Violation notice

Does anyone have a copy of an escalating fine violation notice. We made our first real drive around last night and need to start sending notices to people who are not complying. These are people who have already been notified.

We send a violation letter stating the violation. The second notice states the infraction again and that it needs to be taken care of within so many days. The third letter states that they are in violation and will be fined $25/day per our documents. This letter is typically send certified mail.

Harold, thanks for that information. The Rule I posted would qualify in Arizona when the Managing Agent observes the violation, take a time dated photo, and testifies at a Hearing. Many owners do not feel comfortable complaining to their neighbor face to face. This is a reason to hire a MC to do Covenant enforcement.

Harold is absolutely correct but I am really bothered by the attempt by the Management person to "wiggle" around the State law. Shame!

Pat

Below is the complete wording of the Arizona Senate Bill that will go into effect around August 2006.

Step three (c)regarding observing a violation seems to leave room for interpretation "The first and last name of the person or persons who observed the violation."

It doesn't say who first saw the violation, so presumably a homeowner can call the MC and ask them to take a close look at a property to see if they see a violation. Then it becomes the MC who is observing the violation and then writes the letter.

SB 1007:

ASSOCIATION BOOKS AND RECORDS: Owners are entitled to see association books and records pertaining to “contemplated” litigation. An association cannot charge a member for making books and records available for review. An association has 10 business days from a request by an owner or an owner’s designated agent to make records available or copies of requested records. The association can only charge 15 cents per page for copies of records.

FORECLOSURE LIMITATIONS: Associations can only foreclose if assessments are delinquent for a period of one (1) year or if the owner owes $1,200 or more in assessments (whichever occurs first). The provisions in SB 1007 regarding foreclosure limitations mirror the provisions of SB 1008. SB 1008 was also signed into law by the Governor on April 10, 2006.

REQUIREMENT FOR ENFORCEMENT OF ASSOCIATION DOCUMENTS: Before taking action to enforce the provisions of the association’s documents regarding the condition of the unit/lot owner’s property, the following steps need to be followed:

STEP ONE: The association must give the lot/unit owner written notice of the violation of the association’s documents and a description of the process the unit/lot owner must follow to contest the notice.

STEP TWO: A unit/lot owner who receives this written notice may provide the association with a written response by sending the written response by certified mail to the association’s address (as listed on the notice of contact form recorded with the county recorder) within ten (10) business days after the date of the notice.

STEP THREE: The association is then required to respond to the unit/lot owner within ten (10) business days (after receipt of the certified mail containing the response from the unit/lot owner) with a written explanation regarding the notice.

The written notice shall provide at least the following information:

a. The provision of the association's documents that has allegedly been violated;

b. The date of the violation or the date the violation was observed; and

c. The first and last name of the person or persons who observed the violation.

The association cannot proceed with any action to enforce the association’s documents (including the collection of attorneys’ fees) before or during the time described above. Note: All aspects of SB 1007 apply to planned communities and condominiums.

Bill

Pat, the only purpose of fines for violations is to encourage compliance with the Covenants and Rules. And Covenant compliance is desired by the vast majority of homeowners I have encountered. The Board would rather not have to spend their voluntary time dealing with violators and the managing agent would like nothing better than to see no violations. There is no financial insentive except for a Rules violator.

You apparently have had a bitter experience; but that is not an excuse for you tone. Thus, I will not respond to your posts again unless you are civil.

PatH: As the moderator of this forum I must ask that you read and follow the posting rules here. Click the Posting Rules link at the top of the forum page.

An excerpt is, "This forum is for HOA Boards, Committees and Volunteers to discuss topics concerning their association duties. Topics from individual homeowners, who are not acting as association volunteers, are no longer addressed here....Post any relevant topic you like, but please keep it clean, positive and friendly."

As an example, the following comment posted by you is neither helpful, positive nor friendly, "By PatH: Typical Boards and management interpretation, turning words around to be able to get to the homeowner for the $$$$"

This forum is for HOA Board members to share ideas and learn to better our communities. We strive to stay positive and ask for your help in this endeavor.

Thank You,
HOATalk.com

Bill - I definitely am not an attorney and I'm sure SB 1007 will indeed be subject to minute interpretation, and it will probably be one of the first items brought before the Office of Administrative Hearings if the govenor signs HB 2824.
But I can tell you our board has changed our rules effective July 1st to require written and signed complaints from a homeowner before the MC will investigate. Anonymous calls will no longer be accepted. Whether the MC withholds that information on the violation notice doesn't matter because the first section of SB 1007 along with ARS 1805 allows a member to inspect association records and SB 1007 overrides Section B.2 of ARS 1805 about restricting access to pending or contemplated litigation. So in our HOA anyway, the homeowner will have access to who turned him in. By withholding that information on the violation report, the MC can make it another hoop to jump thru, but the information must be available. Harold

I disagree Pat. I believe a violation notice has two purposes and neither one has the intent of getting more money out of members. I understand people are motivated by two factors; education and finances and that is what a violation notice touches on. Our first notice is a warning and this works as an educational tool for the many members who are motivated in that way. The second notice includes a fine and, unfortunately, it works for those who are willing to learn the hard way.