SFPMA

Menu
Join SFPMA

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

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

THE FEDERAL CORPORATE TRANSPARENCY ACT REQUIREMENTS AFFECTING ALL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS

THE FEDERAL CORPORATE TRANSPARENCY ACT REQUIREMENTS AFFECTING ALL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS

What Every Board Member and Manager Must Know

In January 2021 the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) was enacted by Congress. In 2024 its far-reaching requirements are planned to go into effect. The CTA was adopted by Congress to provide additional transparency in entity structures and ownership in an effort to combat tax fraud, money, laundering, and other illicit activities. It is designed to capture more information about the ownership of specific entities operating in or accessing the United States marketplace. A recent Small Business Administration reports over 27 million small businesses that are considered non-employer firms and thus have no employees. Learning of the beneficial ownership of these entities, Congress hopes to crack down on their misuse. The CTA is particularly targeted to these types of small businesses operating as so called “shell companies.”

By the time you are finished reading this article, each reader should be familiar with some new terms, such as, “FinCen,” and “beneficial owner,” to name just a couple. While the practical enforcement procedures of the CTA are currently unknown, the reason why you must be familiar with the registration and continuing reporting requirements of the CTA is because failure to comply with requirements of the CTA can lead to fines from $500–$10,000 per violation and jail time of up to two years.

While there is little doubt that community associations do not pose a threat for terrorist activity, tax evasion, money laundering, and other illegal activity that is the target of the CTA, sadly, community associations are not currently exempt from the initial registration and continual updating requirements of the CTA. While the CTA requirements for compliance are not particularly difficult, they are onerous and will reveal certain personal information about board members and possibly managers, too. Also, at the present time there does not appear to be any type of exemption from the requirements of the CTA for law enforcement personnel and others who may have gone to extra lengths to keep certain personal information private. However, the CTA does require that this information remains confidential and only used for its intended purposes.

The CTA, amongst its other requirements, requires domestic reporting companies such as corporations, limited liability partnerships, and any other entity, created by the filing of a document with the secretary of state, or any similar office under the laws of the state, to comply with its reporting requirements. This includes community associations as they are organized as a business entity (i.e., a not-for-profit corporation). In addition to providing the information regarding the entity (meaning the association), the CTA requires certain information regarding the association’s “beneficial owners.” A “beneficial owner” is defined, in part, as a person who exercises substantial control of the reporting entity.

Therefore, minimally, according to the CTA, the president and vice president are deemed to “exercise substantial control over the entity” thereby seemingly requiring certain personal information to be provided to the federal “Financial Crimes Enforcement Network” or “FinCen” for short. These beneficial owners must report their name, date of birth, address, unique identifier number, such as a Social Security number, possibly a driver’s license number or passport number, and a photocopy of the non-expired document that evidences such information, too. Whether other officers and directors will be required to similarly provide personal information remains to be seen but it is likely.

Those filing the requisite documents to assist an entity with its compliance with the CTA must provide similar information too. Those qualified to file such documents for corporate entities with FinCen are as follows either:

i) the individual who directly files the document that creates the entity (this could be the attorney that files the articles of incorporation with the state to create the community association corporation); or,

ii) the individual who is primarily responsible for directing or controlling the filing of the relevant document by another (this prong could refer to the authorized individual as directed by the board of directors, such as the attorney, accountant, or management company personnel to file the necessary documentation with FinCen to comply with the CTA).

In addition to the initial compliance requirements, which must be accomplished within 2024 for already existing corporations, reports must also be updated within 30 days of a change to the beneficial ownership, or within 30 days after becoming aware of or having reason to know of inaccurate information previously filed. Under a strict reading of these provisions, this means that every time there is a change in board members and officers, a report of the change must be made to FinCen within 30 days of the event. As mentioned above, failure to comply with requirements of the CTA can lead to fines from $500–$10,000 per violation and jail time of up to two years.

