Become a Member: JOIN SFPMA TODAY   LogIn / Register: LOGIN/REGISTER

SFPMA Industry Articles | news, legal updates, events & education! 

Find Blog Articles for Florida’s Condo, HOA and the Management Industry. 

Release of Liability and Hold Harmless Agreements by JEFFREY REMBAUM, ESQ., KAYE BENDER REMBAUM

Release of Liability and Hold Harmless Agreements by JEFFREY REMBAUM, ESQ., KAYE BENDER REMBAUM

  • Posted: Apr 07, 2023
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on Release of Liability and Hold Harmless Agreements by JEFFREY REMBAUM, ESQ., KAYE BENDER REMBAUM

Release of Liability and Hold Harmless Agreements

by JEFFREY REMBAUM, ESQ., KAYE BENDER REMBAUM

If Your Association Requires One, Then You Must Read This…

Many communities offer a host of amenities for their residents and guests to enjoy, such as clubhouses, fitness centers, playgrounds, swimming pools, tot lots, tennis courts, etc. One of the upsides to providing such amenities is that the residents and their guests have a variety of activities to choose from, which enhances the quality of life within the community. However, one of the potential significant downsides to offering such benefits is that the association often incurs liability if a resident or guest is injured while using one of the amenities.

Accordingly, it has become commonplace for associations to require that residents and guests sign a document that releases the association from liability and holds the association harmless when a resident or guest uses the amenities. Although the title of the document may vary—“Hold Harmless,” “Indemnification Agreement,” “Release of Liability,” or “Waiver and Release”—there is usually language included within the document along the lines of the following:

“I, Mr. Owner, on my own behalf and on behalf of all other occupants and guests to my home, for and in consideration for use of the association’s facilities, equipment, etc. hereby release and hold harmless the association, its members, officers, directors, agents, etc. from any and all liability which may arise out of or in connection with my participation or use of the foregoing facilities, equipment, etc.”

This language is often referred to as an “exculpatory clause,” which is a clause that is designed to relieve a party from blame or liability. Such language has traditionally served to help prevent an association’s liability to an owner or guest when he or she is injured while using the amenities. It may have been a while since anyone has taken a good look at the specific language included in the association’s release, and it may be taken for granted that such language will automatically protect the association from liability. Many such form documents do not provide the protection you might think they should. A recent Florida appellate court case dealing with such exculpatory clauses highlights this potential issue and offers pause.

Specifically, The Estate of Nicholas Adam Blakely, By and Through Michele Wilson, as Personal Representative v. Stetson University, Inc., WL 17997526 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022), involved the tragic death of a young man who played football at Stetson University. As described in the written appellate opinion, the young man pulled himself out of an afternoon football practice complaining to an assistant athletic trainer that he felt dizzy and that his chest felt tight. Although the trainers continued to monitor his symptoms on the sidelines, after approximately 45 minutes the young man collapsed. Thereafter, university employees attempted various emergency medical procedures in an unsuccessful effort to revive him. The young man was transported to the hospital where, sadly, he died.

The trial court found that the two identical releases signed by the young man were sufficiently clear to bar claims brought against the university arising from his death after participating in the football practice. On appeal, however, one of the arguments focused on whether the language in the releases that the young man signed were sufficient to be enforceable. The appellate court determined it was not. Although the entirety of the written releases are unable to be reproduced here, the particular language that the court focused on is set out below. Specifically, the appellate court placed emphasis on the following:

I understand that the dangers and risks of playing or participating/practicing may include, but are not limited to: death…Because of the dangers and risks involved in participating in intercollegiate athletics, I recognize the importance of following the Coaches and Sports Medicine staff instructions regarding playing techniques, conditioning, rehabilitation/treatment recommendations and team rules, etc. and agree to obey such instructions…I hereby assume all risks associated with participation and agree to hold Stetson University…from any and all liability…of any kind or nature which may arise by or in connection with my participation in any activities related to the Stetson University athletic program. The terms hereof shall serve as a release and assumption of risk for myself, my heirs, estate, executor, administrator, assignees and for all members of  my family. The terms hereof shall serve as a complete release and waiver of liability for myself, my heirs, estate, executor, administrator, assignees, and for all members of my family.

