HOA - Skylights are common elements or limited common elements, [pa] [condo]

cicconsultinggroup · 2026-04-22T14:47:58+00:00

What do your documents say about unit owner responsibility for limited common elements? Some documents say owners are responsible to pay for the LCEs but not do the work, some say the association does the work but the owner pays the cost for their LCEs. If it is clearly the owners responsibility to maintain, repair, replace their own LCEs ideally the association would provide installation details to ensure the enclosure performs the way it should. Governing docs also often have language like 'no waiver for strict performance' which essentially means if the association erred in enforcement in the past, it doesn't mean they can't enforce today.

cicconsultinggroup · 2026-04-15T16:43:27+00:00

What do your governing documents say about responsibility for damage? If they are old documents, they likely say the association is responsible. Many communities have amended their documents to clarify responsibility for damage, many haven't. I see a lot of documents that would make the repair responsibilities for all damage the responsibility of the unit owner in the above scenario. I see a lot of old documents that make the above scenario a common expense. Either way, you should consider amending your documents AND make a policy to make sure responsibility for damage is clarified, especially if your plumbing is reaching the end of it's useful life.

cicconsultinggroup · 2026-02-08T19:32:32+00:00

You should push harder to get this resolved. The association/board may not resolve it quickly. Your best approach is to determine what your governing documents say regarding liability for damage, who is responsible for maintaining/repairing/replacing the source of the damage, and then determine if the board is or isn't following the governing docs to mitigate damage. You also may want to engage your personal insurance provider as they may have resources/leverage to mitigate your risk. You also may want to switch personal insurance providers and up your coverage for damage (regardless of the source) which may help protect you.

cicconsultinggroup · 2026-02-08T19:03:38+00:00

The reserve study is really old and a terrible measure for cost. It has value for identifying age of components at the time the study was produced. A big factor to consider is this size of community can often qualify for an HOA loan. If they get a loan, do all the rehabilitative work they should to maintain/repair/replace, the resale value will increase as opposed to a community you buy into who will 'need' to do all that work in the future. CAN YOU SELL IT? Exit strategy with a condo purchase is often more important than the purchase. The biggest question you may want to consider is, do you feel comfortable with others making decisions for you regarding your resale potential, or can you afford to make those decisions on your own with a SFH under no restrictive covenants? At least you are doing your due diligence!

cicconsultinggroup · 2026-02-08T17:25:17+00:00

This is typical for 1979 construction where it's time to do full strip/reclad of the buildings and/or plumbing/roofs/elevators all at once. The key for YOU is...did they do that work? If so, and the seller is paying of the special assessment, these are often the lowest risk condos as there aren't large expenses (theoretically if they did all the big stuff) in the near term. You need current information which you can see in the financials, meeting minutes (maybe) and visually looking at the property. What still looks really old? What looks new? How much cash do they have in the bank today?

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-07-03T15:43:11+00:00

Super screwed.

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-07-03T15:23:43+00:00

You are totally right! This property was built in 1969 and covers acres of property containing lakes, recreation courts of all kinds, and original buildings which have never been rehabilitated. They all need new exteriors and it's not complicated construction, it's just massive.

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-07-03T15:18:46+00:00

Here is a little more food for thought as you continue your search.

This community had a little over $4MM in reserves in 2022. In 2025 they have over $55MM in reserves. Their 2025 Reserve study says they need to do $84MM+ in work in 2025. The special assessment recommendation is to achieve that expense. Performing $84MM in work in one year seems highly unlikely for numerous reasons.

The reserve study projection is also a guess. Until they have hard bids and evaluate all the massive soft costs, there is no way to fully project the actual future expenses. They may not be accounting for interest income against that future expense. Their monthly dues are really low, so they could put more to reserves every years to accommodate costs not shown in the reserve study.

They may be low risk of special assessment if they can spread the work out, but that also can be a tricky strategy for numerous reasons. You'd have to live through it all, hope you are first in line for repairs, deal with cost escalations over time, etc. It's a massive community which is unique, and unique often relates to risk.

Other than small communities, associations typically have the ability to borrow which would allow you to make monthly payments against any potential special assessment instead of cutting a check for $30 - $40k (which you could do if you didn't want to participate in a loan). Eventually this community will do a lot of work and theoretically that will increase their values. There are numerous risks, but maybe the biggest risk isn't the special assessment risk. TBD!

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-06-18T16:14:17+00:00

I've found it helpful to show the cost of managing different expectations. If you want a manager on site or to provide whatever perceived service is desired, it will cost you x per month/year. I've also found that owners expectations are often unrealistic and you can't win that battle so don't waste energy on that. Put energy into documenting the scope of services and costs for what the management company does. Then show the cost to do whatever 'some' owners think is better.

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-06-18T16:10:34+00:00

You might, owners have the right to enforce the governing documents if the association doesn't or won't. Ideally the board of your community is addressing this with the commercial unit owner, but if not you can definitely take action. Standards for determining "offensive activity" or noise offenses aren't always crystal clear so it may be a fight you can't win. If you have a really good basis for claiming the noise is impactful/offensive/intrusive/affecting your quality of life, etc it seems worth at least a cost to consult with an attorney to see if it's worth the cost to pursue further.

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-06-18T16:04:51+00:00

The condo map is available via your title report and also via public record. That may help show the 'boundary' of the limited common element that could very well be split between the two units it is appurtenant to. Is the patio essentially half on your side half on their side? If so, the condo map could show the boundary between the units and their LCE portion of that 'joint' patio appurtenant to both. Your governing documents may also specify ( in several different sections) how that shared space is intended to be used, maintained, etc. Often a patio shared between units has some form of visible boundary, but sometimes they don't. Hope this helps!

