The Colorado legislature will consider three home owner's association (HOA) Bills this session. Two will be mostly administrative and one could serve to be the most impacting HOA legislation of the past 20 years improving upon responsibilities and accountability in the HOA property manager industry and the potential to save HOA home owners millions of dollars annually.
SB 16-082, HOA Whistleblower (intimidation) Protection, and HB 16-1149, Remove Budget Reporting Exemption HOAs Predate Act (CCIOA), have admirable goals and provide great expectations but will accomplish neither (for now). These Bills have the same ole' problem that characterizes HOA legislation over the past decades: they lack enforcement from the home owner's perspective except through our costly, litigious, time consuming court system matching HOA funds and lawyers against the very limited resources of the home owner. Lacking an accessible and affordable venue to enforce these Bills home owners will more feel good about the Bills than experience any change.
HB 16-1133, HOA Manager Professional Responsibility and Disclosure, can positively affect home owner's rights and their wallets and provide financial relief to small businesses serving HOAs. This Bill modifies the HOA property manager (PM) licensing law. The Bill addresses the abusive and costly property manager HOA Transfer Fee that involves duplicate and triplicate billing of home owners for services already paid for with HOA dues, requires home owners to be provided a detailed receipt of charges for Transfer Fees, and requires that all Transfer Fees be in compliance with authority to charge as stated in State and Federal laws. This fee costs home owners upwards of $10 million a year. The Bill provides the smallest of HOA property managers financial relief from requirements to obtain a license that can cost them more than a year's income. Also, the Bill improves upon requirements for property managers to comply with State laws and HOA governing documents. The reason this Bill will immediately impact home owners is that when non-compliance with this Bill occurs a home owner can file a complaint with DORA (Dept of Regulatory Agencies) free of charge, have the complaint investigated, violators (HOA property managers in this case) can be fined and/or have their license revoked. and it will directly affect abusive PM Transfer Fee practices by requiring justification and documentation of to payees.
Showing posts with label property manager. Show all posts
Showing posts with label property manager. Show all posts
Friday, February 5, 2016
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.
Thursday, March 5, 2015
CAM Licensing Hearings Fall Short For HOA Home Owners
The final public hearings on developing rules under the
Community Association Manager (CAM) licensing program surfaced little in the
way of new recommendations but plenty on weaknesses in home owner
protections. The rules were absent of
details that are the foundation for home owners to bring complaints against
abusive practices:
a. No specific rule that
CAMs must comply with HOA governing documents or State law.
b. No rule requiring CAMs to take action when they observe an HOA
Board in non-compliance with their own governing documents or State law.
c. Disclosure
requirements on CAM fees imposed no new requirements. DORA was supposed to address disclosure on
the costly and controversial HOA home sale Transfer Fee. Disclosure will only require a one line
statement in a CAM contract and/or on home sale closing documents; no
requirement to explain or document the fee to the home seller or to provide a
hard copy invoice detailing (disclosing) services performed for the fee; no
mention that the fee can only be for expenses incurred by the CAM in relation
to the home sale for which they have not already been paid.
d. The issue of
reduced fees and educational requirements for the smallest of HOAs (20 or less
units) was ignored.
A Bill will be submitted this legislative session to make
changes to the licensing law. The above
shortcomings were requested for inclusion.
Unless these items are resolved the licensing law could end up being
another HOA law that appears to help home owners but has little enforcement
capability from the home owner’s perspective.
Monday, January 19, 2015
HB 15-1040 Would Remove Protections under Property Manager Licensing
A Bill, HB 15-1040, was introduced for legislative consideration and could have the affect of derailing HOA home owner protections from abusive practices in the property management industry. The Colorado HOA Forum has reviewed the Bill in its' original form and we urge legislators vote against it. The Bill would effectively reduce the number of HOA property managers (aka Community Association Manager (CAM)) required to be licensed by about 80% thus nullifying HB 13-1277 (the CAM Licensing Bill). HB 15-1040 would require only those CAMs in HOAs with 200 or more homes to be licensed. Thus approximately over 7,700 of the 9,600 registered HOAs would be exempt from their CAM being licensed and allowing the CAM to operate without any oversight, guidelines, and with little accountability: the very problems that prompted licensing.
