[WSBARP] HOA Matters

[Paul Neumiller]

For the good of the order (ie.  hivemind):

"Aldons and Inese Abers appeal a summary judgment action in favor of Fawn Lake Maintenance Commission (FLMC); the Aberses maintain that because they combined their two subdivision lots into one, they are obligated to pay homeowners' dues for only one lot. The Aberses assert that a FLMC representative told them that if they combined their lots, they would pay dues for only one lot; thus, the Aberses reason that the FLMC has either waived its right to collect for two lots or is estopped from doing so. Finally, the Aberses appeal the trial court's award of attorney fees to FLMC. Because the covenants apply to the lots as originally configured, and because the Aberses failed to establish a prima facie case on their estoppel and waiver arguments, the trial court properly ruled that the Aberses must pay dues on two lots. We affirm."

Fawn Lake Maintenance Com\'n v. Abers, 149 Wn.App. 318, 202 P.3d 1019, (Wash.App. Div. 2 2009)




-----Original Message-----
From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Josh Grant
Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2020 1:52 PM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] HOA Matters

I don't have a cite for you but I do know a few years ago a court of appeals case said combining two lots into one does not defeat a HOA from continuing to collect 2 assessments.  I would think you could find it with a search engine.




Joshua F. Grant

P. O. Box 619
Wilbur, WA 99185
509 647 5578

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Neumiller
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2020 1:28 PM
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
Subject: [WSBARP] HOA Matters

Listmates:  I have two quick questions with (I hope) quick answers:  1.  I vaguely remember a case where a homeowner combined two lots and then refused to pay for the dues for the two lots because the homeowner now owned "only" 
one lot.  I think the WA court found for the homeowners association and rejected the homeowner's position.  Anyone have a cite to that case?
2.  I have a PC who is being told by her HOA board that ALL communications from the HOA's attorney are subject to the atty-client privilege and will not be shared with the homeowners.  The board takes this position regarding all communications, even non-litigation matters such as interpretation of the CC&Rs.  Any cases out there to get me going on research?  Thanks, Paul Neumiller








***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***

_______________________________________________
WSBARP mailing list
WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fwsbarp&data=02%7C01%7C%7C0d919fa7d2774c410b5408d86bcc82f9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637377873395744255&sdata=Jhww%2FKLxv43wh8sj0%2FRHNZ0UosAFfQ2c7OFbLm7bmio%3D&reserved=0 


***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***

_______________________________________________
WSBARP mailing list
WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fwsbarp&data=02%7C01%7C%7C0d919fa7d2774c410b5408d86bcc82f9%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637377873395744255&sdata=Jhww%2FKLxv43wh8sj0%2FRHNZ0UosAFfQ2c7OFbLm7bmio%3D&reserved=0
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Paul A  Neumiller.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 34670 bytes
Desc: Paul A  Neumiller.vcf
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20201106/406d2c2f/PaulANeumiller.vcf>