On October 9, 2018, the Poudre Overlook Board of Directors voted to impose fines on owners who had installed the wrong shade of gray roof shingle without first giving them a hearing. While this, in itself, is non-compliant with Colorado CCIOA statutes, the decision was overturned after two Board members met with the HOA Attorney.
The original decision would have given the Owners the ability to extend the time for replacement of their roof, and give them the opportunity to see if another hailstorm came in the interim, which would cost them thousands of dollars less than a full replacement out of pocket.
Two tiers were created: One fine if they replaced the roof in 3 years, a higher fine to have 8 years (which is the average life expectancy of a roof, given our now-frequent hailstorms).
Loading…
Reload document 
Open in new tab The two Board members who went to the HOA Attorney, however, returned and claimed that the HOA Attorney rejected the decision because a 1-year statute of limitations would run out. They claimed that if the Owners took the 3-year or 8-year deal, paid the fines, but then didn’t replace the roof by the deadline, the HOA would have no recourse.
Unfortunately, another At-Large Board member had experience in this area, and challenged the notion that the statute of limitations would toll from the date of the hailstorm. Instead, he suggested that we would be creating a contract, and the breach of the contract (ie, not replacing the roof) would instead begin a 2-year statute of limitations.
But, the two Board members, one of whom was formerly a criminal defense attorney, claimed that the analysis was wrong, that the At-Large Board Member had no legal background, and dismissed the concern without allowing a vote or discussion.
The meeting minutes from 10/29/18 clearly show that the information from the HOA attorney was the catalyst and reason for reversing the 10/9/18 Board decision. The result, of course, would be a combination of fines and expenses adding up to nearly $20,000 for the Owners who had used a “similar” color roof shingle that they believed in good faith was compliant with the GUIDELINE in the governing documents.
Loading…
Upon recognizing that this was, in fact, a fraudulent misrepresentation of the attorney advice, combined with the extreme effort to hide this information from the rest of the Board, the Secretary then found it necessary to consult with an attorney and professionals to learn what to do next.
He made contact with Mason at Robinson & Henry, a firm specializing in HOA law, and upon review of the facts, stated that the two Board Members should not just be removed from the Board, but that they should be barred from future participation for such a flagrant and willful action. He quoted a cost of $2250 as a retainer, and estimated that if trial were necessary, it would cost $20,000 to $30,000.