HOA Nut House

I would look into that. It sounds more like selective enforcement which is not legal. On what grounds would one resident obtain a variance, and not another?

My HOA has just imposed a new fee that is more than 50 percent of the anually fee from last year, a direct violation of the stated "no more than 20 percent increase from previous year..." They are stating that the percentage is only 14 percent (if they break the total payment down into quarter payments and base the percentage increase from last years quarterly amount) Is it correct to calculate an anual fee into quarterly and use the quarterly increase percentage as the correct percentage?

To the anonymous poster who stated their assessment had been increased 50%.

Please read the statute posted by Rauni. Note that it says: "the association shall not impose a regular assessment that is more than twenty per cent greater than the immediately preceding fiscal year's assessment." The keys words here are: "immediately preceding fiscal year's assessment." Not the quarterly assessment or the monthly assessment, but the YEAR's assessment. Also be advised that if you are in a condo assn there is NOT cap on the increase in the Condo statutes!

Mary

Selective enforcement is almost always found to be illegal, but do check your documents. RV's are a common, but actually fairly simple issue to prove. Photos are great. I would start out by asking those who do have an RV parked on their lot how they got permission, or if they are gettig violation notices. If they were given permission and it is against your association policy, I recommend asking for a written description of the regulations on RV's from the board and/or management company or if it is directly addressed in your CC&Rs you are in good shape. Ask the board and/or management company why certain individuals have "a waiver" and others don't. The hope is they will begin to clean up their act, but if they do not, or ignore your request for information, take a series photos (with a date stamp) of the violators package it together with a letter to the board and mgmt company explaining your concern that as a member of the association, you are concerned that the board's and/or mgmt co's actions are exposing the association as a whole to legal action for not applying the regulations equally to all members. (When I was on the my board we got one of these sent certified and it really got our atention.) In addition, it sets a precident that your association does not enforce regulations and may allow other owners to violate different provisions with the understanding that there is selective enforcement, so how were they supposed to know that this was going to be enforce. I have seen it happen! My rule, when I served on my board was that if we weren't going to enforce something, we should just get rid of the rule (I know this is very difficult in some associations)

In regards to the 50% increase, while these types of issues can be confusing and just about every CC&R is different, please recognize that state laws trump your CC&Rs, so regardless of the provisions in your CC&Rs the law says increases cannot exceed the 20% mark. Your CC&Rs can limit it to less than this but not more than this. Condos are exempt from this because they have greater resposibilies than planned developments. The concern is that condos frequently pay untilities (electic, water etc.) and if you have a wide variety of cost increases along with utility increases you may not be able to pay your bills and could get the association into legal trouble.

I learned a great deal about the legal aspects of running an association when I was on my board by attending a class put on by CAI. I know they are painted as the bad guys on this and other sites, but to be honest I learned more in a day of attending their class than I have on any of these message boards or 6 years on my board. I don't always agree with their position on issues at the legislature, but the education classes they offer are fantastic! We found out that our board was violating a bunch of laws and that we did not have all the powers we thought. That class got us to clean up our act and I truly think we have a better community now. I would reccomend that every board member have to take some kind of class, and I really think the one CAI put on (ABC or Essentials or something like that) would be a good template to use.

How about a $100,000 void on the face, restraining order that was issued against me through a provable conspiracy with the city and my hoa board members in order to protect a corrupt system.

I need the help of an attorney.

I live in California.

Any help out there?

I am concerned that the activities of our Board of Directors on behalf of the our HOA is going to get us all sued. The part time off duty police officers employed by the HOA to provide security are being instructed by the Board to specifically target and surveil certain residents and their property. One in particular because the neighbors are stating that illegal drug activities are taking place in that house. I think our HOA needs to stay away from this and report this through normal channels to the police or drug enforcement agency rather than using the HOA monies (homeowner dues!) to pay for this kind of surveillance. I think they are possibly violating the privacy rights of the homeowners they have decided to target. Further, while the patrol officer is sitting parked on these pre-selected front doors no patrol protection is provided to the rest of us but our dues are paying for this.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I don't like the idea of associations having any more ability than any other citizen in reporting crime. Unfortunately some (too many) association docs ave prohibitions against certain types of individual conduct. The Board has a legal responsibility to enforce the covenants. This makes them - in my opinion - like Blackwater that was recently kicked out of Iraq. A private armed security force with no accountability.

A court in Florida wrote an opinion I LIKE. It said it (the judges) did NOT think that as a matter of public policy, associations should be in the business of policing individual members' conduct. I CAN'T AGREE MORE.

Interestingly, I used that case to defend an association in a Fair Housing complaint against the association, that was brought by a homeowner who was trying to recover lost rent. Her tenant moved out and she blamed the association. Why? For "failing to take action" against a homeowner member who allegedly was discriminating by "harassing" her tenant. THIS is the kind of MUCK that an association can get into where covenants regulate individual conduct. I wrote a brief, citing case law, and the case was dropped. But this was one court in one state. Another state may not rule this way. To what extent must an association "police" its members? The association is NOT the police.

The flip side of this is the liability the association may face when it arbitarily targets individual members. Board members that have no legal or business background and no training of any sort are tasked with acting as cop? Association attorneys and boards file frivolous lawsuits for injunctions relating to personal conduct. And the association is counter-sued for defamation and damages.
No wonder insurance companies are dropping associations like flies. How would YOU like to be an insurance defense attorney (which I am not) trying to defend an association from some board's horrible conduct? Association boards AND their attorneys have NO business sticking their noses into private conduct of association members. In one court opinion, a judge wrote of an attorney who spent $40,000 of the association's money filing a bogus comlaint against a homeowner, that the attorney acted in "bad faith". That attorney now represents one of my former clients - a client I fired. I pity the homeowners in that association, because this board is no better than the board they replaced. What they want to do is outrageous. But they will shop around until they find an attorney who will do their bidding. And they might just have found him.

The association should not be in the business of operating as police. And that INCLUDES being a "traffic cop". Or the DEA. Or regulator of etiquette.

If you have in your covenants any provision regulating personal conduct, I suggest that you start a petition among your neighbors to insist on an amendment to the covenants removing that provision. And start immediately.

Developers who wrote these covenants didn't care. They washed their hands of the mess when they turned over control to the homeowners.
Now YOU have to live with the consequences of the idiotic covenants the developers or their attorneys wrote.

Sorry about the bluntness here, but this is my pet peeve. Associations are "corporations". NOT state actors, according to courts. If the *real* government wants to maintain this fantasy, then state legislators should enact laws banning these kinds of covenant provisions. I guarantee you the state won't do it. So associations continue to operate as Blackwater and Blackwater-gates occur every day in every city.

So you are going to have to.

My neighbor has violated the deed restrictions in such a flagrant way that one third of the other homeowners have reported his violation to the management company.

I live next door on the zero propery lot line (patio homes) so I am the most disadvantaged by the violation.

I am being told that the attorney who represents the Board of Directors has opined that our CC&R does not stipulated that board has a "duty" to enforce the deed restrictions, only a "right" to enforce. The only reason this has come up is because the board, from all that has been said and done, appears to be assisting the violator rather than the victims (most especially me) to get around the violation.

What kind of slime, legal loophole is that? I would not have bought in a subdivision in Houston TX (no zoning laws here) without being in a deed restricted subdivision with full expectation of those restrictions being enforced.

I absolutely think that this mind set constitutes fraud by a non-profit organiztion.

Anyone who can help please answer. Again, I am in Texas.

Welcome to the world of the HOA..sure it is fraud but boards can do whatever they like to you without consequences. Who watches over these boards? NO ONE..you can go grovel at a board meeting but they don't even have to respond to you. You signed away your constitutional rights when you agreed to follow thier covenants!!! Even if you personally follow the covenants, it is no guarantee that your neighbor will or that the covenants will be enforced! Belive me I hve researched and found in almost every state the governmet has a hands off policy. Even though in most cases the HOA is a mini government over you the poor sucker who bought into the belief that CCRs protect you, that people will follow the covenants and that the Covenants protect your property value.
I got out, but lost 30,000 dollars because of an unfair assesment against me. The HOA sided with developers and condoned the destruction of my property, my access road and the common areas landscaped by former owners of my property. The design committee did not plan for roads or fire protection for new homes along my road. Guess who gets to pay for fire hydrants, drainage, repaving and retaining walls for homes 1/5th of a mile away from my property. Guess who gets to pay to replace what I had when I bought the property...I have a fire hydrant right by my driveway, I had a paved road, I had drainage all filled in with construction debris now.
Consult a lawyer, but you will find any lawyer with HOA experience protects the HOAs and will not take homeownrs as clients, then try to find a lawyer with experience regarding HOAs. Consult 5 or so pay 500 dollars to tell your story each ime only to find out most cases don't get to court or are to costly for you to pursue. GET OUT NOW.
Then try to find a nice home not in an HOA...that is a whole other story.
Former disgruntled member of an HOA

Congratulations Fern! You got out! With your Life, with your Freedom, with your Dignity. It may have cost you $30k but that sounds like a lot less than the cost of slavery to your soul. You Rock! Now find yourself a homestead in HOA-Free Zones, usually much older neighborhoods.

I am the homeowner with the neighbor who has violated the deed restrictions wherein I was originally told that the Board had a "right" to enforce the restrictions but not a "duty" to enforce.

I do not know what kind of continued inquiry the Board has continued to receive from other homeowners who are upset about this since it erodes everyone's property value but they do know that I am serious about bringing an action against them.

