<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">Woops! Both references in
my message to 1991 should have been to 2001. Doug.</font><br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/22/2016 10:18 AM, Paul Neumiller
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BLU437-SMTP3435E4A63114555E69E051D26F0@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Times New Roman \,serif";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Doug, this
certainly falls under the “I didn’t know that” category. I
usually keep my nose out of the SCC arena and took the
client’s word for it that they had 30 days to appeal the SCC
decision.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="color:windowtext">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com">wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com">mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>] <b>On Behalf
Of </b>Doug Schafer<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, April 21, 2016 4:35 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> WSBA Real Property Listserv
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com"><wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [WSBARP] HOAs and Atty Fees<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Paul, you
wrote that the HOA was considering an appeal of the small
claims court (SCC) case, and inquired about relevant cases. I
believe that it is not widely known among lawyers that an
appeal of a SCC case in not a RALJ appeal -- additional
argument and briefing are not allowed in the appeal of a SCC
case (unlike a RALJ appeal). The superior court judge or
commissioner simply listens, in chambers (or wherever), to an
audio recording of the SCC hearing, reviews the written
record, and makes a ruling. So even if there are relevant
cases that were not presented to the SCC judge, the HOA should
not on appeal be allowed to brief and argue those relevant
cases to the reviewing superior court judge.<br>
<br>
The 2013 SCC booklet by the NW Justice Project states:<br>
<br>
"If you appeal, the superior court (not small claims court)
will consider your appeal. The superior court will only look
at the written record and evidence from your original small
claims court trial.8 That means, unless the superior court
says so, you may not bring new evidence or speak to support
your claim again. There will be no jury, no lawyers, or new
claims, unless the superior court allows them."<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.washingtonlawhelp.org/issues/consumer-debt/small-claims-court">http://www.washingtonlawhelp.org/issues/consumer-debt/small-claims-court</a><br>
<br>
I disagree with that passage's inclusion of "unless the
superior court says so" because the 2001 legislation that
changed the appellate review from a "trial de novo" to a "de
novo review of the record" amended RCW 12.36.055 and struck
the previous language that allowed parties equal argument time
and the previous language stating that the reviewing judge
might grant permission for additional evidence and testimony.
The House Bill Report for the 1991 bill summarized testimony
in support of it: "Both the superior and district courts feel
this bill would be helpful by speeding up reviews of small
claims appeals. Superior court judges can conduct them during
the down time, and they will not be required to schedule time
for witnesses to appear." So appellate review of a SCC ruling
is an unscheduled "down time review."<br>
<br>
I attach the 1991 legislation to which I have appended its
Senate and House bill reports.<br>
<br>
Doug Schafer, in Tacoma.<span style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 4/21/2016 2:03 PM, Paul Neumiller
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Arf, indeed!
I knew this was a shot in the dark.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Thanks, Rob.
You have confirmed my understanding that this is a muddled
area. The HOA’s language refers to an: 1) “enforcement
proceeding,” 2) “whether in law or equity”, 3) and awarded
by the “court.” I think this all points up to the
conclusion that the drafters intended for the prevailing
party to receive atty fees only in the context of
litigation. But you never know that the courts will say
so that’s why I asked the question. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">BTW, this is
a huge development and highly unlikely to ever revised
their CC&Rs. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:white"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com">wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a></a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com">mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Rob Wilson-Hoss<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, April 21, 2016 1:11 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com"><wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com></a></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [WSBARP] HOAs and Atty Fees<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif">Paul,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> I think this is going to
depend on the language of the governing documents. In
order to get attorney fees, as you know, you need a basis
in contract or statute or equity or some other source.
