Pavilion from the Ocean

Pavilion from the Ocean

Welcome to iPavilionCondo.com

This forum, by owners for owners, provides useful information for owners to view and discuss.

This blog does not belong nor represents the views of the Pavilon Condo Association

You can subscribe to the blog by entering your email on the upper hand side on the blog. You will then receive an email with a link that you must click on to complete the subscription. Then every time the blog is updated you will receive an email message.

You get what you pay for: ACTUAL LEGAL OPINIONS?


By Jan Bergemann

I see it all the time: Boards asking the association attorney for a legal opinion often don’t really want a real interpretation of the laws and/or governing documents. More often they just want a “legal confirmation” of the way they want to push their “rules” – or the laws they make up.
   
And – make no mistake – there are just too many lawyers and law firms who don’t mind giving the board in writing what they want to hear – no matter right or wrong. And these lawyers are only too happy to confirm what the board members want to hear because they will often reap the benefits of their “twisted” opinions caused by owners filing lawsuits because they totally disagree with the “opinion” of the association lawyer. And the association attorney makes lots of money – no matter win or lose!
   
And since the Florida BAR is just a joke when it comes to regulate its members, these attorneys will get away with it, even if their interpretations are plainly ridiculous.

I have seen “opinions” written by so-called specialized community association attorneys that made me laugh.

I agree” Many of the laws are vague and allow various interpretations because of the choice of words used  in the statutes. But when it becomes obvious that the lawyer’s “opinion” was just written to please the board. It should be called “malpractice” – and not a legal interpretation.

Developer Drops Plan for Contentious Sunset Harbour Luxury Condo Tower


Even by Miami's usual standards for knock-down, drag-out development fights, the political brawl over a proposed luxury condo tower in booming Sunset Harbour has been especially bare knuckled.

First, Miami Beach Mayor Philip Levine recused himself from the deal in March because he owns property nearby. Then, when Beach Towing began fighting the plan, the developers went nuclear and accused the tow service of operating without a valid license for decades. The tow operator and developer ended up tangled in civil court. 
Well, most of that drama is dead for now. Earlier this week, the project's developers quietly asked a city commissioner to withdraw a request for a height variance for the condo tower, effectively killing the plan. 
"Unfortunately, we had broad support from our neighbors but minority dissenters had some considerations that we tried to address," says Dan Marinberg, an attorney with the developer, Deco Capital. "At the end of the day there was no compromise we could reach."
The project, which was bankrolled by New York-based billionaire Marc Rowan, would have built a 90-foot tower with 15 luxury condos and several blocks of storefront retail along Purdy Avenue. Rowan's group, Deco Capital, assembled eight properties for a development called Sunset Harbour Residences. 
But the project met political turbulence from the start. First, the mayor asked a state ethics board to rule whether he should sit out voting on the deal because he owns millions of dollars worth of Sunset Harbour property. The state said Levine was fine, but the mayor recused himself before Miami-Dade's own ethics board could rule on the question.
Behind the scenes, a blistering fight erupted between Beach Towing and Rowan's group. The tow company owns a restrictive deed on one of the Purdy Avenue properties and demanded a big fee to sign off on the project. Instead, the two ended up in court. 
Amidst that legal fight, Rowan's group filed a complaint with the city citing decades-old records they said proved Beach Towing never had proper permitsto run their towing operation
Further complicating matters, Sunset Harbour Residences would have nearly doubled the current height restrictions in the Beach, so city commissioners would have had to sign off on the plan. That lead to more in-fighting and a deluge of emails from residents already fed up with street work and development in the area.
The developers threw in the towel after the latest failed mediation meeting with Beach Towing last week. In letter to commissioners sent yesterday, Deco Capital said that it felt "the appropriate way forward was to respectfully withdraw our application." 
The project's opponents celebrated the move.
"We believe Commissioner Malakoff has done the right thing by withdrawing her sponsorship of a highly divisive and contentious ordinance," says Rafael Andrade, an attorney representing Beach Towing. "The developer should never have politicized and pushed this project with the City Commission, especially without first addressing resident concerns and settling legal disputes with their neighbors."
But Marinberg counters that take, pointing out that neighborhood associations in Sunset Harbour and Belle Isle supported the plan. He says the developers will continue their legal fight with Beach Towing and look into other options on the site. 
"We think the original project was fantastic. It would have been a huge plus for this area," he says. "We're taking a look at what else we can accomplish ... We love the location. The location is unparalleled. You can't find properties like that in South Beach any more, especially in such a hot neighborhood like Sunset Harbour. We're very much interested in continuing our development there."
City Commissioner Joy Malakoff, who sponsored the height variance withdrawn this week, says she hopes the group resurrects their project in another form. 
"I'd love to see something happen there," she says. "We'll see what the developer decides to do with that property now." 

