Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you were an owner of a house governed by a homeowners association (HOA) and heard about this, would you be mad at the HOA board, the owner, both or neither?
1. An owner in the community discovered that the HOA board had violated the HOA’s governing documents and local law by, among other matters, holding elections in violation of the HOA’s governing documents. The board was to be elected every year but the HOA board decided to have only half of the board elected every year. The HOA board said that they wanted to keep friendly people in office.
2. The owner got mad, threatened to sue but did not do so when the board paid the owner.
3. The owner then disputed that the board should have also waived a few months of HOA dues but did not do so. You paid those dues and all other owners did.
4. The owner filed a lawsuit against the HOA wanting those dues to be voided for that owner. The HOA is litigating this. Insurance pays an amount above the HOA’s deductible but the amount in question is below the deductible.
So: an owner is likely getting off the hook for paying dues that you paid, but the HOA did some bad things and is spending your dues money to fight an owner who claims that the HOA did some illegal things.
I'd be mad at both. Unreasonable owner who's mostly in it for the money and an HOA that blatantly disregarded the law and it's own governing documents. Who knows what other legal ramifications there are due to the violations by the board.
the owner who decided to waste the money of all the fellow homeowners. I'd be amazed to hear of the damage done to the HOA and homeowners by the board holding elections in a fashion contrary to the bylaws. So the whole board comes up for election the next annual, heck even quarterly or monthly meeting.
It should have to be shown as a conspiracy by the board to either enrich themselves or push through some project at the cost to all the homeowners that they didn't have the votes for otherwise.
This is more than being "mad at". This corporation conspiracy and homeowner bribery is not only disreputable and despicable but can open a whole can of worms legally.
I'm curious. What reason did the hoa board give for depleting the hoa (you and your neighbors') funds for a lump sum payment to this homeowner? (Now more is asked for but at that time a lump sum was sufficient). How does your board record that in your books? Do you have no requirement for oversite by an accountant annually who would see this activity?
So now you know at least two terrible things about your home, neighbors and living situation. A fellow HOA homeowner member accepts a bribe from the funds his/her neighbors are paying into. And your board, the board with fiscal responsibility for you and your neighbors, makes payoffs as hush money.
It would almost appear at first to be an honorable thing for that homeowner to be mad about those covenant issues and to desire to sue.
....except that now that owner is willing to accept a bribe NOT to sue. hmmm.
Well, there goes the idea of that owner being honorable.
And now that owner wants even more than that first payoff. This person believes she/he can avoid dues at the expense of his/her neighbors. Who will make up those dues then? Who will repair/replace/mow/whatever the areas usually paid for in the dues?
If you were an owner of a house governed by a homeowners association (HOA) and heard about this, would you be mad at the HOA board, the owner, both or neither?
1. An owner in the community discovered that the HOA board had violated the HOA’s governing documents and local law by, among other matters, holding elections in violation of the HOA’s governing documents. The board was to be elected every year but the HOA board decided to have only half of the board elected every year. The HOA board said that they wanted to keep friendly people in office.
2. The owner got mad, threatened to sue but did not do so when the board paid the owner.
3. The owner then disputed that the board should have also waived a few months of HOA dues but did not do so. You paid those dues and all other owners did.
4. The owner filed a lawsuit against the HOA wanting those dues to be voided for that owner. The HOA is litigating this. Insurance pays an amount above the HOA’s deductible but the amount in question is below the deductible.
So: an owner is likely getting off the hook for paying dues that you paid, but the HOA did some bad things and is spending your dues money to fight an owner who claims that the HOA did some illegal things.
Who are you mad at here?
Your community has laws that govern how an HOA holds elections? Really?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
