• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

HOA contract reading disagreement

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

jowparks

Junior Member
Hey everyone,
First thanks for any help! I think our HOA is illegally raising our fees based on a false interpretation of our covenant agreement. I am pasteing what the board member sent me today and then after this I include the article from our covenant documents that pertains to his email.

"

For 2017 we raised our dues approximately 16%. This increase was due to higher maintenance costs. An owner challenged this at our January meeting, claiming that we should have asked the membership for approval based on what is in Section 3 of Article IV of the covenants.



The Board has interpreted Section 3. to mean we could raise the dues in any year to the maximum allowed had we been raising the dues 5% per year since the HOA inception. If the Board had raised the dues 5% every year since the beginning, the current monthly dues would be $349.27. The monthly dues for 2017 is $215.00, thirty dollars more than the 2016 dues. We are below what we think is allowed by Section 3.
"

Here is the part of section 3 article 4 that the board is speaking about

"The maximum annual assessment per Lot for the first calendar year during which an assessment is made shall be $540. The maximum annual assessment against any Lot for any calendar year thereafter shall be one hundred five percent of the maximum annual assessment for the preceding calendar year, whether or not such maximum annual amount was assessed in such preceding calendar year. "


I interpret the second sentence as saying the fee can only be raised to 105% of the previous year, regardless of what sort of assessments have taken place in the past. I would be interested to here a lawyers opinion before I speak to a lawyer in person and have to pay a huge fee. Also what would be your suggested next step?

Thanks again!!

Joe
 


Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Hey everyone,
First thanks for any help! I think our HOA is illegally raising our fees based on a false interpretation of our covenant agreement. I am pasteing what the board member sent me today and then after this I include the article from our covenant documents that pertains to his email.

"

For 2017 we raised our dues approximately 16%. This increase was due to higher maintenance costs. An owner challenged this at our January meeting, claiming that we should have asked the membership for approval based on what is in Section 3 of Article IV of the covenants.



The Board has interpreted Section 3. to mean we could raise the dues in any year to the maximum allowed had we been raising the dues 5% per year since the HOA inception. If the Board had raised the dues 5% every year since the beginning, the current monthly dues would be $349.27. The monthly dues for 2017 is $215.00, thirty dollars more than the 2016 dues. We are below what we think is allowed by Section 3.
"

Here is the part of section 3 article 4 that the board is speaking about

"The maximum annual assessment per Lot for the first calendar year during which an assessment is made shall be $540. The maximum annual assessment against any Lot for any calendar year thereafter shall be one hundred five percent of the maximum annual assessment for the preceding calendar year, whether or not such maximum annual amount was assessed in such preceding calendar year. "


I interpret the second sentence as saying the fee can only be raised to 105% of the previous year, regardless of what sort of assessments have taken place in the past. I would be interested to here a lawyers opinion before I speak to a lawyer in person and have to pay a huge fee. Also what would be your suggested next step?

Thanks again!!

Joe
Most of the folks here are not attorneys.
I am not an attorney.

With that said, I think it's your interpretation that is wrong.
 

FlyingRon

Senior Member
I can't understand which position you are taking, but my understanding is that the assessments can go up 5% for every year from the start regardless of whether they actually did.

For example if your development was established in the year 2000, the maximum assessements would be (rounding to the nearest dollar)...

2000 $540
2001 $567
2002 $595
2003 $625
2004 $656

Even if they only charged $540 in 2001, 2002, and 2003, they could legally charge 656 in 2004.
 

jowparks

Junior Member
Thanks for the reply flying Ron, other user your post was very uninformative.

The reason I am arguing they shouldn't be able to increase so much is because it says: the maximum raise is 105% of previous year, WHETHER OR NOT THE MAXIMUM ASSEMENT WAS MADE IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR. In plain English this means you can go up by five percent each year, it doesn't matter what happened in previous years. I don't understand how you guys (and the board member) are making this interpretation, maybe you can elaborate on how you come to this conclusion?

Thanks,
Joe
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Thanks for the reply flying Ron, other user your post was very uninformative.

The reason I am arguing they shouldn't be able to increase so much is because it says: the maximum raise is 105% of previous year, WHETHER OR NOT THE MAXIMUM ASSEMENT WAS MADE IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR. In plain English this means you can go up by five percent each year, it doesn't matter what happened in previous years. I don't understand how you guys (and the board member) are making this interpretation, maybe you can elaborate on how you come to this conclusion?

Thanks,
Joe
Maybe an attorney can, since we're so "uninformative".
 

jowparks

Junior Member
Flying ron made a reasonable assessment, I just felt your post pure opinion, no logic, no reasoning, which is not what I am looking for.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Flying ron made a reasonable assessment, I just felt your post pure opinion, no logic, no reasoning, which is not what I am looking for.
If Flying Ron's "reasonable assessment" wasn't adequate for your needs, then you will want to consult with a local attorney...really.
 

jowparks

Junior Member
Zigner why are you trolling? I am looking for thorough, well thought responses, not the rant of some internet troll. All I am saying is that FlyingRon made the best response he was able to, or at least it seemed so. All you did was say "You are wrong", that is not helpful or insightful, give reasoning and justification for your decision, otherwise your comment is not merited.

Thanks.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top