HOAleader.com - Tip of the Week - August 14, 2015
Published: Fri, 08/14/15
=================================================================
California Court Hands HOAs a Big Win on Rule Enforcement
=================================================================
In this week’s tip, we discuss a California court case that our experts are universally calling really, really good news for HOAs.
In The Villas in Whispering Palms v. Tempkin, an appellate court OK’d a board’s “resetting” of its enforcement of a pet rule.
The Villas is a 98-unit town home community in Rancho Santa Fe, Calif., according to the May opinion of the appellate court. The association’s original governing documents permitted one dog per unit. In 1998, the HOA added a provision to its CC&Rs permitting variances to the pet restrictions if submitted in writing and approved by the board. In 2003, the board sent notice to owners essentially saying: We know many of you now have two dogs. You can keep your second dog if it’s not a nuisance, but once it dies or leaves the home, you have to begin following the one-dog rule. That, the court noted, was essentially the board granting a variance, without the owners requesting one in writing, to those owners.
In 2005, the board, knowing some owners still had more than one dog, surveyed owners to determine their support for the one-dog rule. The majority wanted to keep the restriction, but also wanted to permit owners to be granted variances. The board then again adopted many of the same restrictions as it had before on dogs and granted four variances. It also pronounced in so many words: “From here on in, we’re enforcing our rules on this one!”
In 2010, the plaintiff, Richard Tempkin, moved in. And a friend moved into his unit in 2011 with her adult dog. They then got a second, younger dog, stating their desire to have a transition period for the older dog to "mentor" the younger dog. The board took notice and eventually found Tempkin in violation of the HOA’s policy; it also denied his request for a variance, began fining him, and eventually sued to enforce its rule.
The trial court rejected Tempkin’s arguments that he was treated differently than other owners who had been granted a variance and denied due process. The trial court held, "The evidence supports that [Villas] has applied its ‘one[-]dog rule’ evenly, since 2005.” The appellate court upheld the trial court’s decision.
Read about why this is such a great case for HOAs in our new article: http://www.hoaleader.com/members/1219.cfm
Best regards,
Matt Humphrey
President
=================================================================
Upcoming Event
=================================================================
Conflicts of Interest and Ethical Dilemmas for HOA Boards:
How to Handle the Most Common--and the Most Difficult
An Exclusive HOAleader.com Webinar With Practical Tips for Condo and HOA Boards
Thursday, August 27, 2015
2:00 to 3:00 P.M. Eastern Time
1:00 to 2:00 P.M. Central Time
12:00 to 1:00 P.M. Mountain Time
11:00 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. Pacific Time
Learn more or Register now:
http://www.hoaleader.com/snip/206.htm
Members save $30!
=================================================================
Recent articles posted at HOAleader.com:
=================================================================
How an HOA Board Got Back on Track in Enforcing Rules
A recent California appellate case provides a nice roadmap for HOAs that have slacked in enforcing their rules but want to get back on track.
In The Villas in Whispering Palms v. Tempkin, the court OK'd a board's "resetting" of its enforcement of a pet rule. Here we explain the case and offer lessons if your board wants to fix its inconsistent enforcement of rules.
Click here to read full article:
http://www.hoaleader.com/members/How-HOA-Board-Got-Back-on-Track-in-Enforcing-Rules.cfm
=================================================================
Veterans Claim They Were Denied Access to HOA Pool
A retired military couple is raising a ruckus because, as renters, they were being denied access to their HOA's pool on the basis that the HOA's rules require an owner to be present.
Is it smart for HOAs to have owners-only rules? On the flip side, if the rule is enforceable, does the renters' status as veterans mean it shouldn't be enforced against them?
Click here to read full article:
http://www.hoaleader.com/members/Veterans-Claim-They-Were-Denied-Access-HOA-Pool.cfm
=================================================================
This Supreme Court Decision Could Affect Your HOA. Have You Seen It?
In this week's tip, we give you a heads up on a June U.S. Supreme Court decision you may not have noticed amidst all the news of the court's decisions on marriage equality and Obamacare.
In Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, the court defined the dispute as one over where housing for low-income persons should be constructed in Dallas--that is, whether the housing should be built in the inner city or the suburbs. The case involved federal low-income housing tax credits that are distributed to developers by state agencies. In Texas, it's the Department of Housing and Community Affairs that does the distribution. The Inclusive Communities Project is a nonprofit that helps low-income families obtain affordable housing.
Click here to read full article:
http://www.hoaleader.com/public/This-Supreme-Court-Decision-Could-Affect-Your-HOA-Have-You-Seen-It.cfm
=================================================================
The Supreme Court's New Disparate Impact Case: What It Means to HOAs
Amidst rulings getting huge media attention, the U.S. Supreme Court also decided that plaintiffs asserting discrimination under the Fair Housing Act don't have to show intent; they can use a disparate impact theory. Here's what that means for HOAs.
Click here to read full article:
http://www.hoaleader.com/members/Supreme-Courts-New-Disparate-Impact-Case-What-It-Means-HOAs.cfm
=================================================================
Florida Makes Phony Service Animals a Misdemeanor. Now What?
A new law in Florida slaps potential fines and jail time on people who knowingly misrepresent an animal as a service animal. The big questions for associations: How they can prove an owner's fibbing and when would they even go to that effort given the legal risks? Here are answers.
Click here to read full article:
http://www.hoaleader.com/members/Florida-Makes-Phony-Service-Animals-Misdemeanor-Now-What.cfm
=================================================================
Get your own copy!
Subscribe to the HOAleader.com Tip of the Week at:
http://www.hoaleader.com/public/department49.cfm
=================================================================
Please feel free to forward the *entire text* of this email to others.
Copyright 2015, Plain-English Media, LLC
(866) 641-4548
http://www.hoaleader.com