by Raymond Daniel Burke | Apr 8, 2022
House Bill 358, now pending in the Maryland General Assembly, would allow alterations in the percentage interests assigned to each unit in the common elements by a vote of less than 100% of the unit owners. Under current law, amendments to a condominium declaration generally require the approval of 80% of the unit owners. However, there are four specific changes that cannot be made without the consent of all unit owners and mortgagees: (1) the boundaries of any unit: (2) the undivided percentage interest in the common elements of any unit; (3) the liability for common expenses or rights to common profits of any unit; or (4) the number of votes in the council of unit owners of any unit. The proposed bill would remove the undivided percentage interest of any unit in the common element from this restriction. Instead, a change in percentage interests could be undertaken by a vote of 60% of the unit owners, and without any mortgagee consents.
Currently, the only amendment permitted with only 60% approval is one that adds or repeals .provisions for the suspension of the use of parking or recreational facility common elements by a unit owner that is more than 60 days in arrears in assessment payments.
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Mar 23, 2022
House Bill 1061, now pending the the General Assembly, would authorize counties and municipalities in Maryland to create a fund to assist in the repair of infrastructure in condominiums and homeowner associations. It is intended to provide for repair and rehabilitation of property that is part a condominium or homeowners association, but of is a nature that would be “traditionally maintained by the county or municipality for the benefit of the general public, including roads and stormwater management facilities.” It would not apply to “recreational facilities used for the exclusive use or benefit of the members of a condominium association or homeowners association or their guests.” In addition to taxes and other appropriations, a portion of the property taxes paid by the condominium unit owners or homeowner association members would be allocated to the fund.
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Jun 1, 2021
A bill that proposed significant changes to the Maryland Condominium Act, as well as the Maryland Homeowner Association Act, concerning the period during which the developer is in control of the council of unit owners or the homeowner association, was passed in the House of Delegates by a vote of 101 – 31. However, it was never brought to a vote in the Senate. As it relates to condominiums, the bill would require that the developer hold at least two meeting per year, rather than the current one annual meeting, and that the unit owners have an opportunity to comment on condominium matters during those meetings. Additionally the bill would require that, if the condominium has a board of directors, within 30 days after 25% of the units have been titled to unit owners, the developer must appoint a board member who is a unit owner and not otherwise affiliated with the developer; and that, if there is no board at that time, a board must then be established The bill would further require the developer to disclose any governmental bonds affecting the project, and provide notice in advance of requesting release of any such bonds. Also, it would be required that the maintenance of the condominium’s books and records begin on the date that the council of unit owners is established, and that the condominium’s books and records be kept separate and apart from those of the developer. The House approved similar changes to the Maryland Homeowner Association Act. In the Senate, the bill was referred to the Judicial Proceedings Committee, which is as far as it went during the 2021 legislative session.
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Dec 16, 2020
Compliance with Section 10-702 of the Maryland Real Property Code has been a source of some considerable discussion. It requires that a home seller provide the buyer with a either a “disclosure statement,” by which information is provided relating to the seller’s knowledge of defects, or a “disclaimer statement,” which applies to “as is” sales, but still requires disclosure of “latent defects.” It should be noted, however, that neither statement is required in connection with the sale of a unit in a property containing five or more units, because the statute expressly applies “only to single family residential property improved by four or fewer units.” In the sale of a condominium unit, disclosure requirements are governed by Section 11-135 of the Maryland Condominium Act, which requires certain disclosures by both the council of unit owners and the selling unit owner.