TRANSFER FEES – WHY ALL THE CONFUSION?


Great article by The Miami Herald this week regarding the fact that condo associations across the state are ripping people off by charging illegal and excessive transfer fees when someone is trying to sell or rent their unit. For those of you who missed it, here is the link:

Here is what The Florida Condominium Act says:

(i) Transfer fees.—No charge shall be made by the association or any body thereof in connection with the sale, mortgage, lease, sublease, or other transfer of a unit unless the association is required to approve such transfer and a fee for such approval is provided for in the declaration, articles, or bylaws. Any such fee may be preset, but in no event may such fee exceed $100 per applicant other than husband/wife or parent/dependent child, which are considered one applicant. However, if the lease or sublease is a renewal of a lease or sublease with the same lessee or sublessee, no charge shall be made. The foregoing notwithstanding, an association may, if the authority to do so appears in the declaration or bylaws, require that a prospective lessee place a security deposit, in an amount not to exceed the equivalent of 1 month’s rent, into an escrow account maintained by the association. The security deposit shall protect against damages to the common elements or association property. Payment of interest, claims against the deposit, refunds, and disputes under this paragraph shall be handled in the same fashion as provided in part II of chapter 83.

The only thing the article missed is the fact that the association does not even get the opportunity to charge any transfer fee whatsoever unless the association is required to approve such transfer. As I teach at every seminar, many association do not have the right to approve any transfers in their governing documents. They only have a right of first refusal. So, when determining if a fee can be charged in connection with the sale or lease of a unit, make sure the association first has the right to approve the transfer. If the association does not have the right, no fee can be charged.

Next, even if the right to approve is found in the governing documents, the fee for such approval must be found in the declaration, articles or bylaws. If there is no fee mentioned, no fee can be charged. If you want to charge a fee, amend your documents.

Of course the all important question is, how much can be charged. What is so difficult to understand about the statute specifically saying: in no event may such fee exceed $100 per applicant other than husband/wife or parent/dependent child, which are considered one applicant? It is amazing how many boards and management companies attempt to change the plain wording of the statute with creative thinking. I’ll hear things like “It’s not a transfer fee” it’s an application fee, it’s a background check fee, a move-in fee, an investigation fee. They will argue until they are blue in the face that it’s something other than a “transfer fee.” They are wrong. According to the Miami Herald article, a 2008 warning letter was sent to a Broward condo from the Division which states that “Transfer fees include such items as clerical fees, fees paid as a part of an applicant’s credit or background check or screening process and move-in fees.”

An attorney who represents a management company is quoted in the article as saying that if the fees are paid directly to the management company, and not the association, the law doesn’t apply. Let’s just say I and the Division disagree. Regardless of whether it’s being charged by the association or management, it’s still a mandatory fee that is being forced upon an applicant who wants to move into the community. The statute clearly intends to create a reasonable restriction on that fee. So, management companies are either going to be content to collect a $100.00 fee from the applicant, or they will simply charge the association directly for their assistance with these application fees and background checks and the association will need to include these fees in the association’s annual budget.


So, what’s the law as it applies to HOAs and transfer fees? There is none. The Miami Herald article opines that HOAs can therefore charge whatever they want. I disagree. If there is nothing in the associations governing documents that authorizes the association to charge a transfer fee, one can’t be charged.

Nobody is arguing that $100.00 may be too little to charge an applicant and that a criminal background and credit check costs the association more than that. That may be true. However, in the absence of language in the statute that allows the association to charge more, they simply can’t and need to stop coming up with creative phrases or reasons to violate the statute. If you’re not happy with the law, get it changed.