Last evening the Board held a special meeting to discuss the violation next door to me and to vote on what they were going to have this person do about the violation. That meeting did take place and now I am being told that the board has been sworn to secrecy about the outcome of that meeting and so I am not to be told anything eventhough I am the most affected homeowner by this violation.

I am in Texas.

Any thoughts on our newly formed Pompous Private Club masquerading as the Board elected to positions by the homeowners?

Thanks

I don't know what the laws are there in Texas, but here in AZ there is no such thing as a secret meeting unless it has to do with a certain member's health, financial situation, or a few other personal matters. Then it is referred to as a closed meeting, and they can only "close" the part where they discuss these things that have to do with a person's privacy, then they have to open up and let you in for the rest. It's even against the law for them to have meetings onthe phone or via email! You can appeaer at any board meeting, events meeting, financial meeting, etc. They have to let you in!(Still talking about Az here). You might want to look up what those specific laws are in your community. Also, if they are on the up & up, (which it doesn't sound like they are) the law will be right in there with your packet you received with all the bylaws, CC&Rs, Architectural mumbo-jumbo, and so on.

Good Luck to you!
Angry

Here is the problem, I live in a community in Oregon. In the mail the community received a Budget for 2008 that states due to the reseve fund only operating at 34% we need to raise the monthly dues from $89.00 to $245.00 , and also we are going to paint our 5 year old community this year, and we will reevaluate at the end of 2008 with an update on the reseve study. Now the 2008 reserve study recommends increase the fee to $70.00 per unit and painting certian parts of each builing not the whole thing. Is there anything we can do as a community?

P.S. we have no amenities the community it is purley grass, no clubhouse, no cable paid, no water paid, and no pool or spa.

Thanks for any help,
Michelle

You should review all of your community documents and find out what the Board can do according to these docs. You should also have the right to review all financial records.

Good Luck!

How does one opt out of an association? Im in texas my home owners association had went from 90% going or signing the blank quarm letters for the annual meeting to the association is saying now 10% that they were going to lower it to. If one has not payed there yearly dues or is still delinquent on there association dues then they are not aloud to vote i guess on things. So does this mean hopefuly that my association is falling appart. Im sure that is wishful thinking but it would be nice. We have had 3 separate management companies run the association since we have lived here now for 9 years. I have always payed my dues and i have not been late. but Is there a way out of being a part of an association, other then moving from my house and inselling my home inflicking that crap on someone else. No one needs to be told how or what they can do with there home that they alown make the house payments for.
Totaly confused

We looked into that, as well. There is a way to "opt out" - but you would have to have 100% agreement and vote by the homeowners in the association.
So, for all practical purposes, what Mika said is true.

We ae trying to keep our Wal Mart bought above ground snap pool in our backyard. We have sumitted the proper paper work to the HOA, Now this has been going on now for a year. Anyway They sent us a letter stating that the pool was not allowed, but along with that sumitted the arc committee's letter that you submit to get something put in the back yard. had the pool, trees and a playground for our son put on the platt, and a professtionally drawn picture by a pool company. Submitted it, and didn't hear anything back for almost one full year, in the CCR's it states if submitted and nothing recieved within fifteen days it approved. But we get a letter dated January 3rd, and we recieved it June 4th, that we had until July 1st to get it down or we will be fined 100.00 per month until down, and then they will take us to court... The pool is not visible from any one's house, except one neighbor and he has a two story house, and he is actually helping us keep it. He was once the President, and hates the rules. But you have to have them changed by 2/3's of the community.. 80 homes here. Is there anything we can do... I will do proxy and go door to door to get the votes to keep it. With gas prices as such, who can afford to go anywhere. Our backyard should be our own.....

What kind of HOA do you live in? If your pool can't be seen from the street, and your neighbor doesn't have a problem with it, why is the HOA even getting involved? How did they even know the pool was even there?

It may be a liability to your home and adjacent properties if it breaks and floods.

We have the same issue, only our neighborhood is all two story homes and three houses can easily view our backyard. Our house is on a corner, and the yard is not adjacent to any other home. Our perception of an "above ground pool" was a permanent structure with decking, etc., not a temporary, seasonal sort that is only 3 feet deep and about 10 feet across. Not the amount of water that would flood any size yard, much less one subjected to the dry Texas heat. None the less, we apparently have a zealous resident intent on eliminating the joy a 3 year old might derive from having such a "structure" in our yard. I was accosted at our community pool at a neighborhood social function by a deranged, post-partum board member who screamed at the top of her lungs to all in attendance that she was not going to be a party to any activity in which a resident who knew they were not compliant was in attendance, and stormed off in a huff. It didn't seem to matter that I am on the social committee that was sponsoring this particular event and had committed to assist at the function. On top of that, we were never notified that we were in violation, nor were we asked to take it down by the management company or any one else. Like you, it didn't seem to matter that the pool in question had already been removed.
In our situation, it seems that as a neighborhood, we have empowered a board of unreasonable control freaks who think that their attempts at publicly embarrassing or humiliating residents earns respect from the rest of the neighborhood. The only thing this particular board member has done has prompted a surge of discussions regarding the question of how to remove her and other members of the current board from office and the restructuring of the by-laws with a new and reasonable board. The only issue I see with this prospect is that the current board has manipulated the by-laws to the point that it will be extremely difficult to remove them. This is no longer a concern to me, as we placed a "for sale" sign in our yard and plan to exit this dictatorship as soon as is reasonable possible.

I am sorry to hear that you have to move due to the stupidty and ignorance of some folks, obviously who feel as if they are better than anyone else. It is awful that you have to resort to saling your house. We have only been in thishouse a year, so we would lose our tails if we tried to sale, with the market as it is in Texas... Plus this is the house that we both wanted in our school district, and a nice neighborhood for rearing of young folks. We waited a year to purchase to make sure of where we wanted to be. Here is it.. except for this... We will make an attempt to talk to the HOA president tonight, if he isn't going to be reasonable, then I will go door to door and get a proxy to change the rule... It means alot to me and my family as we swim everyday in the summer... Sad but true... Economy and gas are keeping us home. This is the first summer that I will have been able to sty home with my kids, worked since I was 14... I have four children, yes some are grown, but I still have two at home. 26,23, 17 and 6... So we all utilize the pool... I am hoping that he will be reasonable, if not I will go to battle. Many things around the neighborhood are not in compliance, wondering about those issues... We soon will see. good luck in your future endeavors...

My HOA is in MD, we received our HOA book when we moved in and have never received any modifications or changes. We refer to this "manual" each time we do anything w/the home or property. However, myself and neighbors continue to get violation letters from the HOA regarding changes that are not in the book. First, our HOA manager will not speak to anyone over the phone, we have to submit back to her in writing (which is fine, because of paper trail). When I send in their section of the book along with what was done and say that I do not see where the violation occurs, she normally backs down with a response "I'll let this one go and update our records". Neighbors and myself are getting really annoyed by this and wish she would refer back to the HOA manual prior to sending out letters. The latest issue is we purchased a kiddie pool for the kids (haven't put it up yet), but we just got the newsletter saying we need approval prior to putting up any type of pool (including a 6' fence, etc.), when I sent an email for clarification her response said that any pool including temporary pools have to follow this rule. When I responded requesting where in the HOA manual it states that, I get no response! What is a homeowner to do w/an unreasonable HOA Management company!

I would seek a legal opinion. If it isn't written in your CC&R's, then you should be able to do what you wish depending on other local laws. You might give the Board or Management company a letter of your intent first and declare that what you are planning is not against the restrictions. I would keep a paper trail of all correspondence. Be sure that you read the Bylaws of the HOA to understand who and how many it takes to change CC&R's or any governing documents. I would also see if the CC&R's are recorded with the county or city. Remember, you should follow all local building and zoning laws. Good Luck!

The bad thing about advising someone to 'find an attorney and sue' is that they end up suing themselves. The board or HOA will hire an attorney and bill the association members.

I live in a gated community in California and recently our board removed all the gate entry access codes from the gate system. They stated it was due to abuse from renters in the community allowing access and giving out the access codes to outsiders. But all the homeowners are being penalized for a few renters. Upon home purchase we were give a remote that operated the entry gate and garage, the Board provided 2 new remoted to each homeowner that only operates the gate. The remote I use recently failed and I was locked out of the property, since there was no access code and there was no one home to call for access. My second remote was given to a trusted family member for emergency access but lives about 30 miles away. Is it legal for the board to remove all access codes and restrict homeowner access to their property? There is nothing in the CC&Rs or By-Laws regarding gate access.
***Side Note: The community recently voted aganist hiring a gate guard which would increase dues by 120%, and I think this change is the boards way of trying to strong arm the community into getting a guard.

Your Board has handled a problem incorrectly! Anything that is that critical should have more unit/home owners involved in finding a solution. It would seem to me, the renter's and owner of the property obligation to find a solution. All owners should not be harmed. If all access entry codes are removed, then you no longer live in a secure, gated community. I would advise collecting signatures and presenting a petition to the Board demanding a remedy to the problem. Power to the owners!

CONFLICT OF INTEREST?

I would appreciate it if you could answer a question for me concerning my home owners association located in Brevard County, Florida.

We have 130 owners with 13 properties facing a large pond that was sold as “Waterfront Property“ when it was developed about twenty years ago. FYI: Our Board of Directors Meetings are open to all members.

Of the seven recently elected board members four of them own waterfront property. Since coming onto the board these four have been trying to ram-rod a project through to improve the pond. The projected cost of this project will just about wipe out or bank accounts. Their answer is - we’ll just assess everyone to do it. Yes, we do have assessments covered in our documents.

