Does your Association Employee an Ombudsman?

CharlesH5,
Like lots of new posts here, this one does not have enough information to really allow for an educated guess.
Just the fact that you employee an outside individual to perform the functions as you describe is unusual but probably not unique.
Tell us more about the size and make up of your association, what sort of salaries are involved, how many hours this individual puts in, who oversees him/her, do they have a binding authority, have they been challenged in court. How many out of how many are unhappy? What are the qualifications for the job?

The only HOA I've ever heard of is, like Glen, the one that was shared with us on this board some time ago.

The use of a paid ombudsman, to me, is redundant.

The board is responsible for its own liaising with the residents.

If it can't do it, then the cadre needs to change to a group of individuals who can.

Donna, I agree. The scenario he's talking about not only seems like overkill, but I don't see how the ombudsman, who is paid by the HOA, could be as unbiased as the type of ombudsman you're talking about that Florida has.

Someone would have an extremely difficult time convincing me, were I a member of that HOA that such a paid position is truly in the best interests of the association.

I'd have the interested owners who want to eliminate the position do some math. What is the ombudsman paid (salary, benies, etc), and what has been done? Does this person have any legal training to try to keep issues away from the (probably) higher paid association attorney? How many issues are kept from the attorney, and at what cost savings to the association.

Who knows whether the position actually is of any value until someone actually crunches the numbers. Let the people who want to eliminate the position do the crunching.

My original question was if any other association contracted the services for an ombudsman? So far the response has been negative and generally critical that such services would be needed.

Perhaps understanding the history of this Association might put this in better perspective and explain why this Association uses the services of a professional ombudsman. In the early 2000's this association was involved in numerous lawsuits that resulted in millions of dollars of damages that the homeowners were assessed a portion for. Our insurance companies paid the rest. Along the way, nearly a million dollars in legal fees was paid to attorneys to defend the Board. Ultimately, the association had to file bankruptcy and pay thousands of dollars a month for independent management.

At this time my house was on the market and I had taken a job in another state. As soon as the bankruptcy was filed buyers avoided our development like the plague. As a result, I had to quit my new job and return to my old home and find a new job since it was obvious that my house would never sell. Needless to say I personally lost tens of thousands of dollars in relocation expenses, benefits, and reduced income. I am sure others in the community were similarly affected.

During this debacle, several board members decided to don orange jackets and disguised as CalTrans workers cut down trees along a major freeway that they felt were blocking their ocean views. The Highway patrol nabbed them in the act and they were arrested. CalTrans sued the Association for several hundred thousand dollars along with individual criminal claims.

Finally, a group of homeowners was able to recall the board that was the cause of these problems and embarked on a multi-year legal effort to rectify the situation. This required the services of a full-time attorney aided by an ombudsman and intensive work by the new board members (one of whom was an attorney). This effort resulted in successful resolution of the large class action lawsuit against the Association and emergence from bankruptcy. The Caltrans suit was also settled. The new board has restored the Association's reserves to nearly 100% of where they should be and is currently building an operating fund reserve.

We now are starting to believe that the worst of the Association's legal problems are behind us. Of course there are still a few problems (easement violations, foreclosures, etc. that require legal help). Nevertheless, the current board is reducing the amount of money budgeted for legal fees in 2010 by 56% and hope to reduce it further in 2011. The issue of whether we still need an ombudsman is a contentious issue. Basically, some homeowners feel his role is no longer needed and are opposed to paying for his services. On the other side are homeowners who believe the ombudsman is providing a valuable service to the community by nipping issues in the bud (note that this forum deals almost entirely with issues that a professional ombudsman is trained to solve). The current board is in the middle of this debate and this board member feels it is premature to drop the ombudsman services.

To resolve this issue, I am suggesting that the ombudsman function be taken over by a volunteer committee. This committee would work with our management company to deal with homeowner issues at the grass roots level. Issues that couldn't be handled at this level would then go through the Association's formal dispute resolution process. It will be interesting to see if any of the ombudsman critics are willing to volunteer their services to this committee.

In summary, the current board does not want history to repeat itself and is taking action to ensure problems that led to the legal quagmire in the past are never going to be repeated. Since the Association hasn't been out of bankruptcy very long and avoided major lawsuits for less than one year, it seems fiscally responsible to this board member to wind down ourlegal and ombudsman support in a deliberate fashion. If homeowners are willing to volunteer as mentioned above, then the process can be accelerated. If no one volunteers, then this board member will strongly endorse continued use of a paid ombudsman since the benefit of these services far outweighs their cost using past history as a guide.

I appreciate the inputs from the contributors to this forum including those in our Association who have strong opinions on the problem.

Charles,

In many assn's the Architectural Control committee and/or the BOD are resp. for issuing violations, along with penalties and/or fines, and settling disputes with h/o's. Instead of forming a new committee, why can't the Arch Comm work with the paid ombudsman during a 'transition' period to gain insight of his methods in solving problems and warding off lawsuits? As others have said, it's really the function of the BOD to do what you're assn is paying an ombudsman to do. However, I agree it was a wise move considering the debacle the old board made of their resp. Now that the assn seems to be on the right track, IMO, it's time to transition the ombudsman out.

All of the blame for what happened in the past cannot be put on the shoulders of the old board. The members have to take some of the resp too because they "allowed" these board members to get away with gross mismanagement of the assn. It's not an excuse to say "the members didn't know what was going on", because it's the members' resp to "know" how their board is operating -- or NOT operating! When the members just sit back and "let" the board do as they please, IMO, they are just as guilty as the board and they end up getting just what they deserve. I know this may sound harsh, but it's a matter of fact. Members have responsibilities too!!

I appreciate everyone's input on this topic and realize it is a contentious issue since it adds to the cost of running the association and its benefit is difficult to quantify. In my Association's case I think it has provided value by keeping us out of serious law suits for the past four years. Hopefully we won't need the ombudsman function in the future.

As a final comment on this topic it seems clear to me from the problems and issues that are raised on this web site that there are very weightly issues that are beyond the ability of a volunteer group to deal with. In this case, before resorting to formal legal processes, it might be a good idea to think about employing an ombudsman which might save thousand's of dollars in legal costs and help minimize ill feelings throughout the Association.

Thanks again for all your input.

Taking it a bit further...

My small association does NOT employ an ombudsman, and in our 25 years of existence, we've NEVER had legal issues! Perhaps this means that NO association needs an ombudsman, since we don't use one, and we've never had a lawsuit.

I believe I asked before, but can't see an answer... Does this ombudsman have any special training? Charles, you mentioned a "professional ombudsman" is trained to handle issues specifically addressed on this forum. How? What training? How many hours does this person put in? Does your ombudsman punch a time-card? Receive benefits?