WILD BOARD MEETINGS!

By Jan Bergemann
   
It seems that screaming and hollering is pretty common at board meetings in Florida’s community associations. Over the years I have attended board meetings where the participants were obviously under the impression that the one who screamed the loudest is right. And if that didn’t work some folks even turned to physical confrontations.
    
I always think that community associations bring out the worst in people. Our TV programs are full of so-called REALITY-SHOWS. As we all know, most of them are actually scripted – and are often not really reality shows. The producers of such shows should just attend board meetings – and they can film better shows than any writer could script.
      
But these screaming and fighting “matches” are in my opinion not caused by just a few obnoxious owners, they are caused by a system that allows bullying and dictatorial behavior. Every fight at such board meetings has two sides to the story. In most communities I know there are two – or even more – parties that fight each other. And these fights often turn ugly, causing scenes like described above.


ONLY IN SPANISH: Fiscalía de Miami-Dade y legisladores buscan soluciones al fraude en condominios


La fiscal sugiere crear en Miami-Dade un equipo especializado en investigar los casos

Legisladores resaltaron la importancia de presentar un proyecto de ley bipartidista

Se considera la posibilidad de que la Policía y la fiscalía pudieran intervenir en casos serios

La fiscal estatal de Miami-Dade, Katherine Fernández-Rundle, y parte de su equipo de abogados, se reunió el viernes con varios legisladores estatales para analizar soluciones al fraude de condominios en el sur de la Florida.

Fernández-Rundle aseguró que este primer encuentro ahondó en buscar soluciones a nivel local mientras los legisladores trabajan en la elaboración de una reforma integral a las leyes que regulan los condominios.

“Las investigaciones de el Nuevo Herald y Univisión 23 han hecho que todos nosotros abramos los ojos ante esta crisis que existe en nuestra comunidad”, dijo Fernández-Rundle.

La investigación Condos de Pesadilla, publicada por el Nuevo Herald y Univisión 23 en marzo y abril, reveló varios casos de fraude en condominios de Miami-Dade y la falta de acción del Departamento de Regulaciones de Negocios y Profesionales, la entidad estatal que debe regular este tipo de complejos residenciales.

La fiscal indicó que una de sus sugerencias apunta a crear en Miami-Dade un equipo especializado en investigar la avalancha de abusos en los condominios, tal como se hizo en el 2004 con la creación del grupo de lucha contra el fraude de seguros vehicular.

Este grupo de investigación, precisó la fiscal, opera con siete miembros y su trabajo ha permitido disminuir ese fraude, mientras que en los vecinos condados de Broward y Palm Beach han visto un considerable aumento.

José Félix Díaz, presidente de la delegación de legisladores de Miami-Dade, dijo que es importante presentar un proyecto de ley bipartidista para lograr el apoyo de legisladores de otras áreas de Florida.

“Ha quedado claro que para poder corregir este problema tenemos trabajar juntos”, dijo Félix Díaz, quien está elaborando una propuesta de ley sobre condominios y ha presentado cambios a la ley actual en el pasado, que no han sido aprobados. “Hay una crisis y si no trabajamos juntos estamos dejando al pueblo desprotegido”.

El representante estatal José Javier Rodríguez, quien participó en la reunión vía telefónica, dijo a el Nuevo Herald que el encuentro sirvió para identificar soluciones prácticas a los problemas que aquejan a los residentes de condominios.

“Estamos considerando como la Policía local y la fiscalía pudieran intervenir en casos serios, de fraude, cuando sea apropiado”, dijo Rodríguez. “Pero lo que sigue siendo claro es que el Departamento de Regulaciones de Negocios y Profesionales tiene un problema grave y no funciona para proteger a los residentes que no tienen los recursos para luchar contra los abusos”.

Fernández-Rundle agregó que el DBPR no tiene el poder, los recursos ni la disposición de atender las quejas de fraudes en los condominios.

Por otro lado, de acuerdo con la fiscal, su oficina y la policía muchas veces enfrentan limitaciones ya que los abusos contra los propietarios de condominios no están contemplados como crímenes en las leyes actuales. Otro de los problemas, agregó la fiscal, se focalizan en las limitaciones de las autoridades para obtener las evidencias de los abusos.

