- The Presidential Altercation
Facts: In this particular community, the Association Board President is very “hands on.” He has served as president for several years and he regularly makes the rounds in the HOA, doing walk-throughs to check for rules violations, including unleashed pets, parking problems, and litter problems. He also visits with many owners about whatever issues are on their minds, both positive and negative.
During one of his evening walk-throughs, Mr. Board President is confronted by an owner who regularly violates the dog rules and parking rules and has been fined in the past. The owner resents the president for being a stickler on the rules.
The owner begins yelling profanities at the president, the president yells back, and the shouting match eventually escalates into a fist fight. It is unclear who throws the first punch, but both men are injured in the altercation. A week later, the owner sues the Association for his injuries.
You Be the Judge: Is the HOA responsible for the actions of the Board President which led to the injury of the owner?
- The Noisy Speed Bump
Facts: HOA had a continuing problem with speeding on its HOA-owned streets. Many residents complained about the safety issue, and the board, in response, had a rubber speed bump installed on the main street into the complex in an effort to reduce speeding. The board did not have a budget for installing asphalt speed bumps, which would have been quieter. The rubber speed bump created a very loud noise, like shots going off, nearly every time the wheels of a vehicle drove over it, outside the bedroom window of one residence. Because this particular street is the only access and egress to the HOA’s development, every owner, visitor, and delivery truck must drive over the bump, both on their way in and on their way out of the complex.
The owner who has the speed bump outside of her window is demanding that it be removed, or else replaced with quieter asphalt speed bump. The board says no, we have to protect the safety of all the owners, and watch the budget.
You Be the Judge: Who is right, the board or the complaining owner?
- When the Association’s Insurance Policy is More Generous than the CC&R’s Obligations
Facts: A pipe breaks in an upstairs condo, flooding the condo and the unit below it. Much of the property is damaged or destroyed, including walls, floors, carpet, appliances, cabinets, light fixtures, and wood flooring. Neither the owner nor the HOA is at fault for the pipe break.
The CC&R’s state that HOA only has to repair common area (the bare walls and floors), and the condo owner must replace her own improvements and fixtures. However, the HOA’s insurance policy happens to be more generous than this in coverage, and provides that all fixtures and improvements are covered.
The HOA doesn’t want to make a claim on its insurance because it can fix the bare walls and floors for an amount less than its deductible, and because it doesn’t want to have a water claim history that will make its premiums go up.
If the HOA makes the claim, the owner is going to get her carpet, wood flooring, wall coverings, cabinets, and everything else paid by the insurance. If not, the owner pays for all of these things out of her pocket.
You Be the Judge: Does the board have a duty to make the claim and get the coverage?
- Discipline of Outspoken Owner
Facts: An owner complained to the board about the HOA’s playground structure being outdated and unsafe. In response to this complaint, the board decided to put up barriers around the structure so that it couldn’t be used pending the board’s investigation. There is another playground area on site, but not within close proximity to the owner’s home. The owner has 2 young children who use the playground.
During an HOA barbecue that was taking place near the old playground, the complaining owner decided to stage a protest over the board’s response time to the issue and perceived lack of interest. Approximately 6 weeks had passed since the board had put up the barriers, and the owner thought that the board was taking too much time to replace the playground structure. The owner knocked over the barrier and climbed to the top of the structure and began chanting over and over, “The board doesn’t care about kids! The kids deserve a new playground now!” The owner shook the structure, rocked it back and forth, and continued to shout, causing quite a disruption. One of the board members who was present, demanded that the owner get off of the structure, which he did after 5 minutes or so. The barrier that the owner had knocked over was damaged and had to be replaced costing the HOA $100.
The board sent the complaining owner a notice of its intention to fine the owner due to what occurred and, in fact, voted to fine the owner. The owner objected to the fine and requested IDR. The board went through IDR, where the owner said that he was exercising his constitutional right to free speech and assembly, and that any fine would interfere with those rights. The board decided to keep the fine in place.
You Be the Judge: Who is right, the board or the owner?
- Board Member’s Objection To Approval Of Contract Behind Closed Doors
Facts: A 5-member HOA board of directors, which is often split 3-2 on issues, has recently undergone an election which has changed the makeup of the board. The former board president, who was used to having the majority on his side, now finds himself in the minority. The new board holds an executive session, and votes in executive session to hire a new manager. The complaining board member had been notified of the executive session, but chose not to attend. Notice of the executive session was not given to the owners. The complaining board member claims that this item should have been voted on at an open board meeting and that the board was required to undertake a selection process, such as obtaining proposals, conducting interviews, etc. The executive session and a brief description of the purpose of the session was noted in the minutes of the next open meeting of the board.
You Be the Judge: Was the board entitled to vote on the hiring of a new manager in executive session, without providing notice of the session and purpose to the owners, and without undertaking a selection process as set forth by the complaining board member? Who is right, the board, or the complaining minority board member?