Knowledge of home owner's association (HOA) issues acquired by State legislators continues to be dominated by special interest influence. HOA laws, recent modifications to such laws, and attempts to legislatively improve upon HOA governance have been primarily written by or killed by special interest groups such as the Community Association Institute (CAI), large property management firms, and/or HOA lawyer groups for decades in Colorado. None of these groups represents home owner's interests or has any particularly measurable membership from home owners or HOAs. Thus, the misunderstanding and misinformation on HOA issues in our legislature is problem number one from the home owner's perspective.
Recent HOA issues exemplify the misinformation in our legislature making HOA reform a difficult task. 1) Implementing an out of court binding dispute resolution process for HOA complaints to provide an accessible and affordable venue to resolve most HOA disputes. This process has been endorsed in a State study, would relieve our court system of case loads, instantly make our State HOA laws effective, and not require costly litigation for very simple HOA problems. The "big lie" promoted is that the system would cost too much to implement and deny home owners the right to a court case, WRONG. The process is mostly in place (and paid for) in the State's HOA Office, staffing and related costs would be paid for with HOA registration fees amounting to no more than pennies a "year" per home owner, complaint filing fees would also contribute to cost recovery, and home owners could choose either a court case or the State process. Our court system would reduce case load and thus taxpayer costs and home owners and HOAs would save on legal costs far exceeding any minor increase in HOA registration fees. A similar system has been implement for HOA Property Manager (PM) complaints. 2) HOA Transfer Fees cost home owners millions of dollars each year and are not only applied illegally based on State law and FHA/HUD rules but represent duplicate and triplicate charges to home owners and Title companies for services already paid for with HOA dues. The "big lie" and defense of this fee: kill any effort or open discussion to limit or end the fee without defending it. 3) The HOA PM manager licensing Bill was to address full disclosure of fees charged by property managers: never happened and abuse continues. Full disclosure has been defined by our legislature, DORA, and special interest to be a one liner in an HOA contract or on home closing documents. No requirement to provide home owners a detailed receipt of charges or any explanation to justify charges, no need to ensure charges are lawful (just collected), no means to question any fee, and if such fees are not paid by a home owner they can be precluded from selling their home and liens can be placed on their homes. 4) HOA PM licensing was implemented but look closer and one discovers the rules of conduct are weak and reflect the wants of the very industry to be regulated, the law was used to promote the sales of educational courses for a specific private company (CAI), it lacked specifics requiring compliance with State HOA law, exclusions were placed in the law to benefit large property management firms, time share property managers were excluded, etc. 5) Legislators have been requested to provide financial and educational requirements relief to the smallest HOA property managers as the cost to get a license for many can be nearly equal to or greater than the annual income from their services. Such reduced fees are provided to small HOAs in registering. The "big lie" is that this type of proposal exempts small HOA property managers from licensing and such misinformation has stopped efforts to help small businesses and 6) All State HOA legislation, although comprehensive and mostly clearly definitive, lacks any meaningful process for enforcement other than our costly, litigious, and time consuming court system making enforcement of the most simple home owner's rights a "pay-to-play" legal system. Thus legislators can brag about their efforts on passing HOA Bills but most are simply ornamental and feel good and will remain so until enforcement is included in such laws.
Legislative apathy and misinformation continues towards HOA Colorado home owners who make up nearly 60% (and growing) of the State's population living in nearly 9,000. The thousands of complaints and inquiries received by the State's HOA Office and by DORA in the recently implemented HOA PM licensing program exemplify a problem and a problem ignored. Until our legislators make an attempt to listen to and understand the facts on HOA issues and the flaws in the laws they created (with special interests) the road to HOA reform will be lean for home owners and lucrative for those that have been allowed to write and/or influence laws.
Tuesday, January 5, 2016
Monday, December 21, 2015
State HOA Office Requires Exposure and Enforcement Authority
Colorado has a State HOA Office but you would never know it. The Office was created over two years ago with little fanfare and notice to the public. The original efforts in creating the Office were to provide oversight of HOA communities, some enforcement of HOA laws, and to provide a comprehensive repository of State HOA information. Unfortunately, the Office was never granted any oversight or enforcement authority thus only serving as an administrative entity. To date the Office has provided a valuable service to home owners (those who know about it) by posting on its' web site a very comprehensive library of HOA laws and guidelines and educational sources; conducting community HOA informational meetings; collecting, compiling, and reporting on the status of HOA housing in the State; administering an HOA registration program; and developing an HOA complaint filing system that has catalogued thousands of complaints/inquiries and surfaced major problems in HOA governance and in enforcement of HOA home owner's rights. Note, the Office can't advise home owners on legal rights, provide legal opinions on the validity of any complaint, get involved in problem resolution, or provide any referrals to legal counsel.
