Heading back to small claims court

Here we go again. Board discussed 5 items not on the agenda all framed as a personal attack on me. 3 unreasonable denials of association records. Then I asked the membership on Nextdoor to please ask the board to do the right thing. Crickets.

Thank you, Bill. There are many silent supporters. Half our members asked for a refund when two assessments were ruled invalid. But nobody wants the shame heaped upon them when the board and their buddies attack.

The reason I put on Nextdoor is that the board and all its buddies read it. I was hoping somebody with a brain could reason with them. I’m not very bright.

CIVIL CODE SECTION 4930. LIMITATIONS ON BOARD MEETINGS.
(a) Except as described in subdivisions (b) to (e), inclusive, the board may not discuss or take action on any item at a nonemergency meeting unless the item was placed on the agenda included in the notice that was distributed pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 4920. This subdivision does not prohibit a member or resident who is not a director from speaking on issues not on the agenda.

Each violation carries a fine of up to $500. I asked for $1. (4955)

Do you think these directors feel you humiliated them in small claims court?

Do you think this might explain why they are behaving the way they are?

Yes, you were on the correct side of the law. In theory, yes the board should also want to be on the correct side of the law. But in reality what often happens instead is this: In the directors' minds, you caused each director to 'lose face.' When one party has more power than one's self, and a loss of face occurs, the probability that the more powerful party will exact revenge is high.

Never expect to regain trust or respect. Maybe you can force civility, but it will cost you time and energy. At best, you're a "frenemy." Studies show that people loathe "frenemies" more than they loathe enemies, because they never know what the frenemy will do next.

I am sorry about the personal attacks. I am sorry that you might have to go back to small claims court for the records.

I would expect no support from neighbors but if there is support, I would be grateful.

I doubt they were humiliated in court because they haven't learned anything. Every chance they get they bash the Davis-Stirling Act and say it wasn't meant for an association like ours, it was meant for condos in Los Angeles. And why would they refuse to send me the minutes of an open board meeting? Every trip to court has made our association better. I'm not trying to force civility; I want the invoice copies they were showing everyone else. They should never have attacked me in the first place. The problem is mainly one couple who think they are the king and queen of the development.

And... looking at this completely from the outside and without considering the merits of anyone's positions... when I see repeated disputes with the board, I always wonder if the disputes themselves are the real goal. I lean move heavily toward that interpretation if the disputes involve repeated use of the same strategy that has apparently so far failed to achieve whatever it is the plaintiff is trying to achieve.

I'm fairly certain that many neighbors who are affected by the situation will be thinking along those same lines, especially if this is costing them money. Taking money out of people's pockets is a surefire way to lose, regardless of the righteousness of one's positions.

And this is why it's important to not give up. Because the errant egomaniac board members and their friends will have intimidated members into giving up. That's exactly what they want so they can go back to their totalitarian ways without restraint. When the board is sending cease and desist letters to members who are violating nothing, when they go to the local government to block permits that are violating nothing, when they force elderly widow to pay thousands of dollars on a void assessment lien that charged 19% instead of 9%, who really is your neighbor? That is why you can't liken an HOA neighborhood to a nonHOA neighborhood. The HOA by nature prevents having a normal friendly helpful community of neighbors. What normal natural community lets some neighbors have the power of sale over your house for a couple thousand dollars or the ability to lien you at whatever interest rate they choose. Maybe we have an extraordinarily bad board compared to others but I can't just sit back and do nothing. I lived in an HOA before with many more homes than here, and it ran beautifully. Frenemy is a misnomer. Neighbors have come over or contacted me privately to thank me for the changes that have been made. But the main thing is I can't just do nothing when I see our community getting abused.

Mainly to vent and I always like hearing comments from experienced contributors.

Terri, If I wanted to see something that an evil Board was giving me grief about...but allowing members to order(yes, wierd!), I'd get a neighbor-owner to order a copy for me.
And as far as a "30" personal attack at Open session" response, SILENCE often is a terrific response. I learned this raising teenagers.

Terri, NO! but 5 Teenagers can often feel like 30. 30" was referring to your 30 minutes under attack.

TerriS6, what I would do:

Ten Years Ago
Ten years ago and taking into account other information you have shared, my response would almost assuredly have been to pursue the records in an automaton-like, emotion-less way, step by purposeful step, with patience and following the bylaws and state law. At some point, and assuming I was in California where statutes permit the pursuit of records using small claims court, I probably would have gone to small claims court. Ten years ago (and even today) I would not ask my neighbors to join me in any battle, because years before I had already learned that "persuading" people in a "movement" is rarely successful. People either "get it" and are interested, or they do not and are not. (Sometimes they figure things out after awhile, grokking what they read and hear over time. Some then join up.) Simultaneously I would run for the board. Because to me criticizing without being willing to do the work is just cheap and shows a lack of integrity. (I know you intend to run for the board. I appreciate this.)

Ten years ago and in my naïvety I would be dismayed and unhappy with the harassment and the lies the board was putting out about me.

Today
CathyA3's point about not rocking the boat so as to preserve one's electability down the road are well taken by me. Granted this is only because of experience and so hindsight. Today if the wrongs the board was perpetrating were large enough, I would strictly focus my efforts on getting a lawful election run and strategically campaigning for the board, with enough other candidates who felt as I did to win a majority. If I could not get enough qualified people, I probably would not run for the board. Subsequently the reason I might not pursue records any further is because: I am much more conscious of the raw power a board has. I am much more aware of how many directors simply haven't the smarts, never mind time as volunteers, to understand bylaws, covenants and statutes. Also some boards wield the HOA attorney not as an educational tool, but as a weapon to harass. This can be fought, and possibly with successes, but it is time-intense and draining. In other words, these battles are often pyrrhic in nature.