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Jul 15, 2020
Here is a link that you can copy to your browser to view my latest opinion/commentary in The Baltimore Sun:
https://www.baltimoresun.com/opinion/op-ed/bs-ed-op-0716-equal-protection-20200715-e46odlco7fhvtdzv4wy6kjzave-story.html
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Jul 14, 2020
In a newly issued opinion, the Court of Appeals of Maryland has clarified existing law and expressly recognized an independent cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty. In William H. Plank, II, et al. v. James P. Cherneski, et al., Misc. No. 3, September Term, 2019. the Court observed that whether Maryland recognizes an independent cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty is a question that “Courts and commentators have been asking … for 23 years since this Court articulated its holding in Kann v. Kann, 344 Md. 689 (1997).” In Kahn, the Court declared that there was “no universal omnibus tort for the redress of breach of fiduciary duty,” but noted that “[t]his does not mean that there is no claim or cause of action available for breach of fiduciary duty.” 344 Md. at 713. In its new decision, the “Court recognizes an independent cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty. To establish a breach of fiduciary duty, a plaintiff must demonstrate: (1) the existence of a fiduciary relationship; (2) breach of the duty owed by the fiduciary to the beneficiary; and (3) harm to the beneficiary. The recognition of an independent cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty is pertinent to the operations of condominium and homeowner associations, and, in particular, may impact the potential liability of developers during the period of time when they are in control of an association’s board.
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Jun 1, 2020
An amendment to Section 11-103 of the Maryland Condominium Act, adopted by the General Assembly during 2020 legislative session, clarifies the procedures for obtaining the consent of the holders of mortgages and deeds of trust to amendments to the condominium’s declaration, where such consent it required under a condominium’s governing documents. It is intended to address circumstances in which holders of mortgages or deeds of trust do not respond to notices of proposed amendments. The new law provides that the condominium provide holders of mortgages and deeds of trust with a copy of the proposed amendment, and, if the holder fails to object in writing within 60 days after receiving the notice, they are deemed to have consented to the amendment. This provision is not applicable where the proposed amendment would (1) alter the priority of the lien of the mortgage or deed of trust; (2) materially impair or affect the unit as collateral; or (3) materially impair or affect the right of the holder to exercise rights under the mortgage or deed of trust. In those instances, express consent must still be obtained. A similar amendment was enacted to Section 11B-116 of the Maryland Homeowner Association Act. These new provisions take effect on October 31, 2020.
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Jun 1, 2020
An amendment to Section 11-109.2 of the Maryland Condominium Act passed during the 2020 session of the Maryland General Assembly requires that the budget adopted at an annual meeting be distributed to each unit owner no more than 30 days after the meeting at which the budget was adopted. The distribution may be made “by electronic transmission, by posting on the condominium association’s home page, or by inclusion in the homeowner association’s newsletter.” An amendment to the same effect was enacted as to Section 11B-112.2 of the Maryland Homeowners Association Act. The new law takes effect on October 31, 2020.
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Jun 1, 2020
Legislation enacted during the 2020 session of the Maryland General Assembly increases the amount for which an individual unit owner is responsible where the cause of damage to any portion of the condominium originates in their unit. Under Section 11-114 of the Maryland Condominium Act, condominium master policies must cover property damage to all of the condominium structure, including both the common elements and units as originally constructed and finished by the developer, with the unit owners providing individual insurance for their improvements and personal contents. If damage originates in an individual unit, the owner is responsible for the insurance deductible under the condominium’s master policy, up to a maximum cap, which has been set a $5,000. The new law increases that cap to $10,000, and will take effect on October 1, 2020. The statute will now provide: “If the cause of any damage to or destruction of any portion of the condominium originates from a unit, the owner of the unit where the cause of the damage or destruction originated is responsible for the council of unit owners’ property insurance deductible not to exceed $10,000.” Any remaining deductible amount remains a common expense.
by Raymond Daniel Burke | Apr 3, 2020
As multi-family housing communities, condominium’s need to be particularly mindful regarding the impact the Covid-19 pandemic. I have received a number of requests for guidelines, and condominiums are correct to reach out for advice from their attorneys and property managers. There should be clear communications issued to the community concerning complying with social distancing requirements within the premises. This includes such matters as restrictions on the use of facilities, issues relating to visitors and deliveries, and contact with employees, contractors and vendors who may be on the property. Notifications need to be provided as to how scheduled meetings will be conducted, as well as instructions with regard to contacts with board members and management. A specific plan needs to be in place for dealing with owners who request deferral or other accommodations with regard to the payment of assessments. And special instructions need to be established for the dissemination of information about the presence in the community of someone who has tested positive for Coronavirus, or is in self-quarantine as a result of experiencing symptoms or having had contact with an infected person. It is extremely important to seek professional guidance at this time as to what policies need to be in place and the content of communications with unit owner members.