La investigación periodística demostró casos de fraude electoral mediante la falsificación de firmas para las elecciones de los miembros de las juntas directivas de varios condominios. Además se reveló que el condominio The Beach Club at Fontainebleau Park se realizó una millonaria licitación para reparar los techos y se terminó contratando a una empresa que compitió con dos compañías falsas.
La serie también documentó fraude notarial en decenas de declaraciones juradas, notarizadas por Carmen Aslan, una empleada de FM Law Group, una firma del abogado Héctor Martínez. Ese bufete suele representar legalmente asociaciones de condominios administradas por la compañía Sunshine Managetment Services.

El senador Miguel Díaz de la Portilla dijo que el proyecto de ley que presentara la delegación de Miami-Dade, incluirá propuestas para tipificar cómo delitos algunas acciones que permiten las irregularidades en la administración de condominios.

“Esta será una prioridad de la delegación del condado Dade”, aseguró Díaz de la Portilla, quien agregó que confía en que los legisladores del sur de Florida lograrán el apoyo de sus colegas de otras partes de Florida.

Las propuestas de reformas amplias a las leyes suelen ser analizadas durante varias temporadas legislativas antes de ser aprobadas.

Pero mientras más se tarden las soluciones, crecerá la desesperación de algunos propietarios de condominios, sobre todo muchos residentes de bajos ingresos, opinaron algunos legisladores.
“En Hialeah hay un condominio que se llama Los Sueños que se ha convertido en una pesadilla para los residentes”, dijo el senador René García. “Si en Tallahassee no quieren hacer el trabajo, debemos traerlo a nivel local”.

Pavilon in the News: South Florida condo boards rip off consumers with high application fees


State law says condo associations shouldn’t charge fees greater than $100 per applicant
But nearly 50 percent of Miami-Dade condo listings ask more

That’s making a tough housing market even tougher for the poor and middle class
Condo associations across South Florida are ripping off consumers with high application fees in violation of state law, a Miami Herald investigation has found.

Associations are allowed to charge people applying to buy or rent a unit a maximum of $100 per person. The nonrefundable fees cover the costs of interviews, background and credit checks. But many buildings gouge tenants and buyers with fees anywhere between $125 and $625, according to lease and purchase applications reviewed by the Herald.

Some associations also tack on moving-in and other charges that run into the hundreds of dollars. At a few condos that allow pets, even residents’ furry friends have to cough up fees of $100 or more.
In Miami-Dade County, nearly half of condo listings show application fees exceeding $100, from fancy high-rises in Miami Beach to run-of-the-mill units in Kendall, according to a Herald analysis of a database used by Realtors. The problem exists in Broward County too but is less widespread.
All in all, the high fees could lead to class-action lawsuits against associations, attorneys say.

“State law seems to pretty clearly prohibit fees in excess of $100,” said Jason Kellogg, a Miami attorney who specializes in condo association law. “This sounds like a major racket. ... The cost of owning or renting a condo in South Florida is expensive enough without associations fleecing residents with illegal fees.”

The cost of owning or renting a condo in South Florida is expensive enough without associations fleecing residents with illegal fees. Jason Kellogg

The revelation follows a series of reports in El Nuevo Herald documenting corruption at South Florida condo associations, including rigged elections and contracts awarded without fair bidding.
Illegal fees are another reminder that South Florida’s poor and middle class can’t keep up in a real-estate market distorted by out-of-town cash, said Ali Bustamante, a professor at Florida International University.

“High application fees are potentially discriminatory by crowding out low-income and low-middle-income renters who can’t afford to put down $300 fees,” he said. “It’s a huge foot on the scale.”
As developers build luxury high-rises at the expense of middle-market housing, rents across South Florida have skyrocketed. The region is now one of the nation’s least affordable places to buy or rent, although a new push for downtown rental buildings could help out.

Still, Bustamante said, “the property owners have all the leverage.”

Jason Wood, a sales manager at a furniture company, said he was charged $125 to apply to the Mirador 1200 condo in Miami Beach in 2012. He paid with a cashier’s check.