I speak of "might makes right" often, but this too is reflecting the benefit of time and some study (practical, philosopical and literary all at the same time). Or to put it in terms that are more universally understood: The school of hard knocks is a remarkable institution of higher learning.

I agree with JackieB4 about responding with silence. With the board having more resources, its fifth grader-like attacks at board meetings cannot be easily stopped (or cannot be stopped at all). Engaging is likely going to cost more emotional energy. In my experience, I think no easy path to feeling good about any of this exists. When campaigning, address egregious errors by the board with calm and with a positive outlook. Speaking in a way that at least on the surface, indicates this is not about one's own ego but instead is about the well-being of the HOA, is high art.

I think I said this before but the only reason we have election rules and our 2nd legal election in history is because I took the board to court.

I’ve read (sometimes skimmed!) the responses. And it seems that most of them are predicated on the belief that your fellow owners and the Board members are reasonable, sensible, decent people who want to do the right thing and want to follow the CC&Rs and D-S. I’ve been dissuaded from this position. And learned that if you want a good, decent, safe, clean, honest place to live, sometimes you must fight for it even if you don’t want the fight and even if it comes at a cost. Because the cost to not fighting is worse.

I’ve said it before, but I never would have believed people could be like this until I moved here. It sounds like Terri is in a similar position. Terri, I’m right behind you regarding going to court. I’ve never done this and am terrified. But, like you, I believe it is my duty to fight for a good honest home to live in. And I will (heaven help me!).

Atta girl.

If such victories are worth the harassment you are facing (suffering?), then continuing on this path is surely the right choice.

I agree with what you say above and your reasoning in general. Sometimes doing nothing is indeed worse than doing something. Even far worse.

Clearly to you the battle was (is?) worth it.

TerriS6 came here, seeming to complain about (1) the harassment; and (2) her board's latest denial of records. I think she has to weigh if the harassment is worth it. Maybe it is.

There is accept and then there's "accept."

What are you going to do to stop specifically the harassment? Anything?

Or let me help you here: Do you believe continuing to enforce the bylaws, covenants and statutes (through the courts where needed) is how one should "reject" the harassment?

With regard to the harassment during board meetings, and since you will not run for the board, I continue to believe the sticks-and-stones approach is best.

[Still playing bartender.]

I thought my posts already indicated I agree that this is often the case, and that it is indeed often worth it to do something.

Each person has to weigh on her or his own the costs and benefits of doing nothing vs. doing something.

Oh come on. If you are willing to back off (and I am not saying you should), then the sooner you do, the sooner the attacks upon you at board meetings will stop. Time does not heal completely all wounds, but it reliably heals the worst part of the wounds.

On the other hand, many a director has quit because they are sick of all the lawsuits and criticism. Happens all the time. For every two directors who dig in, I think there's at least one director who will roll her or his eyes and just up-and-quit.

The part I do not like is your not being willing to serve on the board. Suppose the directors have had it with your objections. Suppose they actually do all up and quit. Suppose no one agrees to run. This is exactly as recently happened at CathyA3's condo. The condo lands in receivership. The assessment doubles.

As long as you are ready for this, have at it. Seriously.

Meanwhile, and in complete seriousness, I do look forward to your getting those attorney invoices.

This is only my personal opinion of what ethical conduct is. I say: "Thou shall not criticize unless one is willing to try to do things better her- or himself."

In addition every competent HOA attorney I know will tell disgruntled owners that the fastest, least painful way to resolve issues is to get on the board with a like-minded majority. Practically speaking, and quite sadly, it's the best choice among what are only bad choices.

If one will not run for the board (with others who feel similarly), then I think keeping the following in mind is iportant: Being on a HOA Board, and so not paid one cent for a lot of aggravation, is extremely hard. Yes, directors should comply with the covenants and statutes. But when owners are not willing to step up and serve on the board themselves, in my opinion, the owners should be darn generous.

Yes, and... ?

Reality says this often does not happen. This forum exists in part to provide suggestions on how to proceed to get a board to comply with covenants and state statute, preferably with the least amount of personal pain. Unfortunately reality says personal pain is almost guaranteed to happen. For an owner's own protection, and from experience, an owner wanting to raise numerous objections to how a board operates should always assume there will be retaliation.

Terri

I applaud your efforts. One of the reasons why I am running for our Board is I also can not sit back and watch our current board run roughshod over the homeowners and basically do want they please - and then when the sh*t hits the fan they step back and call in their $400 per hour attorney to try to bail them out.

I am intrigued over your usage of small claims court and I am considering going that route also. Do you have any resources or info you used or can share? (who did you use to serve notice, what violations can be enforced in small claims court, etc)

I should also add that the attorney isn't needed to GO to SC Court. Often, the Collection process is where one might need one?

Terri offers good advice, James.

Hope I'm not repeating myself but the director who was showing the legal invoices to members complaining we have little money for road work had just presented three written estimates from a paving contractor then announced she was going to get another estimate from her own employer, a paving contractor, after she had competitor's bid in hand!