 

On its face, it sounds complete. But is it? In its analysis of the language included in the releases, the appellate court began by expressing that

[A]n exculpatory clause purports to deny an injured party the right to recover damages from a person negligently causing his injury. They are disfavored in the law because they relieve one party of the obligation to use due care and shift the risk of injury to the party who is probably least equipped to take the necessary precautions to avoid the injury and bear the risk of loss. Such claims are strictly construed against the party seeking to be relieved of liability. Thus, exculpatory clauses are enforceable only where and to the extent that the intention to be relieved from liability is made clear and unequivocal. The wording must be clear and understandable that an ordinary and knowledgeable person will know what he is contracting away (quoting UCF Athletics Ass’n, v Plancher, 121 So. 3d 1097, 1101 [Fla. 5th DCA 2013]).

 

Unlike the trial court, the appellate court took issue with the language contained within the releases because the release forms

  1. failed to expressly inform the young man that he was contracting away his rights to sue the university for its own negligence,
  2. used language that could reasonably lead one to believe that the university would be supervising and training [him] properly such that the young man was only being asked to sign the exculpatory clause to cover injuries inherent in a sport, and
  3. used language suggesting that the terms of the releases were for the young man’s benefit.

 

Accordingly, the appellate court determined that the foregoing supported a determination that the releases were not clear and unambiguous. So, what does the appellate court’s decision mean for exculpatory clauses as related to an association’s release? It means that associations need to review the language in such exculpatory clauses with counsel to assist in aligning the language with the thinking of the court. For example:

  1. Is the language in the release clear, unambiguous, and written in such a way that an ordinary and knowledgeable person would know that he or she is contracting away his or her right to sue the association if an injury occurs?
  2. Is the language in the release free from any indication whatsoever that training and/or supervision is being provided by the association to avoid a mistaken belief by the owner or guest that he or she is merely signing away his or her right to sue for injuries inherent in a particular activity?
  3. Is it unequivocally clear that the individual is giving up all rights to litigate against the association in regard to any accident that may occur, even if the association was negligent?
  4. Are there terms in the release that would make it seem as though the release is for the benefit of the homeowner or guest and not the association?
    If you are in doubt as to the exculpatory language included in your association’s release, do not wait until a homeowner or guest is injured, or possibly worse, to discover that the language is not appropriate for protecting the association from liability. In light of this most recent opinion, you should discuss with your association’s legal counsel when there would be a good opportunity to review and amend such release of liability and hold harmless agreements.
Jeffrey Rembaum, Esq. of Kaye, Bender, Rembaum attorneys at law, legal practice consists of representation of condominium, homeowner, commercial and mobile home park associations, as well as exclusive country club communities and the developers who build them. Mr. Rembaum is a Certified Specialist in Condominium and Planned Development Law. He is the creator of ‘Rembaum’s Association Roundup’, an e-magazine devoted to the education of community association board members, managers, developers and anyone involved with Florida’s community associations.  His column appears monthly in the Florida Community Association Journal. Every year since 2012, Mr. Rembaum has been selected to the Florida Super Lawyers list and was also named Legal Elite by Florida Trends Magazine. He can be reached at 561-241-4462.
Tags: ,
Hurricane Recovery: A rundown of lessons learned from previous storms from Becker Shareholder Joseph E. Adams

Hurricane Recovery: A rundown of lessons learned from previous storms from Becker Shareholder Joseph E. Adams

  • Posted: Apr 02, 2023
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on Hurricane Recovery: A rundown of lessons learned from previous storms from Becker Shareholder Joseph E. Adams

Hurricane Recovery: A rundown of lessons learned from previous storms from Becker Shareholder Joseph E. Adams