My question is: Since their property values will be effected most by this project is it a conflict of interest for them to vote on this matter? And, if it is a conflict of interest, can they voice their opinions on this matter while sitting with the board?

Looking for help,
homeowner and board member

Arizona: (See complimentary Florida statues [Planned Community; Condominium; Corporations and Associations])

Director's Conflicting Interest Transactions, A.R.S. §§ 10-3860, 3861, and 3862.

In Arizona, the four recently elected board members who own waterfront property would have a clear conflict of interest as set forth under A.R.S. § 10-3860(1)(ii), because they have a beneficial and significant "financial interest" as members of the board (and the association) with respect to the proposed pond improvement project. The beneficial and financial interest "would reasonably be expected to exert an influence" on their judgment, both as sponsors of the proposal and when called upon to vote on the transaction (assess the members) as members of the board and the association.

A.R.S. § 10-3860(1)(ii) provides that there is a conflicting interest with respect to a "transaction effected or proposed to be effected" by a corporation, if a director of a corporation knows at the time of commitment that he:

Has a beneficial financial interest in or is so closely linked to the transaction and of such financial significance to the director or a related person that the interest would reasonably be expected to exert an influence on the director's judgment if he were called to vote on the transaction.

It is highly likely these four directors would have a clear conflicting financial interest as "...their property values will be affected (significantly increased) most by this project."

The Arizona nonprofit corporation act provides that directors are therefore prohibited by reason of this conflicting financial interest from participating, deliberating, or voting on such a proposed project. Any transaction that involves a "director's conflicting interest transaction," can be enjoined or set aside by judicial action. A.R.S. § 10-3861. It is irrelevant as a matter of law that any directors may assert or actually believe that he/she will vote only in the best interests of the association (130 members). Arizona law does not support such a rationale as an exception to this conflict of interest rule.

Directors are not only prohibited from participating, deliberating, or voting on a proposal in which they have a clear conflict of interest, but they also have an affirmative duty as required by law to disclose the existence and nature of their conflict of interest to the remaining directors who are not disqualified from voting, including "All facts known to the director[s] respecting the subject matter of the transaction that an ordinarily prudent person would reasonably believe to be material to a judgment about whether or not to proceed with the transaction," to the extent that such information is not known by them. A.R.S. § 10-3860(4)(b). The only exception to this required disclosure is if a director has a legal duty of confidentiality, in which case the director is only required to disclose the existence and nature of the conflict, but must "play no part, directly or indirectly, in their deliberations or vote." A.R.S. § 10-3862(B)(2).

A.R.S. § 10-3862(A) further provides that only qualified directors may vote on a transaction, if there is a conflict of interest, and that a transaction must then receive the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified directors, but that a transaction is effective only if required disclosure is made by the disqualified directors to the qualified directors.

I would say that since the pond is common area, then each home owner owns 1/130 of the pond and all other common area. Depending on the wording of your governing documents, the decision to spend a great sum of money that benefits only a few should be voted on by all owners. Another question I have is, do all owners have access and ability to use the pond? In our community, we have two lakes, one is only used by the owners who live on the lake and they maintain it. The other is a community lake and covered by all owners in the HOA. I would read your governing documents carefully!

My problem is minor but still frustrating. My CA HOA fined me $50 because my 16-yr-old daughter was seen smoking at the pool. They claim they gave repeated warnings. She denies that, but that's beside the point - if they want to penalize me, shouldn't the warnings come to my attention? Can they just dock me 50 bucks out of the blue on any allegation? Does small claims court have jurisdiction such that I could sue for my money back on the basis of selective enforcement, improper warning, etc (the HOA added the fee to my dues)?

do your bylaws and or rules and regulations state no smoking at the pool? Were your rules & regs passed in accordance with your bylaws and state condo bylaws? The board should have documentation of the "repeated" warnings mailed to you and furthermore if they said they mailed them were is the proof???? I.E. certified mail ect......

We have received a summons to appear in court from our HOA.Long story, but basically this has been going on since 2006. HOA fined us initially for installing solar panels. When we pointed out they could not prohibit us or hinder us from using solar, they then began sending violation fines each month ordering us to paint panels to match roof.In turn, we provided a letter from solar panel supplier who explained that painting panels would render them ineffective. So, then they also decided to enforce CCR regarding a missing tree in front yard, that was previously overlooked for more than 5 years. In our defense, I was able to provide a written statement from a neighbor, confirming original tree was destroyed by storm in 2001. We have appealed all these fines to no avail and even met with Board on one occasion. They agreed to waive fines for some other bogus violations, but failed to remove the waived fees from our account. Meanwhile, we are continually being harrassed by petty infractions. ie: Our garbage was not picked up one week, so I called the City and they agreed to send a truck the following day. Within two days, I was sent letter by HOA, "reminding" me that my gardbage can was left out a day longer than it should have been. Now, they are demanding we paint our home and fineing us on monthly basis for not doing so. We have explained that due to the bad economy, we just cannot afford to do so at this time. None of the neighbors have been told to re-paint, even though all our homes were built in the same year.
So, now we will have to go to court and fight lawsuit, but cannot afford a lawyer. I have printed out a copy of az leg ARS 33-1816, which basically states HOA may not prevent installation or adversely affect the cost or efficiency of the device. With regards to the tree, I'm searching for a law that states HOA must act timely and decisively to enforce covenants.
After reading comments at top of page, I'm considering accusing the HOA of selective enforcement and perhaps harrassment.
Any advice?

I believe Arizona now has an arbitration board. Make sure you are prepared with pictures and other documentation when you go. I would check into the law and also check HOA lawyer's websites for information. Ekmark and Ekmark, Mulcahy Law, Shaw and Lines, and Carpenter and Hazelwood are good law firms and have great informative websites. Also look at Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 33.

Good Luck!

I live in an Arizona HOA community. The HOA's manager claims that the law requires the name(s) of a resident be preovided before a violation of the CC&Rs will be condidered by the HOA.

Arizona law ARS 33-1803 requires the name of the "person who observed the violation" be provided on request of the offender. I take this to mean the management person who invetigates a complaint, not the person who filed the complaint. Is this require,ent cintrary to Arizona law?

Also, the HOA manager claims the "law" requires the HOA inspect all properties at the same time for CC&R violations. It seems to me the HOA is hiding behind the "law" to avoid the HOA from finding CC&R violations and creating a chilling effect by requiring neighbors snitch on other neighbors. The manager even claimed the HOA is trying to have this "law" changed.

Why would someone recommend a private citizen seek advice from a bunch of attorneys that represent HOA's?
Regarding Shaw and Lines, apparently someone didn't do their research with the AZ State Bar and the Maricopa County Superior Court regarding Augustus Shaw.

Jim, check out CHORE, they have a link on this site, and they are a good resource for homeowners.

Why would someone recommend
Submitted by Highway on Fri, 12/05/2008 - 3:21pm.

Why would someone recommend a private citizen seek advice from a bunch of attorneys that represent HOA's?

Regarding Shaw and Lines, apparently someone didn't do their research with the AZ State Bar and the Maricopa County Superior Court regarding Augustus Shaw.

Jim, check out CHORE, they have a link on this site, and they are a good resource for homeowners.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Forwarded Message (redacted to protect the innocent):

The lawyer (Augustus H. Shaw IV) for whom you requested a discipline history has 6 public record(s). 4 of these were dismissed. Two charges resulted in Informal Reprimands.

-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 9:09 AM
To: ashaw@shawlines.com
Subject: Noteworthy News and Cases

By return e-mail, please provide citations to the "fraud, $1.5 million" and "fiduciary misconduct/theft, $1.9 million" cases referenced in 'Noteworthy News and Cases.' Thank you.

----- Original Message -----
From: Augustus H. Shaw IV
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 10:09 AM
Subject: RE: Noteworthy News and Cases

I cannot simply e-mail that information without first knowing who you are. Thanks and Happy Holidays.

Augustus H. Shaw IV
Shaw & Lines, LLC
4523 E. Broadway Road
Phoenix, AZ 85040
Phone 480-456-1500
Fax 480-456-1515
e-mail ashaw@shawlines.com
web site www.shawlines.com

The information in this e-mail is ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL and is intended solely for the use by the individual or entity named above. If you believe that it has been sent to you in error, do not read it. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, then delete it.

This firm may act as a debt collector. Any information obtained will be used for that purpose.

From:
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 10:43 AM
To: Augustus H. Shaw IV
Subject: Re: Noteworthy News and Cases

Trusting the cases referenced on Shaw & Lines' website, "Noteworthy News and Cases," were filed in the Superior Court of the State of Arizona (Maricopa County/Pinal County or other), the information requested ("citations") would be part of the public record and would not be confidential nor attorney-client privileged.

It would seem, in furtherance of "proudly recognizing" the successes of Shaw & Lines, your firm would be pleased to favorably acknowledge a simple request.

----- Original Message -----
From: Augustus H. Shaw IV
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 1:26 PM
Subject: RE: Noteworthy News and Cases

The cases are a matter of Public Record. You can petition the Maricopa County Superior Court for a copy. If you desire for me to provide you with a copy, I'll need to know who you are and what your intended use is. I'm not trying to be difficult. I just need the information for my records. Thanks and Happy Holidays.

Augustus H. Shaw IV
Shaw & Lines, LLC
4523 E. Broadway Road
Phoenix, AZ 85040
Phone 480-456-1500
Fax 480-456-1515
e-mail ashaw@shawlines.com
web site www.shawlines.com

The information in this e-mail is ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL and is intended solely for the use by the individual or entity named above. If you believe that it has been sent to you in error, do not read it. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, then delete it.

