Is there a power to evict residents?

Michigan Condo Act talks about the ability of the HOA to evict RENTERS if the owner is behind in dues!

I don't know how you could "evict" an owner. (I thought that was a lease term.) Due process of the law gives them so many days after foreclosure, and then they have to get out. Sometimes the sheriff dept. is called to make sure they leave. I don't know if you can even use the word "evict", then.

I have searched the Michigan Condominium Act

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(3zdulm45vpa5wy45v4ixpp45))/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=mcl-act-59-of-1978

and was unable to find any reference to eviction of renters or lessees. Would you cite the specific section you are referring to?

George, Ohio law provides for BOD initiated evections of tenants in condo communities:

5311.19 Compliance with deed restrictions, declaration, bylaws and administrative rules and regulations.

(A) All unit owners, their tenants, all persons lawfully in possession and control of any part of a condominium property, and the unit owners association of a condominium property shall comply with all covenants, conditions, and restrictions set forth in a deed to which they are subject or in the declaration, the bylaws, or the rules of the unit owners association, as lawfully amended. Violations of those covenants, conditions, or restrictions shall be grounds for the unit owners association or any unit owner to commence a civil action for damages, injunctive relief, or both, and an award of court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees in both types of action.

(B)(1) Except as otherwise provided in the declaration or the bylaws, a unit owners association may initiate eviction proceedings, pursuant to Chapters 5321. and 1923. of the Revised Code, to evict a tenant for a violation of division (A) of this section. The action shall be brought by the unit owners association, as the unit owner’s agent, in the name of the unit owner.

(2) In addition to any procedures required by Chapters 5321. and 1923. of the Revised Code, the unit owners association shall give the unit owner at least ten days written notice of the intended eviction action.

(3) The costs of any eviction action brought pursuant to division (B)(1) of this section, including reasonable attorney’s fees, shall be charged to the unit owner and shall be the subject of a special assessment against the offending unit and made a lien against that unit.

Effective Date: 07-20-2004

The "Right of First Refusal" was standard in early association documents, as they were designed to keep "undesirables" out and were very racist in nature. In addition, because condos's were closely identified with cooperatives, which uniformly required prior approval, similar language was often transferred. When the growth of community association began to rise rapidly (early '70's) many developers and their attorney's simply borrowed from these earlier docs and you will find many today that still have that right to deny people the ability to purchase within the association.

Fair Housing laws have sharply narrowed how this right can be used, alothough its never been defined as to what can be considered, only what can't (race, sex, religion); age is still a divided issue, with senior-only housing allowed to discriminate against families with children, although this is being tested again, with a disabled child, which will really gum up the works.

A year or so ago there were still bylaws in some midwestern states (I think Missouri, Nebraska) that retained language prohibiting non-whites from moving in. These of course are unenforceable today, but still haven't been cleard out of some docs.

Recently in Florida, some associations resurrected the use of this right, in order to try and ensure that purchasers had the means to pay both mortgage and assessments.

A number of Ohio associations amended their documents to prohibit sex offenders from moving in. This implies a right to refuse.

The "Right of First Refusal" is pretty much an automatic lawsuit if used in this day and age.

Not many cases on eviction:

A Florida condominium association was held unable to evict a tenant where the condominium documents did not provide an eviction remedy and where the eviction action was begun without providing notice to the unit owner or joining the owner in the eviction action.
Burnstein v. 5838 Condominium, Inc., 2 Fla. Supp. 2d 183 (11th Judicial Circuit, Dade County, Appellate Division 1983)

A coop - A writ of possession authorizing a corporation to evict one of its shareholders may be granted if the member breaches the rules and regulations in the lease. Furthermore, after the notice of eviction, the member must relinquish his or her shares in the corporation.
Gvozdanovic v. Woodford Corporation, No. 990574, Ohio App. Ct., May 19, 2000.