There are procedures set out in the CTA for information sharing among the federal governmental agencies when in relation to terrorist activity and money laundering as well as requirements for compliance with FinCen when it seeks additional information in regard to such matters. The Internal Revenue Service, the Customs and Border Protection agency, and FinCen can all issue summons for purposes of civil enforcement of the CTA. There are even rewards for persons who report on another that lead to recovery of a criminal fine, civil penalty, or forfeiture that exceeds $50,000 where the payment of the reward is limited to 25 percent of the net amount of the fine or $150,000, whichever is less.

Federal community association lobbyists are seeking an amendment to the CTA so that community associations are expressly made exempt and not caught in its web. But, unless that happens, compliance with the CTA is required for Florida’s community associations. Whether such compliance will be performed by the community association‘s attorney, accountant, or manager remains to be seen, and hopefully additional guidance will be provided by the appropriate federal government agencies in the near future. Should you have the opportunity, please reach out to your federal legislators in regard to the need for an exception for community association compliance with the requirements of the CTA.

For those that would like to read up on the CTA, the starting point for the Act itself can be found at 31 U.S.C 5336. This is the CTA-enabling legislation passed by the United States Congress and signed into law by the President that provides lawful authority to executive departments and agencies of the federal government to both adopt and enact, after public notice and hearings, their own laws that have the same force and effect, as if our Congress enacted them. (As an aside in case you ever wondered how our country ended up with so many laws, it is because of this particular process.) Once 31 U.S.C 5336 was enacted into law, the requisite executive departments and agencies of the federal government went to work adopting all sorts of laws to carry out the intent of the enabling legislation. These laws are published in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).   The CTA is set out in section 1010 FCR 380 and is actually called “Reports of Beneficial Ownership Information;” however, its nickname is the “Corporate Transparency Act,” which has a better ring to it. The CTA can be cited to more fully as Part 1010 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Subpart C, section 380. It is a sub-part of CFR Title 31 titled “Money and Finance,” Subtitle B “Regulations Relating to Finance and Money,” Chapter X “Financial Crimes Enforcement Network Department of the Treasury.”

Due to the far reaching aspects of the CTA and its many nuances that could lead to many traps for the unwary, consultation with the association’s attorney and certified public accounting firm should be considered regarding any questions you may have in regard to the CTA, along with its registration and compliance requirements, too.

Read other great articles on:

REMBAUM’S ASSOCIATION ROUNDUP | The Community Association Legal News You Can Use

 

Tags:
Join us Jan 15, 2024 11:00 AM while we discuss the intricacies of employee management in an association

Join us Jan 15, 2024 11:00 AM while we discuss the intricacies of employee management in an association

  • Posted: Jan 14, 2024
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on Join us Jan 15, 2024 11:00 AM while we discuss the intricacies of employee management in an association

Join us Jan 15, 2024 11:00 AM while we discuss the intricacies of employee management in an association

Employee Management for Boards

Date & Time   Jan 15, 2024 11:00 AM 
Description     Course # 9632457 | Provider # 0009134 | 1 CEU in IFM or Elective Presented and instructed by Leslie Alvarez, PCAM, Community Ace. Guests: Nicole Johnson (Partner, Dir. of Operations; Hafer CPAs & Consultants) and Jeffrey Rembaum, Esq., BCS (Kaye Bender Rembaum).
Managing employees is not an easy task, especially in an association. Board members are not usually experts in human resources. Join us while we discuss the intricacies of employee management in an association. We will cover a review of the actual costs of an employee, costs of turnover, managing performance, ensuring your compensation and benefits is competitive in today’s market, and maintaining a positive work environment.
Condos and HOAs Follow Different Budgeting Rules,” by Becker

Condos and HOAs Follow Different Budgeting Rules,” by Becker

  • Posted: Jan 04, 2024
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on Condos and HOAs Follow Different Budgeting Rules,” by Becker

Condos and HOAs Follow Different Budgeting Rules

Joseph E. Adams / Becker

 

Q: Our association will be holding its annual budget soon. After receiving the notice for this meeting, I called our association manager to ask how and where I could obtain a copy of the proposed budget. I was told that a copy of the approved budget would only be provided to the members after the budget meeting. In other words, the proposed budget would not be provided to the members in advance of the budget meeting at which the proposed budget would be considered and adopted. Is this right? I cannot help but feel very apprehensive about the contents of the proposed budget, considering the fact that it has been made unavailable for review in advance of the meeting? (P.M., via e-mail)

 

A: The answer to your question depends on several factors, including whether your association is a condominium or homeowners’ association.