This firm may act as a debt collector. Any information obtained will be used for that purpose.

----- Original Message -----
From:
To: Augustus H. Shaw IV
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 2:02 PM
Subject: Re: Noteworthy News and Cases

As Shaw & Lines' website, "Noteworthy News and Cases," did not provide any information (Case Information [Case Number], Party Information [Party Name], Case Documents and/or other) necessary to an informed inquiry to the Clerk of the Court, Superior Court (Maricopa County), "Public Access to Court Information, www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/Docket/," Shaw & Line's seemingly inexplicable decision to be unaccommodating, "...please provide citations...," belies "I'm not trying to be difficult." (Emphasis added)

----- Original Message -----
From:
To: Augustus H. Shaw IV
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 1:11 PM
Subject: Re: Noteworthy News and Cases

Believing an attorney has the right to inform and/or promote his/her services to invite the attention of those seeking legal assistance through written, recorded or electronic communication, to include public media and the Internet (eMarketing/online marketing... interactive both in terms of eliciting and providing an instant response) limited by rules defining proper conduct as distinguished from rules permitting the exercise of professional judgment, one might reasonably question any “difficulty” in providing a citation (case number) to any case the lawyer has publicly proclaimed (Internet) his/her success in obtaining millions of dollars in judgment on behalf of the lawyer’s client.

Absent a reasoned response to “…please provide citations to the “fraud, $1.5 million” and “fiduciary misconduct/theft, $1.9 million” cases referenced in ‘Noteworthy News and Cases’ on Shaw & Lines, LLC’s website, perhaps the question is best directed this Monday (12/08/08) to those who serve the public and enhance the legal profession by promoting its competence, ethics and professionalism (transcends common courtesy…6/4/2).

----- Original Message -----
From: Augustus H. Shaw IV
To:
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 1:44 PM
Subject: RE: Noteworthy News and Cases

Your threats are unwarranted and disappointing. Attached please find the information you have requested detailing my firms success obtaining of the judgments referred to on our website. As these cases are public record, I will provide them to you. Please acknowledge receipt.

Please note I have no ethical duty to communicate with you further and have no desire to do so. I have no desire to represent you or to enter into any other relationship with you. As such, please do not communicate with me or any member of my firm in the future. Happy Holidays.

Augustus H. Shaw IV
Shaw & Lines, LLC
4523 E. Broadway Road
Phoenix, AZ 85040
Phone 480-456-1500
Fax 480-456-1515
e-mail ashaw@shawlines.com
web site www.shawlines.com

The information in this e-mail is ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL and is intended solely for the use by the individual or entity named above. If you believe that it has been sent to you in error, do not read it. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, then delete it.

This firm may act as a debt collector. Any information obtained will be used for that purpose.

----- Original Message -----
From:
To: Augustus H. Shaw IV
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 4:00 PM
Subject: Noteworthy News and Cases

"Attached please find the information you have requested detailing my firms success obtaining of the judgments referred to on our website. As these cases are public record, I will provide them to you. Please acknowledge receipt." AHS IV, 12/05/08 (Emphasis added)

-------------------------------------

The “Confirmed copy of Default Judgment.pdf” referenced above is non-responsive to the requested citation, “fraud, $1.5 million;” 2007-095488 is an Amendment (re-recording) of 2005-0074373 and 2006-0929343.

Awaiting the correct citation to the requested “fraud, $1.5 million” case referenced on Shaw & Lines’ website.

----- Original Message -----
From: Augustus H. Shaw IV
To:
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 4:09 PM
Subject: RE: Noteworthy News and Cases

You are more than welcome to contact the State Bar concerning this matter. I have no idea what you want. Attached is what we refer to on our website. I will not correspond with you anymore regarding this matter.

Augustus H. Shaw IV
Shaw & Lines, LLC
4523 E. Broadway Road
Phoenix, AZ 85040
Phone 480-456-1500
Fax 480-456-1515
e-mail ashaw@shawlines.com
web site www.shawlines.com

The information in this e-mail is ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL and is intended solely for the use by the individual or entity named above. If you believe that it has been sent to you in error, do not read it. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, then delete it.

This firm may act as a debt collector. Any information obtained will be used for that purpose.

----- Original Message -----
From: Augustus H. Shaw IV
To:
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 4:14 PM
Subject: RE: Noteworthy News and Cases

Also, please read what is attached. They are clearly judgments for “fraud” in amounts over 1.5 million dollars. It is all right their attached. I have nothing else to give you.

Augustus H. Shaw IV
Shaw & Lines, LLC
4523 E. Broadway Road
Phoenix, AZ 85040
Phone 480-456-1500
Fax 480-456-1515
e-mail ashaw@shawlines.com
web site www.shawlines.com

The information in this e-mail is ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL and is intended solely for the use by the individual or entity named above. If you believe that it has been sent to you in error, do not read it. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, then delete it.

This firm may act as a debt collector. Any information obtained will be used for that purpose.

----- Original Message -----
From:
To: Augustus H. Shaw IV
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 5:19 PM
Subject: Re: Noteworthy News and Cases

An old East Texas adage may well apply to Shaw & Lines’ “responses” to a simple request invited by its website: A bit dog always barks.

Noteworthy News and Cases:

“Shaw & Lines, LLC, recently secured judgment for a community association client in excess of $1.5 million in a fraud case involving embezzlement of community association funds, including theft, fraud, forgery and doctoring bank records.

Only a few months earlier, we assisted another association client in securing judgment against the same individual and his company in an amount exceeding $1.9 million for similar fiduciary misconduct and theft.

In each case, the judge awarded the association treble (triple) damages, all attorney fees (which the judge recognized on the record as “very reasonable”), all costs and punitive damages of $1,000,000 (one million dollars). Both cases were challenged by the defendant, who was represented by counsel. The judgments have not been appealed or set aside, despite efforts to do so.

We proudly recognize the attorneys in our firm for their skillful analysis and experience extended to our clients to provide the best and most effective legal services that our clients deserve. We also thank our clients for their trust.” Shaw & Lines, LLC http://www.shawlines.com/ (Emphasis added)

----- Original Message -----
From: Lawyer Info
To:
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 12:55 PM
Subject: RE: Request of Additional Lawyer History

The lawyer for whom you requested a discipline history has 6 public record(s). 4 of these were dismissed. Two charges resulted in Informal Reprimands.

If you would like further information please call 602-340-7384 and leave a detailed message regarding your inquiry. A Discipline Representative will contact you within 24 - 72 hours.

-----Original Message-----
From: DOTW_Request@azbar.org [mailto:DOTW_Request@azbar.org]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 6:40 PM
To: lawyerinfo@azbar.org
Subject: Request of Additional Lawyer History
Request Date: 12/4/08 6:40 PM

I am interested in a complete lawyer history for:
Mr Augustus Shaw H IV
Shaw & Lines LLC
Phoenix, AZ
Admitted to Practice Law: 2000
Admitted to Arizona Bar: May 24, 2002

Why is this important? What is important that laws should adhered to and that includes Arizona Statutes, including Title 33 and Title 10, the association's CC&R's, Bylaws, and Rules and Regulations. When you purchase into a HOA, you should read and understand all aspects of the documents you are agreeing to. It is also important to participate, or at least follow, what the association board is doing by either attending meetings or reading minutes.

"Why is this important?"

As a reporter for the Daily Planet, I used to get all of my information about HOAs from the Community Association Institute. After all, they were a "nonprofit, educational, entity dedicated to," well, I'm sure you've read their press releases.

But then my editor, Mr White, started having problems with HIS HOA, Metropolis Mews, and he told me and my camraman Jimmy Olsen to start, well, investigating.

In no time at all, we found out that CAI is a TRADE ASSOCIATION with its membership primarily drawn from, and its policies overwhemingly controlled by, law firms, management companies, and vendors who SELL SERVICES to HOAs.

"Why is this important?"

Because CAI misrepresents itself and takes no actions to control abusive behavior by its members. Do a google search on "CAI lawyers" and you'll see what Jimmy and I saw. Read about the FBI's investigation of CAI-affiliated lawyers and management companies in Las Vegas, and the "big picture" will start to emerge.

You can learn a lot (and have a little fun) by reading posts from folks like Phil Filechurner and his law partner F. Lee Foreclosure, and that charter member of the "pretigious Junior College of CAI Lawyers," Velvet Jones, Esq.

You'll learn more than you'd learn by attending any HOA board meeting.

Lois Lane
Daily Planet

I would like to know how many laws and statutes effecting HOAs are instigated by lawyers simply to develop business from volunteer HOA boards and unit owners.

Why buy into an HOA I ask?

"Congratulations to Augustus H. Shaw IV"

Augustus H. Shaw IV joins Arizona’s members of Community Associations Institute’s College of Community Association Lawyers Scott B. Carpenter, Tanis Duncan, Donald E. Dyekman, Curtis S. Ekmark, James H. Hazelwood, Lynn M. Krupnik and Charles E. Maxwell.

Juxtapose the number of State Bar complaints (6) and the number of sanctions (2) against Shaw with relevant excerpts from CCAL’s Goals, “To promote high standards of professional and ethical responsibility in the practice of community association (CA) law through education,” and Eligibility Criteria, “The applicant must demonstrate acceptable qualities of ethics, character, professionalism, service, and leadership. The College values community and public service leadership related to enhancing professional expertise and consumer education about the community association field. The College may conduct its own background check, including confidential character references, to assess the applicant's qualifications,” and consider whether or not to extend your congratulations, along with those of Maria Gonzales (Shaw & Lines paralegal), to Arizona’s newest College of Community Association Lawyer, AH Shaw IV or question CAI’s background checks of its applicant’s qualifications.

