Lawsuite. Florida homeowners $34 million victory.

Started by JohnT38 • 18 replies • 561 views

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

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

JohnT38 (South Carolina)
Posts: 1,631

Posted:

Just thought I'd share this for those that are interested. Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/goal-bleed-owners-dry-34-204000557.html

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

I think that the article is disingenuous or misleading.

The headline and quotes from the homeowner were the same old "oh, those awful HOAS!" that we often hear. But the story states that the lawsuit was against developer Avatar Properties, which is a different matter.

The suit doesn't claim that the HOA itself was improperly collecting fees but that the developer was, apparently during the period when the developer was in control of the HOA and was building out amenities which the plaintiffs say were worth a fraction of the cost that they were charged. In fact one of the plaintiffs actually said so: “Defeat is the status quo,” which ... is, “paying the developer a mandatory ‘for profit’ fee forever. That is not fair.” If anything the HOA as a corporation was the victim.

Rather than saying HOAs behave badly - and I agree that they can and do - the story should be addressing how developers behave badly. But - cynical me - that's less likely to attract clicks.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By CathyA3 on 11/25/2021 5:28 AM
I think that the article is disingenuous or misleading.

The headline and quotes from the homeowner were the same old "oh, those awful HOAS!" that we often hear. But the story states that the lawsuit was against developer Avatar Properties, which is a different matter.

I agree. The story puts out falsehoods about HOAs. In particular the article fails to recognize that covenants are a lawful contract to which owners have agreed in advance of purchase.

PatJ1 (North Carolina)
Posts: 568

Posted:

****Rather than saying HOAs behave badly - and I agree that they can and do - the story should be addressing how developers behave badly. But - cynical me - that's less likely to attract clicks.****

Anything with HOA in the headline........always reads all HOA's are bad or did something wrong.

https://www.wbtv.com/2021/11/15/thats-bit-negligent-management-company-hired-convict-manage-finances-rock-hill-hoa-now-shes-facing-new-embezzlement-charges/

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

So can anyone cite what was false about the story. I would like someone also attach the document that everyone signs that they are agreeing to the covenants as a contract.

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

I guess attorneys don't know how to read or interpret covenants.

https://www.wfmynews2.com/article/news/local/outreach/call-for-action/greensboro-homeowner-able-to-keep-flags-on-property-after-dispute-with-hoa/83-7a8e5070-6f40-4b7e-b148-896019a22377

PatJ1 (North Carolina)
Posts: 568

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By MaxB4 on 11/25/2021 10:21 AM
I guess attorneys don't know how to read or interpret covenants.

https://www.wfmynews2.com/article/news/local/outreach/call-for-action/greensboro-homeowner-able-to-keep-flags-on-property-after-dispute-with-hoa/83-7a8e5070-6f40-4b7e-b148-896019a22377

Or Federal Legislation

https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-bill/42

Shown Here:
Public Law No: 109-243 (07/24/2006)

(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005 - States that a condominium association, cooperative association, or residential real estate management association may not adopt or enforce any policy, or enter into any agreement, that would restrict or prevent an association member from displaying the U.S. flag on residential property within the association with respect to which such member has a separate ownership interest or a right to exclusive possession or use.

States that nothing in this Act shall be considered to permit any display or use that is inconsistent with: (1) federal law or any rule or custom pertaining to the proper display or use of the flag; or (2) any reasonable restriction pertaining to the time, place, or manner of displaying the flag necessary to protect a substantial interest of the condominium, cooperative, or residential real estate management association.

JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265

Posted:

This is apples versus oranges. Let us zero in in one or the other.

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By JohnC46 on 11/25/2021 4:01 PM
This is apples versus oranges. Let us zero in in one or the other.

Which one of the three?

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By MaxB4 on 11/25/2021 9:32 AM
So can anyone cite what was false about the story. I would like someone also attach the document that everyone signs that they are agreeing to the covenants as a contract.

I appreciate your opinion that covenants are not contractual terms. As long as this is your position, you would not find anything false in the story.

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 11/25/2021 9:19 PM

I appreciate your opinion that covenants are not contractual terms. As long as this is your position, you would not find anything false in the story.

It ain't what I said.

LetA (Nevada)
Posts: 2,679

Posted:

Attorney Steve Lehto explains it a lot better. On the surface, it sounds like the declarant misled buyers and upon turnover wanted a boatload of money for the owners to buy the amenities.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWnwwBOICrE

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By LetA on 11/27/2021 5:08 PM
Attorney Steve Lehto explains it a lot better. On the surface, it sounds like the declarant misled buyers and upon turnover wanted a boatload of money for the owners to buy the amenities.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWnwwBOICrE

?????

TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,061

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 11/25/2021 9:19 PM

I appreciate your opinion that covenants are not contractual terms. As long as this is your position, you would not find anything false in the story.

Covenants are deed restrictions.

The courts treat them as a contract.

CathyA3 (Ohio)
Posts: 6,299

Posted:

Quote:

He explains it better if you want confirmation of your "oh those awful HOAs!!!" narrative.

The lawsuit was against the developer/declarant. The HOA (in the form of the owners after turnover) was the victim since the HOA apparently did not own the amenities at that point, the developer did. A lawyer should be capable of handling "nuance" like this - but that doesn't get clicks on the internet.

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By TimB4 on 11/27/2021 10:19 PM

Posted By AugustinD on 11/25/2021 9:19 PM

I appreciate your opinion that covenants are not contractual terms. As long as this is your position, you would not find anything false in the story.

Covenants are deed restrictions.

The courts treat them as a contract.

It's called an implied contract.

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By MaxB4 on 11/28/2021 10:37 AM

Posted By TimB4 on 11/27/2021 10:19 PM

Covenants are deed restrictions.

The courts treat them as a contract.

It's called an implied contract.

No. An "implied contract" is quite different.

MaxB4
Posts: 3,513

Posted:

Quote:

Posted By AugustinD on 11/28/2021 2:58 PM

Posted By MaxB4 on 11/28/2021 10:37 AM

Posted By TimB4 on 11/27/2021 10:19 PM

Covenants are deed restrictions.

The courts treat them as a contract.

It's called an implied contract.

No. An "implied contract" is quite different.

So are CCRs a contract or not?

https://www.davis-stirling.com/HOME/E/Enforcement-of-CC-Rs

AugustinD
Posts: 3,698

Posted:

Pay me and I will tell you.

🎯 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