Management Company Ethics

Our MC letters simply state what needs to be fixed, mowed, etc. It doesn't state anything about origination of complaint at all. It appears that the MC is the complaining party.

As a follow-up to this question, our HOA requires that all complaints be signed prior to a letter being sent to a resident. I can understand this if a complaint is a single evevnt that need to be witnessed but not if the violation is one that can be witnessed by the Community manager. For example, failing to pick up after a dog is an event that need to be witnessed and corroborated if an ADR hearing is held. Having a 72 statues on your property when only 24" is the maximum height, can be verified by the Community Manager. What is the prevailing practive in other communities? Must all complaints be signed before a violation is issued or can they be anonymous for items that can be corroborated by the comunity manager?

When I was on the board, the MC (one inspection per month) made notes of a violation. The next month if violation was still present (except for building someting or a violation of sorts that required approval via a form), a letter was sent out--i.e., for junk sitting around, boat or RV, etc. in driveway. We asked them not to inspect on trash pick-up days because junk WOULD be sitting out. Now they inspect twice monthly. I'm not on the board any longer, and frankly, don't approve of two inspections per month as it appears to be to make extra money and not to expidite keeping neighborhood in compliance. I can't see that they are making any progress with the extra inspection, as there are actually more and serious violations. I do not like the idea of the MC telling a homeowner that a director complained. One of the reasons for having an MC is to buffer for the board so that there is nothing taken personally. Our MC knows where directors live as they drop off the board packets to their homes. Not that all MCs are like this, but ours is unscrupulous and have actually endangered directors by what they have said to HOs. In desperate cases, like our MC, they will find the person on the board who is as needy as they are and side with that person to get rid of another person who is asking them too many questions. That's why I'm not on the board. I was assaulted by an HO and he then he told sympathizing HOs that he'd gotten letters that I had called the MC to have sent to him. That wasn't true--he'd never gotten a letter--his exwife had, but it nothing to do with me, in fact they were from years before I was on the board. It was an awful mess. Bottomline, I believe that there are people out there who will do and say anything to try and get their way and to let you know that you can't tell them what to do with their property (of their spouse's property--which never had his name on the deed). I don't think just a reminder or warning letter works--most HOs know that something is a violation. After years of seeing these kinds of problems, I'm all for having an accountant and an outside independent inspector, if there is going to be a board, and not having a n MC.
EdR

WilliamT,

What does this new law state exactly? I personally feel that if you are in violation of any of the CC&R or by-laws it shouldn’t matter who reported you. You probably knew you were in violation well before you receive the letter.
On the other hand, if you were consistently getting these violation letters for things that just were not true, then yeah I guess to know who it is that’s doing to reporting would be good. It may cause some hostility between neighbors though.

Keep us informed
Chuck W.

Yes, Roger. When I was on board, I didn't like the 60-day problem. For instance, if someone had a load of mulch delivered and it was there on day 1, we thought reasonable time to spread it was within a month, it might still be there in 60 days but the homeowners felt that was okay. The board was chastised for not thinking it was okay. It really doesn't make much difference in our assn. anymore what is right or wrong because our directors are involved in selectivity to friends and directors. I really have a hard time respecting the MC for putting up with them and vice versa. Every week inspection would be difficult for our assn. because it takes about 2-3 hours. At the same time, there have been building projects and forts built against the fences in sight from the street and there is nothing done to speed up the projects nor stop the violations. Because certain HOs have gotten special treatment they now totally disobey the rules--like we have an amendment to our restrictions prohibiting parking on the street all night, but one of the most prolific violaters now has two vehicles parked into the curb of a cul-de-sac, as though it is a parking lot, all times of night and day--this blatant disregard will not be cited, nor anything done about it, even though it's a nuisance to other traffic and to the school bus. Whenever ANYONE has complained about the MC, they've been threatened with a lawsuit. At the same time, I'm not sure it's all their fault. I think they and the board are complicit, protecting each other, and it's about favoritism. Again, your MC seems to be ethical--they all are not. This is not my imagination--the MC wanted me off the board because I insisted that our restrictions be enforced.
EdR