The importance of this Office can be greatly enhanced and justified by granting it enforcement authority through implementing an out of court binding dispute resolution process. This would allow home owner's complaints currently filed with the Office to be acted upon: vetted for referral to an out of court entity that would hear disputes and render an enforceable decision. This process would be accessible to all home owners, affordable, efficient, and not require a lawyer on the most simple HOA issues related to non-compliance with the law. Home owners could still choose to go to court vs using this process. Currently, HOA laws and HOA governing documents lack enforcement provisions from the home owner's perspective other than our costly, time consuming, and litigious court system. This process could be managed by the State HOA Office with no cost to taxpayers: paid for with HOA registration fees and/or complaint filing fees. Note, much of the infrastructure such as staffing, a web site, complaint filing and review are already in place and paid for via HOA registration fees. DORA, the State Agency that would implement this system, already has similar systems in place for HOA property manager complaints and other regulated professions making implementation familiar territory for DORA. A State Study has been completed and supports the implementation of an out of court binding dispute resolution process and only awaits legislative sponsorship of a Bill to implement. Empowering the Office with enforcement authority would immediately make our current HOA laws and HOA governing documents that are ineffective from the home owner's perspective highly effective.
The importance of this Office can be greatly enhanced and justified by granting it enforcement authority through implementing an out of court binding dispute resolution process. This would allow home owner's complaints currently filed with the Office to be acted upon: vetted for referral to an out of court entity that would hear disputes and render an enforceable decision. This process would be accessible to all home owners, affordable, efficient, and not require a lawyer on the most simple HOA issues related to non-compliance with the law. Home owners could still choose to go to court vs using this process. Currently, HOA laws and HOA governing documents lack enforcement provisions from the home owner's perspective other than our costly, time consuming, and litigious court system. This process could be managed by the State HOA Office with no cost to taxpayers: paid for with HOA registration fees and/or complaint filing fees. Note, much of the infrastructure such as staffing, a web site, complaint filing and review are already in place and paid for via HOA registration fees. DORA, the State Agency that would implement this system, already has similar systems in place for HOA property manager complaints and other regulated professions making implementation familiar territory for DORA. A State Study has been completed and supports the implementation of an out of court binding dispute resolution process and only awaits legislative sponsorship of a Bill to implement. Empowering the Office with enforcement authority would immediately make our current HOA laws and HOA governing documents that are ineffective from the home owner's perspective highly effective.
Sunday, December 20, 2015
HOA Property Manager Licensing Nabs First Culprit, but.....
Colorado implemented an HOA Property Manager (PM) Licensing Program July 1, 2015. The intent is to provide home owner protections against unscrupulous business practices in the HOA property management industry. DORA, the agency managing the program, nabbed its' first culprit this past week after the program has been functioning for nearly six months. This is some good news for home owners and a flag waving and press release event for DORA. The Colorado HOA Forum, Colorado's largest and most recognized HOA home owner's advocacy organization, was a force to promote licensing and applauds this single event.
As always seems to be the case with DORA and HOAs and HOAs and legal enforcement of HOA related law, all that glitters is not gold. Let us bring the home owner up to date on what has and is really happening with the licensing program: serious backlog in processing complaints; known unlicensed PMs to DORA have gone months without any corrective action; although the recent culprit was prevented from practicing there should have been accompanying fines and recommendations for criminal prosecution; DORAs feedback to complainants (home owners) is slow, inadequate, or non-existent; DORA implemented licensing rules that favor the industry it is supposed to regulate thus making PM responsibilities and accountability more difficult to prosecute; the web site makes filing complaints and looking up licenses less than an easy and accurate experience ignoring suggestions for improvement; the law needs to be changed to provide financial and credentials relief to the smallest of PM's that in some cases the cost to acquire a license is more than a year's income; and requirements for full disclosure of HOA Transfer fees charged home owners by PMs involves an insulting definition of full disclosure, a one liner on a home closing statement, that ensures home owners can't challenge the legitimacy of this abusive and illegal fee that cost home owners nearly $10 million a year.
The licensing program to date has been more a fees collection, business cost imposition, and tool for special interests to sell educational classes than one of consumer protection. The licensing law and DORA rules have been unduly influenced by interest groups representing the PM industry, the Community Association Institute (CAI), with home owner input scant. DORA has had well over a year to implement this program and home owners deserve more. The law can and must work and home owners will benefit. Legislation is needed to rectify deficiencies in the law to make this program provide the consumer protections intended. Our organization will continue to work with legislators to have the voice of home owners and small businesses heard.
