Thursday, April 18, 2024
Member Login
More RPPTL
Home
About Us
About Us
ActionLine
Join RPPTL
Certification
Fellows
For Law Students
Legislative Positions
Executive Council
Leadership
Upcoming Meeting Info
Awards & Recognition
In Memoriam
Budget
Past Agendas
Sponsors
Our Sponsors
Become a Sponsor
Committees
General Standing
Probate & Trust
Real Property
At Large Members
Search Committees & Members
Archived Committees
Ad Hoc Bylaws
Ad Hoc Civil Rules Revisions
Ad Hoc RTODD
Amicus Coordination
CLE Coordination
Communications
Convention Coordination
Disaster and Emergency Preparedness and Response
Fellows
Historian Committee
Homestead Issues Study
Information Technology
Law School Outreach
Legislation
Legislative Update
Liaison with: American Bar Association (ABA)
Liaison with: Business Law Section
Liaison with: Clerks of Circuit Court
Liaison with: FLEA / FLSSI
Liaison with: Florida Bankers Association
Liaison with: Judiciary
Liaison with: Out of State Members
Liaison with: TFB Board of Governors
Liaison with: TFB CLE Committee
Liaison with: TFB Council of Sections
Liaison with: TFB Pro Bono Committee
Long-Range Planning
Meetings Planning
Membership and Inclusion
Model and Uniform Acts
Professionalism and Ethics
Publications (ActionLine)
Publications (Florida Bar Journal)
Sponsor Coordination
Strategic Planning
Strategic Planning Implementation
Ad Hoc Artificial Reproductive Technology (ART)
Ad Hoc Committee on Electronic Wills
Ad Hoc Committee on Revocable Transfer on Death Deeds
Ad Hoc Guardianship Law Revision Committee
Ad Hoc Study Committee on Due Process, Jurisdiction & Service of Process
Ad Hoc Study Committee on Professional Fiduciary Licensing
Asset Protection Committee
Attorney/Trust Officer Liaison Conference
Charitable Planning and Exempt Organizations
Elective Share Review Committee
Estate & Trust Tax Planning
Guardianship, Power of Attorney & Advance Directives
IRA, Insurance & Employee Benefits
Liaison to Elder Law Section
Liaison to Tax Section
Liaisons with ACTEC
Principal and Income Committee
Probate & Trust Litigation
Probate Law & Procedure
Trust Law
Wills, Trusts & Estates Certification Review Course
Ad Hoc Hayslip
Attorney Banker Conference
Commercial Real Estate Committee
Condominium & Planned Development Committee
Condominium and Planned Development Law Certification Review
Construction Law
Construction Law Certification Review Course
Construction Law Institute
Development and Land Use Committee
Insurance and Surety
Liaison with FLTA
Real Estate Certification Review Course
Real Estate Leasing
Real Estate Structures and Taxation
Real Property Finance & Lending
Real Property Litigation
Real Property Problems Study
Residential Real Estate & Industry Liaison (RREIL) Committee
Title Insurance & Title Insurance Liaison
Title Issues & Standards
2020 Convention Coordination
Ad Hoc Committee on Creditors' Rights to Non-Exempt, Non-Probate
Ad Hoc Florida Business Corporation Act Task Force
Ad Hoc Leadership Academy
Ad Hoc LLC Monitoring
Ad Hoc Study Committee on Estate Planning Conflict of Interest
Ad Hoc Study Committee On Same Sex Marriage Issues
Ad Hoc Trust Account
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
Digital Assets and Information Study Committee
Florida Electronic Filing & Service
Legal Opinions
Liaison with: TFB Business Law Section
Publications
Media
Videos
Podcasts
CLE Events
Upcoming CLE
Recent CLE
Suggested:
Join RPPTL
ActionLine
FR/BAR Residential Contract
Upcoming Meeting
Upcoming CLE
New Decision: Assessments/Successive Liens and Partial Payments (Rajabi v. Villas at Lakeside Cd’m. Assn’n).
12/20/2020
It’s true! If you ignore a court’s warning that you will be acting at your “peril,” then you actually will be in peril, if not an endangered species!!
