Citations for CC&R

I am looking for how associations handle their citation/violation process. We are looking to revamp our process and remove unnecessary steps. We have also started most of our documents going paperless (electronic) unless stated by law.

Currently we issue a Incident Report (tells exactly the incident) and it is emailed to the owner. We then wait for the president (which could be a few weeks) to let us know if they want to issue a citation. If yes, the citation is issued with the exact same information plus when the hearing. The owner does have the option of paying 50% of the fine if it is done before the hearing date which is stated in the citation. That citation is emailed and US mail. Once the hearing is complete, the hearing results are emailed to the owner.

What we thought about doing is remove the Incident Report and immediately issuing the citation via email not US Mail. Most of us do not believe that the decision to create a citation is based on the President. If the individual is in violation of a CC&R then they are in violation. And this would also do away with any favoritism from the president.

I cannot find any statue for Arizona that states the exact process other than A.R.S. 32-2199.01 which talks about after the citation is issued.

Thank you

You're correct in that this shouldn't be the president's decision (who came up with that noise and why didn't the rest of the board shut it down immediately?)

It's OK to send an incident report with a violation letter (adding a time and date stamped photo would be even better). The homeowner might call and want to raise hell immediately but he or she should be to to file the appeal and make tbe case there, or send a written response explaining the issue and asking for more time to fix the problem. The board can discuss all CCR violation issues in executive session and decide to issue an extension or refuse and again offer a right to appeal.

If the violation still exists after the deadline, send another letter (via snail mail this time) with a shorter deadline and state what will happen if the violation isn't addressed (e.g. assess a fine). If the fine isn't paid and the problem remains, you'll probably need to refer this to the association attorney for further action.

Since you don't have state law addressing this,, you can probably use email, but may want to check with your attorney anyway to address things like forwarding g emails, making sure tge language stays professional preserving the emails in case this winds uo in court,, etc. You need to ensure that (1) the homeowner has agreed to accept email communicationfir association business (get it writing) and (2) that you have a current email. Homeowners should be told it's their responsibility to ensure the association has the correct email and that the association's email is placed on a safe senders list so it doesn't get intercepted by anti-spam programs.

Emails should be sent with a delivery confirmation and a read confirmation. You can back it up with a postcard stating when the email was sent and that the owner can contact the property manager for another copy.

Finally, if the issue goes to the attorney, stop all email communication on the matter until it's resolved.

Are you on the Board, SheliaB. Whether or not you are, BOARDS govern HOAs, NOT board presidents. IF a board has voted to let the prez rule on all violations, the whole Board could be guilty of something bad --possibly even derliction of duty.

First thing: get the prez OUT of this sequence. Why in the world does ANYONE think the prez should have this power??????

AZ has a lot of statutes about HOAs so I think there's proably a set protocol about alleged violations & hearings.

Our HOA, and I think most do send a warnng or "courtesy" letter before they call an owner to a hearing. giving the alleged violator xx days to cure the violation. In many cases, no hearing is needed as the alleged violator cures the violation.

In our condo tower it's different as a violation that happens a couple of times a year are noise nuisances, .i.e., loud parties, but noise is report and security goes to the unit and tells them to move inside and tone it w down. That almost always if effective.IF the unit occupants don't comply, then a letter inviting the ownrs to hearing goes out.

Our process is rather simple:

1. Warning letter, 7 days to correct.
2. Warning letter, fine in 7 days if not corrected.
3. Fine letter with right to appeal.
4. Fine escalation to 2x, 3x, 4x ect each 7 days.
5. Lien filed.
6. Owner declared in default and foreclosure initiated.

I agree with others' comments and suggestions.

Our process is much the same as Dean's, although we modify it depending on the nature of the violation. A junk car parked on the common elements can be cured permanently, but repetitive violations (eg., dog waste not picked up, excessive noise) often recur. So the penalties have to fit the nature of the violation.

A previous attorney and a former community manager both cautioned us against over-zealous handling of these things. A weekly walk-through is too much, according to the lawyer - even once a month is pushing it. And the community manager reminded us that nobody enjoys living in a police state (except maybe the folks who think they are the police). We try to hit a sweet spot between too zealous and too lackadaisical - although that can be tough since reasonable people can disagree about where the sweet spot is. As a result, we're never happy. :-)

I think it also matters whether you're talking about condos or an HOA with single family homes. So much of a condo community is common elements, and people are living on top of each other. So there's a greater opportunity for issues that need to be dealt with, which means stricter enforcement.

Also, we flirted briefly with the idea of having a committee of some sort to deal with violations, but that was quickly shot down when a board member pointed out that enforcement activities are confidential and handled in executive session - which means homeowners can't be involved. They can report as many issues as they like(*). They just can't be involved in the correction process.

(* Our complaint form asks if the person reporting the issue is willing to testify in court. This really cuts down on the nnonsense reports.)

To add to your post, our violation policy states another violation within 1 year does not start the process over. In other words, if you receive a warning for dog waste, comply with the warning, and then have the same violation within a year, the process proceeds to the next step - not back to step 1.

Always give someone a chance to correct a situation before commencing any action.

I don't believe you need the incident report step, but I do like the idea of giving owners the opportunity to cure the violation before issuing a fine.

Also strongly agree that the president alone should not have the power to decide if a citation will be issued.