Chapter 718 of the Florida Statutes, the Florida Condominium Act, requires that at least 14 days prior to the meeting where the board will consider the budget, the association must mail, hand deliver, or electronically transmit (to those unit owners who have consented in writing to receive electronic notice) notice of the meeting along with a copy of the proposed budget. The notice of the meeting must also be posted on the condominium or association property at least 14 days in advance of the meeting.

For associations managing a condominium with 150 or more units, these materials must also be posted on the association’s website or make such documents available through an application (app) that can be downloaded on a mobile device

By comparison, Chapter 720 of the Florida Statutes, the Florida Homeowners’ Association Act, only requires 48 hours posted notice of the budget meeting and requires the notice to state that assessments will be considered. There is no requirement that the notice be sent to the owners, and there is no general website posting requirement for HOAs in Florida.

The Homeowners’ Association Act also requires the associations to provide each member with a copy of the annual budget, or a written notice that a copy of the annual budget is available upon request at no charge, within 10 business days of the board adopting the annual budget. There is no requirement for homeowners’ association to send the members the proposed budget in advance of the budget meeting.

Therefore, for condominiums, the proposed budget needs to be sent out 14 days in advance, but the adopted budget does not need to be sent to owners. For homeowners’ associations, it is the opposite, the budget is sent or made available to the owners after adoption but is not required to be circulated before the meeting. Notice procedures are also more relaxed in the HOA context. This is probably one area where the two statutes should contain the same procedures, as this does create some confusion, especially at this time of year when budgets are the main order of business.

There are other important differences between condominium and homeowners’ association budgeting procedures, specifically regarding reserves. In general, all condominiums must present reserves with the budget based on a statutory list of required items, and these reserves must be “fully funded” unless the owners have voted to waive or reduce the full funding of reserves. Conversely, in homeowners’ associations, there is no general statutory requirement for reserves and the provisions of the governing documents are usually determinative.

From your description, it sounds like you are a member of a homeowners’ association. The procedures you describe do not violate the Homeowners’ Association Act. Of course, any additional procedures or requirements of your community’s governing documents need to be followed. The proposed budget is also an “official record” and you are also legally entitled to require the association to produce it for your inspection, and if you choose, copying. The association generally has 10 working days to respond to official records inspection requests.

Joseph 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:
Florida Legislature to Pass Law Prohibiting Associations From Charging Estoppel Fees

Florida Legislature to Pass Law Prohibiting Associations From Charging Estoppel Fees

  • Posted: Jan 02, 2024
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on Florida Legislature to Pass Law Prohibiting Associations From Charging Estoppel Fees

YOUR ASSESSMENTS ARE ABOUT TO GO UP AGAIN

Act Now Before It IS Too Late!

Of all the subjects I never would have thought I would be writing to you about, it is this: the Florida Legislature is dangerously close to passing legislation that prohibits a Florida community association from charging a fee for the preparation and delivery of an estoppel certificate!!! The text of Senate Bill 278, along with its companion House Bill 979, fully prohibits condominium and homeowners’ associations from being able to charge the requesting party a fee for the preparation of the estoppel certificate. But, however, the professional who assists the association prepare and issue the estoppel, such as the management company and attorney, will now charge the association and not the party who requested the estoppel. This year’s legislative session starts very early, on January 9th. Your legislators need to hear from you that you do not want them to support these bills because they will cause financial harm to your association.