Recovery From Hurricane Ian

Unfortunately, Hurricane Ian was a historic storm and has left a wide and substantial swath of damage across Southwest Florida. As we all work to recover from the ongoing effects of Hurricane Ian, I would like to share a few pointers we have learned from past storms and some things we are experiencing with Ian:

  1. Flood Damage: A significant part of Ian’s damage resulted from rising water, which is generally and generically referred to as “flood damage”. It is very important to note that flood insurance and processing flood insurance claims is covered by federal law, not Florida law. Among the notable differences, federal law requires that a “Proof of Loss” be filed for flood claims within 60 days, and the statute of limitations under flood policies is one year.
  2. Disaster Recovery Contractors: There are a number of large national companies, as well as others, who employ large crews of “storm chasers”, and arrive at disaster sites to shore up the property, dry it in, and dry it out. This is critical work and many of these companies are reputable, but not all are. Bills for significant damage sites can quickly approach seven figures (one million dollars plus) without proper justification. Associations can understandably feel under pressure to sign these companies up quickly but there are several critical things to keep in mind:
  • Approval From Your Insurer: Most reputable companies will be known to your insurers and be able to demonstrate they have the “go ahead” from the insurer before engaging in major work.
  • “Mapping”: As Southwest Florida is a significant disaster zone, insurance adjustors are overwhelmed and one may not visit your property for weeks, or longer. It is very important that the disaster relief contractor properly document the conditions it finds and remediates, commonly known as “mapping.”
  • “Assignment of Benefits”: Historically, various participants in this field have asked for an assignment of the association’s insurance policy rights, known as an “AOB”’. AOB contracts are now strictly regulated by statute but should never be given to an outside contractor.

While getting dry-out work started quickly is critical, the association should not enter into a contract with a remediation company, or any vendor, if the association is not comfortable with the term of the agreement and confident in the company. It is always better to take a step back and make a thoughtful decision than to rush into a bad agreement.

  1. Application Of Your Community’s Governing Documents: If the association has experienced significant damage, it is critical that the association be aware of the requirements of the governing documents, especially for condominiums. For example, many documents state that if a certain percentage of the units are rendered “uninhabitable” (usually an undefined term), the condominium is automatically “terminated” (legally extinguished) if a vote to rebuild is not taken, often in a very short time frame such as 60 days after the loss. Other “gotcha” clauses in documents might include the requirement to have a bank act as “insurance trustee” for insurance proceeds.
  2. Emergency Powers: The “emergency powers” provisions of the statutes are now in effect. Among other powers conferred are the power to contract for debris removal and authorize appropriate remediation, including removal of wet drywall and cabinetry, subject to any limitations of the condominium documents. The emergency powers statute also gives associations flexibility in noticing and holding membership and board meetings. As much as is practicable, you should consult with your association’s attorney regarding use of the statutory emergency powers.

The next few months will be a trying time for everyone in Southwest Florida and practically every community association will have to deal with some consequence from Hurricane Ian. The decisions that board members and owners make at this time will, to a great degree, determine outcome for many communities.

Joseph E. Adams is a Board Certified Specialist in Condominium and Planned Development Law, and an Office Managing Shareholder with Becker & Poliakoff. Please send your community association legal questions to jadams@beckerlawyers.com. Past editions of the Q&A may be viewed at floridacondohoalawblog.com.

Tags: , ,
As a homeowner, it is important to know Common Property Damage Claims. by Joseph Maus

As a homeowner, it is important to know Common Property Damage Claims. by Joseph Maus

  • Posted: Apr 02, 2023
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on As a homeowner, it is important to know Common Property Damage Claims. by Joseph Maus

Common Property Damage Claims. As a homeowner, it is important to know

A home or office building is the most important purchase most of us will make during our lifetime. Most of us buy insurance coverage – windstorm, liability, flood, homeowners, and business interruption – to protect our homes and businesses. Yet, today’s insurance policies are lengthy, complex contracts full of exceptions, exclusions, deductibles, and conditions that make the policy difficult to read, and sometimes even more difficult to recover from for your damage. When you call the Maus Law Firm, a top Fort Lauderdale property damage lawyer will handle property damage claims.

