By David Swedelson, Senior Partner SwedelsonGottlieb; Condo Lawyer and HOA Attorney

Owners often want to hold their condo or HOA liable for their damages suffered after a burglary of their unit or home or other criminal act. They claim that their association was required to provide (more) security, that the gates were not working or that a light in the common area was out. An association’s liability may depend on many factors such as whether it is a secured complex, the nature of the security services provided, if any, the association’s knowledge of criminal activities in the area and whether the criminal activities are the kind of activities that the complaining homeowner has complained about, etc. But is an association liable merely because it does not provide security? Is the lack of security the cause of the crime? We have found that sometimes the answer to these questions is “yes”. However, more frequently, the answer to these questions is likely “no,” that the association is not liable for the alleged damage(s). And that was the holding in a recent unpublished California court of appeal decision.

In the Girardi v. San Rafael Homeowners Association case, a husband (a prominent attorney) and wife who owned a home in a luxury planned development (located in Pasadena) sued the Alta San Rafael HOA, where their home is located, for negligence after their house was burglarized twice (jewelry and other valuables with a value in excess of a million dollars was alleged to have been taken). The Girardis claimed that their association owed them, as owners, a duty to keep the premises reasonably safe, and breached that duty by failing to hire a security guard, monitor gates, and maintain the streetlights.

Blog post by David Swedelson, Senior Partner at SwedelsonGottlieb, Community Association Attorney; Condo Lawyer and HOA Attorney

We have been receiving calls and emails asking whether California condo, planned development, or stock cooperative HOAs are required to comply with a 2010 change in Federal law that requires that pool lifts be installed at public pools. We are hearing about this now because there is a deadline for their installation.

Have not heard about this pool lift requirement? The 2010 changes to the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) for public pool facilities require public pools to be more accessible for disabled persons. Small pools must have at least one accessible means of entry, either a lift or sloped entry. Larger pools must have two accessible means of entry such as a lift, sloped entry with handrails, transfer wall with grab bar, transfer system with steps, or accessible pool stairs. Slope entries and lifts are by far the most common.

lift.jpg
Continue reading

By David Swedelson, California Condo Attorney and HOA Lawyer, Partner SwedelsonGottlieb, Community Association Attorneys

Many community associations continue to suffer from delinquent assessments; many owners are still living in their units or homes not having paid their lender/bank or their association assessments for 2 to 3 years. Many associations are not doing enough to collect those delinquent assessments and are leaving money on the table. At many associations, the senior foreclosed, and the associations have taken no action to collect believing that such efforts would be futile. Maybe yes, maybe no. We spoke about this new community association paradigm here.

There is another consequence of the Great Recession that will likely impact many California community associations in the future; many of these associations are deferring maintenance because they don’t have enough income to pay for the regular expenses, much less for extraordinary expenses such as painting. And many are not funding reserves!
Continue reading

Blog article by David Swedelson, California Condo Lawyer and HOA Attorney, Partner at SwedelsonGottlieb, Community Association Attorneys

We sometimes see community associations that are out of control, treating some of the owners or residents very badly, refusing to make repairs, perform maintenance in or around some owners’ units or homes or worse. As this case out of Hawaii tells us, this type of wrongful conduct can have disastrous results.

According to a news article, a jury awarded Molokai residents and condo owners $3.87 million in general and punitive damages against their condominium association. The couple said they were targets of threats, harassment and intimidation by an unlicensed contractor (who was alleged to have had a criminal record and was hired to do various tasks around the Ke Nani Kai Condominium in West Molokai) and the resident manager.
Continue reading

Blog post by SwedelsonGottlieb Partner David Swedelson, Condo Lawyer and HOA Attorney

Interesting and thought provoking article by Florida community association attorney Donna DiMaggio Berger, Esq. that addresses an issue that many of us have thought about, namely a community association’s responsibility for volunteer Community Watch members as well as for the acts of other association volunteers. Follow this link to read the article.