Many homeowners trust that Velvet Jones, Phil Filechurner, F. Lee Foreclosure and other lawyers sympathetic and supportive of individual homeowners’ rights will not drink the grape-flavored Kool-Aid.

_______________________________________________________________________

----- Original Message -----
From: Maria
To: Maria Gonzales
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 8:56 PM
Subject: Congratulations To Augustus H. Shaw IV

Friends,

The Attorneys and Staff of Shaw & Lines, LLC would like to extend our heartfelt congratulations to Augustus H. Shaw IV, Esq. on his election to the Community Association Institutes’ College of Community Association Lawyers. According to the College of Community Association Lawyers website:

The purpose of The College is to acknowledge CAI member attorneys who have distinguished themselves through contributions to the evolution or practice of community association law and who have committed themselves to high standards of professional and ethical conduct in the practice of community association law.

This singular honor is shared by a select few attorneys practicing Community Association Law. We are proud of Augustus and wish him success in his continuing representation of Community Associations, Developers of Community Associations and Time Share Associations throughout Arizona.

Happy Holidays!

SHAW & LINES, LLC
4523 East Broadway Road, Suite 101
Phoenix, AZ 85040
(480)456-1500
(480)456-1515 Fax

Augustus H. Shaw IV

It’s a pleasure to welcome Mr. Shaw into the prestigious Junior College of CAI Lawyers.

The competition this year was particularly stiff, and the Selection Committee’s toga party ran late into the night. Finally, it came down to a choice between Augustus and Nancy Quon of Las Vegas.

The two were closely matched according to the College’s demanding criteria, and the Committee weighed the fact that while the FBI is currently very interested in Nancy, Augustus recently has pretty much stayed out of trouble with that pesky State Bar in Arizona.

The decision though, as it often does, came down to the Evening Gown Competition, in which I can only describe Augustus as breathtaking. When Committee Chaiman F. Lee Foreclosure saw Augustus, well, F. Lee's eyes just lit up. I’m sure that he and Augustus will soon be working closely on, uh, measures to improve our cashflow in these tough economic times.

And Nancy, we’ll see you (and that magnificent thong) again next year!

As usual, have a profitable day.

Phil Filechurner, Esq.
Filechurner & Foreclosure, LLP
“We make money the CAI way: Through the equity in your home.”

To bad Phil, perhaps you should have investigated before you purchased in a Homeowners association!

Jeepers, Brat2!

You wrote: "To bad Phil, perhaps you should have investigated before you purchased in a Homeowners association!"

Phil probably didn’t reply himself ‘cause he’s still in a laughing fit.

You don’t seriously think that Phil Filechurner or any of his fellow CAI lawyers actually LIVE in HOAs, do you?

Phil and his colleagues avoid HOA’s like the plague, except as a source of easy money to pay for their own NON HOA homes, (and of course, their CAI toga parties).

Now of course, there’s an exception to every rule. A few CAIers like Jeff Koger, Mr. Hittner, and the Multivest folks ARE in HOAs.... generally called “detention centers.” Come to think of it, by the time the investigations in Vegas wrap up, we may need a whole new class of CAI credentials for the “Correctional HOA” industry.

Meantime, I hope that your HOA has a rule like the one we’ve got here in Sunnybtrook Farms HOA: All unit owners must have a GOOD ATTITUDE. (and if they don’t we fine ‘en and foreclose nonjudicially to collect the fine!)

Try it in YOUR HOA, folks. It REALLY WORKS!

Rebecca, PCAM of Sunnybrook Farms HOA

Gee Rebecca, there are way to many rules and fines! What about the new Az Statutes for HOAs?

Forwarded Message:

Homeowners in associations might reasonably expect that esteemed members of CAI’s College of Community Association Lawyers would understand the substance of their own work product, recognize an instrument’s county recording number and competently distinguish it from a civil case number. Not so as evidenced by the HOA Nut House thread, “Why would someone…,” posted on December 5, 2008.

Notwithstanding Shaw’s proclamations informing the public of Shaw & Lines’ successes, “obtaining of the judgments referred to on our website,” the website did not provide any information necessary to an informed inquiry to the Clerk of the Court.

Homeowners seek and applaud the truth re their associations, managers and lawyers, as such, from the Clerk of the Court (Maricopa County), “Public Access to Court Information,” the truth re Shaw & Lines’ “successes:”

CV2007-003206, Finely Farms South Owners Association vs. Timothy L. Reedy/Reedy Group
Christopher D. Stickland, Shaw & Lines
$1,551,680.08 Judgment (includes $7,306.00 in attorney fees)
The Court, re Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Request for Summary Disposition, ordered, “No response has been filed to either motion, Good cause appearing. It is ordered granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to Defendant’s liability to Plaintiff.

CV2007-003231, Wind Drift Master Community Association vs. Timothy L. Reedy/Reedy Group
Christopher D. Stickland, Shaw & Lines
$1,924,585.50 Judgment (includes $6,840 in attorney fees)
Default Judgment

“In each case, the judge awarded the association treble (triple) damages, all attorney fees (which the judge recognized on the record as “very reasonable”), all costs and punitive damages of $1,000,000 (one million dollars).” Shaw & Lines (website)

Few would question the “very reasonable” attorney fees in these cases as they represent 0.0041 (percent) of the total judgment awarded.

Excerpted from “Why would someone…,” 12/05/08

“Trusting the cases referenced on Shaw & Lines' website, "Noteworthy News and Cases," were filed in the Superior Court of the State of Arizona (Maricopa County/Pinal County or other), the information requested ("citations") would be part of the public record and would not be confidential nor attorney-client privileged.

It would seem, in furtherance of "proudly recognizing" the successes of Shaw & Lines, your firm would be pleased to favorably acknowledge a simple request.” (Homeowner)

“The cases are a matter of Public Record. You can petition the Maricopa County Superior Court for a copy.” (Shaw)

“As Shaw & Lines' website, "Noteworthy News and Cases," did not provide any information (Case Information [Case Number], Party Information [Party Name], Case Documents and/or other) necessary to an informed inquiry to the Clerk of the Court, Superior Court (Maricopa County), "Public Access to Court Information, www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/Docket/," Shaw & Line's seemingly inexplicable decision to be unaccommodating, "...please provide citations...," belies "I'm not trying to be difficult."

Absent a reasoned response to “…please provide citations to the “fraud, $1.5 million” and “fiduciary misconduct/theft, $1.9 million” cases referenced in ‘Noteworthy News and Cases’ on Shaw & Lines, LLC’s website, perhaps the question is best directed this Monday (12/08/08) to those who serve the public and enhance the legal profession by promoting its competence, ethics and professionalism (transcends common courtesy…6/4/2).” (Homeowner)

“Your threats are unwarranted and disappointing. Attached please find the information you have requested detailing my firms success obtaining of the judgments referred to on our website. As these cases are public record, I will provide them to you. Please acknowledge receipt.” (Shaw)

“The “Confirmed copy of Default Judgment.pdf” referenced above is non-responsive to the requested citation, “fraud, $1.5 million;” 2007-095488 is an Amendment (re-recording) of 2005-0074373 and 2006-0929343.

Awaiting the correct citation to the requested “fraud, $1.5 million” case referenced on Shaw & Lines’ website.” (Homeowner)

“Also, please read what is attached. They are clearly judgments for “fraud” in amounts over 1.5 million dollars. It is all right their attached. I have nothing else to give you.” (Shaw)

“An old East Texas adage may well apply to Shaw & Lines’ “responses” to a simple request invited by its website: A bit dog always barks.” (Homeowner)

I only went to one HOA meeting when I lived in Mesa, but I am pretty sure a Velvet was the attorney for the homeowners.

CAI Public Relations (CAI Central Arizona Chapter Co-chair)...do as I say, not as I do (Augustus H. Shaw IV)?

Public relations, see HOA Nut House, "Your Purple House Press on the Net," http://hoanewsnetwork.com/media/, particularly "HOA Help" at http://hoanewsnetwork.com/media/blog/hoa-help.php#comment-7415, the thread’s 51st post, "Why would someone recommend," thru its 68th post, "I only went to," especially noting 54, "Below is Judge Swanns court," 61, "Congratulations to Augusts," and 67, "Forwarded."

The pot calling the kettle black?

CAI – Central Arizona Chapter 2008 Committee Chairs

Public Relations: Brandi Reynolds (Co-chair), brandi@chaixlaw.com, and Augustus H. Shaw, IV (Co-chair), ashaw@shawlines.com

Forwarded Message

I live at Circle Tree Condominiums at 461 W. Holmes Ave Mesa, AZ. This may sound funny but all of us love our HOA. Most of us are glad we live in a community where there are Rules that prevent our property value from declining due to slum lords and owners neglecting their property. This HOA has a Rules, Grievance and Security Committee made up of residence that police the area and cite home owners with a kind warning at first. Its nice to know that the neighbors are watching along with the HOA. Community involvement like this where owners and renters work side by side with the HOA makes for a great community. These guys are sharp don’t fight with the owners enlist them to work with and for you.

We also like the strict Parking Rules the lots are by permit only, this not only keeps out unwanted people and cars it insures that residence and renters have registered with the Association. Circle Tree condominiums are part of Mesa's Crime Free so when you register your vehicle the association knows who you are and makes sure you don't have a felony record or have been convicted of selling drugs. Its a great way to make sure the child molester, armed robber or the rapist is not your next door neighbor.

