ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Real Estate & Property Law Blogs -> California Condo & HOA Law

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Real Estate & Property Law

: California Condo & HOA Law

Good Standing - Board Members - Dialogue Continued - for HOAs and Condos

ADVERTISEMENTS

I did a blog essentially similar to this in October 2007 and republished it just before this blog. As I said in that text, there is quite a bit of misunderstanding about these terms ("good standing"), and when they can be asserted to prevent someone from serving on the board, and when they can be used to prevent an owner from participating in association elections. And of course, there is today's world (and economy) some things have changed since I wrote the blog in October of 2007.

A new question arises - if an owner/board resolve an assessment delinquency or other CC&R violation via a written settlement agreement, does that resolve the violation itself, such that the owner would then be in good standing?

I would say, that "depends".

As for an example, if the settlement agreement is that the late fees and interest are to be deducted if the owner pays by "XXX" date, and the owner does pay by that date, they would be in good standing on the date they pay (assuming the docs say that they have to be "current" in their assessment payments to be in "good standing"). If the agreement involves a payment plan, the good standing issue would be resolved wwhen the payment plan was fulfilled. Thus, the agreement itself in either case would not settle the question of good standing.

Any other violation could bring in all sorts of discussions. If an owner has an unapproved pet that violates the governing documents but agreement is reached that the pet is legally/properly "grandfathered" (allowed to stay until it dies or moves away), then violation is resolved.

But if someone has erected a deck that is ordered to be removed within 30 days, that would be considered a violation until it is resolved.

So, the question of when the violation is resolved and good standing is resumed is a question of fact, depending on the situation, the type of violation, and how it is to be resolved.

Confused yet?
That is why you get help! Hopefully, the right kind of help.


Full post as published by California Condo & HOA Law on July 24, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0139 secs (new cache)