Disagreeing with Your Insurance Claim for Property Damage

You have four options if you disagree with the amount the insurance company is offering you for your damage:

Most insurance companies create entire TV marketing campaigns designed to say that you’re part of the insurance company’s “family”. However, the reality of the insurance business is that insurance companies exist to make money. That means that insurance company needs to minimize the amount of claims it pays out; meanwhile, maximizing the premiums that it collects.

When an insurance company doesn’t offer to pay you the full (or fair) amount of your property damage, you need to be prepared to fight. While many homeowners are hesitant to go to court – fearful of a lengthy or expensive legal battle against a big-name insurer – settling for less than your claim was worth can end up costing you more in the long-term. The repairs your home needed can continue to pile up, lowering the value of your property. Hiring the best Fort Lauderdale property damage lawyer you can find will save you the headache later.

The Process for Property Damage Claims & Florida Property Owner’s Obligations

When making insurance claims for property damage, it is helpful to know how the process typically unfolds. Our Fort Lauderdale property damage lawyer knows that while there are many potential scenarios, the property owner should first understand their own obligations under the insurance policy. Second, the property owner should understand the reasons for the insurance company’s denial of their claim.

Any property insurance policy will place some obligations on the property owner when they make a claim for property loss. These obligations will differ from policy to policy, but the following are several of the most common requirements.

  • Notice of Loss: The property owner is generally required to provide notice of the loss to the carrier promptly. The policy should provide a specific deadline. Failure to meet this deadline could result in the claim being barred.
  • Protect Against Further Damage: The property owner is also required to take reasonable steps to protect the property from further damage. For example, if the roof of a property is damaged by a hurricane, the property owner must attempt to place temporary covering to protect the interior. However, the exact conduct that is considered “reasonable steps” will often be subject to interpretation.
  • Proof of Loss: After making a claim, the property owner will need to submit a proof of loss statement. This statement is generally signed under penalty of perjury and itemizes the damages. A typical deadline for the proof of loss is 60 days after a request by the insurance carrier.

How a Fort Lauderdale Property Damage Lawyer Can Help You with Your Homeowner’s Insurance Claim

Unfortunately, even if you have paid your homeowners’ insurance premiums on time for decades, this does not guarantee that your insurance company will treat you fairly if you need to file a claim. Bad-faith insurance claim denials are common, and homeowners can run into various other issues with their property damage claims as well. As a result, if you need to file a homeowners’ insurance claim, it is a good idea to hire an attorney. Here are just a few examples of the ways an experienced Fort Lauderdale property damage lawyer like Joseph Maus can help:

1. Determining If Your Claim is Covered

Before you devote the time, energy and resources to pursuing a property damage claim, you first need to determine if your claim is covered. An experienced Fort Lauderdale property damage lawyer will be able to review your homeowners’ insurance policy and assess the damage to your home in order to determine if your insurance company is liable.

2. Dealing with Your Insurance Company On Your Behalf

If you have a claim, your attorney will be able to deal with your insurance company on your behalf until your claim has been fully and finally resolved. This important for a few different reasons: (i) Florida’s insurance laws are complicated, and asserting your legal rights can be difficult; (ii) in some cases, there will be a legitimate dispute as to whether a homeowners’ insurance policy applies; and, (iii) successfully pursuing a homeowners’ insurance claim for significant property damage takes time, and you will need someone to handle your claim while you focus on work and your day-to-day life.

3. Overcoming Bad-Faith Coverage Delays and Denials

As we mentioned above, insurance companies routinely deny policyholders’ property damage claims in bad faith. If your insurance company is not handling your claim appropriately, you may need your attorney to take legal action on your behalf. If you have a claim for insurance bad faith, then you can seek compensation above and beyond the amount of coverage to which you are entitled under your policy.