Why should community associations be stuck with the bill for the estoppel? This bill will fully shift the financial responsibility for the estoppel from the buyer or seller right on over to the association. In other words, the association still has to pay its agents, be it the management company or attorney, etc., to prepare the estoppel. At times it takes a lot of work, coordination and effort to timely issue the estoppel, let alone all of the liability that comes along with its issuance.

Since when in the United States of America can the legislature require any of us work for free? Well, it may sound like that because the buyer or seller will not have to pay for the estoppel but we all know in reality, nothing is free. This draconian fee shifting legislation could in a great many cases, if not all, act to increase every homeowner and condominium unit owner’s assessments who live in the community. Preparing estoppels can take significant time, most, especially, if there is a long history of nonpayment associated with the account. Also, existing violations must be taken into account in the estoppel certificate, etc., If the math is wrong, the issuer of the estoppel could end being financially responsible for the shortage, and they could be subject to, amongst others, Federal Fair Debt Collection Practice Act claims due to a mistake. Therefore, there is significant time involved in gathering all of this information, ensuring it is correct, and then issuing the estoppel within the required 10-day business day legislative timeframe. To make a long story short, management companies will have to increase their fees charged to the associations to offset their inability to charge the fee to the requesting party for the estoppel, and thus, every member of your association will have to pay more.

As to any rumors of rare abuse by those charging excessive estoppel fees, there are already safeguards built into the existing legislation which provide for summary legal proceedings that can be brought to compel compliance with the existing estoppel legislation and its financial cap. It even provides for prevailing party attorneys fees.

If you hear that objections to this legislation from management companies and attorneys are because they do not want to lose revenue such is not the case at all. It’s really quite simple: This legislation will fully shift the responsibility for the estoppel fees, from that of the requesting party, to all the owners that already live in the association’s community and who have nothing to do with the transaction at all.

As this is holiday season, if this passes into law, what a horrible gift that would be. To prevent this legislation from becoming law, please reach out to your legislators and let them know that you object to Senate Bill 278 and House bill 979.

HERE is a link to the SB 278.

Tags:
Tune Into Condo Craze And every Sunday At 11:00 a.m. Find us on our YouTube channel for our live shows.

Tune Into Condo Craze And every Sunday At 11:00 a.m. Find us on our YouTube channel for our live shows.

  • Posted: Jan 02, 2024
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on Tune Into Condo Craze And every Sunday At 11:00 a.m. Find us on our YouTube channel for our live shows.

Tune Into Condo Craze And every Sunday At 11:00 a.m. Find us on our YouTube channel for our live shows.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel 

 

 WE WILL TAKE YOUR CALLS AND ANSWER YOUR CONDO AND HOA QUESTIONS THROUGHOUT THE HOUR. CALL US AT 877-850-8585 DURING THE SHOW.

TAKING YOUR CALLS ON WHATEVER TOPIC YOU NEED ANSWERS TO OR WHATEVER YOU NEED TO GET OFF YOUR CHEST.

*OUR LAST SHOW ON 850. AFTER 15 YEARS – WE ARE LEAVING 850 WFTL AND GOING STRAIGHT TO YOUTUBE

 

Tags: , ,
ELECTIONS, INSURANCE, AND A SENSELESS DEATH

ELECTIONS, INSURANCE, AND A SENSELESS DEATH

ELECTIONS, INSURANCE, AND A SENSELESS DEATH
This season, more than any other of late, the issue of condominium election ballot verification reared up. The condominium election process is unique and very regulated. In addition to many other requirements, ballots are to be placed in an inner plain and unmarked envelope which is to be placed inside a larger envelope which must, as per Florida law, contain the unit owner’s name, address, unit number and signature. As part of the election process, this information is later verified against the associations’ membership records to ensure that only the unit owner, or the unit owner’s designated voter, cast their ballot. It is the plain inner envelope that guarantees anonymity.

