D.L. from Middlesex County, Connecticut writes:
Dear Mister Condo,
I am having an on-going problem with our property manager and the Board. My unit needs a repair that is clearly an HOA responsibility (an issue involving the building foundation). The Connecticut General Statutes are clear and unambiguous that the HOA is responsible for the repair. Relevant past history — I began requesting this repair in 2017, and the property manager has been dragging his heels until I “lawyered up” in March 2019. The latest development is that the Board and the property manager are agreeing to the repair PROVIDED that I sign an agreement indicating that I am “on board” with the selected contractor. I have absolutely no idea where this is coming from. Furthermore, this is unprecedented. I have previously served multiple terms as a Board member, and am a past Board president. I am very familiar with how repairs are handled, and have NEVER heard of a unit owner being coerced into signing an agreement in order to have a repair made. I am not aware of anything in Connecticut condominium law that allows a Board or a property manager to attach a condition to a common element repair — which — the HOA is legally mandated to assume responsibility for. Your thoughts please.
Mister Condo replies:
D.L., as I always begin such an opinion… I am not an attorney and offer no legal advice in this column. While I have never heard of such a thing as a person being “on board” with a repair, if the Board is asking you to sign an agreement you would be best advised to seek legal counsel before you do so. I can’t imagine this heading to court and the association attorney producing a document that states you claimed to be “on board” unless you were actually setting sail on a ship! I am awfully sorry that you have a foundation problem. There have been many in Connecticut and associations found themselves scrambling because the problem typically surfaced long after the developer was absolved from any responsibility. I hope you get your repairs done to your unit and that they are done to the satisfaction of all involved, “on board” or otherwise. Good luck!
This is correct the unit owner shouldn’t be asked/required to sign an agreement (and are they intending both sides to sign, as ‘agreements’ are typically signed by both parties). Our association is often coming up with faux legal gobbly gook that would not provide any protection in a challenge/lawsuit, but to the uninitiated, it might appear “legal.” In principle or actuality isn’t good to go along with signing anything just to get something accomplished. It is hard to know their reasoning without more info. I discovered from a FOIA on a property manager a situation where a unit owner had wanted an actual roofer, and not a handyman, to do a roof repair that had been leaking for years into the unit. The owner was weary of repairs that didn’t last. However, the assn/property manager dug in their heels, and the unit owner filed a complaint with CT DCP. It could be this assn/property manager doesn’t want flak about the type of repair person/company who would be used to do the job. It might not even be a licensed, insured contractor, or a HIC registration. Foundation repairs are often patched, which can be a temporary fix at best and not truly repaired, which can involve more intensive (aka expensive) work. Since the unit owner says they have a lawyer, the lawyer should respond and push back, who knows what the assn. may feel they can use the ‘agreement’ as proof from which to protect themselves, which wouldn’t do much for them, but could cause more hurdles to clear before getting a proper repair.