Common Claims for Property Damage in Fort Lauderdale

When can you file a property damage claim? As a homeowner, it is important to know when you are entitled to insurance coverage and when you may need to come out of pocket to cover repairs to your home. With this in mind, here are some examples of common property damage claims in Fort Lauderdale:

  • Storm Damage Claims – While homeowners’ insurance policies do not cover flood damage caused by hurricanes and tropical storms, they do cover other types of storm damage.
  • Tree Damage Claims – If a tree in your yard fell on your home, your homeowners’ insurance policy should provide coverage.
  • Water Damage Claims – Water damage caused by leaking pipes, HVAC system failures and other similar types of issues should be covered under your homeowners’ insurance policy.
  • Fire Damage Claims – Fires from lightning strikes and other causes are generally covered as well, and your policy should cover your home as well as its contents.
  • Mold Claims – Mold claims are often disputed; but, if your house has mold from a “covered peril,” then the costs of remediation should be covered.
  • Theft Claims – If your home has been burglarized, your homeowners’ insurance policy may provide coverage for any damage that occurred during the break-in in addition to the value of your stolen property.

Here are 6 common property damage claims;

#1 Storm Damage, #2 Tree Damage, #3 Water Damage., #4 Fire Damage, #5 Mold, #6 Theft.

Where do you turn to get help?

The Maus Law Firm has been successfully handling insurance-related claims since 1993. We will competently and aggressively represent you in your homeowner property damage insurance claim, or commercial business insurance claim.

Call 954-784-6310 or

visit our website now, for a free consultation.

SFPMA & Members are ready to Handle Storm Damage & Claims for Condo and HOA Properties!

Trusted Members are; Legal Firms, Public Adjusters, Roofing, Engineering & Restoration Service Companies that work with you on Solutions to Storm Related Damage.

This is a Division of SFPMA – http://FloridaAdjusting.com

 

Tags: ,
“Notice of Board Meeting Must Include Agenda” by Becker

“Notice of Board Meeting Must Include Agenda” by Becker

  • Posted: Mar 29, 2023
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on “Notice of Board Meeting Must Include Agenda” by Becker

Q: The board of directors of my condominium association recently voted on an issue that was not on the posted agenda. Following the meeting, the board realized that this was an error and there is a question as to how to correct the mistake. Should the board address this at the next board meeting and vote to undo what they voted on? (S.G., via e-mail)

A: Section 718 112(2)(c) of the Florida Condominium Act requires that notice of board meetings be posted on the condominium property at least 48 hours in advance (certain notices must be posted and sent to all owners 14 days in advance). The law goes on to say that the posed notice specifically must identify all agenda items. The public policy is that if owners know what the board will be voting on, they can decide if they would like to come to the meeting to observe or offer input.

The statute goes on to provide that an item not included on the notice may be taken up on an “emergency” basis by a vote of at least a majority plus one of the board members. Any emergency action so taken must be noticed and ratified at the next regular board meeting.

It is not suggested that the issue taken up was an emergency, but rather it was just a mistake. While there is no way to go back in time and cure the mistake, the most appropriate cure would be for the association to add the issue on the agenda at the next board meeting and have the board properly address the issue and revote on the motion.

Interestingly, for homeowners’ associations, while there is a requirement that notice of board meetings generally be posted at a conspicuous place in the community at least 48 hours in advance, there is no requirement that an agenda for the meeting must be posted. However, given that the Homeowners’ Association Act, Chapter 720, Florida Statutes, provides that members have the right to speak on all “designated items,” posting an agenda is a “best practice” and an agenda should be available at the meeting to confirm what issues owners may address.

Q: What does “plurality of the votes” mean when there are five seats up for election in a homeowners’ association? (J.Y., via e-mail)

A: Plurality means that the candidates who get the most votes win, whether they received votes from a majority of those who cast ballots or not.

