1200 Park Central Blvd. South, Pompano Beach, FL 33064
9121 North Military Trail, Suite 200, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410
855 E SR 434., Suite 2209, Winter Springs (Orlando area), FL 32708
1211 North Westshore Blvd., Suite 409 Tampa, FL 33607
Offices in Miami-Dade (by appointment)
Reach any office: 800.974.0680

1200 Park Central Blvd. S., Pompano Bch, FL 33064
9121 N. Military Trail, Ste. 200, Palm Bch Gdns, FL 33410
855 E SR 434., Suite 2209, Winter Springs (Orlando area), FL 32708
1211 N. Westshore Blvd., Ste. 409, Tampa, FL 33607
Offices in Miami-Dade (by appointment)
Reach any office: 800.974.0680

Appellate Court Ruling On Claims Of Third Party Purchasers At Lender Foreclosures Likely Harmful To Homeowner Associations

In recent years, legal issues have been raised by third party purchasers at a lender foreclosure sale following the changes in Chapter 720 of Florida Statutes governing homeowners associations, and in particular the provision which makes a new owner liable for a prior owner delinquency in assessments. A large majority of governing documents of homeowners associations contain provisions that exempt any purchaser at a lender foreclosure sale from liability for any prior delinquency on the property. After the changes to Section 720.3085 F.S. in 2007, associations considered such third party purchasers to owe all delinquencies based upon the provisions of the Statute in place at the time these purchasers acquired title to the property and the lower courts have regularly agreed with that conclusion when a challenge was raised. Many such investor-purchasers objected to these claims, suggesting that they should be covered by the exemption in the documents. On May 27, 2015, the Fourth District Court of Appeals answered this question in favor of the position of the third-party purchasers in Pudlit 2 Joint Venture, LLP v. Westwood Gardens Homeowners Association, Inc., Case No. 4D14-1385.

Pudlit 2 Joint Venture, LLP (“Pudlit”) purchased properties within the Westwood Gardens Community from lender foreclosure sales. As many homeowner associations have recently done, the Westwood Association demanded all unpaid assessments which predated the Certificate of Title on the properties, which Pudlit paid “under protest and with full reservation of all rights and remedies,” and then filed a law suit against the Association for a declaratory judgment. Of particular interest in this case was certain particular provisions of their declaration of covenants, which indicated specifically that “the personal obligation for delinquent assessments shall not pass to [a] successor in title unless expressly assumed by [such successor]” and, that in the event of a foreclosure sale, it “shall extinguish the lien of such assessments as to payments thereof which become due prior to such sale or transfer. . .” Pudlit claimed that the effect of these provisions in the declaration wiped out the Westwood claim against them. Westwood claimed that the Statute in place at the time of the foreclosure sale governed their rights and obligations, not the declaration.

The Trial court ruled in favor of the Association, which was appealed here. The Appellate Court reversed in favor of Pudlit, finding that a third party purchaser at a lender foreclosure sale is a “third party beneficiary” to the provisions of the governing documents of the Westwood Association that provided the exemption, notwithstanding the existing Statute on the date Pudlit took title. The Court decided that the Statute crossed the “constitutional” line and impaired the “existing” contract rights of Pudlit, making the Statute unenforceable. The Court further indicated its opinion that the Statute was not retroactive in its intent and, in order for any homeowner association that was in existence prior to the Statute being enacted in 2007 to recover similar claims against a third party purchaser, it must have language in its governing documents that incorporates the changes to the Statute and/or expressly incorporates the provisions of Section 720.3085 F.S. It was the conclusion of the Court that the Declaration of Covenants for the Westwood Gardens Community “expressly creates rights for successors in title,” such as a third party purchaser at a lender foreclosure sale.

The provisions of the governing documents in this case are substantially similar to a large percentage of existing declarations of covenants in Florida. It is recommended to have the association attorney review the current provisions of the governing documents for all homeowners associations and evaluate the exposure of the association to this type of defense and/or claim. To maximize the ability of the association to recover unpaid assessments from third party purchaser at a lender foreclosure sale, amendments to the governing documents should be undertaken by the association as quickly as possible. The amendments that are suggested would minimally include a provision that automatically incorporates changes to Florida Statutes as they are adopted by the Legislature. For greater protection, another amendment can be included which expressly incorporates the provisions of Section 720.3085 F.S., as it may be amended from time to time.

Florida Supreme Court Updates Activities Of A Community Association Manager That Constitute The Unlicensed Practice Of Law

In its decision made in 1996, Florida Bar re: Advisory Opinion – Activities of Community Association Managers, the Florida Supreme Court issued an advisory opinion regarding whether or not certain activities of licensed Community Association Managers (CAMS) constitute the unlicensed practice of law.  In 2012, the Standing Committee on Unlicensed Practice of Law of the Florida Bar (the “Committee”) received a new petition to review these activities and some others, to clarify or update the decisions made in 1996 and advise the Supreme Court of its findings.  Public hearings were held and a report was submitted to the Court by the Committee in 2013.  The Court issued its updated ruling on these issues on May 14, 2015, in a similarly titled decision, Florida Bar re: Advisory Opinion – Activities of Community Association Managers, Case No. SC13-889.  In the decision, there is some clarification, but also unresolved questions on many tasks.

