by Raymond Daniel Burke | Jan 13, 2016
The Circuit Court for Baltimore City has entered a significant money judgment against a condominium council of unit owners as a means of enforcing its prior order finding the condominium in contempt for failing to complete court ordered repairs. In a case in which I represented the unit owner, the Circuit Court had originally ordered the Harborview Condominium to undertake and complete, by the end of December 2013, certain specified repairs to the exterior common elements needed to make the building watertight. In July 2014, the Circuit Court held that both the failure to include certain specified items in the repair contract, and the failure to complete the repairs within the time ordered by the Court, amounted to willful contempt, and called for the imposition of sanctions. The Circuit Court further found that the case presented the “exceptional circumstances” required under Maryland law for the award of compensatory damages, consisting of monthly payments to the unit owner continuing until the repairs are completed. The Court also established certain construction deadlines to be met in order for the Condominium to avoid additional damage payments. These rulings were affirmed by the Maryland Court of Special Appeals in August 2015. In an order dated December 30, 2015, the Circuit Court directed that the unpaid monthly payments to the unit owner be entered as a money judgment. It further ordered that the total of monthly payments not yet due be accelerated and included in the money judgment. The total money judgment entered exceeds $600,000. (more…)
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Aug 24, 2015
The Maryland Court of Special Appeals has upheld a ruling of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City finding a Condominium Council of Unit Owners in contempt of court for failing to make common element repairs within the time designated in the ruling of an arbitrations panel, and ordering that monthly payments to the displaced unit owner for alternative living expenses continue until the repairs are properly completed. I served as counsel for the unit owner. The appeal can be found entitled as 100 Harborview Drive Condominium Council of Unit Owners v. Penthouse 4C, LLC, No. 0901, Sept. Term 2014, and you can review the opinion by copying the following link: http://www.courts.state.md.us/appellate/unreportedopinions/2015/0901s14.pdf
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Aug 12, 2015
Maryland Governor Larry Hogan has signed into law HB 1183, which provides protections to new home buyers who are unable to secure a loan commitment to permit them to proceed to closing. The new law, which relates only to the initial sale of new homes, amends Section 14-117 of the Real Property Article in the Annotated Code of Maryland concerning loan contingencies in new home contracts. It provides that all new home contracts must be contingent on the purchaser obtaining a loan commitment. Additionally, the contract must state the maximum loan interest rate the purchaser is obligated to accept, and the time period in which the purchase must obtain a loan commitment. If the purchaser does not obtain a loan commitment within the stated rate limit and time period, either the seller or the purchaser may declare the contract void. Any deposit is to be returned to the purchaser. (more…)
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Apr 15, 2015
Versions of a bill that was originally intended to limit fees charged by condominium associations for providing resale certificates has passed both houses of the Maryland General Assembly with amendments that limit the association’s liability for inaccurate information contained in those certificates. The Maryland Senate has joined the House of Delegates in passing an amended version of House Bill 1007, which limits the liability of a council of unit owners or a homeowners association for errors and omissions in the content of the resale certificate to the amount of the fees paid for the certificate. As originally proposed, HB 1007 would have limited the fee charged by condominium councils of unit owners for providing required information in connection with the resale of a unit. It also provided that required resale disclosure information to be furnished by a homeowners association as part of the sale of a home in the community. These requirements were retained in the amended bill passed by both houses, with an amendment that limits the fees charged to “the lesser of $175 or the actual cost.” But the amended version goes much further. In addition to providing for two additional fees associated with the resale process, the approved version of the bill provides that “[a]ny liability of the council of unit owners for an error or omission in the certificate shall be limited to the amount of the fees paid for the certificate.” This same limit on liability applies to the certificates now required to be furnished by homeowner associations. (more…)
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Apr 3, 2015
By a vote of 140-0, the Maryland House of Delegates passed an amended version of HB1007, which, as discussed in my prior post, was intended to limit the fee charged by condominium councils of unit owners for providing required information in connection with the resale of a unit. Most significantly, the amended version limits the liability of a council of unit owners for errors and omissions in the content of the resale certificate to the amount of the fees paid for the certificate. It makes not distinction as to whether such errors or omissions are intentional. This is contrary to, and is seemingly in response to, a ruling of the Maryland Court of Appeals. In a unanimous opinion filed on April 30, 2012, the Court of Appeals, in the case of MRA Property Management, Inc., et al. v. Armstrong, established that provisions the Maryland Consumer Protection Act apply to the information contained in a condominium resale certificate, and a council of unit owners and property manager can be liable for unfair and deceptive trade practices if the information has a tendency to mislead the purchaser, even though they are not party to the sales contract, and even if they have otherwise complied with the condominium resale disclosure requirements contained in Section 11-135 of the Maryland Condominium Act. The bill passed by the House would abrogate this ruling, and limit the council’s liability to “the amount paid for the certificate.” This would leave defrauded purchasers with recourse only against a management company. (more…)
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Mar 12, 2015
Legislation has been introduced in the Maryland House of Delegates that would limit the fee charged by condominium councils of unit owners for providing required information in connection with the resale of a unit. House Bill 1007 would also require requested information to be provided by a Homeowners Association as part of the sale of a home in the community.
Under Section 11-135(c) of the Maryland Condominium Act, within 20 days after receiving a written request from a unit owner, the council of unit owners is required to provide a certificate containing information concerning the community that is required to be disclosed to a potential purchaser under that section of the statute. The law presently provides that the council may charge the unit owner for its costs in furnishing the material. The proposed legislation would limit this charge to the lesser of $250 or the actual costs.
Under Section 11B-106(b) of the Maryland Homeowners Association Act, a homeowner who is selling their property is required to furnish the potential purchaser with certain information about the community. The proposed legislation would add a new subsection (c) to the statute that would require the homeowners association to provide that information upon request of the selling homeowner. It would impose the same limit of the fee charged for providing this material; i.e., the lesser of 250 or the actual cost. (more…)
