as months go by, and JB is still acting property manger, although nothing is getting done. It's a problem.

JB is a ruthless , sneaky little man. I want him gone. He has misappropriated funds.anyway..

Let me get back to the dedicatory instrument. Ok, I will write a letter , just the facts. I'm really surprised that the attorney who is highly regarded agreed to facilitate the boards actions..

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

Augustine,

my first goal when coming here was finding the statute and authority for which i could send a certified letter and cc the attorney informing the board they failed to follow the due process requirements.

You helped me tremendously, That problem is solved. the charges were removed.

The post labeled technical question.. was my question regarding if the board had authority to record a dedicatory instrument.......

anyway.. i can tell you read it. and you immediately saw what the intent was..

-- What this COA apparently recorded with the county clerk is not anything I have ever seen recorded. The COA did it under the guise of a "dedicatory instrument." Pfft. To me, its obvious that the purpose of this recording was to embarrass, humiliate, and defame, all as a penalty for which I think the Board has no authority.

again, its' one thing to harass and bully me off the board.. it's another to defame me. I want the document removed.

Like you said. "it's not anything I have ever seen recorded.". that's saying something!. JB to control of the property and it's day to day operations and doesn't want anyone questioning him. I have always been the only one who would question him. I became his enemy number one. I don't care if he hates me , what i do care about is his using his position on the board to harass and intimidate me. I do care about his attempts to punish me without due process . I do care that an official document was filed which is clearly not a instrument of the declaration but rather another bullying,humiliating abusive action that the board took , it certainly wasn't acting in good faith in the interest of the assocation.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

LaskaS, thank you for elaborating in your first June 12, 2021 post. Internet forum communications being what they are, I tend to think it's impossible for anyone to have the whole picture here.

Reading that you have six (knock on wood) stepping up to ask for maintenance to be done is good.

Quote:

Posted By LaskaS on 06/12/2021 12:40 AM

Like you said. "it's not anything I have ever seen recorded.". that's saying something!.

For the record, it's not like I head over to my county clerk's offices regularly. More like maybe 20 trips over the last 15 years or so to check on a variety of issues, like legitimate and illegitimate mechanic's liens; bogus harassing liens placed on people's homes where I am by a certain hate group; looking up info on a tiny strip of land that a developer wanted but an individual homeowner was thinking of keeping (an interesting "ransom strip" situation); checking on what bank held a mortgage (a legal fiction these days?); and reviewing plats for covenants not well known but entirely enforceable, flood plain designations, and zoning (a fungible concept according to just about any city council?). What is recorded with the county appears to be in random order, of necessity. When I was leafing through microfiche, all manner of docs would come up. Nothing interesting or crazy like the filing LaskaS describes in her first post to this thread. Still my adventures as a layperson with the county clerk records are far from comprehensive.

Do you intend to speak with county clerk staff? Because I would be interested in reading what they say.

Quote:

[redaction] to control of the property and it's day to day operations and doesn't want anyone questioning him. I have always been the only one who would question him. I became his enemy number one. I don't care if he hates me , what i do care about is his using his position on the board to harass and intimidate me. I do care about his attempts to punish me without due process . I do care that an official document was filed which is clearly not a instrument of the declaration but rather another bullying,humiliating abusive action that the board took , it certainly wasn't acting in good faith in the interest of the assocation.

No, the directors weren't acting in good faith in the interest of the association. I wonder if in fact the Board is trying to make an example of you. The Board is saying: Question us, and this is what we will do to you.

Others here might jump all over your statement "I have always been the only one who would question him." I have already posted my thoughts on this. Unless there is some kind of physical emergency requiring immediate attention, never question a manager. Instead, question a board about why a manager is doing xyz. I beliee keeping away from this manager, and communicating only with the board on management concerns, is important.

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

augustine,

Did you actually read the policy that was filed with the county which I am asking about?
I thought most county clerk hoa and condo records were available online through the county. So, I assumed you accessed them online. However, after rereading your posts. Im not sure you read the actual document or were referencing the excepts I included in my initial post.

regarding the county clerk..I'm not sure exactly what I need to say.

I may be incorrect, but I would think that the first step would be for me to send the board, and attorney, certified a letter.