Association governing documents can provide that basis,
but some of them clearly say, <i>upon litigation</i>, and
some say, <i>whenever a lawyer is asked to think about
this at all whether or not the matter proceeds to
litigation.</i> Mine say, </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt">If the
Board of Directors is required to expend any funds, with
or without litigation, in pursuit of the collection of any
assessments, as defined herein, including the payment of
any real property or other taxes associated with the
subject lot; the assertion of or defense to any claims
regarding the authority, jurisdiction or exercise of any
of the powers of the Association; the assertion of or
defense to any claims regarding the personal or real
property of the Association; the correction of any
violation of Fabulous Acres Country Club covenants and/or
rules; or with regard to any other dispute concerning its
actions and/or powers; all expenses, including but not
limited to attorney, accountant, other expert, title
report and surveyor fees; lot condition remediation costs;
and all other costs of litigation, including court and
discovery expenses; and any and all other amounts
reasonably expended in the process of collection, dispute
resolution or correction; shall be paid by the member or
person or other entity responsible.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> Of course, whether your
recorded running covenants allow that, or allow you to
amend to that, after Chiwawa, is another question
entirely. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> Arf (always the last word in
any discussion that involves Chiwawa).</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> The second question is, what
does 64.38.050 mean, exactly? I have heard of judges
saying, no, you can't get fees under the statute because
the dispute does not involve a "violation of the
provisions of this chapter...." But the provisions of the
chapter include the very expansive language about the
rights of the association, at .020, including fines and so
on; and especially as the fining authority is spelled out,
the underlying dispute that resulted in the fines was
really a dispute that the association had the right to do
what it did. Which is a dispute about the authority of the
association under the powers statute, so it really is
about a violation of the provisions of the chapter. And
really, a strict reading of .050 pretty much eliminates
its use as a basis for attorney fees in most real life
situations. To me, that is the most telling way of looking
at it. A strict reading means, a general member is telling
the Board, you have violated your duties under this
chapter," but there is no direct chapter provision that
says to general members, you all have to follow the rules.
So does that mean that in practical effect, the attorney
fee provision is only available to use against
associations? What a disaster that would be - general
members playing gotcha with small rules and getting
attorney fee awards, while associations can't get attorney
fees for exercising their statutory powers. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> But this is so far beyond
what most Superior Court judges, let alone District Court
judges, ever see or get training about; and from what we
have seen lately, the appellate interpretations of the HOA
Act have been, at the very least, "interesting." You can
expect to get a different response from different judges.
There is very little predictability in much of real
property law, and that is especially true for HOA
decisions </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif">Rob</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman ,serif",serif">Robert D. Wilson-Hoss <br>
Hoss & Wilson-Hoss, LLP <br>
236 West Birch Street <br>
Shelton, WA 98584 <br>
360 426-2999</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman ,serif",serif"><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="www.hossandwilsonhoss.com"><span
style="color:blue">www.hossandwilson-hoss.com</span></a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:rob@hctc.com">rob@hctc.com</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><i><span
style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">This
message is intended solely for the use of the
addressee and may contain information that is
privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure
under applicable law. If you are not the addressee,
you are hereby notified that any use, distribution, or
copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If
you received this message in error, please notify us
by reply e-mail or by telephone (call us collect at
the number listed above) and immediately delete this
message and any and all of its attachments. Thank
you.</span></i><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt">This
office does debt collection and this e-mail may be an
attempt to collect a debt, Any information obtained
will be used for that purpose. </span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman ,serif",serif">To the extent the Federal Fair
Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 1692) applies
this firm is acting as a debt collector for the
condominium/homeowners' association named above to
collect a debt owed to it. Any information obtained will
be used for collection purposes. You have the right to
seek advice of legal counsel.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman
,serif",serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma",sans-serif"> <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com">wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a></a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com">mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Paul Neumiller<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, April 21, 2016 11:34 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com">wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [WSBARP] HOAs and Atty Fees</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">HOA member engages in violation
behavior. HOA holds many meetings and starts the fining
process. Both sides “lawyer up” and multiple letters are
exchanged. Member backs down and fixes violation before any
court action is taken. HOA spent about $5k in attorney fees
getting to that point. The HOA’s CC&Rs state the “the
party prevailing in any enforcement proceeding, whether in
law or equity, shall have from his opponent any attorney’s
fees that the court may deem reasonable.” So, for grins and
giggles, the HOA took the member to small claims court to
recoup its attorney fees. Court said “not so fast, there
was no court action here so the CC&Rs atty fees
provision and RCW 64.38.050 don’t apply”. (HOA has 30 days
to appeal decision.) My research is reveals nothing
regarding recouping attorney fees when there is no court
action under these circumstances. All reported cases
citing RCW 64.38.050 involve filed cases. Any cases out
there? <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"><br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>WSBARP mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com">WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp">http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
WSBARP mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com">WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp">http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>