A person at the Mirador’s front desk said the fee is now $150.

“I am currently looking for a new place and see all over they advertise fees of $200 to $300,” Wood said. “Miami is already a rip-off when it comes to cost of housing and this is more salt in the wound with no real system of ... tenants’ rights.”
Jacking up the price

The Florida Condominium Act prohibits condo associations from charging so-called transfer fees of more than $100 per applicant “in connection with the sale, mortgage, lease, sublease, or other transfer of a unit.” The law also states that married couples should be treated as one person and pay a total of $100, and prevents associations from charging dependent children or people renewing their leases. Any transfer fees — including charges associated with background checks, screening and move-in fees — have to be clearly stated in a condo’s governing documents.

But the rules are widely flouted.

To apply for a lease at 2 Midtown in the popular neighborhood near Wynwood, a renter must pay a $200 application fee, plus a $350 “processing” fee. Only money orders are accepted.

At the Pavillion in mid-Beach, the association charges $260 for new applicants.

An extra $160 might seem like small change, but it adds up. The Pavillion has 408 units. About 200 of them are rented out at any given time, according to a tenant information package.

At larger buildings, the benefits for management and associations are even greater. Quantum on the Bay in Edgewater has nearly 700 units. The association charges tenants a $100 application fee plus $125 for “registration and orientation,” $175 for “administrative review” and $225 to move in and out.
Property management companies usually handle the applications and profit from high fees. The associations also make extra cash.

“These buildings are processing applications all day every day,” said Stavros Mitchelides, a Miami Beach-based Realtor. “And you don’t get your money back if you’re not approved.”
Isola on Brickell Key charges $200 per applicant. The Henderson and Helen Marr in Miami Beach each charge $150. So does 401 Blu, although it gives spouses what seems like a discount: $200 per couple. (By law, they should only have to pay $100.)

“I have a lot of clients where $100, $150 is a lot of money,” said Mitchelides, who only recently learned the up-charges were illegal. “A lot of these people are renters. It’s not fair. I had a girl who couldn’t afford more than $1,400 per month [in rent] and her application fee was $250.”

Mitchelides was thumbing through a real-estate industry trade magazine last month when he happened upon a mention of the $100 cap. He called the Florida Realtors’ legal hotline and was advised his clients could file civil lawsuits against the condo associations or complain to the state attorney general and the Tallahassee agency that regulates condos.

“Obviously, no one is going to sue over that amount,” Mitchelides said. “And Realtors don’t want to spend all day filing complaints.

Instead, he called the Herald.

The newspaper analyzed home listings on a database for Realtors called the Multiple Listing Service. It found that in Miami-Dade, 46 percent of condos listed for rent or sale say they require a fee of more than $100 per applicant.

The entries on the database are made by Realtors, not condo associations, and may not always be accurate.

“I think it’s higher,” Mitchelides said.

In Broward, only 22 percent of condos asked application fees higher than $100.

The cities with the most condos on the market were all in Miami-Dade and had high rates of illegal fees: Miami (48 percent), Miami Beach (40 percent), Sunny Isles Beach (50 percent) and Aventura (44 percent). The biggest markets in Broward had much lower rates of illegal fees: Fort Lauderdale (12 percent), Hallandale Beach (29 percent), Hollywood (24 percent) and Pompano Beach (23 percent)
.
Almost none of the condo associations mentioned in this story returned requests for comment. Neither did several management companies at buildings that charge more than $100 per applicant, including KW Property Management, First Service Residential, Quest Management and Aqua Management. One company that did respond complained that the $100 fee doesn’t cover the costs of background checks.

And Fredrick Rotstein, property manager for the Isola condo tower, wrote in an email that the association “will be immediately reviewing our ‘transfer fees’ and will make sure that they are in compliance with the applicable statute.”

It’s up to board members to audit their rules and have counsel make sure they’re compliant with the law, said Jonathan Goldstein, a Miami attorney. “They shouldn’t take for granted that management companies or previous boards had in place leasing policies that were compliant with the governing declaration, municipal ordinances or Fair Housing Act regulations,” he said.

Unlike condo associations, homeowners’ associations — which govern planned communities of single-family homes — can charge whatever they wish. Condo associations can also legally assess fees for estoppel letters and mortgage questionnaires.