Q: From what I understand, Florida law does not require directors to reside in the community, but our condominium documents do require residency within the community to be eligible to serve on the board of directors. Which would control? (S.F., via e-mail)

A: Florida law controls over your condominium documents in this instance, and the residency requirement in your condominium documents are not enforceable as being contrary to Florida law.

Section 718.112(2)(d)4 of the Florida Condominium Act states that every unit owner has the right to serve on the board. There are also certain limitations on board eligibility within the Act itself. For example, certain convicted felons are ineligible for board service. Certain financial defaults to the association can also disqualify a person from running for or serving on the board.

Other than the criteria for ineligibility set forth in the Act, limitations on the right to serve on the board are not legally valid. The Division of Florida Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes, the state agency which has specified regulatory oversight of condominiums, has also ruled that “residency requirements” for board service contained in association bylaws are invalid. However, term limits contained in bylaws are valid in condominiums.

Joe Adams is an attorney with Becker & Poliakoff, P.A., Fort Myers. Send questions to Joe Adams by e-mail to jadams@beckerlawyers.com. Past editions may be viewed at floridacondohoalawblog.com.

 

A FEW BIG CHANGES IN THE LAW By Eric Glazer, Esq.

A FEW BIG CHANGES IN THE LAW By Eric Glazer, Esq.

A FEW BIG CHANGES IN THE LAW

By Eric Glazer, Esq.

Believe it or not, it’s getting harder to sue someone or to sue a business in the State of Florida.

First, it’s more risky now to sue your insurance company.  The typical case that comes to mind is the one where a condominium association sues its own insurance company for failing to pay for roof damage because the insurance company does not believe the storm caused all that damage.  Until now, there was no risk for the condominium association.  The attorney took the case on a contingency and, if the association won the case the association would be entitled to an award of attorney’s fees against the insurance company.  And, even if the association lost, the association did not have to pay attorney’s fees to the lawyers for the insurance company.  In other words, the risk of paying attorney’s fees only ran one way.  No longer.  Now the association has no right to collect attorney’s fees against their insurer even if the case is settled or won.  The association bears the risk of not having their fees paid by their carrier which should ultimately result in a smaller recovery.

Perhaps the biggest change to the law since I’m in practice went into effect last week.  The statute of limitations regarding negligence actions went from four (4) years to two (2) years.  That is a bombshell.

The law is primarily intended to go after personal injury lawyers and prevent personal injury cases from winding up in the courtroom.  From a condominium and HOA perspective the change in the law will also have major effects.  For example, all claims for damages to condominium or HOA property caused by someone else now have to be filed in two years and not four.  This could be damage caused by contractors the association hire, or unit owners who live or rent on the property.

There are some other bills of interest that may pass during the legislative session and if they do, I’ll let you know.

 

Tags:
THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE – AFRAID TO PASS REQUIRED EDUCATION

THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE – AFRAID TO PASS REQUIRED EDUCATION

THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE – AFRAID TO PASS REQUIRED EDUCATION

DOES THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE WANT YOU TO REMAIN DUMB?

By Eric Glazer, Esq.

For those of you who are intelligent and decided to come to a Board Certification class in the last few months and learn all about the new safety and reserve laws, I applaud you.  It was my honor meeting you and teaching you all over the state.

I love that look in your eyes and the groan that comes over the crowd when I tell you that you do not need to be here today.  You did not have to get certified by taking what I believe is both a board certification and a life safety class.  The Florida Legislature still allows Board members to get certified by signing a ridiculous form that says you have read your governing documents and you promise to enforce them.

Are the new safety and reserve laws found in your governing documents?  Of course not.  You have to be taught them to know what you are now required to do in order that another Champlain Towers disaster never happens again.  You don’t learn these laws by staying home in your pajamas, printing a form off the computer and signing it.  When the members of your Board can get certified by signing that self-serving form, lives are at risk.

