Evan McKenzie on the rise of private urban governance and the law of homeowner and condominium associations. Visit evanmckenzie.wikispaces.com for my published articles and services.
"Protection"??? I think they mean "lack of protection" for homeowners. Let's be clear here: Glazer is not looking to take care of homeowners but rather to force homeowners to fund a state agency that doesn't actually do anything for homeowners. Why not give the homeowners a cause of action against directors instead of expecting them to pay money to a state organization to "take care of it for them". It isn't going to happen. It's yet another "assessment" used to fund an industry and for which the homeowners will get ZERO in return.The gated community example is pure pablum. Gates are not security gates. Exactly how does collecting millions of dollars from residents burdened by HOAs solve this problem? IRONICALLY the example was for a CONDO that is already regulated by DBPR. So what did DBPR do to prevent this? How was the homeowner better off with DBPR involved? What exactly would DBPR do? Self-defeating example. QUIT trying to fix condos there is no fixing them. They need to be phased out.
Florida's DBPR is essentially useless, even for condo owners. The DBPR lacks the authority to investigate or resolve most of the usual HOA or COA disputes: failure of the association to maintain common property; disputes over stupid rules and restrictions to include selective enforcement; abusive fines and collection tactics; unjustified foreclosures; and hostile corporate takeovers and forced termination by investors (or developers masquerading as "bulk buyers"). Issues regarding lack of access to financial documents or Association official records is still routinely denied or delayed or avoided by game playing, with no actual consequence to Board members or Managers for non-compliance. If the financial issue they can hear about appears to be a criminal act, they can refer it to the DA. Big deal.
Post a Comment