As always seems to be the case with DORA and HOAs and HOAs and legal enforcement of HOA related law, all that glitters is not gold. Let us bring the home owner up to date on what has and is really happening with the licensing program: serious backlog in processing complaints; known unlicensed PMs to DORA have gone months without any corrective action; although the recent culprit was prevented from practicing there should have been accompanying fines and recommendations for criminal prosecution; DORAs feedback to complainants (home owners) is slow, inadequate, or non-existent; DORA implemented licensing rules that favor the industry it is supposed to regulate thus making PM responsibilities and accountability more difficult to prosecute; the web site makes filing complaints and looking up licenses less than an easy and accurate experience ignoring suggestions for improvement; the law needs to be changed to provide financial and credentials relief to the smallest of PM's that in some cases the cost to acquire a license is more than a year's income; and requirements for full disclosure of HOA Transfer fees charged home owners by PMs involves an insulting definition of full disclosure, a one liner on a home closing statement, that ensures home owners can't challenge the legitimacy of this abusive and illegal fee that cost home owners nearly $10 million a year.
The licensing program to date has been more a fees collection, business cost imposition, and tool for special interests to sell educational classes than one of consumer protection. The licensing law and DORA rules have been unduly influenced by interest groups representing the PM industry, the Community Association Institute (CAI), with home owner input scant. DORA has had well over a year to implement this program and home owners deserve more. The law can and must work and home owners will benefit. Legislation is needed to rectify deficiencies in the law to make this program provide the consumer protections intended. Our organization will continue to work with legislators to have the voice of home owners and small businesses heard.
Wednesday, December 16, 2015
HOA Property Manager Implementation: Problematic
Colorado fully implemented its' Community Association Manager (CAM) Licensing Program (aka HOA Property Manager) July 1, 2015. DORA, the state Agency responsible for implementation and management of the program, had over one year to analyze, plan, design, develop, test, and implement the program. The scope and complexity of the program are very similar to other regulated professions in the State thus making implementation neither new territory or requiring a host of new on-line applications. Our organization, Colorado HOA Forum, offers the following status report on this program and it is not good:
- The rules developed by DORA to ensure CAM compliance with the law and bring accountability to the profession are ambiguous and require change. Specifically, (1) rules need to definitively and comprehensively state CAMs must comply with all State HOA laws and HOAs governing documents; (2) require CAMs to notify HOA Boards if any of their activities are in non-compliance with State HOA laws and/or HOA governing documents and recommend corrective action and if violations continue the CAM must report the event to DORA and the State's HOA Office;
- DORA requirements for full disclosure of CAM fees assessed HOAs and home owners are severely lacking and avoid accountability. In particular, DORA requires nothing more than a one liner in an HOA contract or on home closing documents to represent full disclosure which is simply conceding to CAM industry demands to allow things to remain as is. DORA full-disclosure requires no detailed explanation of a fee or why it is charged, who determines the amount of the fee and retains it, confirming and explaining that any fee doesn't overlap or duplicate any charge already paid for through HOA dues or by a Title Company ( (such as the HOA Transfer Fee), requires no receipt to the payee identifying charges by line item, and no requirement to justify the authority to charge the fee and a statement how any Transfer Fee is in compliance with State law HB 11-234 that defines and restricts this fee.
- The DORA web site complaint application requires changes to make it easier to use: develop an on-line complaint status process; assign a tracking number upon completion of complaint for users to inquire/determine the status of their complaint; allow users to mail in documentation that is not conducive to e-mailing; immediate on-screen confirmation when completed with complaint that indicates a successful filing; the license lookup system doesn't list provisional/temporary licenses and only lists one licensed CAM for the largest of property management companies; one can't enter an HOA and find the CAM; search results for a CAM license lookup results in display of information from all DORA programs (clutter!); allow for display all HOAs serviced by a licensed CAM; and provide options to classify the type of CAM complaint to make review and justification of complaints easier to complete and review.
- The time frame in which CAM complaints are resolved is extremely slow to non-responsive. There are cases where DORA knows for months a CAM is not licensed and refuses to take action such as a cease and desist order and/or fine. Closing out/decisions on complaints is very slow and too often complaints seem lost in a bureaucratic maze.
- DORA licensing, fees, and educational structure is burdensome to the smallest of CAMs and relief to these small businesses should be implemented similar to relief given small HOAs in registration fees.
- The licensing program to date is more of a fees imposition and collection system and sales promotion tool for educational courses for a private firm (Community Association Institute (CAI) than a program for bringing integrity and accountability to profession.
Saturday, November 28, 2015
HOA and Property Manager (CAM) Complaints: Speak Out
The HOA Property Manager (aka Community Association Manager
(CAM)) licensing law was fully implemented July 15, 2015. This law provides home owners a chance to
help clean-up abusive industry practices and provide a forum for home owners to
rein in violations of State law and HOA governing documents. HB 13-1277 is the licensing law.
The complaint process involves an on-line/web application
and is fully explained in our Complaint Guide and should not take more than
15-20 minutes. Since the State HOA
Office has no investigative or enforcement authority we suggest you direct all
your HOA problems that you want investigated to DORA under the licensing
law. The State HOA Office can also be
apprised.