It’s ironic that they placed language in the new laws requiring the directors to follow them or face breach of fiduciary duty charges.  So…..according to The Florida Legislature, you must apply these new laws in your condominium, you just don’t have to learn them and know what is actually required of you.

Every legislator I have ever spoken to about a mandatory educational course in order to get Board certified is in favor of it.  Yet, it remains a mystery why in the past it has been removed from the statute.  The classes are free and are even accessible via ZOOM.  This year, there are several condominium bills floating around at the moment.  Not a single one has any mention of mandatory education for Board members.

Back to the title “Does The Florida Legislature Want You To Remain Dumb?”  How else would you explain it?

Tags: , ,
ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS – CONDOMINIUMS GOING GREEN/ KBR Legal

ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS – CONDOMINIUMS GOING GREEN/ KBR Legal

  • Posted: Mar 03, 2023
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS – CONDOMINIUMS GOING GREEN/ KBR Legal

ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS – CONDOMINIUMS GOING GREEN

Is your condominium association prepared to accommodate unit owners who request EV charging stations?

The purchase and use of electric vehicles (EVs) are forecasted to grow exponentially in the next decade. To accommodate the need for new facilities associated with EVs, Florida law has required condominium associations to accommodate owner’s requests for EV charging stations.

While gasoline powered vehicles are still dominant on Florida’s roads, the ever-growing presence of electric vehicles cannot be ignored. The number of electric vehicles on our highways and streets continue to climb as they become more and more affordable. As consumers continue to embrace a greener lifestyle, Florida’s lawmakers have paved the way for condominium unit owners’ need to have access to electric vehicle charging stations. Effective July 1, 2018, new legislation, section 718.113(8) of the Florida Statutes, became effective which facilitates a unit owner’s ability to install and use an electric vehicle charging station within the unit owner’s limited common element parking space.

This new legislation prohibits the condominium association’s board of directors and a declaration of condominium provision or other restrictive covenants from prohibiting (or being enforced to prohibit) any unit owner from installing an electric vehicle charging station within the boundaries of the unit owner’s limited common element parking space, subject to certain conditions as laid out in this new legislation.

It is important to note that the right of installation of an electric vehicle charging station is ONLY applicable to the “limited common element” parking space and does not apply to a “common element” parking space. There is an important difference between a common element and a limited common element parking space. While all unit owners own an undivided interest in both, the limited common element parking space vests an individual use right to the owners of the unit to which the limited common element is appurtenant (connected to). Therefore, associations may prohibit the installation of electronic vehicle charging stations within the common elements or other portions of the condominium property that are maintained for the general use and benefit of all unit owners, but not as applied to a limited common element parking space, subject to the limitations and conditions of the legislation.

 

Thus, section 718.113(8) of the Florida Statutes, provides that, in considering a unit owner’s request to install an electric vehicle charging station, the association first must determine whether the charging station is to be installed within the boundaries of the requesting unit owner’s limited common element parking space. Whether a parking space is a limited common element is determined by the provisions of the declaration of condominium designating the parking space for the exclusive use and benefit of the owners of a specific unit.

 

If it is determined that the parking space is a limited common element, the unit owner may have the electric vehicle charging station installed subject to the requirements of the new legislation. These requirements provide that:

1) The installation cannot cause irreparable damage to the condominium property.

2) The unit owner is responsible for the costs of installation, operation, insurance, maintenance, repair, and removal of the charging station.

3) The electricity for the electric vehicle charging station must be separately metered and payable by the unit owner.

All of the above costs, if left unpaid by a unit owner, are enforceable by the association as any other assessment due pursuant to section 718.116, Florida Statutes, meaning if left unpaid their condominium unit can be foreclosed.