Given the sheer volume of units in many condominium communities, which translates to the number of ballots that can be received, the process of tabulating the ballots can take hours. To speed things up, some condominium communities prefer to verify the outer envelope information in advance of the election ballot tabulation that takes place during the annual members’ meeting. That said, and what may come as a surprise to some, is that you cannot just start verifying the outer envelopes. If you do, then your entire election is subject to challenge. Tampering with the election materials creates an inescapable cloud over the entire election process from which there is no escape, but a new election. It is so simple to avoid, too.

 

Section 61B-23.0021, of the Florida Administrative Code, details the verification process as follows: “Any association desiring to verify outer envelope information in advance of the meeting may do so as provided herein. An impartial committee designated by the board may, at a meeting noticed in the manner required for the noticing of board meetings, which shall be open to all unit owners and which shall be held on the date of the election, proceed as follows. For purposes of this rule, “impartial” shall mean a committee whose members do not include any of the following or their spouses: 1) Current board members; 2) Officers; and 3) Candidates for the board. At the committee meeting, the signature and unit identification on the outer envelope shall be checked against the list of qualified voters. The voters shall be checked off on the list as having voted. Any exterior envelope not signed by the eligible voter shall be marked ‘Disregarded’ or with words of similar import, and any ballots contained therein shall not be counted.” Now you know how to have your cake and eat it, too. Just follow the simple procedures to verify the outer envelopes and you can be home in time for the 10:00 P.M. news.

 

Once you are elected to the board, make certain the directors’ and officers’ liability coverage is in place. In most instances, a board member’s duty is to exercise their reasonable business judgment. They can make decisions that later turn out great or bad, but so long as they acted reasonably under the circumstances, and without malicious intent, the association’s insurer typically stands by their coverage obligations. Noteworthy is that, as related to procurement of insurance, a condominium board member’s statutory duty as set out in s. 718.111(11), Fla. Stat, is one of “best efforts”. Casualties of all sorts can occur at any time. For example, just look to the recent tragedy that led to the death of Trayvon Martin.

 

Friends, family and clients are all asking, will George Zimmerman’s homeowners’ association be sued? Yes, most likely it will. That is one deep pocket not likely to be missed. We could also see intentional tort claims brought against the individual directors by the victim’s family. If such claims are victorious, then it’s the individual directors who are liable, not the association’s insurer. Under the circumstances, as reported thus far, a finding of individual board member liability is not unlikely.

The more difficult question to answer is whether the HOA will have liability for its actions or failures to act? Was the association, based on the acts of its boards (both past and present) negligent or grossly negligent (reckless disregard that rises to such a level so as to appear to be an almost willful violation of the safety of others)? If so, the insurers would likely fight to pay only their fractionalized share of the association’s blame. This is referred to as “contributory negligence” where each culpable party pays their share of the blame. You might also hear about some court activity where the plaintiffs try to force the association to suffer its judgment separate from the other defendants. Doing so could create opportunity for larger settlements and judgments. Think of it this way, would you rather receive just $1,000 from 10 people, or have 10 people each give you $1,000?

 

In many ways, suing a homeowners’ association is like suing a successful, well capitalized corporation. Without proper insurance coverage in place, a judgment against your association would also be your next special assessment. Make sure your association’s insurance professional is made aware of all activities taking place in your community, from watch committee activity to use of the clubhouse by private organizations. Crime and accidents occur everywhere, at any time, when you least expect it and without notice. Advance planning is your only defense.

Tags: , ,
The Florida law (SB-919) known as the “Homeowners’ Association Bill of Rights” took effect on October 1st, 2023

The Florida law (SB-919) known as the “Homeowners’ Association Bill of Rights” took effect on October 1st, 2023

The Florida law known as the “Homeowners’ Association Bill of Rights” took effect on October 1st. 2023 (SB 919)

MIAMI – The Florida law known as the “Homeowners’ Association Bill of Rights” took effect on October 1st.