Licensing was implemented to provide oversight and prevent abusive practices in the CAM industry in ALL HOAs and improve the skills and credentials of ALL CAMs. There is no relationship between the size of an HOA and vulnerability to abuse. In fact the opposite may be true as smaller HOAs more heavily rely on the CAM for all facets of asset and financial management The reasons prompting this Bill have not been mentioned but surely won't be corrected by simply excluding smaller HOAs which is an arbitrary solution to an undefined problem in the licensing law. As with any law there can be improvements when it causes unintended problems. Minor changes to the law may be needed as we suggest below but NO consideration should be given to excluding CAMs from operating rules and guidelines simply because they manage a small HOA,
A very important feature of the licensing law is that it provides for HOAs and home owners in small and large communities with an out of court dispute resolution process that otherwise requires complaints to be resolved in our costly, time consuming, and litigious court system. The out of court dispute resolution saves HOAs and home owners on legal costs and allows an affordable and accessible venue for home owner and HOA problem resolution. This right should be afforded to ALL HOAs but this Bill would exclude this process to home owners in smaller HOAs.
Smaller HOAs deserve the same protections afforded to those in larger HOAs and this Bill would do the opposite. The educational requirements, cost to acquire a license, and/or type of license for those serving small HOAs (under 50 homes) might be revisited with just cause based on experience with the law but under no circumstances should CAMs serving smaller communities be allowed to operate outside of and not accountable under the CAM licensing law.
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
Your Voice: HOA Oversight in Colorado Raises Questions: Part II
This is part two of a two part article on HOA governance in Colorado and the role of a government agency in influencing (or not) HOA law.
DORA is also chartered to seek out multiple providers for educational requirements under CAM licensing and to develop testing procedures. To date, and after one year, DORA has not posted on its’ web site the competing educational providers with the CAI remaining the sole source. CAI legislative sponsors promoted the CAI courses and DORA gave tacit approval and to date there has been nothing indicating that DORA has reviewed and certified the courses, that the courses are reflective of current HOA changes in the law, and a process to mandate annual review of such courses will take place. Also, by not early on posting alternative sources for educational classes the CAI can charge what they want and CAMs are left with a sole source of “approved classes?” An unintended (again) promoting of a private company via a government agency.
DORA is now considering allowing the CAI to conduct its’ own testing and grading of exams and granting partial license certification to PMs. This is contradictory to the law that indicates a professional testing company shall complete testing and grading with only DORA granting license certification in part or in full. Furthermore, the oversight, review, and update of CAI class material, testing and grading procedures, and security over such tests have not been reviewed by DORA. We know of no plans to do so. If the CAI request is granted, we will have the same folks (CAI) that have been “leaders” in CAM education and leadership in Colorado for two decades and resulted in the in the need for regulatory oversight be the guiding light in “cleaning-up” the industry. This arrangement (along with CAI involvement in guidelines) is equivalent to allowing a company that is polluting a lake and waterways write their own rules and standards and complete testing of waters for safety, and issue their own licenses. DORA needs to take full control of this program to maintain the integrity of the licensing program.
Then there is the recent event whereby a Bill was proposed to end/limit the unwarranted, unjustified, and illegal (in Colorado) HOA home sale Transfer Fee. Our legislative sources at the Colorado HOA Forum and articles on the CAI legal web site indicate the CAI lobbied hard to defeat this Bill. As a result the Bill was totally diluted into a disclosure law thus ensuring nothing would change and million of dollars would continue into the bank accounts of CAI members. DORA was to address disclosure of all fees and the HOA home sale Transfer Fee in their guidelines for CAM licensing. Not surprisingly, the first release of CAM licensing guidelines included only vague directives on fees disclosure. DORA’s ambiguous and loose disclosure mandates for HOA Transfer Fees don’t require justifying the fee in detail. DORA CAM guidelines don’t mention in disclosure requirements that the HOA Transfer Fee is not mandated by law nor hold up the sale of a home hostage in the event the fee is protested by the seller. Also, with no requirement to justify the fee by cause with an itemized invoice, it will make it difficult for home owners to protest this fee. The opportunity for DORA to protect consumer rights, as their charter indicates, will be missed if fees disclosure of all types are not required to be detailed and justified.
