If sued, could HOA even defend itself?



The Summit's HOA may be threatened by at least two lawsuits. 

At the August 13th Board of Directors meeting, it was revealed that the previous property manager, still a CAMS employee, ordered a new sign for the corner of Summit Parkway and Summit Ridge Drive. According to information presented to the Board, she had been authorized only to obtain bids, and her spending limit was $1,000.

Instead, she ordered the sign at an expense of $8,600. Now the sign company wants to be paid. The Board later decided not to repair the wall or to replace the sign. They apparently weren't told that the sign had been ordered.

A second possible lawsuit involves a DHEC engineer who is billing the HOA for about $12,000.

Here's the problem. Can the HOA even defend itself?

At the May 7, 2024 Board meeting a Motion was made and approved to "hire" (retain) the Turner Padget law firm. No mention was made of the law firm (McCabe, Trotter & Beverly, P.C.), which had represented the HOA for years. No mention has been made of any Engagement Letter.

Was that Motion properly made? Because there is a serious question about the legitimacy of the Summit's Board, the directors, the officers, and the Voting Members, it may be that Turner Padget is not really the HOA's law firm.

If the officers who "hired" them did not have the authority to do so (because they are not legitimate officers of the HOA), then Turner Padget is not the HOA's law firm.

I have wondered whether the HOA's "officers" disclosed to Turner Padget that none of the current directors was duly-elected. The HOA does not have any legitimate directors or officers!

Turner Padget may not be able to defend the HOA. And the officers (and directors) cannot retain a different law firm, for the same reason. The officers themselves will be unable to go to court to defend the lawsuit, because they are not really officers of the HOA. If they take an oath that they are officers, they will perjure themselves.

Could the HOA be unable to answer a lawsuit and then be slapped with a default judgment?

And could it get worse?

The HOA needs to fix this problem. The way it gets fixed is for each of the 27 Neighborhoods (besides Barony Place) to hold a Neighborhood Meeting, elect a Neighborhood Committee, and for that Neighborhood Committee to elect a chairman who becomes its legitimate Voting Member.

Then the Voting Members hold a Meeting and elect directors (or possibly just ratify the current directors). Good legal advice is needed. And then the new legitimate directors elect officers.

This is so simple. Why isn't the current board doing it?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Annual Meeting, Barony Place Neighborhood - continued to 5/4/2024

Barony Place Neighborhood (Barony Place I and Barony Place II attempted to hold a Neighborhood Meeting this afternoon. Of the 78 homes, seventeen (17) homes were represented, and that was not sufficient to meet the quorum requirement of 26. The meeting was continued to Saturday, May 4, 2024, 1:00PM, at 44 Barony Place Circle. An effort will be made to have at least 26 homes represented in-person or by proxy. Three homeowners have volunteered to be on the Neighborhood Committee: Tracy Manderino (Barony Place II), Della Glynn (Barony Place II) and Gwen Hayes (Barony Place I). If a quorum is present on May 4th, those present, including by proxy, will elect the Neighborhood Committee. Once the Committee has been elected, it will select one of its three committee members to be the Voting Member for the next 12 months. The other two members will be Alternates. A new announcement will be distributed to your newspaper box, along with a proxy. If you will not attend Saturday's meeting, plea
Read more

Open Letter to Barony Place "Voting Member"

An open letter to the "Voting Member" of Barony Place Neighborhood. Good morning, Billie, If you and/or an Alternate attended last night's board of directors meeting, will you please send out a recap of the meeting to Ann Stirlen and me (and to all the homeowners and residents in Barony Place)? About a dozen homeowners from throughout The Summit showed up for the board meeting  at the church  last night, only to learn from one person that it had been switched to Zoom, which allowed the board to meet in secret. Many of them had not received the email from the office that the board was (illegitimately) closing the meeting to homeowners. There are only about 1,800 (73%) email addresses of the 2,480 Members in the website database. I attempted to join the meeting on Zoom, as I am Attorney-in-Fact for Ann Stirlen, but I was not admitted to the meeting. The HOA's attorney has quoted a section in the By-Laws that she believes allows the Board to close the meetings. That spec
Read more

Special Assessment Possible?

How would you feel about a $3,000 Special Assessment levied by the HOA against you and every other HOA Member (homeowner)? Article X, Section 4 in the CC&Rs allows this. Are you aware of that? Should the Board do everything possible to eliminate the possibility of such a Special Assessment? What is the Board doing that might just lead directly to such an Assessment? The HOA, by actions of the President (Justin Martin), the Treasurer (Vernell Butler, and the Safety Committee Chair (Dennis Rybicki) entered into a contact with the Richland County Sheriff's Department, effective February 1, 2023. They arranged for special patrols in the Summit at a cost of $48.00/hour. In the Special Duty Agreement is a Liability clause. It reads,  "The Requestor will hold harmless the Richland County Sheriff's Department from any and all claims or liabilities resulting from service and indemnify RCSD for any loss due to any injury of its employee unless there is a determination of neglige
Read more