💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

SteveS8 (New York)
Posts: 128
Posted:
Everyone in our community (which is about 2/3 way through completion) just received a notice from the builder that it will "be applying for a Release of Subdivision Bond and Escrow Deposit" for 3 Condo divisions in our development as well as "the HOA sections".

Can anyone tell me what that means?
Thanks!
Steve
GlenL (Ohio)
Posts: 5,491
Posted:
The Builder has to post a bond with the local Zoning Board to insure that the work is completed as approved by the ZB. When the work is finished they get the bond back; so if there are any problems with those buildings then the owners need to file a protest in writing asking the ZB to hold the bond until the work is repaired/completed.

Studies show that 5 out of 4 people have problems with fractions
GlenL (Ohio)
Posts: 5,491
Posted:
You know like the leaking garages.

Studies show that 5 out of 4 people have problems with fractions
SteveS8 (New York)
Posts: 128
Posted:
Thanks, Glen...
So that begs the question of what happens now that we have had those garage leak issues in all the apartment garages for over 2 1/2 years? The builder has done some excavation and patched up some walls, but we have not seen any significant rain since he did this (about 3 weeks ago) and we have no idea if what he did will stem the tide (so to speak).
Steve
GlenL (Ohio)
Posts: 5,491
Posted:
Then you need to protest the release of part of the bonds until you are sure the fix works. That is unless you are still under warranty of the builder and want to handle it that way.

Studies show that 5 out of 4 people have problems with fractions
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Steve,

I believe you should also file a complaint with the Registrar of Contractors. Contractors usually rush to have any complaints filed with ROC taken care of ASAP!

Also, since the leaky garages are throughout the HOA this may be a construction defect situation. Check to see if there are any state statutes addressing this.
SteveS8 (New York)
Posts: 128
Posted:
Glen, thanks. That was very helpful but wait!
So, the announcement by the builder that we should applaud him for repaving the roads in the part of the community that was completed (after the construction trucks were gone) was not entirely altruistic but may have had something to do with getting his bond money back? BTW... do we have any idea how much money we are talking about? How would we find that out?

Mary, thanks.
We would only pursue the complaint road if we have exhausted everything else. I have no desire to hurt the builder's reputation. We need him to sell all the houses in our community and go elsewhere, but we want to make sure we will not pay down the line.
Steve

MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By SteveS8 on 05/24/2010 2:44 PM
Glen, thanks. That was very helpful but wait!
So, the announcement by the builder that we should applaud him for repaving the roads in the part of the community that was completed (after the construction trucks were gone) was not entirely altruistic but may have had something to do with getting his bond money back?

Um. So?

Seriously, the man is in business. He's not doing any part of it "altruistic"ly.

My neighborhood's developer didn't pave our roads as a gift to us, out the kindness of his heart, either.

It's all part of the business plan, and he gets his money back once it's paved.

I'm really not seeing a problem with that.

Remember, he had to put his money up for the bond to begin with. I'm pretty darn sure he knew that once the neighborhood was complete (or whatever the zoning requirements are for the roads to finally be paved), that he was going to spend more money paving it in order to get his bond $$$ back.

SteveS8 (New York)
Posts: 128
Posted:
Michele,
I can completely understand why you are so puzzled by my reference to the word "altruistic". But you were not at the last open meeting when the builder stood up there in front of his 55+ audience and spoke about how he got the roads repaved as he said he would because he cares about the community and all the people in it. For some reason there was no mention that he was obligated to do so.
Steve
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By SteveS8 on 05/24/2010 3:02 PM
Michele,
I can completely understand why you are so puzzled by my reference to the word "altruistic". But you were not at the last open meeting when the builder stood up there in front of his 55+ audience and spoke about how he got the roads repaved as he said he would because he cares about the community and all the people in it. For some reason there was no mention that he was obligated to do so.
Steve

Seriously, Steve, please, you and your neighbors need to get over yourselves.

He certainly is not "obligated" to get his own money back.

But to think otherwise is just plain -- narrow -- thinking.

There is also absolutely nothing wrong with him trying to put spin on something like that. It was no doubt a political statement and, as you and others probably knew as soon as the words came out of his mouth, it never was and never will be about altruism.

The thing is, your own bias is clear in this case. You have issues with this guy. So you necessarily have to deride or snipe at everything he says and does.

Bottom line, still, is that he is first and foremost a business man.

He will eventually be moving on from your development and, quite frankly, probably doesn't give two ****s about the people there.

He would likely prefer, though, not to have a riot on his hands when he meets with the neighborhood, but the fact is, he runs a business. He is not your friend. He is not your neighbor (after he leaves the development).

I think it would be in your and your neighbors' best interests to re-check your expectations about what type of relationship is a reality between your residents and the business man who develops properties for a living, and not because it's either a nice thing to do or because he expects some sort of community medal for it.

He simply expects a decent profit, and enough cash flow to post bond on another development he plans to begin somewhere else. And he likely would just prefer not to have to engage any residents in any development, if he doesn't have to. Or at the very least, would prefer to keep it at a minimum.

There is nothing wrong with you and your neighbors wanting to stay on his radar screen and wanting to hold his feet to the fire in terms of accountability and what not.

But stop pretending it's an altruistic relationship, or that he has or should have altruistic goals.

The best you should hope for is a reasonable relationship. If you get a better one, bonus, if you don't, then understand it's probably nothing personal. He just wants to get his cash flow to a reasonable level so he can continue to make a living.
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
PS: I wasn't "puzzled" by your altruistic reference. Frankly I thought it was wholly disingenuous.
SteveS8 (New York)
Posts: 128
Posted:
Michele,
I was being facetious. It was not my intent to make anyone think that I thought he was doing anything for altruistic reasons.

Even though he has said that he loves the community and the people, it is abundantly clear that was not his motivation for building it, but I will say that when you speak softly in such glowing terms, you will convince a fair amount of older senior citizen. I am just a bit more crotchety than most.

I am not fooled. The people with leaking garages for 2 1/2 years who had asked for solutions and not received them are not fooled, but there are many people in the community who listen to him and believe that he can do no wrong no matter what the facts are.

You stated, "The thing is, your own bias is clear in this case. You have issues with this guy. So you necessarily have to deride or snipe at everything he says and does."

Michele, some things are worth sniping at and others are not. The man is not the devil. This is a lovely community, and my wife and I love it here. But there are things wrong that need fixing, and the people on the Board (well, at least the ones that are elected by the residents), in many cases, either are not aware of problems that exist, or are scared to stand up and fight for the residents, or are incompetent.

Does not the fact that all Condo building garages in the community leaked seem worthy of someone standing up and saying, "enough"?

And now that the builder is asking for his Surety Bond and Escrow back, is it not worthy of someone standing up and saying, "Not so fast"?

Steve

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

  • ✓ Ask follow-up questions
  • ✓ Share your experience
  • ✓ Get expert advice
  • ✓ Access 350,000 discussions
Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here