Category Archives: lawsuit

Where Does CAI Stand On Florida Condo Terminations?

      6 Comments on Where Does CAI Stand On Florida Condo Terminations?
guest blog by Deborah Goonan

Unless you’ve been hiding under a rock for the past decade, you have probably heard about Florida’s boom and bust real estate market for condominiums. The big news right now is the fact that hundreds of condo owners are being forced to sell their homes at a loss to developers and investors, in a series of so-called voluntary condo terminations.

In a recently published article in the Wall Street Journal,  Jack McCabe, CEO of McCabe Research & Consulting LLC, was quoted as saying close to 400 uncompleted complexes remain as part condo and part rental in the state of Florida.

A Bloomberg Businessweek report published last month estimates that 235 condominiums have been terminated statewide since 2007.

West Palm Beach attorney and CAI member, Michael Gelfand, was also quoted in the WSJ article,“It is a classic case of unintended consequences” of the 2007 amendment, which, according to the article, he helped to draft.

Hundreds, perhaps thousands of condo owners have been caught in the middle of a battle to keep their homes or at least receive just compensation. Owners from 13 condo complexes have joined together to fight against developers, and have created their own Facebook page: Floridians ACT.

Attorney Michael Mayer, of Peyton Bolin PL, which operates five offices in Florida, has taken up the fight for owners of Via Lugano condominium in Boynton Beach. According to Mayer, the legal suit contends that the 2007 statute amendment allowing for optional termination by less than unanimous consent does not apply to condominiums created prior to its enactment. The suit also challenges the takeover on Constitutional grounds, at both state and federal levels, as a violation of owners’ rights to “acquire, possess, and protect property.” The Peyton Bolin law firm is listed among CAI’s member service providers.

Ironically, in the midst of terminations of unsuccessful condo projects, a south Florida real estate blog reports that lenders have eased financing for development of 260 new condo towers (over 35,000 units) in South Florida alone, most of them close to the water and on the high end of the market.

So what is CAI’s official Public Policy on the matter?

Look no further than page 58 of CAI Government & Public Affairs Public Policies:

“Community Associations Institute (CAI) supports protections that enable property owners to challenge governmental taking of common or private property. CAI opposes legislative or judicial actions that would limit or restrict the ability and rights of community associations to maintain control over association common property.”

Read between the lines: Developers and private investors who take control of the Association must not have their property rights restricted. Furthermore, it would be inappropriate to protect owners’ rights where the party seeking to take property rights is not the government.  CAI maintains, generally supported by the courts, that Community Associations are corporate entities, and are not government entities.

Whose interests does CAI actually represent? The introduction to Public Policies provides some contradictory language:

“CAI is dedicated to fostering vibrant, responsive, competent community associations that promote harmony, community and responsible leadership. CAI advances excellence though a variety of education programs, professional designations, research, networking and referral opportunities, publications, and advocacy before legislative bodies, regulatory bodies, and the courts.

In addition to individual homeowners, CAI’s multidisciplinary membership encompasses community association managers and management firms, attorneys, accountants, engineers, builders/developers, and other providers of professional products and services for homeowners and their associations. CAI represents this extensive constituency on a range of issues including taxation, insurance, private property rights, telecommunications, fair housing, and community association manager credentialing. CAI’s over 32,000 members participate actively in the public policy process through more than 60 local, regional and state chapters and 35 state Legislative Action Committees and one federal Legislative Action Committee.”

Are Community Association Boards that are controlled by developers and investors exercising “responsible leadership” in these hostile corporate takeovers that deprive Americans of their property rights? Does Florida Statute 718 represent the “individual homeowners” constituency of CAI, through optional termination provisions drafted by one of their own member attorneys? It seems the statute as written supports the collective interests of the Association rather than the individual interests of owners.

Is it realistically possible to provide “advocacy” that will encompass a “multidisciplinary membership” where the interests of one subset of a constituency are often in direct conflict with the interests of another?  You be the judge.

References:

http://investing.businessweek.com/research/markets/news/article.asp?docKey=600-201408291903KRTRIB__BUSNEWS_31950_37969-1

http://www.caionline.org/info/provider/Pages/CAINationalServiceDirectory.aspx

http://www.caionline.org/govt/news/Political%20HeadsUp%20Public%20Document%20Library/CAIPublicPoliciesJan2013.pdf

https://www.facebook.com/Floridiansact

http://www.peytonbolin.com/recent-press/

http://online.wsj.com/articles/in-florida-condo-battles-play-out-1407260650

http://therealdeal.com/miami/blog/2014/08/29/condo-construction-financing-spigot-begins-to-open-in-south-florida/

 

If It Seems Too Good To Be True………..RUN!!!

      No Comments on If It Seems Too Good To Be True………..RUN!!!

