Construction Defects Legislation: Denver Post gets it wrong AGAIN!

Re: Construction - defects bill hits snag, May 6, Denver Post

 

Our letter to the Denver Post concerning their problem of excluding HOA home owner's input into the Construction Defects Legislation issue and including the Community Association Institute (CAI) that represents HOA property managers and lawyers (NOT home owners) into the discussion. No matter how many times the post reporters are apprised of this concern they continue to seek out the CAI to represent home owners.

Letter to the Editor:

Each of the past several years legislation on construction defects litigation is introduced and each year the Denver Post reporters get this wrong.  They continue to identify the Community Association Institute (CAI) as representing those living in home owners association (HOA).  Wrong!  This organization represents HOA property managers and HOA lawyers.  There membership has nothing to do with home owners, HOAs or home owner centric interests.  They oppose empowering home owners to vote on the use of their own funds on litigation and promote court cases vs out of court, accessible, and affordable venues for dispute resolution(the issues in the legislation).  In fact, home owner's organizations have been excluded from input on this legislation.  Maybe the Post can get this right next year. 

 

Denver Post Article Again in Error on Construction Defects Issues

"Climate for construction-defects reform in Colorado much changed", Jan 12, 2016
They simply refuse to get input from any HOA home owner's organization


The Denver Post again allows those making millions from HOA Construction Defects (CD) litigation to represent the voice and rights of home owners and distort the debate in CD legislative reform. No input from any recognized HOA home owner’s organizations. Their point person again on home owner’s rights is isolated to none other than the Community Association Institute (CAI). The CAI represents the interests of property managers and HOA lawyers, NOT HOME OWNERS.  If CD legislation is ever be explained in a truthful, balanced, and productive manner it must first get by the CAI smoke screen that is all too pervasive in this issue.  

First, almost all HOAs created in the past 15 years mandate in their Declaration that arbitration vs our court system be used in CD dispute resolution. Of the 8,500+ HOAs in the State most are beyond the statute of limitations to sue over CD. As a percentage or relative number of all HOAs, those that changed their Declaration (at the encouragement of HOA lawyers) is very, very small. Thus precluding HOAs from changing their declaration and infringing upon homeowner’s rights is a weak argument. Furthermore, a recent Colorado court case has ruled HOAs can be prevented from changing their Declaration. The CAI would have the public believe the inability to change the Declaration will have a profound impact on home owner’s rights but the reality is that it would mostly impact the ability of HOA lawyers to promote litigation in our costly court system.

The other issue involves requiring home owners to vote on the approval of the use of their own funds on CD litigation. Currently, any HOA Board at the encouragement of their attorney can spend unlimited HOA funds on litigation without the knowledge or approval of home owners. The CAI opposes this empowerment of home owners as it would effectively reduce litigation.

We at the Colorado HOA Form offer the following CD legislative proposal to mitigate litigation and empower home owners: "HOA home owners are required to be apprised of and vote on the use of HOA funds in all litigation". Why is this so difficult!

Denver's Construction Defects Ordinance: make it simple

State construction defects legislative reform has failed so localities do it themselves.  Now it's Denver's turn. The goal for developers is to cut down on the number of and frivolous lawsuits.  However, this always comes with too many caveats at the expense of home owner's rights.  Home owner's (not represented in the debate) would like to be empowered on the use of their funds in litigation.  Too often costly HOA litigation is pursued by HOA Boards and their lawyers without the knowledge or approval of home owners and can result in draining HOA reserve funds and special assessments.  A simple, compromise law that would serve both interests groups can be crafted by State legislators and integrated into State HOA law.  It is no more complicated than this:  All HOA litigation, other than for routine and administrative matters, funded with HOA resources and/or debt instruments requires a majority vote of approval by home owners.  Supplement this by requiring that prior to any vote home owners be made aware of the proposed law suit, its' purpose, total cost and funding sources, and the consequences in the event of an unfavorable decision.  This simple amendment to State HOA law will automatically cut down on law suits, save home owners and developers significantly in legal costs, and empower home owners over the use of their funds.  The issue of requiring arbitration is mostly a moot point.  Almost all HOA declarations over the past fifteen years requires this dispute resolution process and is only changed to promote costly court cases at the encouragement of HOA lawyers. Simple in this case is a WIN WIN for all.