|
Clear Bolshevism, Socialism, Fascism and Tyranny.
Only the American born retard can condone HOA concept.
Look into your fucking constitution sometime morons!
-Sub
©¿©¬ Patrick's HOA News wrote:
> ASSOCIATIONS
>
> Suspect fees imperil their nest egg
>
> By Stephen Glassman and Donie Vanitzian, Special to The Times
>
> Question: In July 2003, we purchased a Marina del Rey condo for
> $630,000 with low monthly dues. At the time of purchase, both
> salespeople said no major repairs to the unit or buildings were needed
> in the near future, and none were noted in escrow disclosures. We
> learned the seller's salesperson owned many units here and seemed to
> be a permanent board director whose agenda was to keep the monthly
> fees very low.
>
> As seniors, we planned on retiring in two years, but once we moved in,
> the monthly fees kept increasing. In December 2003, the board
> circulated an announcement demanding mandatory owner attendance at a
> meeting. It said all the planters lacked drainage and must be rebuilt
> with new drains and waterproofing. It said mold was found in all the
> storage areas and deemed the work "necessary" and an "emergency."
>
> In February 2004, the planters were torn out at an initial cost of
> $6,500. Today, it all remains in disrepair with no projected
> completion date. No work has begun on the mold problem.
>
> In July 2004, the board called a meeting for yet another emergency. It
> announced that the entire complex's cedar paneling was rotted, with
> estimated repair costs beginning at $45,000 per owner and "no
> guarantee where it will end."
>
> Some skeptical owners hired an independent investigator, who
> discovered that the paneling isn't rotted but that several
> influential salespeople who live here want to upgrade all their units,
> then sell and move. We learned that the same group has dominated board
> positions and is responsible for many poor decisions while wielding
> heavy-handed influence over owners.
>
> We've now spent thousands on the unit, are faced with paying the
> $45,000 assessment and have been warned that "more unexpected
> expenditures" are coming. These expenses have jeopardized our
> financial stability and retirement plans. Do we have any recourse?
>
> Answer: Many residential deed-restricted buyers fail to understand the
> depth of investigation that must be performed to protect their assets
> before a purchase. For seniors on a fixed income or approaching
> retirement, condo ownership isn't always affordable. Association
> assessment payments are always increasing and special assessments are
> never more than a board vote away.
>
> Because there are more titleholders than board directors, stopping
> runaway emergency assessments isn't impossible. Civil Code Section
> 1363.05(h) defines "emergency" as circumstances "that could not have
> been reasonably foreseen, which require immediate attention and
> possible action by the board." Neither of the situations described
> constitutes something unforeseeable by a board. The fact that the
> board has warned homeowners to expect more unexpected expenditures
> automatically removes these expenses from the definition of emergency
> by law.
>
> What it does indicate is a lack of due diligence and a breach of the
> duty directors owe to all titleholders by virtue of being elected to
> the board. Civil Code Section 1365.5(e) requires that at least once
> every three years the board of directors "shall cause to be conducted
> a reasonably competent and diligent visual inspection of the
> accessible areas of the major components which the association is
> obligated to repair, replace, restore or maintain as part of a study
> of the reserve account requirements of the common interest development."
>
> The board must conduct this inspection in good faith, and its failure
> to do so may be cause for removal of one or all directors or subject
> them to liability.
>
> Any change approved by the board made for the benefit of a few board
> directors and not the entire membership would constitute a breach of
> duty and, if proven, could also result in individual liability for
> those directors who approved the change.
>
> If the special assessments in any fiscal year total more than 5% of
> the budgeted gross expenses of the association, a majority of the
> titleholders must approve those special assessments.
>
> Making the decision to buy a deed-restricted property requires
> pre-sale investigation. Do not rely on statements made by third
> parties, including salespeople, management personnel or board
> directors. Regardless of who makes the representation, each assertion
> must be independently investigated and verified in writing to your
> satisfaction. Any request for information made and not timely complied
> with is a warning against purchasing that property.
>
> Questions can be sent to P.O. Box 11843, Marina del Rey, CA 90295 or
> e-mailed to noexit@mindspring.com
>
> http://www.latimes.com/classified/realestate/printedition/la-re-
> associations19jun19,0,6641340.story?coll=la-class-realestate
|
|
Re: Suspect fees imperil their nest egg