What if you had a chance to buy a million dollar condo in one of Chicago’s fanciest high rises for a mere half million dollars? Wow! That’s luxury living for half the price. You trust the developer because he’s one of the richest, most famous, most successful people to ever convert high rise apartments into fancy, high priced condominiums.

What if you learned this famous developer was secretly trying to develop this project by borrowing millions of dollars at a 50% interest rate? As you look around at your unfinished condo, rancid unpainted hallways, and busted elevators wouldn’t you begin to feel a little bit queasy about your investment?

When you buy into any kind of Common Interest Community your heart, soul, and your net worth are all jointly owned by your neighbors….and the developer. The story linked below might make you long for that single family cottage way out in the country.

(link to Chicago Tribune story on Gouletas)

 

 

 

HOA Residents Try To Bail Out

      7 Comments on HOA Residents Try To Bail Out
guest blog by Deborah Goonan

The HOA, Association of Poinciana Villages (FL), wants to become a city. In fact, a group of residents have been attempting to become a municipal corporation for several years. The group has recently completed a feasibility study that it will submit to Florida Legislature.

It seems as though the large subdivision of Poinciana is tired of being underfunded and getting no services from Osceola and Polk Counties, despite the fact that 47,000 residents pay taxes to both Counties and the state of Florida. Their mature HOA cannot provide needed services provided to residents of nearby cities of similar size. Apparently the residents pay assessments, while the developer does not. The residents are tired of Developer Avatar retaining majority control since 1971 and want each resident to have voting rights, instead of a 9 member Board of Directors voting on behalf of each of Poinciana’s Villages. What a concept!

Who can blame these residents? After all, compare PUBLIC local government (municipal or county level) to PRIVATE governance in HOAs.

*A municipality has access to property and sales tax revenues, low interest loans, issuance of municipal bonds, state and federal grants. * The HOA is limited to collection of assessments that are NOT based on assessed property values. (often the $50K home pays the same assessment as the $500K home and even commercial property owners) The HOA has very limited access to financing through loans.

*A municipality can take advantage of economies of scale, and can cooperate with nearby towns and cities, or enter into local agreements to provide needed services. * HOAs have no option to collaborate with neighboring communities or public entities to provide needed services. In fact, its governing documents (the so-called CC&Rs contract) often state that the local governing entity will NOT provide such services, because the Developer has given away owner rights to these services as part of the development agreement at the time permits were issued.

*Local government elected officials are compensated, are publicly vetted, and they generally possess experience relevant to their respective roles. They often have term limits. Should these officials fail in their work, they are usually voted out of office in the next election. If they engage in unethical or illegal conduct, they will eventually be investigated, and held personally liable, without constituents having to bring a legal suit. *The HOA Board is comprised of volunteers who are practically immune from personal liability and oversight. The burden is placed upon owners and residents to investigate wrong-doing or spend personal funds in filing a civil suit.

*Voting and elections in a city – one vote per registered adult voter vs. one vote per unit (dwelling) owned. That means tenants vote, and each adult in the household gets to vote. No one in the community gets more than one vote. * The HOA Developer is granted weighted voting rights and appoints the Board as long as he controls most of the votes. After turnover, Boards are often elected by representative voting members, proxies, and other dubious means. Of course, allocation of voting rights is inequitable: the more property one owns, the more votes one has. They and the managers they hire often lack necessary personal and professional skills to do the job.

*The city has sovereign immunity, limiting its legal liability. * The HOA is a corporation that must insure itself against potentially high legal liability.

This is one evolving story to monitor closely.

(article on Poinciana seeking municipality status)
(PINCHOS residents group statement on reasons to incorporate)
(Letter from PINCHOS to Florida Legislators)

 

Norristown PA Condominium Failure Costs Taxpayers Millions‏

      3 Comments on Norristown PA Condominium Failure Costs Taxpayers Millions‏
guest blog by Deborah Goonan

Why should you care about continued construction of HOAs, even if you do not live in one?

City and County planning boards love HOAs because they increase the property tax base, while requiring very few, if any, additional services to be provided within the boundaries of these communities. In theory, HOA residents pay assessments for their own services – which can include road maintenance, storm water system maintenance, security, and the like, as well as maintenance of common areas and multifamily (attached) housing structures. In other words, HOA owners pay more of their property tax dollars for a lower level of city or county service. That means higher net tax revenues for cities and counties. Or does it?

I have blogged before about the fact that non-HOA taxpayers are increasingly footing the bill for HOA failures in their cities and counties. Over the past few months, several media reports have surfaced about troubled and failed private HOA communities. Today I present one example from Norristown, Pennsylvania, as originally reported in The Inquirer last month. (see link to article below)

According to the report, a 26-unit condominium at 770 Sandy Street was constructed in the mid-2000s. After construction, when problems became apparent, city “Inspectors pinpointed hazards years after the building was occupied, including load-bearing walls that were hollow, exposed wiring, and fire escape stairs made of wood.” How did the developer, R. Bruce Fazio, get away with selling homes with so many apparent construction defects?