It revises the requirements for the governance and regulation of homeowners’ associations to:

  • Require all notices for homeowners’ association board meetings to specifically identify the agenda items for the meetings;
  • Revise the requirements for the association’s use of a member’s e-mail to send notices, including allowing a member to designate an address different than the property address for all required notices;
  • Require that, if a homeowners’ association collects a deposit from a member for any reason, including to pay for expenses that may be incurred as a result of construction on a member’s parcel or other reason for such deposit, such funds must not be co-mingled with any other association funds, the member may request an accounting of such funds, and the association must remit payment of unused funds within 30 days after completion;
  • Provide that an officer, director, or manager who accepts kickbacks is subject to monetary damages under s. 617.0834, F.S., relating to the conditions imposing civil liability on the officers and directors of corporations and associations not for profit;
  • Provide that an officer or director must be removed from office, and their access to official records denied, if charged with the crimes of forgery of a ballot envelope or voting certificate used in a homeowners’ association election, theft or embezzlement of association funds, destruction of or refusing to allow inspection of association records, if such records are accessible by association members, in furtherance of any crime; or obstruction of justice;
  • Require directors and officers of an association, including a developer-controlled association, to disclose specified activities which may pose a conflict of interest;
  • Clarify that a developer’s appointment of an officer or director does not create a presumption that the officer or director has a conflict of interest with regard to the performance of his or her official duties;
  • Revise the notice requirements for imposing and collecting fines, including providing members notice of how to cure a violation, if applicable; and
  • Provide criminal prohibitions related to fraudulent voting activities that are punishable as first degree misdemeanors, including preventing members from voting, and menacing, threatening, or using bribery to directly or indirectly influence or deter a member from voting

 

We are sure there will be more to come, as the State’s changes to the Law slimmed down the original Law and added to the original law.

SFPMA and Our Legal Members.  October 1, 2023

 

Tags: ,
FLORIDA’S NEW “LIVE LOCAL” ACT By Eric Glazer, Esq.

FLORIDA’S NEW “LIVE LOCAL” ACT By Eric Glazer, Esq.

FLORIDA’S NEW “LIVE LOCAL” ACT

By Eric Glazer, Esq.

Here’s a new law that is already causing chaos in our communities.  As many of us are unfortunately already learning, there is a lack of affordable housing in our state.  In order to combat this problem, The Florida Legislature passed a new law.

The Live Local Act is a new Florida law that was designed to increase affordable housing development. The nearly 100-page piece of legislation allocates up to $811 million for affordable housing programs. It also carves out a variety of tax incentives, land-use policies and other strategic initiatives to encourage developers to build more affordable housing in the state.  Among them is a provision that modifies the approval process for new housing developments by requiring local governments to relinquish control of several zoning and land-use regulations.

Although I have not had the time to review the new law, it appears that the major problem with the new rules is that apparently, local officials are preempted from weighing in on zoning, density and height restrictions for eligible developments. Qualifying projects are defined as any residential housing project on commercial, industrial or mixed-use land that allocates at least 40 percent of units to be affordable for residents earning up to 120% of the area median income.

Think about this for a moment.  Think about a piece of land in your community that is commercial, industrial or mixed use and that is only a story or two tall.  Think about the fact that your local zoning laws require the structure to remain only a story or two tall.  Now think about throwing those height restrictions in the garbage, and instead allowing a developer to build affordable housing that is 30 stories tall on all of these properties, and nobody in your community has the power to stop it.  That’s the position that developers are certainly taking.

All of your local laws regarding height and density would be pre-empted by this new law and affordable housing, as tall as can be, would be the new law of the land.  Cities like Doral and Miami Beach are already fighting back.  No doubt that the courts will have to weigh in on this one.

Should the State of Florida be allowed to make a law that pre-empts your local zoning code and instead allow affordable housing to be built on any commercial, industrial or mixed-use property, without any restriction regarding density or height?  Seems scary to me.

 

[AdSense-B]

 

Tags: ,
OWE MONEY? YOU MAY NOT BE ALLOWED TO RUN FOR THE BOARD By Eric Glazer, Esq.

OWE MONEY? YOU MAY NOT BE ALLOWED TO RUN FOR THE BOARD By Eric Glazer, Esq.