In this letter, do I ask them to remove the document from the county?
also. what is the meaning of non-recorded dedicatory instrument.? vs recorded dedicatory instrument. or rather, does that matter with regards to my request.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

LaskaS:

-- I have not read this "non-recorded dedicatory instrument."

-- Nationwide I think few county clerk records are online.

-- I would start with the county clerk, since she may be able to fix the problem, and then you do not have to tangle with the COA. Plus there's a chance the county clerk will contact the COA and explain that what they recorded is not allowed.

-- With the county clerk (or her staff), you could start with: "Do you allow any documents a person brings to you to be recorded?" Then ask, "What does 'non-recorded' mean, as shown in this document [show her the document[?" Listen to the County Clerk's (or her staff's) answers. Then ask: "This document [show her the document] is intended to harass. It does not have a legal basis. Can you remove it?" I expect there's a fair chance she will tell you either she cannot help, or go talk to an attorney. Finally, ask if you yourself may record a document stating that the COA's non-recorded dedicatory instrument has no basis in law (or similar).

-- I'd be googling just like you with regard to the meaning of the phrase "non-recorded dedicatory instrument." Nothing is coming up.

-- I would appreciate your update as to what the county clerk says.

-- Otherwise, you have to figure this out. I do not want to offer further assistance.

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

augustine,

thanks for the suggestions on the questions. i would have had no idea exactly what to say.

I'll post an update with what happens with the county clerk.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

LaskaS, if you speak with County Clerk staff, then I would take page II-23 and page II-24 from http://www.txcourts.gov/media/1450036/county-clerk-manual-2020-edition.pdf. From page ii-1, the latter is the "Texas County Clerk Procedure Guide... a reference guide covering the various duties, responsibilities and procedures of the County Clerks in Texas."

From pages II-23 and II-24:
===
"A document or instrument is presumed to be fraudulent if:
.
.
.

2. The document or instrument purports to create a lien or assert a claim against
real or personal property or an interest in real or personal property; and

A. Is not a document or instrument provided for by the constitution or
laws of this state or of the United States;

B. Is not created by implied or express consent or agreement of the
obligor, debtor, or the owner of the real or personal property or an
interest in the real or personal property or an interest in the real or
personal property, if required under the laws of this state, or by
implied or express consent or agreement of an agent, fiduciary, or
other representative of that person;"
===

Above, 2.B. is what makes me think the COA may have filed a fraudulent document under Texas law.

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

thank you so much!..

I've been thinking about how to proceed and want to make sure I have the right info.

Do you suggest actually going to the county clerks office. Calling them and asking for an appointment.?

one last question.

The letter I wrote and cc'd the attorney regarding the assessment that was added to my account without due process... that worked very well.

I'm wondering if I should construct a letter to the board with the relevant statutes that prohibit restrictions to an owners access of common elements without due process..etc. and cc the attorney

if so, I think the applicable statute ,in addition to tuca due process requirements ,
PROPERTY CODE
TITLE 11. RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
CHAPTER 202. CONSTRUCTION AND ENFORCEMENT OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS

again,, You have already done way more than I can every thank you for. If you are too busy with the other two coa situations you are dealing with to respond to this, I will proceed with just the first option you suggested of contacting the county clerk.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By LaskaS on 06/15/2021 6:18 PM

Do you suggest actually going to the county clerks office. Calling them and asking for an appointment.?

Have notes in front of you. Call. Talk slowly. Tell the staff that a document your COA filed calls you out in a harassing and defamatory way; that you have an interest in the property named in the document; that you never consented to the document's being filed or to change your interest in the property; that there was no vote by the membership to amend the dedicatory instrument; and bottom line, you think the document the COA filed is either fraudulent or unlawful or both. Ask for an appointment to discuss this. See what the county clerk staff say. Be super polite. Listen. Do not argue. Consider mentioning the two pages from the document I linked above. If the staff do not seem sharp, consider asking if you might meet with the County Clerk herself. Which would be a very big deal. The County Clerk is a high ranking person, as you may be aware, with much on her plate.

I do not want to get into anything else until the county clerk staff responds.

You are welcome.

What I get out of this is a better understanding of how county clerks operate.

LaskaS (Texas)
Posts: 1,025

Posted:

Augustine, just an update, I called and got a staff member , she took my information and said someone will call me back..
If i don't hear back this week, i'll call again.