Publishing Architectural Violations

167 Townhomes, in Maryland. Price range $130k to $150k
We are not a high up scale community, but our management company has neglected to do the proper inspections of our property for the past ten to fifteen years.
The Board of Directors relied on them too much, but the Architectural Committee has recently performed a comprenhensive inspection, and found many serious violations.
We want to publish the violations on our web site useing only the addresees of the homes, but the property management is shy about offending those homeowners who are in need of giving their properties some serious attention. We would also have published complimentary remarks about some who have maintained their homes in an excellent manner.
We have received some very positive comments from homeowners who admit they have been negligent in their upkeep, and will resolve to have the repairs completed.
However! there are some who say they will not, because the problems have existed for ten years, and no one has addressed them before. Our documents say " Failure by the Association or by any Owner to enforce any covenant or restriction herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter" (example--shed's over four feet high cannot be more then eight feet from the back of the house, and must be at least five feet away from the back of any fence) These guidelines are clear in our CC&R's, but the property manager says since they have been in place for ten years, we cannot enforce the rule, because they might get upset.
What do we do when "new homeowners", after purchasing their home, have signed their documents, binding them to our rules/regulations, and ask for the same size shed that clearly states in out arc guidelines that it is "NOT" allowed?
Whew!!!!! Question has anyone had issues with useing their websites to publish these sorts of problems?????
Thanks:
Jim

James,

I agree with Glen. I wouldn't publish them. At least, not by unit number or address. That's the same as using names since people will recognize addresses and know who lives where, so there's no difference between using addresses and using names.

Instead, I would quote the relevant CCR paragraphs to highlight what is required and then mention that a recent inpection showed a number of violations. You can mention a few specific, numerous, or more outstanding violations without specifying addresses or names.

Then, be frank about the lack of enforcement over the years and indicate a desire to close that chapter and get back on track to improve everybody's property values by "cleaning up the neighborhood." Try to appeal to people's sense of pride and willingness to cooperate for the good of everyone.

You'll have a few who just won't care, of course, but once you get most people to cooperate and conform, enforcing violations against the remaining few will be easier.

Consider it a sort of "amnesty" program. You may have to make some changes to allow for violations of long standing that may be costly to correct, but if the CCRs can be amended to make some allowances for trivial things, that might help.

Seeing as it's the board's and MC's lack of diligence for many years that has allowed this to happen, you're going to have to figure out a way to make some concessions. You'll catch more flies with sugar than you will with vinegar (or whatever the saying is). I also remember the story about the cold north wind and the warm sun. They made a bet on which could get the coat off the old man. The wind tried to blow the coat off the old man, but he just pulled it tighter. The sun gently warmed the old man and he eventually removed his coat.

First want to say thanks for the replies. Second, I meant to say our homes are in the price range between $230k, and $250k. I shorted us out by $100k
The price of our homes is what started this matter, because everyone is saying for what they pay for their homes, you would think people would want to show some pride in homeownership.
The reason for the question to post the arc violations, is because we "DO" post the names of homeowners whose wages we garnish for non payment of their assessement fees. This is done, because it becomes part of our monthly board minutes, and the minutes are posted on our community web site. Our attorney said it is lawful, because when something goes to court it becomes a public record.
I would be more inclined to be embarrased about something like that, then telling the community someones deck needs to be power washed or their fence needs repaired.
However! I do agree with your comments, just wondered about the comparisons of being told to publish the one, and not the other.
Thanks again:
Jim

Jim:

I agree with the others, I see no good that will come out of publishing them. If you happen to "shame" one or two into fixing their homes, the irreparable harm that will be done to many others will have a negative impact on your community for many years to come.

The other thing to remember is if you are going to publish it you better have a great webperson without a life. If House A is cited for not staining his deck and he decideds to do it one Saturday he should be removed from that list immediately. However, we all know that won't happen and it opens the association up to lawsuits.

Great post, Glen!

I think that invasion of privacy issues, not to mention public humiliation, possible slander, PLUS lack of a "hearing" on the violation, could land your HOA in court.

Think of another way to express the need for corrections of violations.