 

Additionally, as provided by the new legislation, the association can and should require that the unit owner:

1) comply with bona fide safety requirements, consistent with applicable building codes or recognized safety standards, for the protection of persons and property;

2) comply with reasonable architectural standards adopted by the association that govern the dimensions, placement, or external appearance of the electric vehicle charging station, provided that such standards may not prohibit the installation of such charging station or substantially increase the cost thereof;

3) engage the services of a licensed and registered electrical contractor or engineer familiar with the installation and core requirements of an electric vehicle charging station;

4) provide a certificate of insurance naming the association as an additional insured on the owner’s insurance policy for any claim related to the installation, maintenance, or use of the electric vehicle charging station within 14 days after receiving the association’s approval to install such charging station; and

5) reimburse the association for the actual cost of any increased insurance premium amount attributable to the electric vehicle charging station within 14 days after receiving the association’s insurance premium invoice.

 

A unit owner’s “right” to install a charging stations is not, however, without limits. An association may require that the unit owner comply with all safety requirements, applicable building codes or recognized safety standards for the protection of the association property and its members. An association may also require the unit owner to engage the services of a licensed and registered electrical contractor or an engineer that is familiar with the installation and requirements of an electric vehicle charging station. An owner wishing to install an electric vehicle charging station may also be required to comply with any reasonable architectural standards adopted by the association that govern the dimensions, placement or appearance of the electric vehicle charging station. However, such standards cannot substantially increase the cost of installation.

The new law also provides for additional safeguards for the association. For example, installation of an electric vehicle charging station may not cause irreparable damage to the condominium property. The electricity for the electric vehicle charging station must be separately metered and paid for by the unit owner making the installation. Cost of installation, operation, maintenance and repair of the electric vehicle charging station, including hazard and liability insurance, is the unit owner’s responsibility. Additionally, an association may require the unit owner to reimburse the association for the actual cost of any increased insurance premium attributable to the electric vehicle charging station. The law also shields condominium associations from construction liens resulting from the installation of electric vehicle charging stations by unit owners.

The new law does not, however, say anything about what happens if the association voluntarily opts to install “common” electric vehicle charging stations. In other words, if a condominium association opts to install these “common” electric vehicle charging stations (after complying with the necessary legal requirements) it does not mean that unit owners no longer have the right to install their own charging stations. The new law also does not address who is responsible for any costs associated with upgrading the condominium’s electrical system if an upgrade is necessary to handle the increased electrical usage. (The above 3 paragraphs Originally posted on floridacondohoalawblog.com and written by Jennifer Horan)

Just our Thought: It would be nice to see Condos installing Charging Stations, Separate Meters and then Charging Electric Car owners Fees to cover costs and a little extra for the Associations. We will see what happens?

 

Although your condominium association may not have received a request for the installation of an electric vehicle charging station as yet, your board of directors should be prepared for such a request. After all, it is only a matter of time. Therefore, condominium boards should consider adopting rules and regulations governing the process by which a unit owner is required to make such a request and provide for procedures by which the board of directors is to conduct its review and approval of the request.

While a unit owner desiring to install and use an electric vehicle charging station within his or her limited common element parking space will be able to do so by way of this new legislation, the association still has the authority to govern certain aspects of the installation and use and should be proactive in making rules and regulations in line with this authority. Your association’s legal counsel can be of great benefit to the board in creating a clear and concise process governing the electric car charging stations installation and use.

 

Keep up to date with Articles for Condo and Homeowners Associations

Rembaums Association Roundup

 

 

Tags: , , , ,
Event: “Ask the Experts” Thursdays Live on the first Thursday of each month, from 5:00pm to 6:00pm Eastern

Event: “Ask the Experts” Thursdays Live on the first Thursday of each month, from 5:00pm to 6:00pm Eastern

  • Posted: Mar 02, 2023
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on Event: “Ask the Experts” Thursdays Live on the first Thursday of each month, from 5:00pm to 6:00pm Eastern

Ask the Experts’ Thursdays

Live on the first Thursday of each month, from 5:00pm to 6:00pm Eastern

Attorney Robert Kaye answers your community association-related questions on this monthly addition.

Do you have questions about your condominium, homeowners’ or cooperative association? Get your questions answered live on-air, anytime during the show!

The new number is: 561-623-9429