For those that do not know the story, Trayvon Martin, a 17 year old kid was shot and killed by on February 26, 2012 by a volunteer Captain of the Neighborhood Watch in a gated Orlando, Florida community association.
Continue reading

By David Swedelson, Senior Partner, SwedelsonGottlieb Condo Lawyer and HOA Attorney

Some condominium and homeowner association residents think that their pet is well trained and does not need to be leashed, and they ignore the association’s rules regarding leashes, believing they do not apply to their well-trained pet. They just do not get the fact that many people are afraid of dogs, especially when they are off leash. What they also do not understand is that just as a municipality has the power to cite a citizen for not having their dog on a leash, so too does a California condominium or homeowner association have the right to enforce its leash rules.
Continue reading

By David Swedelson, Condo Lawyer and HOA Attorney

For many associations who are preparing to hold their annual elections, boards and managers are trying to determine who is actually eligible to be a candidate for the board and who can vote. This is a big issue these days as there are so many delinquent owners. Boards and managers are questioning why an owner who is not paying their assessments or is in violation of the CC&Rs or rules should be able to serve on the board. The fact is that for many California community associations, the bylaws and other governing documents may not set out any qualifications for serving on the board. This means that even a tenant or other non-owner can serve on the board.

Follow this link for a PDF of David’s full article on this subject.

By the condo lawyers and HOA attorneys at SwedelsonGottlieb

As reported by the Community Association Institute’s California Legislative Action Committee (CLAC), “Senate Bill 880 leapfrogged ahead of hundreds of other bills and was signed into law on February 29, 2012. Since this bill was passed as an Urgency Bill, it goes into effect immediately.

As you may remember, in late 2011 the California Legislature pushed SB 209 through despite several flaws, and when Governor Brown signed SB 209, he admitted the bill had a number of serious flaws, such as allowing the taking of association common areas for a homeowner’s private use in violation of California’s Constitution and the Davis-Stirling Act (which generally requires approval of 67% of an association’s membership before an owner can exclusively use common areas).

Blog post by David Swedelson, Partner, SwedelsonGottlieb, California condo lawyer and HOA attorney

I recently posted a blog article and link to my article about the $55,000 dog. Out of Toronto comes word of an (almost) $40,000 parrot. Some owners are finding that their pets can be very expensive if they do not comply with their condominium or homeowner associations’ governing documents.

According to the article (follow this link), a Toronto (Canada) condominium association took action when neighbors complained of hearing the parrot. Apparently, this condominium association has a no pet policy. The homeowner, who owned the unit at the association since 1989, thought that the “no pet” policy applied only to dogs and cats. At first, the owner claims he tried to make a joke of the dispute, writing a sarcastic letter to the board asking if it would be OK if he had a goldfish. The answer was no. Apparently, his association takes the prohibition on pets very seriously, as they should.

Blog post by David Swedelson, SwedelsonGottlieb Partner, Condo Lawyer and HOA Attorney

Think the court will not award significant attorney’s fees in a breach of CC&Rs case? In Klein v. Nyamathi (Bell Canyon HOA), a recent (unpublished) Court of Appeals Decision, the Nyamathis were found liable to their neighbors at a planned development located in the Bell Canyon area of Southern California for almost $400,000 for improperly grading their property and, as a result, flooding the Kleins’ property under nuisance and breach of contract/CC&Rs theories. The Kleins also sued their HOA, claiming that the board had failed to enforce the CC&Rs as to their neighbors; the HOA settled before trial.

The trial court also awarded the Kleins attorney’s fees of $552,655.75 and costs of $63,595.83, over $600,000. The Nyamathis appealed, contending that while the Kleins may be entitled to their attorney’s fees for the breach of the CC&Rs claims, they were not entitled to all of the fees, as some of the claims were not covered by the CC&Rs. They argued that the fees must be apportioned. The Court of Appeal did not agree.

Contact Information