Sounds lovely. You have to love all those rules and the resident patrols looking for violations, rapists and drug dealers. Do they look right into your home through the curtains? That would be better than just looking from the street I think. I am feeling warm and fuzzy just thinking about it.

“Sounds lovely.” What’s not to love about this HOA? http://www.circletree.net/

Circle Tree Owners Association:
Corporation Type: Non-profit
Business Type: Animal Husbandry (?)

“…Rules that prevent our property value from declining…,” see Balance Sheet, 2008 Annual Report.

Arizona Corporation Commission: File Number: -0147492-9

Corp. Name: CIRCLE TREE OWNERS ASSOCIATION

Domestic Address
% TRI-CITY PROPERTY MGMT
760 S STAPLEY DR #3
MESA, AZ 85204-3400
Statutory Agent Information
Agent Name: RICHARD SAATHOFF

Agent Mailing/Physical Address:
760 S STAPLEY DR #3
MESA, AZ 85204-3400

Agent Status: APPOINTED 04/09/2007
Agent Last Updated: 06/19/2007
Additional Corporate Information
Corporation Type: NON-PROFIT Business Type: ANIMAL HUSBANDRY
Incorporation Date: 05/27/1982 Corporate Life Period: PERPETUAL
Domicile: ARIZONA County: MARICOPA
Approval Date: 06/01/1982 Original Publish Date: 06/18/1982

08 ANNUAL REPORT 04/11/2008
See Balance Sheet: 02383961

Administrative Dissolution Date Administrative Dissolution Reason Reinstatement Date

AD-DISSOLVED - FILE A/R 07/29/2005
07/16/2001 AD-DISSOLVED - FILE A/R 08/30/2001
03/10/1993 REVOKED-MAINTAIN STATUTORY AGENT 07/26/1993
09/10/1988 REVOKED-FILE ANNUAL REPORT 11/25/1988

I live at Circle Tree Condominiums at 461 W. Holmes Ave Mesa, AZ. This may sound funny but all of us love our HOA. Most of us are glad we live in a community where there are Rules that prevent our property value from declining due to slum lords and owners neglecting their property. This HOA has a Rules, Grievance and Security Committee made up of residence that police the area and cite home owners with a kind warning at first. Its nice to know that the neighbors are watching along with the HOA. Community involvement like this where owners and renters work side by side with the HOA makes for a great community. These guys are sharp don’t fight with the owners enlist them to work with and for you.

We also like the strict Parking Rules the lots are by permit only, this not only keeps out unwanted people and cars it insures that residence and renters have registered with the Association. Circle Tree condominiums are part of Mesa's Crime Free so when you register your vehicle the association knows who you are and makes sure you don't have a felony record or have been convicted of selling drugs. Its a great way to make sure the child molester, armed robber or the rapist is not your next door neighbor.

Thank's for sharing! I feel the same way about mine and for the same reasons.

Apparently Circle Tree Condominium’s efforts and "...Rules, Grievance and Security Committee made up of residence (sic) that police the area...the neighbors are watching along with the HOA" and the Mesa Police Department's Crime-Free Multi-Housing Program result in an "...association that (sic) knows who you are and makes sure you don't have a felony record or have been convicted of selling drugs. Its a great way to make sure the child molester, armed robber or the rapist is not your next door neighbor."

"Sounds lovely...feeling warm and fuzzy just thinking about it."

What might others (prospective purchasers and/or their "renters") think about those Mesa apartment communities that participate in the Mesa Crime-Free Multi-Housing Program developed by the Mesa Police Department to reduce the spiraling criminal activity in many of the city’s multi-family communities, sound lovely?

Mesa Police Department Crime Free Program

Crime-Free Multi-Housing Program

For the Mesa Police Department, spiraling crime rates in the city's numerous apartment communities presented a particularly demanding problem. To reduce this criminal activity, the police department developed the Mesa Crime-Free Multi-Housing Program.

In Arizona, like other states, we have "Drug Free School Zones." This is not to imply there ARE no drugs in the school zone, but rather this is to warn that there are SERIOUS consequences for anyone who gets arrested for drug-related crimes in a school zone.

In Arizona, many corporations have a "Drug Free Workplace" policy. This is not to guarantee there ARE no drugs in the workplace, but rather to warn employees that there are SERIOUS consequences for anyone who is caught using drugs at work, bringing drugs to work, or for coming to work under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol.

In Arizona, the Mesa Police Department began the "Crime Free Programs" for apartment communities, townhomes/condominiums, mobile home parks, hotels/motels, self-storage lockets. etc.

The Crime Free Program does not imply there IS no crime in a designated area, but rather this is to warn that there are SERIOUS consequences for anyone affiliated with illegal activity on or near the designated area. These consequences can include immediate termination of rental agreements and the eviction of renters, their family members, and guests. The "One Strike You're Out" policy has since been applied to all Federal Section 8 (low-income) Housing communities across the United States of America.

Signs posted on the property do NOT state the area is a Crime Free or Drug Free Zone, but rather the signs state that the property has JOINED the Crime Free Program. The Crime Free Program requires all renters and invitees to live a 'crime free lifestyle' while on or near the designated area.

Renters must also sign a Crime Free Addendum to their lease. The management takes a 'zero tolerance' stance to criminal activity, and enforces the civil contract signed by the renters. In some states, like Arizona, the Crime Free Policy has also been codified into state law.

The program is not called a "Crime Reduction Program," because we are not asking people to live a 'crime reduced lifestyle -- we require they live a 'crime free lifestyle.'

We have not set up an "Anti-Crime Environment Program" because that would imply to renters that there is an expectation of safety in and around the environment that simply cannot be guaranteed. Crime knows no address. It can occur anywhere.

By simply stating, "We Have Joined The Crime Free Program" there are no guarantees made or implied about the physical environment. There are no guarantees made that criminal activity will not occur in a designated area.

This is UNFORTUNATELY what we must deal with at this community club. Sames rules and covenants as HOA and same corrupt board that thinks they are doing good for the entire community! We are located in Washington state near Mt.Rainier and after resigning from the board for corrupt reasons, I (we) feel that they are only getting worse and wonder if we have ANY recourse!

PCC Corruption control
For Paradise Estates members to inform them of how "THE BOARD" conducts matters that will effect all concerned due to lack of common sense,lack of leadership,and incompatence!

Saturday, March 14, 2009
BOARD OF DICTATORS

I really feel sorry for those people, homeowners, lot owners, whatever you call yourselves, out in Paradise Estates. You are being screwed over royally and yet you refuse to do anything about it! There are four of us that have set our necks on the line for what we believe to be the truth, but we cannot do this without your assistance. PAY ATTENTION lot owners! This board is doing what it wants to do and whatever they want to outlay of your assessments, they are doing this also!

#1: What is wrong with continuing to maintain the construction mobile, it is cheaper than what they were paying (as quoted by the treasurer at a meeting - but we NEVER saw a written report). So why spend money when not all the cul-de-sacs have been upgraded with new pipes! But the board approved $15000 to obtain new pumps because the water manager does not do his job correctly!

#2: Spending useless money to have a webpage, when there are free ones out there and very practical to use. Passed by the board to spend $500 for this item!

#3: Mileage - now there is a big one! For two years, three of us pushed for looking into getting items shipped out here, rather than pay .50 per mile to go into wherever to pick up supplies! But we have people, some who are not even on the board, spending your money foolishly for going into town to pick up supplies and even charge mileage. The time has come - NO MORE VOLUNTEERS! We have to pay them!

#4: The copy machine in the office must be a real doosey! Whomever is copying certainly does not know that money is saved when copying sheets on the front and back - very wasteful on spending your assessments!

#5: Did they get three bids on the septic? I doubt it seriously!

#6: Oh, by the way, no one is allowed audience with the board. Don't even bother to put the new business in your agenda, you don't let anyone speak anyway. I had requested three items to be put on the agenda. Our outdated handbook states that we just have to let the board know in advance of the meeting what we would like included. They sent back to me an email stating they would "consider" adding the items; however, guess they decided the items did not warrant discussing. One being an apology from the president for accusing three members of vandalism, removal of the illegal board member (however, good news, she resigned! - but this was NOT on the agenda!). So only a select few are allowed this privilege!

#7: Do we still have people who are not paying, but you are doing nothing about them. You, us, them, whatever, WE ARE PAYING FOR THE DEADHEADS!). But they want to stop us from using the 1st amendment and displaying our dislike of this board. What? They feel that it does not look good to visitors - they don't want other people to know that they are like.

I cannot believe that as lot owners, you are not paying attention! I know that some of you believe that this is the best board we have had, and it could very well be in their eyes, but so much goes on that you don't realize because you do not even go to meetings! I know that is where we can have our say, that is until this board of dictators.

