Thursday, August 31, 2006

More huge costs for RV3 Association

Yes folks. The lack of reason and empathetic listening is costing Riverview Third thousands of dollars. This leads me to believe that we may be at the critical point where incompetant board members will be let go. Here is the latest blunder which has cost a fortune:

Just got off the phone with my attorney. The good guys win again.
My story is this. Last August I was presented with a bill from the association for $400. This included 3 fines for police calls in July, 1 fine for littering, and 2 fines for damage to the siding and the $250 charge for driveway damage.. Upon checking with the police, I discovered that there were no police calls for July. I then sent the association a letter stating that based upon a lack of evidence for the police calls, no repair on the driveway, and no evidence that my tenants had damaged the siding or littered I would not be paying the money. The letter I got back stated that the charges stood and that the board would file a lien against the property if I refused to pay. Several letters were exchanged over the next few months and the late fees piled up. In January, the rental charge hit and I refused to pay that. In April, the board sold my debt to a lien company. Besides paying the $600+ that the board alleged I owed, the lien company also prepaid my monthly assessments through the year and tacked these onto the amount I was said to have owed. I received a letter from the lien company demanding payment of approximately$2200. I ignored the letter, waiting for them to take me to court. Early this month I received a letter from Helmuth and Johnson (attorneys for the lien company) informing me that I now owed around $3500 and that my property would be sold at a sheriff's sale on September 6th. That's what I was waiting for. I contacted my attorney, gave him my documentation, and let him go to work. The result is that all action has been dropped against me. Helmuth and Johnson has decided that there was no basis for any of the charges and has recommended that the lien company go back to the board and attempt to collect from the association. This decision is important because besides representing the lien company, Helmuth and Johnson has also represented the association in the past.
The upshot of this is that two law firms on opposite sides of the fence have now reviewed the declaration, bylaws, rules, and the small claims court verdict and agreed that the board's use of fines is not acceptable. We should be confident that any action any of us take in court against the board will be upheld.
My next step is to request that the board reimburse me for my attorney's fees. Since the board's fraudulent actions (the attorney's language) caused me to hire an attorney to defend myself, they are at fault for the damages. If the board refuses to pay, I'll be glad to see them in court.
Len Lorence

Tuesday, August 29, 2006

August 28th 2006 Muting

Where to start:

One of the board members wanted stairs on the deck. That flew through just fine.
Board members want to get house numbers installed on the rear of the homes. The only reason for this is so they don’t have to run around the front of the home to get the house number when they find weeds or dog poop.

Board decided to halt late fees for one particular homeowner who owes lots of money. The premise here is that if he keeps up with an extra $100 per month to get caught up, they will waive the late fees. George opposed this.

The city of Coon Rapids sent a letter to the board condemning one of the decks. Decisions were made by individual board members to go ahead and replace the deck. The discussion was that the City only gave them 20 days so they had to react before the meeting. They need educating or they need to be honest. The city hands out violations and explains that it is possible to appeal. Even besides this, the housing inspector (Michelle Posch) will allow the association meeting to take place and waive the 20 days. This of course is a classic case of not knowing how to communicate.

One member (Gloria) has internal damage (due to water penetration via the roof and siding) and the association told her that even though the damage may have been caused by bad workmanship on roofing or siding, she is responsible for getting insurance to cover the inside of the home. What they fail to realize is that poor workmanship can be litigated and if the cause of the internal damage is due to outside work, the court will find in favor of the plaintiff.

Riverview 4th wants to meet with Carol. Carol said that she had some email communications regarding this. She has had other email communications regarding RV3 issues. This is the same person that told me (yes I have it in writing) that her email was for her work and she did not use email for RV3. Do we have a liar on the board or am I missing something?

Lots of discussions regarding using homeowners for deputy style reporters. Yes folks, they want to use neighbors for the dirty work. Imagine the fun that’s going to be. John Rettger was obviously against this. He explained that having neighbors report on neighbors was not right.. Al Dittbrenner also agreed that this would not be a good idea.

Anyway, besides this they already have whining neighbors at the meetings complaining about dog poop. Get real people, dog poop on your neigbors ground doesn’t prove your neighbors dog actually had a bowel movement there. I can’t wait for that argument.

I spoke at the meeting regarding a $25 fine I had received last year for weeds. I had to remove the weeds AND pay the fine. Here is the argument: John Rettger was fined for a driveway issue. 2 months ago, the board members voted to return the money because no service was provided. I think that was a good decision. However, I see no difference between a fine for driveways and a fine for weeds. In both cases, no service is performed. According to the last RV3 litigation conclusion,

CHIN v. Coventry Square holds that extra fees are invalid where there is no relation to actual expenses incurred by the association.

Carol said that they would discuss this at the end of the meeting. Of course the meeting almost adjourned when George said that they owe a discussion on my question. Al Dittbrenner simply overpowered and said “we already discussed this. Nothing more to talk about. These fines have been ok for the last 30 years”

OK like that constitutes correctness. Due to the lack of capacity to communicate or listen to RV3 members such as me, I have decided to file at Anoka County Court House. I will be inviting Al and Carol to the court discussion. Filing fees plus Weed fees will cost the association $85 and Carols time, and Al’s time will cost $500 (we already set precedence on that) and this time, since people get paid for court, I will be asking for $250 also.

Total association cost for lack of empathetic listening skills = $835.00 if I win and $500 if I lose.

I guess the weeds fine will cost the association a lot of money either way.

Friday, August 11, 2006

The Process Is Complete

Checks were sent out and to recap here is how the process progressed:

Management company pushes board towards control of rental property
Board decides on illegal extra charges for landlords
Landlords group points out the inconsistency with the covenants
Board members and group argue for 10 months due to disagreement
Landlords warn of pending law suit
Management company realizes they bit off to much to chew.
Management company account manager gets fired due to lack of ability
Landlords takes Riverview to court and wins law suit.
Board pays non-compensated board member using association funds
Law suit indicates other possible illegal activities.
Board members return funds to landlords equating to illegal charges.
Board members learn a lesson? Maybe.
Board members realize they have zero power over the covenants and must abide by the covenants
Some board members retire based on too much stress
Board starts slow process of learning to communicate and extinguishing the power trip
Management company showing signs of weakness
Management company gets a little more aggressive towards board and starts directing them

See everyone at the next meeting.

Sunday, August 06, 2006

Lack of Urgency

I'm hoping that the management company cuts checks soon. They are overdue returning illegal funds by 6 weeks. When they get non-payment by a Riverview Third member, they charge an APR rate of around 154 percent.

We will soon get into an interest charge argument (discussions are not possible with these people) led by me. The board will argue "we only voted to give the money back at the last meeting". Guess what, your vote does not count. The law instructed you to return illegal funds and gave you a date of July 5th to appeal. It is now August 6th with no action.

This is what I call lack of focus, lack of urgency, poorly run management company, and certainly poorly run board system. I have noticed however that the urgency of the board changes when payment to board members is involved. This association HAS to be the most difficult account f0r New Concepts Management Company. They should raise their rates and change the name to "Old Concepts Management Company" I don't experience ANYTHING that this management company does that is "NEW".
The only thing they seem to use the computers for is billing, accounting and email. God forbid they should contemplate a "new concept" like internet hosting so members can opt out of the US mail system.

Of course, the internet solution allows an association to run their own business without a management company so thats kind of scary. Someone should really check out various options such as:
www.internet4associations.com