The viability of an amended condominium association assessment lien filed more than a year after the initial, first filed lien was recently addressed in
Rajabi v. Villas at Lakeside Cd’m. Assn’n, Inc., Case No. 5D18-852 (Fla. 5th DCA November 13, 2020)
which also reminded that any thought that a de minimus principal balance will not draw scrutiny, if not ire, in a Florida association lien foreclosure proceeding, will likely be dashed. A copy of the decision is attached.
The Facts.
After purchasing a condominium unit in August 2010, unit owner Rajabi made “several late payments” for assessments due for that year and for part of 2011. The timeline is as follows:
January 2011. Outstanding balance of $82.50.
March 2011. Initial, the first Assessment claim of lien filed.
April 2011. The Association stopped crediting the owner’s account with his assessment payments, instead forwarded his checks to the Association’s attorney where the checks were deposited into the attorney’s trust account.
The Association continued to assess the unit owner and the balance continued to accrue late fees and interest.
February 2013. The owner wrote to the Association that the Association ignored requests for his current statement. In a subsequent letter he confirmed emails and Certified letters for the accounting.
July 2013. The Association files its second claim of lien. The Association did not provide a notice of intent to file a second claim of lien.
July 18, 2013. The Association provides the owner a notice of intent to foreclose.
August 2013. The Association’s attorney sent the owner the Association’s itemized ledger. The ledger:
Was identified as an “official record of the Association kept in the ordinary course of business;”
Confirmed that the owner’s payments were never applied;
The Association added assessments, late fees and interest while noting the date that the owner’s checks were received; and,
Included “partial disbursement” entries reflecting monies received from the Association’s attorney and applied to the outstanding balance.
At the Trial Court.
The Association obtained a final judgment of foreclosure of the second lien in the amount of $135,205.80 including $48,533.91 in principle, interest, late fees and other fees and $80,590.76 in attorney’s fees.
The Appeal.
The appellate court reversed on two independent grounds.
The first ground was the Association’s failure to provide the owner a notice of intent to file the second, 2013 claim of lien. That failure violated
Section 718.121(4) Fla. Stat. (2013)
. The Association’s argument that the second claim of lien was merely “supplemental” to the first claim of lien was rejected.
Florida law does not contemplate a “supplemental” claim of lien piggybacking onto a prior lien that has been extinguished by the passage of time.
The second ground was the Association’s “erroneous handling of the owner’s payments,” violating the Condominium Act payment allocation provisions in
Section 718.116(3) Fla. Stat.
This erroneous handling also breached the Declaration of Condominium’s similar payment allocation provisions. The appellate court harkened back to the “disapproval” of a homeowner’s association’s failure to properly post payments in
Ocean Two Cd’m. Ass’n. v. Kliger, 983 So. 2nd 739 (Fla 3d DCA 2008)
.
Kibitzing.
The decision reminds condominium associations to timely file their assessment lien foreclosure complaints. After one year of effectiveness, the lien is extinguished, assuming no tolling provision applies. It cannot be revived.
Nevertheless, no need for rending of garments.
The decision does not prohibit filing a new claim of lien. Filing a new claim of lien may be relatively simple.
As the decision follows the statutes, new notices of intent to lien and to foreclose are required for which there is some expense. There will be a sixty day minimum delay, Section 718.121(4) Fla. Stat., ninety day minimum for homeowners’ associations Section 720.3085(4)(a) and (5) Fla. Stat.
In terms of priority, there likely is little to be lost as what intervening lien will arise that has priority over the association’s lien? Real property taxes will always be there. First mortgages will normally have priority, but if they, as regular procedure, obtain an association estoppel letter, the lender will normally not close the loan with an outstanding balance.
It may be best said that if the one-year time period has passed, bite the bullet and start over! Of course, this assumes that the Section 95.11 Fla. Stat. Statute of Limitations has not run.