Ms. G

Two years ago I bought a duplex, unknowing at the time that the attached home had been vacant for 5-7 years. The owner has dymentia and is living with her brother who is supposed to take care of it. Last year that home had a leaky pipe which I didn't find out about until the water started creeping under the wall into my home ruining my floor. My Homeowners paid for a new floor, etc. However, since the leak was never fixed, it happened again and once again my Homeowners took care of it and have been, supposedly, trying to get reimbursement from my neighbor's homeowners ins. for their costs and my $1000 deductible ($500 each time) but have had no success. I know now that I'll have to file a civil lawsuit. However, my real concern is the condition of the home since I'm sure there has to be mold thoughout since the windows had condensation for quite some time. I'm afreaid the mold will infect my home at some time. I have called every govt agency in my county and town and no one seems to have any control into getting this home inspected, fixed up, rented, sold or anything. My HOA has done nothing to help, all they do is sometimes mow the grass. Now birds are living somewhere in the gutter of the home which I'm sure is doing damage. Does anyone have any suggestions to offer? I am so aggravated and upset with this and have run into a brick wall trying to get some answers. THANKS

Can an HOA force a homeowner to repaint his hme when it is finacially impossible. And can they lehgally hire a paintint contractor to inspect homes? Is that not a conflict of interest.

i have to agree with my neighbor in Stone Ranch here in Montgomery Texas. The POA board members are Nazis. They think they have every right to come in to our property. The POA want the rest of us to live like them.
POA dues are supposed to have access to a pond YES pond! and some riding trails but nothing.
the POA is supposed to notify home owners of meetings or voting - nobody knows no sign - very secret. Nobody really know who all is on the board because its so secret. they refuse to show where the money is going.

DON'T BUY A HOUSE IN STONE RANCH MONTGOMERY TEXAS!!!!

Your POA is obviously "a secret society" exhibiting all the negative, controlling, nazi-like qualities that distinguish it from other, less extreme "civic institutions." Do they wear hoods and white/red/black robes when conspiring together? They sound like they could possibly be a "Death's Head Organization" and if so, are probably very politically connected.

Proceed with caution and by all means, video tape all of their gatherings from a secure vantage point. Discovery by the members of such a society could result in death by dismemberment,etc. Best of luck to you in your attempt to document their nefarious activities, and please, keep us posted if humanly possible!

Our HOA rules clearly state about parking of cars in yards I see it all the time, Also rules about contruction equipment and cars being stored in yards. Also unlicensed vehicals parked on property. My HOA say I have to fill out a compliant form and the people have to know who I am making the compliant. My problem is I worry about my property and leaving my wife while I work nights if I register a compliant. So I see things being against the rules but unless I put myself and property in jepordey. I have pictures and many letters dealing wirth this.

I live in a condo community in California, and have been here for 4 years. When I moved in, late in the year, I paid my HOA dues. When the new year rolled in, there was an increase in the dues. Every year since there has been an increase in dues! It has gone up 5 times for me in 4 years!! They increase their dues, and release an expense account to justify their increase, but it seems fishy to me that they are paying for things that should not go up every year, like grounds maintenance. Why can they do this, can they legally just increase dues every year? What can the owners not on the HOA do? Can we petition them to cease their increases? PLEASE HELP!!

The board has a right to raise assessments 10 to 20 percent a years or according to your governing documents. They should provide yearly or biyearly financial statements and possibly a yearly budget depending on your HOA's documents. Grounds maintenance generally changes year by year like everything else. Your board is probably made of volunteers. Why not volunteer to serve on the board or a committee?

They have "the right"? What about my rights? I am the homeowner! You can bet I don't make 10 to 20 percent more salary a year!!
I am not happy with this answer. I want more information! Please answer the following questions:

What does it take to REMOVE a HOA and the company that oversees them?

Can't the homeowners petition to STOP the yearly increases?

What about suing the HOA for unfair business practices? Can't the owners sign a class action lawsuit?

I am VERY disturbed that I live in a community that has the "right" to take a little more of my money each year, without my say!
PLEASE provide more details in WHAT I can do to STOP this madness!!

You should your documents you signed when you purchased your home. They are a legal contract between you and York HOA.

Everything depends on your association's documents. They are the rules you must live by or move. You agreed to these documents when you purchased. The documents should describe your rights and how to remove a board or members. But you need to become involved and not sit back and complain. Find other members that feel as you do and start a petition.

Well, all of this has been very insightful. Thanks for getting back to me.

DAN--I will take your advice. I will MAKE the time and effort to do my homework. I am very well educated, and talented, enough to get the job done. Thanks for the links. It sounds like a challenge, and I like challenges. That's what helped drive me to earn my MA!

SAM--You are pretty bitter there, Bub. I am sorry you are so closed minded, living in a democracy. Your posts gave me nothing but a "Bah Humbug" feeling. But, even Scrooge changed, and it didn't take months and months, or years. And, I resent being referred to as "clueless screech owl". Your advice will not be heeded.

Jb--Thanks for all your advice. I will look into all the details I need. I appreciate the thoughts. Sorry I sounded so manic. I was just letting my emotions get the better of me.

O.k., off I go to attempt to slay a dragon!!

Kudos for you taking on the dragon! It won't be easy, but since it's where you live, where you have invested a large portion of your time and money into your home, in the end it's well worth it. As long as you keep in mind the bigger picture of if it's good for the association, it's good for you too, you will find allies in the strangest places and find yourself moving forward on your goals.

Our dragon isn't dead, but at least he's been pushed back into his lair and the community is better for it and for the better part are aware of the dealings while he reigned so we can better keep him there.

Feel free to contact me directly if you like for what we did befit4life@verizon.net.

Dan

I live in a HOA in Kansas. I have a group of people who live across from me who have at least 7 adults living in a single family home. This causes a problem when their cars are parked in the street constantly. It is in my contract that cars are not to be parked in the street. They always have at least 2 cars parked in the street and tonight there are 3 of them parked there. Oh and when the cars are parked in the street there are typically no cars in their driveway. I have talked to my HOA several times about what they are going to do about the problem. They say that there is nothing they can do but ask them to park in their driveway and garage. My question is, how can it be stated in our HOA contract that there are not to be cars parked in the street, but the HOA say that they can't do anything about it? I am very at the end of my rope because I feel like I am not getting any help from my HOA. I have been taking pictures 2-3 times a day of their house and the cars that are parked in the street for almost a week now just in case we need proof one day. It's like my HOA board is full of a bunch of wimps! I didn't mention that the people living across from me are Hispanic, but they are. My HOA is afraid of them using the race card I believe, even though this has nothing to do with race. To me it isn't about race, it is about following the rules. I have sent my neighbors across the street a letter myself asking them to please follow the rules of the HOA. Is there anything I can do to advise my HOA board. I feel like they are scared because they are new to this HOA board thing. They have only been in charge for 1 year. I have been in contact with them about this matter ever since my neighbors moved in across the street in the summer. All I want is for my neighbors to follow the rules like I do. Any advice?!

Carrie

In Florida, does a person have to be on the deed in order to be a member of the association or more specifically, do you have to be on a deed to be a board member?

In IL, it is illegal to state that all Board members must live on site but one board member (9 years) will not perform the same duties as the other 2 such as enforcing parking rules - is there anything we can do?

CAUSE NO: 2010-CI-00497

BRADLEY L. CROFT, CHERIE CROFT,
WILLIAM CLARK, BROOKS CLARK,
JASON RIGGIN and TAMARA RIGGIN, Derivatively on behalf of: Shavano Rogers Ranch Swim Club, Inc., a Non-Profit Texas Corporation
Plaintiffs

v.

AMS SA MANAGEMENT, LLC and
JEANETTE BARBARA LOWRY, Individually
Defendants

IN THE DISTRICT COURT

288th JUDICIAL DISTRICT

BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS

VERIFIED MEMBER
DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT

Now comes Bradley L. Croft, Cherie Croft, William Clark, Brooks Clark, Jason Riggin and Tamara Riggin, hereinafter collectively referred to as Members, by and through their attorney, files this Verified Member Derivative Complaint. This is a member’s derivative action brought for the benefit of Shavano Rogers Ranch Swim Club, Inc., a Texas Non-Profit Corporation, to protect and benefit its members. This cause of action is against AMS SA MANAGEMENT, LLC and JEANETTE BARBARA LOWRY, hereinafter collectively referred to as LOWRY.

CAUSE OF ACTION

This is a member derivative action brought by members of Shavano Rogers Ranch Swim Club, Inc., on behalf of the corporation, against the management agent of the corporation seeking to remedy defendants’ mismanagement, breach of fiduciary duties, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, constructive fraud, and breach of contract. By reason of Defendants’ position as the management company for the Swim Club, and because of the Defendants’ ability to control the business and financial affairs of the corporation, the Defendants’ owed the corporation and its members the duty to exercise due care and diligence in the management of the affairs of the corporation and in the use and preservation of its property and assets. Further, Defendants owed a duty to the corporation to insure that the corporation operated in compliance with all applicable federal and state laws, rules and regulations.
The conduct of the Defendants complained herein involves knowing violations of their duties as the manager of the corporation and the absence of good faith on their part has caused serious risk to the corporation and monetary loss caused by their negligence and fraud.
Defendants’ wrongful course of conduct, as described herein, has exposed the corporation to regulatory liability, judicial fines, irreparable monetary damage and caused substantial losses to the corporation.

I. Discovery Control Plan

1. Plaintiffs requests entry of a Scheduling Order under Level 3 as provided by Rule 190.4 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

II. Parties

2. Plaintiffs reside in the community of Shavano Rogers Ranch Falling Brook and are members in good standing in the Shavano Rogers Ranch Swim Club, Inc. a Texas Non-Profit Corporation doing business in Bexar County, Texas. Plaintiffs have standing to bring this derivative complaint pursuant to the Texas Business Organization Code. Plaintiffs have standing to assert these claims on behalf of the corporation and will fairly and adequately protect the interest of the corporation and its other members.
3. Defendant AMS SA MANAGEMENT, LLC, dba Association Management Services, is the management company retained by the Shavano Rogers Ranch Swim Club, Inc. and does business at: 1600 NE Loop 410, Suite 202, San Antonio, Texas 78209. Its registered agent is Jeanette Barbara Lowry.
Defendant Jeanette Barbara Lowry, individually, controls AMS and does business at: 1600 NE Loop 410, Suite 202, San Antonio, Texas 78209.