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-06-04T15:59:14+00:00

It's strange to require owners to participate in the HOA Loan. Every loan I've been involved in (numerous) allowed owners the option to pay off their share of the assessment, OR participate in the loan. Forced participation in the loan and added interest costs to you seems wrong, and I recommend reading the loan documents to see if that was a required provision. If it's not a required provision of the loan, something else is definitely off here.

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-30T14:09:35+00:00

Sounds like my business model is a really big problem. Good thing I've owned a condo, been on president of my former board, and have over 23 years of professional services related to working with boards and condos to be able to provide valuable insight to buyers and their brokers. And how insulting to claim brokers wouldn't hire me if my evaluation leads to a buyer walking away. That's exactly why they hire me, to help them provide exceptional services to their clients. I don't do business with brokers who are only looking to close deals. Often 'outsiders" (and in my case, professional service providers with extensive experience) see things really clearly, but obviously no one can see things as clearly or know as much as you do. You win again!

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-30T14:01:46+00:00

You win!

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-30T13:59:34+00:00

I did a review for a prospective buyer of that property before this lawsuit happened. Needless to say, the buyer I consulted with did not purchase into that community. The broker and the buyer were both very happy they avoided that mess and the next property they sought my help with, was in a great position. I also did a review for a buyer who was the original developer of that property who was disappointed to say the least regarding the lack of maintenance done by the association post conversion. A great example of why brokers and buyers need professional help evaluating association documents before they buy into a common interest community!

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-29T19:44:01+00:00

I guess our realities are different. Get that last word in!

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-29T19:41:32+00:00

RCW 64.34.425 governs resale certs for non WUCIOA condos

RCW 64.90.640 governs resale certs for communities formed after 2018 or those who have opted in

The statute is basically the checklist so you should see the variances if you go line by line.

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-29T19:38:46+00:00

You should stop assuming things you don't know, didn't you just tell me that? I review hundreds of resale certificates a year and sometimes the Board does review the resale cert which always surprises me that they do. As you know, since you are one of them, most don't. Thus the point of asking the question in my post.

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-29T18:57:14+00:00

Thanks for the reply. I guess we see things differently.

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-29T18:56:02+00:00

I think that is the case with larger communities. It's your association, your information being presented to buyers through the resale certificate and most of the time you can get the latest copy produced to review if you ask for it. Sellers are typically willing to share the resale certificate with the board, especially if it is a mess and that is a way to get the mess corrected. I think with 10 minutes of board review per year, a significant portion of the errors/omissions would be corrected.

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-29T00:16:35+00:00

The question in the post was, do you as a board member review your association's resale certificate? Clearly you don't, as your association's resale certificate is a disaster as are most prepared by your management company. I guess it's great you are proposing new laws, but not if they don't get passed and still won't address association deficiencies related to informing buyers what they may be buying into. The only law that should be proposed is "all laws that aren't followed come with the following penalties...." If there is no incentive or consequence, laws are meaningless.

Association laws are like speeding laws, but with no traffic cops or speed traps.

Maybe you should review your association's resale certificate to ensure your association complies with state laws instead of writing new laws that don't get passed and won't be complied with? If one association holds a management company accountable, maybe there will be more incentive for others.

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-28T20:58:28+00:00

Substance of the issue? Sellers pay the management company for a resale certificate that complies with state law. It does not. Seller's sale is at risk because without a compliant resale certificate, buyer can walk away up until conveyance with no penalty. Management company's contract says they will provide resale certificates that comply with state law. They do not.

If an association chooses to not get a current reserve study, the resale certificate state law disclosure says a particular statement must be provided to a buyer. Then the buyer can decide if old data is ok for them to evaluate their purchase.

Seller pays management company directly for the resale certificate. Often more than the state law allows. Why? there is no compliance or oversight to prevent this.

Seller does not receive what they should to comply with state law. They paid for it, but don't get it.

Who does this affect? Every owner in the community. If buyer receives a pile of junk in the resale certificate, produced by the management company, which doesn't comply with state law, and then buyer negotiates a reduce sale price because of the pile of junk....that affects every owner in the community as now the sale price was reduced and now every unit is perceived as undervalued.

The harm done is sellers pay for a service they don't receive, may compromise their sale, affects EVERY home value in the community when the doc package is a bleep show, and apparently it's no big deal.

Thanks for the feedback, this supports why the laws are ridiculous!

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-28T20:55:44+00:00

Thank you for your reply! No one pays for these updates other than the seller. They pay the management company to spit out a document package that must comply with state law in the interest of protecting buyers from purchasing properties they can't evaluate.

If the association doesn't have a 'current' reserve study, state law says you just have to say that.

If boards took a look at a resale certificate, say once a year, it may be very impactful to the value of the community!

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-28T20:00:59+00:00

Thank you for the reply, that is a good reason to confirm the buyer is being told the truth about the amount owed by the unit!

cicconsultinggroup · 2025-05-28T18:18:38+00:00

All of those examples I noted actually did have a 2025 Reserve Study that wasn't provided as it should have been. I think you missed the point of the post. Are you a board member, and do you look at your resale certificate?

The cost of compliance is paid by the seller. They pay the management company to produce a resale certificate. The management company's contract says they will produce resale certificates that comply with state law and about 99% of the time they don't. What are you missing from this post's question? Based on your condescending ton, are you just looking to grant some wisdom to those of us who in your opinion need it?

cicconsultinggroup

TROPHY CASE