St. Petersburg Times Online: Business

Weather | Sports | Forums | Comics | Classifieds | Calendar | Movies

Fining is more effective when a lawyer's involved

RICHARD WHITE
Published June 7, 2003

Question: We have a hard time getting people to serve on the board, let alone organizing a fining committee. Can the board approve a rule setting the fines for certain violations, or must a lawyer be involved in the enforcement?

Answer: A lawyer need not be involved as long as the guilty party pays. First, some background: Florida statutes require that you establish an independent review committee to impose fines, separate from the board of directors. Once an owner has been cited for a finable infraction, he meets with the committee. In the best-case scenario, the penitent owner agrees to pay the fine.

But if the owner refuses to pay, what next? You have no choice but to take the owner to court. The board could pass a rule to add the fine to the owner's monthly assessment, but if the owner refuses to pay - if she won't write that check - you're stuck. If you then go to court, the judge will likely throw your case out because you failed to follow the statutes by establishing a fining committee. This is why I recommend involving your attorney in establishing fining procedures.

On the campaign trail

Question: Several owners submitted their names and qualifications for vacancies on our condominium association board. Some of the current directors sent out a letter before the election to all owners, urging them to vote for two particular candidates. Is it legal for board members to campaign for new board members by name?

Answer: Yes, it's legal. Board members should use their own money and materials to send out these letters; association funds should not be used.

Double-barreled query

Question: The developer of our condominium building operated it for two years as a rental before converting it to a condominium. During that time, he contracted with a cellular company to place an antenna on the roof of the building. At the time of conversion he did not disclose information about the tower on the roof to the buyers. He claims he has the right to retain the income from the antenna because he retained contract rights during the sale of the units. Would it be right for him to sell the building and yet retain the rights to the roof?

Answer: This is both a title question and a sales disclosure question. A seller can retain mineral rights and air rights, but this should be disclosed to the buyer. It is possible he has sold the property subject to his retention of the air rights, but this should be taken up with your attorney or the closing agent. You're going to need legal advice on this one.

- Write to Richard White, c/o Community Living, St. Petersburg Times, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731; or e-mail him at CAMquestions@att.net Please include your name and city. Questions should concern association operations; legal opinions cannot be offered. For specific legal advice, contact an association attorney.

Readers may call the state Division of Condominiums Bureau of Customer Service at toll-free 1-800-226-9101 with questions or requests for materials. Access the Bureau of Condominiums Web site at www.state.fl.us/dbpr/lsc/index.shtml or write to Bureau of Customer Service, 1940 N Monroe St., Northwood Centre, Tallahassee, FL 32399-1032.

© Copyright, St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.