Upon further investigation, it was discovered that the municipality had issued a flawed permit, and apparently failed to identify building code violations prior to occupancy.

In 2010, the building was condemned, and a judge ordered the city of Norristown to make repairs totaling $3 million.

But despite the fact that taxpayers have already forked over $3 million for the apparent negligence and incompetence of the developer and city officials, problems still continue, with many units remaining vacant and unlivable due to water damage from frozen pipes. Another condemnation may be in the works. How much more money will it cost the city of Norristown?

The unfortunate owners of these ill-fated condos have faced major financial loss and stress, but the residents of Norristown at large are also paying the price to clean up the mess left behind. Meanwhile, the developer and city officials are not being held accountable. Read the article below for details.

Your tax dollars at work?

(link to news story about Norristown failures)

 

Who or What is The Community Association Institute? (CAI)

      10 Comments on Who or What is The Community Association Institute? (CAI)
guest blog by Stan Hrincevich, (www.coloradohoaforum.com)

Homeowners Associations (HOAs) are comprised of three entities: home owners, HOA Boards and their legal counsel, and the property management company (PMC). Problems can arise from any of these but for those who follow HOA issues the involvement of PMCs can be most problematic. PMCs affect HOA governance with their direct involvement in operational and financial matters and through their trade organization, the Community Association Institute (CAI), which has undue influence in HOA legislative activities that craft HOA law. For decades the sole source for Homeowners Association (HOA) information for the media and the State Legislature has been the CAI. Why not? Their name implies they represent the concerns of community associations and home owners: aka HOAs. Legislators “trust” this organization to represent home owners and citizen interests but most have no idea who or what they represent.

Legislators actually think their membership and funding comes from HOA home owners and HOAs: WRONG. They have trusted this organization for decades and have allowed them to set the rules in HOA governance and financial management. Yes, they craft the legislation that sets the rules for their industry and interests and ensure through their actions that HOA State law and HOA governing documents are highly enforceable from the HOA Board’s and PMC perspective and very weak for home owners. Due to this close relationship between the CAI and legislators across the country, HOA legislative reform has been very difficult and the few Bills that have passed have been watered, are more cosmetic than effective, and in no way help with enforcing home owner’s right

If you visit CAI or their legal affiliate web sites and read their literature you would think they represent HOA home owner interests. Wrong! Their membership is mostly comprised of PMCs and lawyers. The CAI is an organization that derives most of its’ income from selling their educational classes. Nothing wrong with this but read below on how they commingle this business with legislation. Then there is CAI “the trade organization” for PMCs. Nothing wrong with this either except that they have ensured all State HOA laws aren’t written to hold PMCs accountable for their actions.

Then there is the connection between the CAI and HOA lawyers who have ensured through their legislative influence that no binding, affordable, and accessible out of court dispute resolution process is available to resolve HOA home owner complaints. This of course ensures HOA legal enforcement from the home owners perspective against abusive HOA Boards and PMCs remains in our litigious, time consuming, pay-to-play court system making HOA law mostly ineffective.

The CAI and the entities they represent and work with in State legislatures have thwarted HOA legislative reform for decades. Recent examples:

*killing an HOA Transfer Fee Bill that would have limited the fee and required explanation and justification of the fee (this costs home owners in Colorado $10 million a year);

*opposition to a Bill that would have required HOA home owners to approve the use of HOA funds prior to entering into expensive legal actions;

* opposing an out of court binding dispute resolution process for home owner complaints (leaving home owners with only our pay to play court system for the most minor dispute resolution);

*their involvement in writing Colorado legislation to license property managers resulted in using such legislation to promote their sales of educational courses and hence drive up the cost of such required educational courses for property managers;

*opposing the limiting of HOA fees, fines, and administrative and legal fees on HOA debt; opposing term limits on Board members when others are available to serve;

*obstructing legislation on protections of home owners against liens and foreclosure for HOA debt; attempts to promote legislation that would expand the independent authority of Boards in governing HOA operations (without home owner approval); and the list goes on and all anti-home owner.

You can blame the CAI for the lack of HOA reform with their legislative intervention but much blame also goes to our political process that makes money the name of the legislative game and places unfunded citizen groups at a disadvantage.

The CAI and its constituents are the most anti HOA home owner group in the nation and in Colorado they most certainly are a wolf in sheep’s clothing and our legislators and the media are only beginning to realize their role. The beginning of HOA legislative reform and improved governance thus begins with dispelling the belief that the CAI represents home owners; revealing their history and actions in HOA legislative reform; curtailing the CAI’s influence with our Government agencies, media, and legislators; and having HOA home owner groups recognized in our legislature and in the media to offer a home owner centric perspective to improving HOA governance.