III. Jurisdiction and Venue

4. The Court has jurisdiction to hear this cause in that the damages are in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of the Court.
5. All or a substantial part of the events and transactions giving rise to the causes of action stated herein occurred in Bexar County, Texas, making venue proper in Bexar County pursuant to Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 15.002(a)(1).
6. At the time of the events and transactions giving rise to the causes of action all parties resided in Bexar County, Texas, and thus, venue is proper as to all parties in Bexar County, pursuant to Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §15.005.
 
IV. Facts

7. Plaintiffs are members in good standing with the Shavano Rogers Ranch Swim Club, Inc., a Texas Non-Profit corporation, located in Bexar County, Texas.
8. LOWRY is the owner and operator of AMS SA MANAGEMENT, LLC, dba Associated Management Services which manages the Shavano Rogers Ranch Swim Club, Inc. pursuant to a Management Certificate for Homeowners Association and an Association Management Agreement. LOWRY is also the Registered Agent of the Swim Club Association.
9. Plaintiff Bradley L. Croft, hereinafter referred to as CROFT, pursuant to a Writ of Mandamus, requested that he be allowed to inspect all of the books and records of the Swim Club pursuant to the covenants, conditions and restrictions of said corporation and pursuant to TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. Art. 1396-2.23; the TEX. PROP. CODE ANN. Chapter 207; and, the Texas Business Organizations Code Sec.A22.351. LOWRY had refused to allow CROFT the right to inspect said Books and Records which necessitated the filing of the Writ of Mandamus.
10. After reviewing the financial records provided by LOWRY, CROFT and his agent found that there were accounting irregularities, fraudulent management practices, money laundering, kickbacks concerning contracts with vendors, comingling of funds with other HOA communities and misappropriations of funds. LOWRY has refused to provide any further copies of documentation concerning questionable transactions by LOWRY. CROFT notified the Board of Directors and Officers of the Swim Club of these claims and demanded that the Corporation take appropriate action against LOWRY. The Board of Directors has notified CROFT that they refuse to litigate this matter.
Several members have requested CROFT to proceed in this derivative suit and wish to participate in a Class Action against LOWRY. It is CROFT’s intention to solicit all members of the Shavano Rogers Ranch Swim Club, Inc. to participate and intervene in this Derivative Action.
11. LOWRY has charged for services rendered which were not performed and/or were not authorized by the Association or its members pursuant to the Management Agreement. LOWRY has fraudulently reimbursed and/or paid her company for services rendered and materials purchased that were not authorized or approved by the members of the Association pursuant to the Management Agreement.
12. LOWRY has received and used Gift Cards that were not authorized under the Management Agreement with the Association. These Gift Cards were used to purchase materials alleged to be for the Association. These purchases were then submitted to the Association for reimbursement by LOWRY. LOWRY refused to provide verification of who purchased said Gift Cards and documentation as to the source of funds used to purchase the Gift Cards. LOWRY has a fiduciary and legal responsibility to provide documented evidence of expenditures made by LOWRY, for the benefit of the Swim Club, which were reimbursed by the Swim Club.
13. LOWRY has utilized certain vendors and self-owned companies to provide services for the members of the Association. Amounts paid to these entities exceed the amounts provided under contract and contain amounts for chemicals that could not have been utilized for the Swim Club facility without eminent harm to the members.
14. As a signatory on the Association’s Operating Account, Reserve Accounts and the Management Company Account, LOWRY has used these accounts to further her own financial gains at the expense of members of the Association. LOWRY has used ghost accounts to transfer funds from reserve accounts and operating accounts. LOWRY controls millions of dollars in HOA funds.
15. The actions of LOWRY are willful, negligent, malicious, illegal and unauthorized conduct. LOWRY has breached her fiduciary responsibility to the members of the Association. LOWRY has used member funds to pay for legal services relating to lawsuits filed by a member of the Association against the Defendant for negligent acts of the Defendant. The Association is not a named party to any lawsuit. These fees were paid to attorneys who represent the Plaintiffs as a member of the Association. The fees are being used to defend the actions of the Defendant which constitutes a conflict of interest between the parties. The attorneys are protecting the actions of the Defendant against the members who are paying their fees. These attorneys represent all of the HOA communities managed by the Defendant.
16. Further, LOWRY failed to properly deduct employee payroll taxes and issue these employees W-2 forms as required by the Internal Revenue Code. The failure of LOWRY to properly report the employees income has caused the members to be liable for penalties, fines, and past due taxes.

V. Fraud

17. All previous allegations are incorporated herein by reference.
18. Defendant knowingly and recklessly made false and material misrepresentations. Defendant omitted material facts from annual accounting which made her representations fraudulent and misleading. Defendant knew that her representations were false when they were made, and/or made these misrepresentations recklessly. Defendant has committed fraud in the performance of the agreements of the parties.
19. Defendant intended that Plaintiffs would act on her misrepresentations and omissions.
20. Plaintiffs relied on the foregoing misrepresentations to the detriment of the Plaintiffs, and Defendant has benefited from Plaintiffs’ reliance.
21. All of the foregoing acts of common law fraud are continuing in nature.
22. As a result of the foregoing common law fraud by the Defendants, Plaintiffs is entitled to rescission of all transactions, and to the return of all consideration paid to the Defendant.
23. In the alternative, as a result of the foregoing common law fraud by the Defendant, Plaintiffs has sustained actual damages in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court.

VI. Breach of Fiduciary Duty

24. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs for all purposes the same as if set forth herein verbatim.
25. Defendant owed Plaintiffs fiduciary duty. The duty was owed, among other reasons, because of a contractual relationship with Plaintiffs based upon their membership in the Association and confidence that included a trust that Plaintiffs’ funds would be properly manage and that Defendant would not profit by way of fraud or willful misconduct. Defendant breached and betrayed that trust.
26. Defendant breached her fiduciary duties to the Plaintiffs. As a direct and proximate result of that breach, Plaintiffs have been injured and suffered damages within the jurisdictional limits of this Court.

VII. Negligent Misrepresentation

27. All previous allegations are incorporated herein by reference.
28. Plaintiffs would show that Defendant has made negligent misrepresentations to Plaintiffs.
29. In the course of her business, Defendant made representations to Plaintiffs in which she supplied false information.
30. Defendant made these false representations for the guidance of Plaintiffs, and Plaintiffs justifiably relied on these false representations.
31. Defendant did not exercise reasonable care of competence in obtaining and communicating the false information to Plaintiffs.
32. Defendant’s negligence has proximately caused damage to Plaintiffs in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court.

VIII. Constructive Fraud

33. All previous allegations are incorporated herein by reference.
34. Defendant committed constructive fraud when she misrepresented material facts and failed to disclose material facts, including her conflicts of interest as described above.
35. As a result of the foregoing constructive fraud by the Defendant, Plaintiffs are entitled to the return of all fraudulent consideration paid.
36. In the alternative, as a result of the constructive fraud by Defendant, Plaintiffs are entitled to actual damages in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court.
37. In addition to the foregoing remedies, Plaintiffs are also entitled to the equitable remedy of disgorgement of all compensation and other benefits received by Defendant in the course of her duties to Plaintiffs.

IX. Breach of Contract

38. All previous allegations are incorporated herein by reference.
39. Plaintiffs would show that defendant has breached a contract or contracts with Plaintiffs as a member of the Association.
40. Plaintiffs have been damaged by Defendant’s material breaches of contract and will continue to be damaged by Defendant’s wrongful acts. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to actual damages in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this Court.

X. Exemplary and Punitive Damages

41. All previous allegations are incorporated herein by reference.
42. The harm to Plaintiffs from Defendant’s tortious conduct resulted from Defendant’s fraud, malice, negligence, illegal and unauthorized conduct.
43. As permitted by Chapter 41 of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code, Plaintiffs ask that the Court and Jury award exemplary and punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the Defendant and to set an example that will deter others from committing similar acts in the future.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs, prays for the following:
a. that Defendant be enjoined from transferring or encumbering funds
under Defendant’s control that may be required to compensate the Plaintiffs
for its damages; Plaintiffs will be irreparably damage without the Order of this Court.

b. that a constructive trust be imposed on all funds at issue;
c. that Defendant be cited to appear and answer;
d. that, upon trial by jury on the merits, Plaintiffs recover actual damages;
e. that, upon trial by jury on the merits, Plaintiffs recover exemplary and punitive damages, and
f. that, upon trial by jury on the merits, Plaintiffs recover attorney fees, prejudgment interest, post judgment interest, costs of court, and such other and further relief to which Plaintiffs may be justly entitled.

FROM: RICHARD SNELL
210-858-5156

I need some help dealing with a my HOA

I'm trying to put up a shed but my HOA rule says sheds can't exceed 6 feet. In south Florida here all sheds need to be hurricane approved and there is no shed 6ft that's hurricane approved.
I've looked around the development and found a few other people with sheds visible from the street well over 6 feet and google maps shows many more that aren't visible from the street HOA says they won't approve mine if its over 6 foot

How can i deal with this doesn't the rules have to apply to everyone the same ?

I'm afraid if i make big deal out of it and bring it to there attention they will just dig there heals in even deeper.

So far all I've done is talked to them a few times and then i submitted my app with survey showing the location i left out the height on the app and they returned it unproved said i need to specify the height

any ideas here how to deal with this

Mark_in_florida@yahoo.com

What if it is not visible like other you referenced?