Sticking it to foreigners

Some condo associations single out foreign buyers for higher fees, reflecting the added costs of a background check on someone who’s lived overseas.

At Sunset Palms West in Kendall, international buyers must pay a fee of $150. At 801 Meridian on the Beach, the fee soars even higher: $350 for a foreign buyer.

Pets get squeezed, too.

900 Biscayne in downtown Miami charges tenants $100 to apply, $300 to move in and $250 to register a pet, all nonrefundable.

State law prohibits condo associations from charging transfer fees of more than $100 per person or married couple.

Consumers generally don’t know they’re being overcharged.

Only 13 people filed complaints about the high fees in Miami-Dade and Broward counties over the last year, according to the Florida Division of Condominiums, Timeshares and Mobile Homes. In five cases, the division sent “letters providing education” to the associations.

Asked if application, move-in and pet fees of more than $100 violated Florida law, a spokesman for the division declined an interview but emailed the relevant section of the Florida Condominium Act.
The state Legislature raised the limit from $50 to $100 in 1990.

Saul Gross, president of Miami Beach-based Streamline Properties, said $100 was hardly enough to cover the costs of doing background checks.

He said state legislators set the limit “before Airbnb and the short term rental epidemic [and] before Associations realized if they weren’t careful about approving tenants, it would interfere with the quality of life of the long-term unit owner residents.”

Streamline charges $150 application fees at at least two buildings it manages in Miami Beach.
Gross said he believes the statute caps transfer fees at $100 but allows higher charges for credit checks.

(A post on the condo division’s website states “the maximum charge allowable is $100 per applicant.”)

And Lynda Horvat, an attorney for Neighborhood Property Management, said if the fees are paid directly to the management company, and not to the association, the law doesn’t apply.
“Property management companies lawfully charge associations to perform services, which include but are not limited to processing tenant applications, conducting background checks and interviewing tenants,” Horvat wrote in an email. “The service charges paid to the property management pursuant to its contract with the association are not transfer fees.”

The service charges paid to the property management pursuant to its contract with the association are not transfer fees. Lynda Horvat.

That reading seems to contradict a 2008 warning letter the division wrote to a Broward condo.
Transfer fees “include such items as clerical fees, fees paid as a part of an applicant’s credit or background check or screening process and move-in fees,” the letter states.

“The Division takes the position that a mandatory fee, which an association requires an owner, purchaser or leasee to pay in connection with the sale or lease of a condominium unit is a transfer fee,” it continues.

“Charging more than $100 per person is a violation of Florida statute,” said Miami attorney Josh Rubens. “The money should be refunded.”


What are considered “Official Records” in Florida Condominiums and HOAs?


Question: I am the secretary of my homeowners’ association. In reading the bylaws, I see that I am responsible for making sure that the association maintains all official records. However, our bylaws do not specify what constitutes an “official record.” We just had our annual elections. We now have ballots, and a large number of torn open envelopes. Are these all official records? And, if so, how long do I have to keep them for? J.S. (via e-mail)

Answer: That is a good question. The Florida Condominium Act (Chapter 718 of the Florida Statutes) specifically lists ballots, sign-in sheets, voting proxies, and all other papers relating to voting by unit owners as “official records” which must be maintained for one year from the date of the election/meeting (generally speaking, most records must be kept for seven years).

The Florida Homeowners’ Association Act (Chapter 720 of the Florida Statutes), however, does not mention voting materials used at members’ meetings as part of “official records.”  However, the HOA Act does include a “catch all” provision that requires homeowners’ associations to maintain all “written records” not specifically listed in the statute. It is my opinion that ballots and all of the envelopes fall within this definition, and must be kept as official records. Of course, I am assuming your HOA is conducting secret ballot (rather than proxy-based) elections under proper authority in your bylaws, which is one of the most common mistakes I see in homeowners’ association operations.

The HOA Act generally provides that official records must be maintained within the state for seven years unless a different timeframe is provided (for example, bids only need to be kept for one year). Therefore, as odd as it may seem, all of these materials are supposed to be kept for seven years. If there is a management company, their contract usually requires them to oversee this.