Association's attempt to evict unit owner is not granted because unit owners are not subject to a landlord-tenant cause of action.
Nob Hill Condominium Association, Inc. v. Mitchell, Fairfield County Superior Ct., Judicial District of Bridgeport, CV88-0252133, July 26, 1989

There's a lot of cases dealing with first refusal. If you need them send me a separate note.

Joe

Looking though our CC&R's I found this, however I do not know if it would stand up in a court of law. Nor do I see a judge granting it over minor violations of the Covenants; I would presume it would take something truly egregious or a well established pattern of violations to even make it possible to prevail in something like this.

Section 13.3. Involuntary Sale. If any owner (either by his own conduct or by
the conduct of any other occupant of his Unit) shall violate any of the covenants or restrictions or provisions of the general law, this Declaration or of the By-Laws of the Association attached hereto as Exhibit C, or the regulations adopted by the Board of Trustees of the Association, and such violation shall continue for fifteen (15) days after notice in writing from the Board of Trustees or shall occur repeatedly during any one-year period after written notice or request from the Board of Trustees to cure such violation, then the Board of Trustees shall have the power to issue the defaulting owner a thirty (30) day notice in writing to terminate the rights of the said defaulting owner to continue as an owner and to continue to occupy, use or control his unit. Thereupon, an action in equity may be filed by the Board of Trustees against the defaulting owner for a decree of mandatory injunction against the owner or occupant subject to the prior consent in writing of any mortgagee having a security interest in the unit ownership of the defaulting owner, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. In the alternative, the action may pray for a decree declaring the termination of the defaulting owner’s right to occupy, use or control the Unit owned by him on account of the breach of covenants, and ordering that all the right, title and interest of the owner in the property be sold (subject to the lien of any existing mortgage) at a judicial sale upon such notice and terms as the court shall establish, provided that the court shall enjoin and restrain the defaulting owner directly or indirectly from reacquiring his interest at such judicial sale. The Association, however, may acquire said interest at such judicial sale. The proceeds of any such judicial sale shall first be paid to discharge court costs, master’s or commissioner’s fees, court reporter charges, reasonable attorneys’ fees, real estate taxes and assessments and all other expenses of the proceedings, and all such items shall be taxes against the defaulting owner in said decree. Any balance of proceeds, after satisfaction of such charges and any unpaid assessments hereunder or any liens may be paid to the owner. Upon the confirmation of such sale, the purchaser thereat shall thereupon be entitled to a deed to the unit ownership and to immediate possession of the Unit sold and may apply to the court for a writ of assistance for the purpose of acquiring such possession, and the decree shall so provide that the purchaser shall take the interest in the property sold subject to this Declaration.

George,

I'm certain you recall 1st year Ks and that stuff about a willing buyer UNCTB and a willing seller UNCTS. 13.3 (supra), while Draconian, is a poison that (evidently) some choose to swallow, yes?

George,

Below are the paragraphs from my 55+ Condo Assocaition Bylaws under "sale or lease of units"

A. The sale or lease of an apartment requires the prior approval of the Board. Without such prior written approval, any proported sale or lease is null and void. (Pretty strong statement)

B. Application for Board approval shall be made on the form provided for that purpose which is available from the Board. An interview will be scheduled with the applicant after the submission and completion of the form and (Fees, etc).
Approval or disapproval of the application will be in accordance with the Declaration of Condominium, and rules and regulations issued by the Board as may be amended.

C. The Board will indicate it's approval, in the event of a sale , by completing the required NOTORIZED Certificate of Approval, which is to be recorded with the deed in the County records. Purchasers shall furnish the Board with a copy of the recorded deed.

Then as to renters, it states that "All owners of record who have lessees in their units are responsible for the following of rules and regs, bylaws and all governing documents of the association by their lessees. Under the Florida condominium act, the association has the rights to enforce such rules and regs, bylaws and association documents".

>>>Turn around, and sell the closet of the other condo you own for $5,000,000.00, and let the board buy that one because they refused.<<<

That would have to be a really Large closet. Included fancy shelving and hangers aside, I doubt you'd get more than $250K.