The appellate court did not have to address the viability of an “amended” condominium association assessment claim of lien, if filed before the
Section 718.116(5)(b) Fla. Stat. (2020)
one year expiration period. The court’s rationale would appear to allow an amended claim of lien; however, the claim of lien must be recorded before the one-year anniversary of the original claim of lien. The Condominium Act’s one year limitation does not re-commence, but instead continues from the recording of the original claim of lien; however, it would appear particularly if the original claim of lien is being amended the one year period commences on the original claim of lien’s recording. As a reminder, the one-year period does not apply to a homeowners association claim of lien filed pursuant to Section 720.3085 Fla. Stat., and there is the statutory extension of the one year period for a bankruptcy court stay preventing the filing of a foreclosure action.
The appellate court did not prohibit the Condominium Association from sending partial payment checks to the Association’s attorney to hold in trust; however, the court appears to condemn the Condominium Association’s failure to enter the amounts paid on the Association’s ledger.
The appellate court also did not comment upon the Condominium Association’s statutory duty to generally provide an accounting record upon request. That may not have been an issue on appeal or there may be other reasons, particularly as the request for records would not be dispositive in light of either of the two reasons for reversal.
The court did note that the unit owner stopped paying assessments, but that was not to discredit the owner. The court accepted the owner’s statement that payments were stopped because the Association was not recording payments. The court did not expressly approve of the withholding of payments; however, the failure to make payments was not held against the unit owner.
The decision ends with a footnote observing that:
… there was no evidence demonstrating how the Association calculated interest or whether it did so correctly and in accordance with the terms of the Declaration.
While this quote may be dicta because the issue of proof of the calculation of interest would be moot in light of the reversal, the footnote appears to meander from precedent providing that interest is in essence a ministerial matter for which proofs are normally not required. Perhaps distinguishing this case from most other foreclosure actions, is what may have been a somewhat convoluted ledger because of the manner in which principal was, and was not, posted. Hopefully, this dicta will not shift a ministerial determination into an issue of fact for each dispute, recognizing that the calculation of interest is not unique to association lien foreclosure actions.
What does the Association do now? The holding was a plain vanilla “reversal.” No remand. No other directions to the trial court. Thus, the Association is not receiving a proverbial second bite at the apple, at least on this second claim of lien.
Should the Association regroup and record a third claim of lien? Presumably, yes after providing a notice of intent to lien. Monies due outside the limitations period likely have to be dropped, if nothing else than to avoid debt collection law penalties.
What happens to the $80,000.00 attorney’s fee claim? In light of the reversal that the claim of lien was not preceded by the statutory notice of intent to lien, it would be anticipated that the unit owner would argue that no attorney’s fees would be due.
Speaking of attorney’s fees, if the owner plead attorney’s fees it would be anticipated that the owner would recover reasonable attorney’s fees for the appeal and likely the trial court.
In this same regard, it is not known how attorney’s fees for this lien foreclosure exceeded $80,000, especially if the matter was non-jury which the opinion does not indicate.
Undoubtedly, many will be second guessing the initial decision of the Association to proceed when the initial delinquency was less than $100, especially if that amount resulted from the accrual of late fees and interest.
Perhaps a side note, or maybe not, interestingly, the court remarked that the unit owner’s renovation had a detrimental impact on other unit owners. One must wonder whether issues regarding the renovations pushed the Association down this path of “peril.”
Beyond the decision and disputes, one must wonder when the Legislature will move the requirement for an initial notice of intent to lien from 718.121 to 718.116, where it belongs.
And last but not least, this decision stands as a stark reminder that Florida community associations that fail to accept partial payments do so literally at their own “peril.”
Michael J. Gelfand
Past Chair
Real Property, Probate and Trust Law Section
of The Florida Bar
Click
www.RPPTL.com
for Breaking News
About Florida’s Largest Substantive Law Section!
Florida Bar Board Certified Real Estate Attorney
Florida Supreme Court Certified Mediator:
Civil Circuit Court & Civil County Court
Fellow, American College of Real Estate Attorneys
LOGIN
Email Address:
Password:
Login
Forgot your password?
Reset Password.
FOLLOW US
Facebook
Twitter
QUICK LINKS
Events Calendar
New Decisions
Events
Next Meeting
Upcoming CLE
FR/Bar Contracts
Cybersecurity
Contact Us
FAQ
Law Students
FAQ
Have a QUESTION about
this website or in general?
Forgotten Password?
Click to reset Password