Condominiums plagued by frivolous lawsuits
Homeowners suing the HOA causes problems for all owners in a complex. This makes it impossible to get an FHA loan, difficult to close a conventional loan and harms the value of all the units. In California (we are a litigious state) anyone can sue the Home Owner Association and hold everyone hostage.
Laguna Niguel, Laguna Woods and Newport Beach have the highest number of this type of Civil suits in the State.
Case # Orange County Superior Court 30-2012 00611073
Dolumeter Wharton V Old Trabuco Highlands Homeowners Association
Dolumeter Wharton did
not pay her HOA dues for two years.
Dolumeter Wharton Sued the Home owner Association in Orange
County Superior Court filed as a case less than $25000 claiming they didn’t
have the right to charge her late fees. On The Orange County Superior Court
Case Access the case appears satisfied financially, however this creates headaches, hardship for owners and holds down the value of units in the complex with frivolous claims.
The case was originally against American Express… then
Dolumeter Wharton (one owner in the complex) cross- complaint sued the Homeowner
Association for collecting normal monthly dues. Mr. Wharton did not pay her HOA
dues for two years and tried to dispute in court that the collection company
that the HOA used was illegal. Wharton
wanted the condo complex to waive all her late fees of $1700. Wharton paid the
past due bills.
Superior Court of California- County of Orange, Case access
and enter her name Wharton, Dolumeter you can see the case. She also sued four
other people about various and sundry (don’t look solid or valid) issues in the
past. She originally sued American Express in this filing then took a broad
approach and sued everyone in sight. You can see on the case access Wharton
paid $10000 and later this was set aside.
Since this was filed as Under $25000 he could not have
re-couped any more than that amount. Insurance in the master policy covers this.
The HOA did have to hire an attorney. The case has nothing to do with the solid
HOA – it is about one unit owner trying not to pay the monthly dues. Dolumeter
is asking for an apology from the HOA…
Verified losses $6700 + $1700 but still dragging all the
homeowners and mortgagees into problems. In order to close a home loan in a
condominium complex, lenders must verify the cost of lawsuits and if the
pending litigation creates a hardship or financial strain on the owners, and
mortgage lenders. These frivolous claims
end up harming all the owners in a condo complex. It adds costs. It makes the
value of the units less because it is difficult to get conventional or FHA
financing. The only person who will win in this is her Attorney.
Rule 3.740. Collections cases
(a) Definition
"Collections case" means an action for recovery of
money owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than $25,000,
exclusive of interest and attorney fees, arising from a transaction in which
property, services, or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does
not include an action seeking any of the following:
(1)
Tort
damages;
(2)Punitive
damages;
(3)Recovery
of real property;
(4)Recovery
of personal property; or
(5)A
prejudgment writ of attachment.
(b) Civil Case Cover Sheet
If a case meets the definition in (a), a plaintiff must check
the case type box on the Civil
Case Cover Sheet (form CM-010) to indicate that the case is a
collections case under rule 3.740 and serve the Civil Case Cover Sheet (form CM-010) with the
initial complaint.
(Subd (b) amended effective January 1, 2009.)
(c) Exemption from general time-for-service requirement and case
management rules
A collections case is exempt from:
(1)The
time-for-service requirement of rule 3.110(b); and
(2)The
case management rules that apply to all general civil cases under rules
3.712-3.715 and 3.721-3.730, unless a defendant files a responsive pleading.
(d) Time for service
The complaint in a collections case must be served on all named
defendants, and proofs of service on those defendants must be filed, or the
plaintiff must obtain an order for publication of the summons, within 180 days
after the filing of the complaint.
(e) Effect of failure to serve within required time
If proofs of service on all defendants are not filed or the
plaintiff has not obtained an order for publication of the summons within 180
days after the filing of the complaint, the court may issue an order to show
cause why reasonable monetary sanctions should not be imposed. If proofs of
service on all defendants are filed or an order for publication of the summons
is filed at least 10 court days before the order to show cause hearing, the
court must continue the hearing to 360 days after the filing of the complaint.
(f) Effect of failure to obtain default judgment within required
time
If proofs of service of the complaint are filed or service by
publication is made and defendants do not file responsive pleadings, the
plaintiff must obtain a default judgment within 360 days after the filing of
the complaint. If the plaintiff has not obtained a default judgment by that
time, the court must issue an order to show cause why reasonable monetary
sanctions should not be imposed. The order to show cause must be vacated if the
plaintiff obtains a default judgment at least 10 court days before the order to
show cause hearing.
Rule 3.740 amended effective January 1, 2009; adopted effective
July 1, 2007.
THIS RULE Wharton filed under is to try and stop the HOA
from foreclosing on her individual unit.
Caroline Gerardo NMLS # 324982