Continue reading “Florida Supreme Court Updates Activities Of A Community Association Manager That Constitute The Unlicensed Practice Of Law”

Retrofitting In Condominiums The Clock Is Ticking

Recent changes to Florida Statutes have included provisions in the Fire Safety Code that requires condominiums to undertake installation and/or changes to certain fire/safety related devices within the condominiums.  Due to the significant expense typically required to retrofit a condominium in the manner contemplated in the Fire Safety Code, and in recognition of the significant burden this would place on the unit owners, changes to the Condominium Act (Chapter 718 of Florida Statutes) allows an association to vote to “opt-out” of the requirement to retrofit the fire sprinkler system that services the condominium, including the common elements, association property, and the units.

Continue reading “Retrofitting In Condominiums The Clock Is Ticking”

Navigating Assistance Animal Requests

In recent months, formal requests to pet restricted communities for a reasonable accommodation to keep an emotional support animal has increased significantly.  Additionally, there have been new court decisions and other developments in the Fair Housing laws since our last article in Legal Morsels in 2011 (see https://hjq.a4f.myftpupload.com/how-community-associations-should-properly-handle-service-animal-requests/).  The following updates and supplements our prior posting on the topic.

Continue reading “Navigating Assistance Animal Requests”

Appellate Court Decision Alters 23 Years Of Collection Practices For Condominium Associations

In a somewhat surprise decision, the Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal has ruled that, in certain circumstances, associations may not rely upon the provisions of Florida Statutes that relate to the collection of delinquent assessments when an owner makes a payment with a restrictive endorsement.  (A restrictive endorsement is a notation on a check or cover letter that limits the manner in which the funds may be used or applied.)  Chapter 718 of Florida Statutes (for condominiums) was amended in 1991 to provide that payments received by associations are to be applied in a specified manner and expressly notwithstanding any restrictive endorsement placed on the check or cover letter by the paying owner.  This was originally included in the Statute to make certain that an owner that was delinquent could not avoid paying the interest, late fees, attorney’s fees and costs incurred by the association in the collection process by placing a restrictive endorsement on the payment.  This has been routinely followed in condominiums for the past 23 years without issue (and incorporated into Chapter 720 F.S. in 2007 for homeowner associations).

Continue reading “Appellate Court Decision Alters 23 Years Of Collection Practices For Condominium Associations”

2014 Legislation Affecting Community Associations

During the 2014 Legislative Session, a number of bills were adopted which will have an impact on community associations.  The three (3) bills which will likely have the most impact are outlined herein.


I.  GENERAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION BILL – House Bill 807:

Among the new legislation adopted by the 2014 Legislature is House Bill 807, which contains provisions affecting condominiums, cooperatives and homeowner’s associations.  The changes provided by this Bill will be effective July 1, 2014.

Timeshares v. Vacation Rentals: Revisions were made in Chapter 509 of Florida Statutes, relating to Public Lodging Establishments, removing or excluding timeshare projects from the restrictions relating to such establishments.

Continue reading “2014 Legislation Affecting Community Associations”

Reserves: An Overview For Community Associations

The topic of “reserves” in community associations is one which can be confusing.   Chapters 718 (governing condominiums), 719 (governing cooperatives) and 720 (governing homeowners associations) of Florida Statutes each contain provisions regarding reserves.  However, while similar in some respects, the statute for homeowner associations in particular have significant differences.

Continue reading “Reserves: An Overview For Community Associations”

Court Clarifies Limitations On Association Accessing A Condominium Unit When The Owner Is Not Present

Quite often boards of condominium associations desire to access units in the condominium for various reasons when the unit owner or approved occupant is not present.  There may be a water leak in a unit below and the association is looking for the source.  There may be insects that are infesting other units nearby.  Sometimes, the board just wants to see what is going on in the unit.  While Section 718.111(5) of Florida Statutes provides associations with the irrevocable right to access all units in the condominium, such right is not absolute.  The qualifying portions of the Statute are “when necessary”, “to perform maintenance, repair or replacement of common elements or of any portion of a unit to be maintained by the association”, and “to prevent damage to the common elements or to a unit or units”.  Occasionally, a board may be overzealous in its desire to access the unit and there can be consequences from doing so improperly.

Continue reading “Court Clarifies Limitations On Association Accessing A Condominium Unit When The Owner Is Not Present”

Appellate Court Reiterates Prior Ruling In Second Spiaggia Appeal

The Third District Court of Appeal has completed its second review of the issues involved in the controversial decision from 2013 regarding “joint and several” obligations of owners for unpaid assessments.  (This decision involves only condominiums in light of changes made to Chapter 720 of Florida Statutes in 2013.)  In Aventura Management, LLC, v. Spiaggia Ocean Condominium Association, Inc., Case No. 3D13-1437, March 5, 2014, the appellate court was presented with what it considered to be the same issue previously decided in Aventura Management, LLC v. Spiaggia Ocean Condominium Association, Inc, 105 So. 3d 637 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (identified by the Court in its decision as “Spiaggia I“).

Continue reading “Appellate Court Reiterates Prior Ruling In Second Spiaggia Appeal”