Whom Does the HOA Attorney Represent?

Last May 7, 2024 the HOA's Board of Directors, upon motion by Linda Potter and second by Dennis Rybicki, voted unanimously to "hire" (retain) the law firm of Turner Padget.

At the time the board really didn't seem to know how much the legal fees were going to be for important categories of legal services; ex., collection services, general legal advice, amendment of CC&Rs and By-Laws, etc. The Board had apparently not received an Engagement Letter, and subsequently the Board never authorized Danny Trapp to sign any Engagement Letter, which spells out services and fees.

The Board never discussed in public how it would disengage itself from the law firm of McCabe, Trotter & Beverly, P.C., which had handled legal business for the HOA for years. That separation has never been discussed at a monthly board meeting. Was it ever completed? At what cost to the Association?

The Question is, whom does Turner Padget represent?

Since it was the Board that retained Turner Padget on behalf of the HOA and it is the HOA that is paying their fees, doesn't Turner Padget represent the HOA; i.e., the Members of the Association.

The law firm does not represent the Board of Directors. The law firm does not represent one or more of the officers of the HOA. 

If a Member of the HOA sued the Board or one or more officers over failure to comply with the By-Laws, would Turner Padget have a conflict-of-interest and have to represent the HOA, but not the Board members or officer(s)?

Everything on which the law firm advises should be for the benefit of the Association.

The law firm was made aware last summer of the questions about legitimacy of the Voting Members and of the elections of Directors by Voting Members. The law firm was urged to inquire deeply, to be certain that those who had approached it on behalf of the HOA actually had the authority to do so. Did they?

Members of the Board were urged to disclose to Turner Padget that there were questions about the legitimacy of the Voting Members, the Board, the election of Directors, and the election of officers.

In my opinion, the first advice that Turner Padget should have given the Board was to correct the problem of so many illegitimate Voting Members (those who were in place without the required Neighborhood Meetings).

I suggested to the Board that it should not "sandbag" the attorneys. Tell them the truth. Did the Board do that? Did Turner Padget inquire in-depth? Was the Board honest with them? Did anyone on the Board, besides Danny Trapp, talk with Turner Padget?

Did Turner Padget tell Danny Trapp that the Board must comply with the By-Laws? If they did, did Danny inform the full board of that advice?

Why is the Board still allowing homeowners to "get signatures" to be recognized as "Voting Members"? 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What? No trampolines?

OK, you trampoline fans. Are your rights and privileges being tramped on by your Board of Directors? The office sent out an email just before 2:00PM threatening you with a dreaded violation notice and the possibility of fines, if you dare to put a trampoline in your yard.  This is what the email from the office said,  " Please be advised that, pursuant to Section 13, Page 22, Article XII of the covenants, no structure of a temporary nature shall be placed upon any unit or any part of the properties. This includes, but is not limited to, tents, temporary gazebos, shacks, trailers, and any other structure of a temporary nature.  "Kindly note that trampolines are classified as temporary play equipment and, as such, are not permitted within the community. We ask that you ensure there is no trampoline present on your property to avoid receiving a violation notice and subsequent fines." What do the Covenants say? "Section 13. Tents. Trailers and Temporary Structures. Exce...
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

Pet Peeve #1 - Tinted License Plate Covers

Image
  AO(Q?)H 152 My #1 pet peeve is heavily-tinted license plate covers. These are prohibited under South Carolina law (and by laws in many states), but my belief is that these drivers are seldom stopped.  These drivers can run red lights, speed, tailgate, even cause hit-and-run accidents, and witnesses can only say, "I couldn't see the license plate number." My solution? Troopers, deputies, and cops should stop these cars. Ticket the driver. Remove the license plate frame, tinted cover, and license plate as evidence. This will force the driver to have his car towed, because he cannot operate a motor vehicle on the roads without a license plate. Make it inconvenient and expensive. Drivers KNOW they are violating the law. They expect to get away with it, and they do. It's time for this to stop! Pet peeve #2: heavily-tinted front windows.
Read more