ACCORD AND SATISFACTION CASE STUDY BACKGROUND

CONCLUSION Given this uncertainty regarding the interplay between applicable provisions of the Condominium Act and the Florida law of accord and satisfaction, many attorneys believe that it would be in your Association’s best interests to carefully consider the consequences before accepting and tendering for payment any payment made in respect of a disputed amount which is accompanied by a restrictive endorsement or other instrument purporting to be in satisfaction of a disputed debt. Absent consultation with your association’s legal counsel, we suggest that any such partial payments which provide restrictive endorsements stating “full and final payment” of amounts due or any other similar language be rejected in order to preserve your Association’s rights to pursue the full amount due and owing in light of the recent ruling of the Appellate Court. Finally, the Appellate Court’s ruling in St. Croix Lane Trust & M.L. Shapiro, Trustee v. St. Croix at Pelican Marsh Condominium Association, Inc. provides further support for your association to have a professional collections company collect delinquent payments on your behalf. These issues are hard to understand and a misstep could cost your association hard dollars that should not have been lost. It is always in the best interest of the community association to have an experienced collections company who has experience in collections and familiarity and understanding of changes occurring in the association collections landscape. MITCHELL DRIMMER, VP, CAM Tel: 866.736.3069 ex. 804 Fax: 866.774-2997 e-mail: mitch@snapcollections.com Web Site www.snapcollections.com...