Condo Renters vs. Co-owner rights

[LiveInPeace]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Michigan

Question: Can a Condo Association pass by-laws that are different for tenants than co-owners? Example...tenants can not have pets, but co-owners can; tenants only allowed two cars, co-owner's more; tenants can't part in visitor spots, co-owner's can, etc. I thought by-laws need to treat all residents the same, but a specific co-owner's lease agreement can spell out rental specifics for an individual unit concerning special rules such as "no pets". Please advise as it is causing war on those co-owners who want the right to say yay or nay, but not be limited by special By-laws the Board wants the community to pass which seem discriminatory. Thanks very much.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[HomeGuru]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Michigan

Question: Can a Condo Association pass by-laws that are different for tenants than co-owners? Example...tenants can not have pets, but co-owners can; tenants only allowed two cars, co-owner's more; tenants can't part in visitor spots, co-owner's can, etc. I thought by-laws need to treat all residents the same, but a specific co-owner's lease agreement can spell out rental specifics for an individual unit concerning special rules such as "no pets". Please advise as it is causing war on those co-owners who want the right to say yay or nay, but not be limited by special By-laws the Board wants the community to pass which seem discriminatory. Thanks very much.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

**A: the HOA needs to get a legal opinion from legal counsel as there is no clear cut answer to your question.

 

[tranquility]

Many HOA have different rules between owners and non. Usually it has to do with maximum percentages of non-owner tenants allowed.

While there are some cases which don't allow disparate treatment, most do. But, there is an even greater problem.

Standing.

Since the tenant was not even a glimmer in the eye of the owner when he bought the condo, the eventual tenant will not even be a third-party beneficiary to the legal documents of the HOA (unless the documents give rights to tenants and not owners). The tenant can't really complain to the HOA.

He can complain to his landlord who can complain and who could have standing if something happened he didn't like.

How this interaction occurs for pets would be as follows. (I imagine. Only if the specific harm and the specific facts were presented could someone say more.)

The HOA objects to the pet in violation. Tenant does not get rid of pet. HOA fines owner. Owner deals with the problem. One way could be to get an attorney and sue the HOA saying the disparate treatment is illegal. The attorney will look up the specific factual predicate and help determine if the owner has a case. Then the owner can pay the many thousands it would take to sue the HOA (usually with risk as the documents often have a loser pays provision) and, if he wins, can allow the tenant to keep the pet.

I wonder if litigation is the course most owners take?