A recent case in Florida (MacKenzie v. Centext Homes, 208 So.3d.790 (2016)) was not bashful about holding a developer to the same rules as other property owners in a Homeowners’ Association (“HOA”). The HOA in this case was still largely under developer’s control during the period in question. The developer controlled Board included a reserve […]
Developer Held to Same Rules as Other Owners Read More »
Facts Montana Developer of three condominium-hotels at Big Sky Ski Resort sold units subject to Declarations that required “all unit owners to use [Developer], or an agent designated by [Developer], as their exclusive rental agents,” when renting out their condominiums. The Declarations also provided that “Unit owners may decline to renew the rental management contract
Claims for When Developers Have TOO Much Control of Association Read More »
Facts Plaintiff, Coley, owns a home in an HOA, the Eskaton Village (“Association”). Two other Eskaton named entities (“Eskaton”) develop and support HOAs. A five-member board runs the Association, subject to the Declaration. Eskaton has always controlled three of the five directors on the Association Board because it owns 137 of the 267 units. The
Self-Dealing by Director is a Breach of Fiduciary Duty (Case 1) Read More »
Becker Boards Summit, LLC v. Summit at Copper Square Condominium Association – 2018 WL 6695279 ( 2018 Ariz.) Issues: The court in this case addressed two important issues: Can a Developer, before turnover, amend a Declaration to convert Common Element to Limited Common Element for the benefit of a Developer Unit? Can Developer contracts entered
Declarant Contracts, Including Easements, can be Voided Read More »
Summary A single warranty date applies to each condominium building in a development. Meaning that each unit does not have its own warranty date, and units in different buildings will likely have different warranty dates, unless they happen to be completed on the same date. The Facts Village Lofts Condominium Association consisted of two buildings:
Investigate for Hidden Defects at Turnover or Pay the Price Read More »
Yes, developers can be lazy, greedy good for nothing con-artists. Developers can also adversely affect the rights of an association by simply doing nothing. Specifically, a developer (owner of the property and declarant of the association) with knowledge of construction defects can prevent the association and/or unit owners, after turnover, from potentially suing the contractor
Even the best and most established real estate developers can face hard times, especially in the aftermath of recession and economic downturn, as we experienced a few short years ago. Many condominium and subdivision developments found themselves half completed, both in terms of units and homes built, and common area improvements (like streets and curbs)
In a recent case out of New York (Board of Mgrs. Of 325 Fifth Ave. Condominium v. Continental Residential Holdings LLC, 139 A.D.3rd 472 (2017)) a condominium board signed a broadly worded document, releasing the developer and multiple other developer-related entities and their “heirs, executors, administrators, successor and assigns” from claims associated with the construction
Thinking of Signing a Release? Do Your Homework Read More »
A Court in Colorado recently dealt with a developer who placed a provision in the declaration of a condominium association prohibiting amendment of the declaration – ever – without the declarant’s written consent, and requiring that all construction defect claims be resolved through arbitration (Vallagio at Inverness Residential Condominium Association, Inc. v. Metropolitan Homes, Inc.
Developers Sometimes Draft Documents for Their Own Benefit Read More »
Facts Plaintiff, Ms. Carmichael, is on the board of directors of Commerce Towers Condominium (“Association”). On the board with her is Mr. Frese and Mr. Vickers. Mr. Vickers, Mr. Frese and Mr. Tarantino are the officers of the Association. (collectively “Officers”). All three are also the officers of Tarantino Properties, Inc. (the “Management Company”). Carmichael
Self-Dealing by Director is a Breach of Fiduciary Duty (Case 2) Read More »