Several CAM violations stand out and we ask you and your
fellow home owners to pursue via a complaint: 1) CAM is not licensed (simple
lookup on your part) 2) violations in conducting elections, meetings, extremely
poor property maintenance, records release(items a,b,and/or c below) and 3) charging HOA Transfer Fees (items “a”
and “c” below). All are applicable to
CAM complaints. Each one requires a
separate complaint.
The explanation of your CAM complaint involves: 1) a
description of your problem including how you understand it violates your
rights. Include one or more of the below
statements extracted from the licensing law to support your complaint. 2) Evidence such as you paid a Transfer Fee
documented on your home closing papers, your request for documents has been refused,
etc.
Supporting all complaints should be your documentation
including an email informing BOTH the HOA Board and CAM of your problem, allow
7-10 days for resolution and if not resolved file a complaint. If you need
guidance let us know. Complaints are
confidential with DORA.
Let’s all participate to surface problems and hold violators
accountable.
Extracts from CAM Licensing Law:
a. KNOWINGLY VIOLATING OR KNOWINGLY DIRECTING OTHERS TO
VIOLATE CCIOA (or your HOA governing documents)
b. HAVING DEMONSTRATED UNWORTHINESS OR INCOMPETENCY TO ACT AS
A COMMUNI-TY ASSOCIATION MANAGER BY CONDUCTING BUSINESS IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO
EN-DANGER THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC
c. ANY OTHER CONDUCT, WHETHER OF THE SAME OR A DIFFERENT
CHARACTER THAN SPECIFIED IN THIS SUBSECTION (1), THAT CONSTITUTES DISHONEST
DEALING.
Friday, November 20, 2015
Colorado HOA Forum's Winter Edition Newsletter Posted on Web Site
The Colorado HOA Forum, www.coloradohoaforum.com, Colorado's largest HOA home owner organization has posted its' Winter 2015 newsletter on its' web site. This edition focuses on the implementation of the new HOA Property Manager (aka Community Association Manager (CA)) licensing program, HOA Transfer Fees, HOA and CAM dispute resolution and complaint filing with the State, and a host of other HOA issues. An overview of the Forum's latest HOA Town Hall Meeting from November 12 in Aurora, CO is presented indicating what is of concern to HOA home owner's. Keep in touch with HOA current events, HOA legislation, and home owner's issues with this easily accessed newsletter. This is Colorado's only HOA periodical presenting HOA issues from the home owner's perspective. Those wishing to subscribe to this free newsletter can join on the Forum's web site.
Wednesday, November 11, 2015
Colorado HOA Property Manager Licensing: make it effective and not burdensome
The HOA Property Manager Licensing Law HB 15-1343 has now been fully implemented and some obvious weaknesses and flaws exist that should be addressed. Two issues stand out that need attention: changes to the law and DORA's administration of the law. This posting addresses changes to the law.
Community Association Manager (CAM aks HOA Property Manager) law:
The law requires small HOA CAMs to pay and complete the same requirements as mega-CAMs. This has caused CAMs serving small HOAs (in particular in rural communities) to end their services: the financial burden was too much. Relief should provided in the law, similar to small HOA registration requirements, to reduce educational and other fees requirements but NOT eliminate them for those CAMs serving less than a total of 25 units.
This law, similar to HB 14-1254, Disclosure of Fees, was supposed to require full disclosure of any fees assessed and/or collected by a CAM (from the HOA or home owner). DORA has allowed this to be defined as a one-liner in a contract or on home closing documents with no detail, no receipt to the home owner, no justification of the fee, and no mention that the CAM, not the HOA, determines the amount of the fee and retains it. Disclosure is particularly important when CAMs assess HOA Transfer Fees that average $350 on the sale of an HOA home and provide no legal basis, receipt, or work justification. Disclosure must be not only required in detail but clearly defined what detailed disclosure means. Any fee assessed home owners, in particular the Transfer Fee, must be in compliance with State law SB 11-234 that authorizes and limits this fee. Note this law can't limit the amount of, refund, or adjust a fee but it is a first step in reining in this abusive fee.
The CAM law needs to be more clearly defined and strengthened to include requirements that CAMs must comply with State laws and the HOAs own governing documents. DORA has refused to include explicit rules and the law should be updated to clearly include:
CAMs must comply with all State HOA laws and with the governing documents of the HOA they serve and knowingly violating or being aware of such violations is subject to fines and/or revocation of license.
If a CAM is aware of an HOA Board being in non-compliance with State HOA law or their own governing documents they must immediately advise the Board and their legal representation of such non-compliance and suggested corrective action; if the corrective is not taken the CAM must apprise both Board and the HOA's legal representation in writing of such violation and recommended corrective action; if corrective action is not taken within seven days after CAM notification, the CAM will notify DORA and the HOA's legal representation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)