The next test for DORA is coming this legislative session. Our organization will be pursuing legislative sponsors for an out of court binding dispute resolution process for home owner complaints Bill. The CAM licensing program includes a home owner complaint resolution process handled out of court through DORA. Also, a State HOA dispute resolution study completed by DORA endorsed this process. The CAI and legal types, however, oppose this process. DORA will be asked to speak on this issue and if they reject it they are rejecting and invalidating the very work they will be doing under CAM licensing and other licensing programs they administer. DORA should also speak to allegations that this out of court process will result in home owners losing legal rights and the process is as costly as a court appearance: both NOT true.
Citizen trust in our government institutions is at an all time low and HOA home owners need look no further than the examples above to take that trust down another notch. If DORA was fully operating within its’ mission statement (see below) and being an active participant in the legislative and regulatory process there would be no reason for this article:
“DORA is dedicated to preserving the integrity of the marketplace and is committed to promoting a fair and competitive business environment in Colorado. Consumer protection is our mission.”
DORA is also chartered to seek out multiple providers for educational requirements under CAM licensing and to develop testing procedures. To date, and after one year, DORA has not posted on its’ web site the competing educational providers with the CAI remaining the sole source. CAI legislative sponsors promoted the CAI courses and DORA gave tacit approval and to date there has been nothing indicating that DORA has reviewed and certified the courses, that the courses are reflective of current HOA changes in the law, and a process to mandate annual review of such courses will take place. Also, by not early on posting alternative sources for educational classes the CAI can charge what they want and CAMs are left with a sole source of “approved classes?” An unintended (again) promoting of a private company via a government agency.
DORA is now considering allowing the CAI to conduct its’ own testing and grading of exams and granting partial license certification to PMs. This is contradictory to the law that indicates a professional testing company shall complete testing and grading with only DORA granting license certification in part or in full. Furthermore, the oversight, review, and update of CAI class material, testing and grading procedures, and security over such tests have not been reviewed by DORA. We know of no plans to do so. If the CAI request is granted, we will have the same folks (CAI) that have been “leaders” in CAM education and leadership in Colorado for two decades and resulted in the in the need for regulatory oversight be the guiding light in “cleaning-up” the industry. This arrangement (along with CAI involvement in guidelines) is equivalent to allowing a company that is polluting a lake and waterways write their own rules and standards and complete testing of waters for safety, and issue their own licenses. DORA needs to take full control of this program to maintain the integrity of the licensing program.
Then there is the recent event whereby a Bill was proposed to end/limit the unwarranted, unjustified, and illegal (in Colorado) HOA home sale Transfer Fee. Our legislative sources at the Colorado HOA Forum and articles on the CAI legal web site indicate the CAI lobbied hard to defeat this Bill. As a result the Bill was totally diluted into a disclosure law thus ensuring nothing would change and million of dollars would continue into the bank accounts of CAI members. DORA was to address disclosure of all fees and the HOA home sale Transfer Fee in their guidelines for CAM licensing. Not surprisingly, the first release of CAM licensing guidelines included only vague directives on fees disclosure. DORA’s ambiguous and loose disclosure mandates for HOA Transfer Fees don’t require justifying the fee in detail. DORA CAM guidelines don’t mention in disclosure requirements that the HOA Transfer Fee is not mandated by law nor hold up the sale of a home hostage in the event the fee is protested by the seller. Also, with no requirement to justify the fee by cause with an itemized invoice, it will make it difficult for home owners to protest this fee. The opportunity for DORA to protect consumer rights, as their charter indicates, will be missed if fees disclosure of all types are not required to be detailed and justified.
The next test for DORA is coming this legislative session. Our organization will be pursuing legislative sponsors for an out of court binding dispute resolution process for home owner complaints Bill. The CAM licensing program includes a home owner complaint resolution process handled out of court through DORA. Also, a State HOA dispute resolution study completed by DORA endorsed this process. The CAI and legal types, however, oppose this process. DORA will be asked to speak on this issue and if they reject it they are rejecting and invalidating the very work they will be doing under CAM licensing and other licensing programs they administer. DORA should also speak to allegations that this out of court process will result in home owners losing legal rights and the process is as costly as a court appearance: both NOT true.
Citizen trust in our government institutions is at an all time low and HOA home owners need look no further than the examples above to take that trust down another notch. If DORA was fully operating within its’ mission statement (see below) and being an active participant in the legislative and regulatory process there would be no reason for this article:
“DORA is dedicated to preserving the integrity of the marketplace and is committed to promoting a fair and competitive business environment in Colorado. Consumer protection is our mission.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)