OWE MONEY?  YOU MAY NOT BE ALLOWED TO RUN FOR THE BOARD

By Eric Glazer, Esq.

I feel like I handled a thousand annual meetings in the last month, flying from one to the other.  When running the meetings, and depending upon whether the association is a condominium or HOA, it is important to know if the person running for the board, or even the winner of the election, is eligible to serve because they owe money to the association.

Let’s start with condominiums first, Florida Statute 718.112 (2)(d) states:

A person who has been suspended or removed by the division under this chapter, or who is delinquent in the payment of any assessment due to the association, is not eligible to be a candidate for board membership and may not be listed on the ballot.

So, in a condominium, the person’s eligibility to run and initially serve on the board is decided when the owner submits their notice to be a candidate, and that is no less than 40 days before the election.  If at that time,  the owner is delinquent in any assessment their name cannot be printed on the ballot and sent to the unit owners.  On the night of the election the association need not worry if anyone is delinquent and cannot serve because their name was already excluded from the ballot.

The law in a Florida HOA is much different.  Florida Statute 720.306(9)(b) states:

A person who is delinquent in the payment of any fee, fine, or other monetary obligation to the association on the day that he or she could last nominate himself or herself or be nominated for the board may not seek election to the board, and his or her name shall not be listed on the ballot. 

Lots of differences between the two statutes here.  In a condominium, you can only be prevented from being placed on the ballot if you owe an assessment.  In an HOA, your name can be prevented from being placed on the ballot if you owe any fee, fine or other monetary obligation to the association; a far more restrictive provision in an HOA.

In addition, remember that in most HOAs, nominations are taken from the floor on the night of the election.  That is the “day that he or she could last nominate himself or herself or be nominated for the board.”  Therefore, on the night of the election, we need to know if any of the proposed nominees owe any fee, fine or other monetary obligation.  If so, their name cannot be accepted into nomination.  They cannot run.

ONCE A DIRECTOR BECOMES 90 DAYS DELINQUENT

The Condominium Act states:

718.112: Director or officer delinquencies.—A director or officer more than 90 days delinquent in the payment of any monetary obligation due the association shall be deemed to have abandoned the office, creating a vacancy in the office to be filled according to law.

The Homeowners Association Act states:

720.306(9)(b) A person serving as a board member who becomes more than 90 days delinquent in the payment of any fee, fine, or other monetary obligation to the association shall be deemed to have abandoned his or her seat on the board, creating a vacancy on the board to be filled according to law.

[AdSense-A]

Tags: , ,
Legal Morsel by Robert Kaye: “Federal Court Identifies Potential Collection Issue for Community Associations in Florida”.

Legal Morsel by Robert Kaye: “Federal Court Identifies Potential Collection Issue for Community Associations in Florida”.

Federal Court Identifies Potential Collection Issue for Community Associations in Florida

Community association operations rely upon the timely and full payment of all assessments by all of the owners. One of the mechanisms that Florida law provides to put associations in a stronger position when an owner becomes delinquent is the “secured interest” of the association in the unpaid assessments by way of its ongoing lien against the unit or lot for the unpaid assessments. This secured interest puts the claim of the association at a higher priority than most other claims, other than a first mortgage or unpaid property taxes. However, a recent decision in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida, In re: Adam, Case No.: 22-10140-MAM, September 23, 2022, has cast a potential cloud on that secured interest.

In the In re Adam case, the Association previously obtained a judgment of foreclosure for over $76,000, which was considered as a secured interest by the Court.  The Association was also claiming an additional $36,558 which came due after the judgment was entered.  The owners were asking the Court to decide that the $36,000 was not secured and therefore uncollectible in the bankruptcy (or at least not fully collectible).

