<HTML xmlns:o><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr bgColor=#ffffff text=#000000>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>Plaintiffs in small claim court do not have a right to appeal the results
of a dispute over a $5000 dispute . Only defendants do. HOA is out
of luck.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Josh</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">Joshua F.
Grant, PS<BR>Attorney at Law<BR>P. O. Box 619<BR>Wilbur, WA 99185<BR>tel 509 647
5578<BR>fax 509 647 2734<BR></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=schafer@pobox.com
href="mailto:schafer@pobox.com">Doug Schafer</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Friday, April 22, 2016 11:59 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com
href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com">WSBA Real Property Listserv</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [WSBARP] HOAs and Atty Fees</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'><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 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>
<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-TOP: #e1e1e1 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 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">mailto: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: 12pt">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
href="http://www.washingtonlawhelp.org/issues/consumer-debt/small-claims-court"
moz-do-not-send="true">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: 12pt"><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-BOTTOM: 5pt; MARGIN-TOP: 5pt">
<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-TOP: #e1e1e1 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in">
<P class=MsoNormal><B>From:</B> <A
href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><A
class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated
href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com">wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</A></A>
[<A href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">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
href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><A
class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E
href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com">mailto: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: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman
,serif",serif'>Paul,</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman
,serif",serif'> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; 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: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman
,serif",serif'> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt">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: 14pt"> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; 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: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman
,serif",serif'> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; 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: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman
,serif",serif'> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; 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: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman
,serif",serif'> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; 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: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman
,serif",serif'> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman
,serif",serif'>Rob</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman
,serif",serif'> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-AUTOSPACE: "><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; 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: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New
roman ,serif",serif'><A
href="wlmailhtml:www.hossandwilsonhoss.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><SPAN
style="COLOR: blue">www.hossandwilson-hoss.com</SPAN></A><BR><A
href="mailto:rob@hctc.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">rob@hctc.com</A></SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-AUTOSPACE: "><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: 10pt">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: 10pt; 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: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman
,serif",serif'> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></P>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in">
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif'>From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif'> <A
href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><A
class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated
href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com">wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</A></A>
[<A href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">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 href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">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: 12pt; 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 href="mailto:WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com" moz-do-not-send="true">WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com</A><o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE><A href="http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp" moz-do-not-send="true">http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp</A><o:p></o:p></PRE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 12pt; 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>
<P>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>WSBARP mailing
list<BR>WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com<BR>http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp</DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>