Departments

If a member comes to the management office requesting an accessible parking space because he’s disabled, and you see no obvious signs of disability, like use of a mobility device, you might have to ask for the appropriate documentation to support the request, such as a government-issued license plate. But beware of members who ask for more than they need—for example, a member who asks you to reserve an entire section of the parking lot for his exclusive use, rather than one spot.

If your community includes mixed-use space, your association may be afraid that members will have to battle customers who are visiting retail stores or entertainment venues for parking spaces. But worse than that is the increased risk of crimes happening at the community if nonmembers have access to parking lots or garages. This can be commonplace if a member regularly rents out his space, creating a steady stream of strangers using that spot. To prevent unwanted visitors’ access to the community, many associations restrict the use of parking spaces to members only.

When enforcing your community association’s house rules, you’ve probably heard members claim they weren’t aware that they were in violation because they never received a copy of the house rules in the first place. This could lead to a sticky situation if a member’s violation has damaged common areas or other members’ units, but the member claims that he’s not liable because, without a copy of the house rules, he had no way of knowing that his behavior was prohibited.

Facts: Several members in a condo association posted flyers in common areas, claiming that the property manager was stealing and mismanaging association funds.

The manager sued the members for defamation. The members asked a trial court to dismiss her claims. The trial court denied the request. The members appealed.

Decision: A Texas appeals court affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Facts: A condominium member signed a rent-to-own contract. The purpose of the contract was for the renter to eventually own the unit. The member asserted that the renter was entirely responsible for paying condo assessments and fees. Under the governing documents, a member with a rent-to-own contract was, in fact, a “co-owner” with the renter and, therefore, jointly and severally liable for costs.

Safety for members and staff in a planned community or condominium is one of the most important items on a manager’s or management company’s agenda. Tight security provides a sense of safety so that members can enjoy day-to-day life in the community without worrying about being victimized. And staff members feel that they are working in a secure environment. Plus, preventing certain types of crimes, like graffiti, saves the association time and money on repairs.

At some point, it may become necessary or just desirable to change how a common area is used. Changes in the demographics of the members or the fact that an amenity isn't used often may facilitate a change. But don't expect all members to get on board with a new use. In some cases, it could be difficult when it comes time to vote on the issue. Whether a majority vote versus a unanimous vote is needed to implement the change is of key importance.

Safety for members and staff in a planned community or condominium is one of the most important items on a manager’s or management company’s agenda. Tight security provides a sense of safety so that members can enjoy day-to-day life in the community without worrying about being victimized. And staff members feel that they are working in a secure environment. Plus, preventing certain types of crimes, like graffiti, saves the association time and money on repairs.

A seven-year-old Florida law is forcing condo owners out of their units in favor of investors who want to convert the buildings to rentals. Previously, the Florida Condominium Act required agreement from all owners in a condominium association before a “condominium pact” could be dissolved. Then, in 2007, state lawmakers lowered the requirement to 80 percent of unit owners, despite objections by prominent lawmakers, including the former governor, Jeb Bush.

Facts: Several planned community absentee members who rented their homes to short-term vacationers sued the association over an annual fee imposed on owners who rented their homes and a mandatory garbage collection fee adopted by the board of directors. The association filed a cross-claim against the owners. A trial court ruled in favor of the association. The owners appealed.

Decision: A California appeals court upheld the trial court’s decision in favor of the association.