In deciding whether certain association claims were secured and collectible in the bankruptcy setting, the Court undertook an analysis of Florida law on the subject.  The Court noted that both the Florida Condominium Act (Chapter 718 F.S.) and the Homeowner’s Association Act (Chapter 720 F.S.) currently contain express provisions that identify that the lien of the association is effective from the original recording of the declaration (with the added requirement in HOA’s that the declaration specifically expresses this lien right).  However, the Court also points out that the Condominium Act was amended in 1992 to provide for this effective date.  (The Homeowner’s Association Act was amended to provide for it in 2008.)  Prior to these amendments, these Statutes provided for the effective date of the lien to be when it was recorded in the public records of the county.  The analysis of the Court required it to consider whether the current version of the Statute applies to the situation or whether an earlier version of the Statute is the controlling authority.  (This case involved a condominium so only the Condominium Act was considered in the decision.)

To make that determination, the Court applied the principles of the seminal case of Kaufman v. Shere, 347 So.2d 627 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), which require declarations to contain the specific phrase “as amended from time to time” when identifying the Statute that governs the documents in order for the current version of the Statute to apply.  This is because Statutes are not retroactive in their application unless the legislature expressly makes them so in the Statute itself.  Both the U.S. and Florida Constitutions do not allow for the State to make a law that infringes upon the vested rights in an existing contract (which would be the declaration).  As a result, the contract (declaration) would need to have the specific “as amended from time to time” language (often called “Kaufman” language) to automatically incorporate changes to the Statute that is not otherwise retroactive.

When the Court reviewed the governing documents, it noted that they were from 1987 and did not have the Kaufman language.  As such, the Court held that the provisions of the declaration were the same as the Statute in 1987, which provided that the lien was effective only upon being recorded in the public records of the county.  Since the Association did not file another lien for the amount being claimed subsequent to the foreclosure judgment, the Court concluded that this portion was not secured.  In the bankruptcy setting, this meant that the Association would likely be unable to recover most, if not all of this claim from the Debtors, Mr. and Ms. Adam.

While this issue may be most relevant to associations when dealing with a case in bankruptcy, it is possible that it could also be raised in state court foreclosure cases under certain circumstances.  It is also important to note that this Bankruptcy Court did not include a significant issue in the analysis regarding the Statute at issue, that being whether or not the statutory provision was “substantive” or “procedural”, as those terms apply to this situation, which could have led to a different result.  (This portion of the legal analysis is quite technical and beyond the scope of this article.)

For communities whose declarations were recorded prior to the statutory changes described above, the first step in protecting the interests of the association is to review the documents to determine whether Kaufman language is already in them.  If not, the board may wish to consider proposing an amendment to the owners to change the documents to include this language, if not for the entire declaration, then at least for the timing of the effectiveness of the lien of the association.  Having qualified legal counsel review these issues in the documents is a strong business practice.

 

[AdSense-A]

 

Kaye Bender Rembaum is a full service commercial law firm devoted to the representation of community associations throughout Florida. Under the direction of attorneys Robert L. Kaye, Esq., Michael S. Bender, Esq., and Jeffrey A. Rembaum, Esq. Kaye Bender Rembaum is dedicated to providing clients with an unparalleled level of personalized and professional service regardless of their size and takes into account their individual needs and financial concerns. Most of our attorneys are Board Certified in Condominium and Planned Development Law. The associates of Kaye Bender Rembaum establish relationships with clients to understand their needs and goals. Kaye Bender Rembaum assists clients in all matters of Association representation including, but not limited to, collection of assessments, contract negotiation, covenant review and amendment, covenant enforcement and construction defect claims. Kaye Bender Rembaum also keeps clients up-to-date on new developments in the law and how they are personally affected by them. Kaye Bender Rembaum provides prompt, effective, high quality, cost-efficient and understandable legal advice and services to a diverse client base. Associates strive to help clients operate and administer their communities better and to educate them on their responsibilities and duties under Florida law and their governing community documents. Robert Kaye, Michael Bender and Jeff Rembaum are industry leaders who are often sought out by public policy makers and the media for advice and commentary on community association law. Offices in Broward, Palm Beach, Orange and Hillsborough Counties, as well as Miami-Dade by appointment. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation. Thank you for your interest in Kaye Bender Rembaum.

Website
https://kbrlegal.com/
Phone
Tags: