What is the name of your state? TN
I have rather sticky situation on my hands and I need your advice. I am the condo owner and I live on the first floor in a 3 story apartment complex. On Jan. 24th a pipe broke on the 3rd floor and flooded my apartment. The 2nd floor apartment didn't sustain any damage and is owned by the guy from the 3rd floor.
Following the incident I had to replace my carpet, mat and few other items. The total damages were around $1500.
I have sued the owner of the 3rd floor apartment for the damages. In the court he was able to prove that it was not the pipe, but the meter, located in a shed that houses water heater, that caused the damage. According to the HoA rules, the meter is the HoA's responsibility. My witness, HoA representative was stupid enough to admit that. So, the court dismissed the case and ruled that HoA is at fault here and they should pay for my damages.
When I showed the judgment to the HoA board and asked them to pay for the damages, they just blatantly refused saying that "the judge was wrong and misread HoA rules", "I should appeal" and "we won't pay". As HoA was not named as a defendant, they are not legally bound to pay for the damages.
Here are two scenarios that I am thinking over:
(1) I should sue the HoA. But what if the (new) judge reads the HoA rules and interprets them differently, deciding that this it is the owner from the 3rd floor who is liable? What will I be able to do with two dismissed cases? Would that be a dead-end for me?
(2) I should sue HoA and the owner from the 3rd floor. However, there is a possible caveat here. The owner can exercise "Res judicata" doctrine in this case and I will be back to scenario (1) ?
Is it really impossible for me to get my money back from whoever is at fault here?
Anybody with ingenious idea, please help!What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state?
I have rather sticky situation on my hands and I need your advice. I am the condo owner and I live on the first floor in a 3 story apartment complex. On Jan. 24th a pipe broke on the 3rd floor and flooded my apartment. The 2nd floor apartment didn't sustain any damage and is owned by the guy from the 3rd floor.
Following the incident I had to replace my carpet, mat and few other items. The total damages were around $1500.
I have sued the owner of the 3rd floor apartment for the damages. In the court he was able to prove that it was not the pipe, but the meter, located in a shed that houses water heater, that caused the damage. According to the HoA rules, the meter is the HoA's responsibility. My witness, HoA representative was stupid enough to admit that. So, the court dismissed the case and ruled that HoA is at fault here and they should pay for my damages.
When I showed the judgment to the HoA board and asked them to pay for the damages, they just blatantly refused saying that "the judge was wrong and misread HoA rules", "I should appeal" and "we won't pay". As HoA was not named as a defendant, they are not legally bound to pay for the damages.
Here are two scenarios that I am thinking over:
(1) I should sue the HoA. But what if the (new) judge reads the HoA rules and interprets them differently, deciding that this it is the owner from the 3rd floor who is liable? What will I be able to do with two dismissed cases? Would that be a dead-end for me?
(2) I should sue HoA and the owner from the 3rd floor. However, there is a possible caveat here. The owner can exercise "Res judicata" doctrine in this case and I will be back to scenario (1) ?
Is it really impossible for me to get my money back from whoever is at fault here?
Anybody with ingenious idea, please help!What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state?