National Cooperative Bank

Court Upholds Case Against Cape May Condo Door to Door

A New Jersey appellate court recently upheld a trial court's refusal to force condo unit owners to pay an assessment levied to cover the replacement of sliding glass doors in each of an HOA's units. In the case of Regent Beach Condominium Association v. Capolino, the appellate court ruled the condominium did not have the power to assess owners for the replacement cost of items included within the definition of "unit."

The original case involved a dispute over the replacement of doors at Regent Beach, a 52-unit condominium in Cape May. Each of the condo units came equipped with sliding glass patio doors, and in 2002, several association members approached the board about replacing their doors, which had become worn and weathered. According to court documents, the issue was complicated by the fact that the doors were not a standard size, and that the condo building's exterior walls had been waterproofed, necessitating custom-made replacements.

Also, the condominium's master deed defined the doors as part of individual units and not common elements, thus the board felt that replacing them could impact the waterproofing and appearance of the exterior walls, which are common elements. In the interest of maintaining the building's aesthetic integrity and waterproofing, the association proposed replacing all the doors in the community at one time—whether the unit owners wanted new doors or not.

According to court documents, while a "substantial majority" of the residents voted in favor of a special assessment to pay for the custom-built doors, a number of residents objected strongly, and refused to pay the assessment. The association filed suit against the holdouts and filed liens on their units for the amount of the assessment. A trial court found in favor of the defendants, granting them summary judgment on the assessment issue, and ordering the HOA to reimburse the unit owners—with interest—for their costs, and for the any liens they had to pay upon selling their units.

When the condo association appealed, the appellate court also rejected the condo's argument that it was necessary to replace the doors and level the assessment because if owners had replaced the doors themselves, the new doors might not match the other units. The appellate court felt that even if the Condominium Act allowed the condominium to do this—which it does not—the association could have avoided having mismatched or improperly installed doors simply by explicitly requiring each owner to replace his door with a door of similar style, quality and aesthetic standards.

Read More...

Related Articles

New Jersey’s 2016 Budget Plan

Pensions, Payouts and Politics

Surviving a Financial Firestorm

Overcoming Fraud & Neglect

Keeping the Books

The Seventh Annual Condo, HOA, & Co-op Expo-Wednesday, May 7, 2014

 

Comments

  • OMG I really feel there is a God, after reading this artical you have given me hope to put our condo president Bully in the hot seat, after our last meetting he voted in have our condo fees raised in order to replace silding doors, we are aganist this action and are moving forward in to put him on notice.We are not going down without a fight. Futhermore we are so upset with his actions, my wife and I have put our unit up for sale....anybody want to buy a nice condo on the bay. Thank You for this post and might need some help with problem.

Leave A Reply