Protection for Administrator & Owners

Ken

Platinum
Jan 1, 2002
13,884
495
83
Fabio,

Without going into detail as to why it is necessary to ask, and assuring you I'm not asking you tell me at this time what the policy should say, but is it permissible to include in the Rules of a Condominium that the Administrator will be protected if sued by an angry person for some administrative decision or recommendation to the assembly that displeased the person? Likewise, can there be language that protects owners participating in an assembly?

I am not asking about lawsuits brought against the condominium or association but those brought against individuals who are sued individually, for example, by someone who wants to intimidate them to do what he wants or to change what has been done. Is there language that can be put in the Rules that assures them that if they are doing the job they won't be abandoned by the group if what they do results in their being sued as individuals?

Ken
 

MommC

On Vacation!
Mar 2, 2002
4,056
7
0
dr1.com
Ken.....as I have left my copy of our condo

registration and regulations in the Dr I cannot give you the exact wording of the clause however the administrator is empowered by the regulation (legal law of the condo as set out in the Condo registration act) to act on behalf of the owners of the condo. Therefore he can not be sued individually rather the condominium association must be sued as a whole. Our ass'n carries insurance to protect the ass'n (aka the owners) for various common perils.
The wording does not come from any "bylaw" that the ass'n has passed in it's annual meetings but rather from the legislation governing condominium itself.
Hope this helps......I'm sure Fabio can give you more detail as to the "legislative act" that governs this.
 

Ken

Platinum
Jan 1, 2002
13,884
495
83
MommC,

Thanks for reply. In not too distant future, I would like to talk more with you about the rules of your condo. But meantime, how would your condo deal with the following situation?

Someone trying to achieve a particular outcome brings personal lawsuits against the individual owners that happen to live in the DR. It is a form of manipulation. He wants to intimidate these owners so that when they attend meetings of the condo membership they will either abstain or vote in his favor on motions that are contrary to his interests. He really has nothing against them, but they can attend condo assemblies and they can and do vote.
 

MommC

On Vacation!
Mar 2, 2002
4,056
7
0
dr1.com
Best bet for them is to band together.......

and let him know they will not tolerate his nonsense.
They can propose a motion that if necessary the condo will "fund" all "defense" of frivolous litigations brought against individual owners by ANY other individual. If they have a majority the motion will pass and the fellow bringing these lawsuits will be forced to help pay the defense against himself through his condo fees.

We had one owner that used to bring a pistol to the Annual General meetings in hopes of intimidating the rest of us so they would get what they wanted (beneficial only to them). The president simply stated that the meeting would not be called to order until all offensive weapons were removed from the area and said if necessary the authorities would be called. Want to bet how fast the revolver did a "disappearing" act???

We also have "pre-meeting" meetings with a core group of owners who do not always see eye to eye however form a majority block of votes. We discuss what are the most important issues to be resolved at the "real" meeting and who will be the person presenting the "cause" (usually the one who is most interested in that particular issue). This gives time for the erson to do their research-get all the facts and figures (if a cost is involved) and ask the administrator to place it on the agenda.
Some issues do not get dealt with if the majority feel it is a "hopeless cause" or too expensive for the current year however it will be brought up at the meeting for discussion and sometimes resolved or deferred for the next year.
Hope this helps.........
 

Ken

Platinum
Jan 1, 2002
13,884
495
83
Thanks, MommC. I like your idea about a rule relative to funding the defense of owners against frivolous lawsuits. Whether this is legally possible is one of the things that I'd like to know. The rule would have to be drawn carefully in order not to make it broad enough to cover lawsuits related to matters involving owners who are involved in other activities.

When you live in the DR you can sometimes find yourself in situations that your previous life didn't prepare you for.
 

MommC

On Vacation!
Mar 2, 2002
4,056
7
0
dr1.com
You're right Ken........

It would need to be worded so that it covers only items related to the condo and "intimidation" type frivolous lawsuits. I think if they band together as I suggested and let this fellow know he ain't got a chance to intimidate them, he'll withdraw rather quickly.
At least that has been the case for us. Even most of the owners who are not a part of our "control" group appreciate the fact that we only want wants best for the condo so it functions properly and is maintained well and they'll make suggestions for us to consider that we may not have thought of.
For example this year it was decided to purchase an "inversor" to provide external lights when there is no power at night for safety (we had tried several yrs ago to buy a generator of sufficient size to provide the whole complex with power but there were too many owners who were afraid they would get stuck paying for it while others wouldn't contribute ie-not pay their condo fees).
As it is four of us have a generator and we light our stairway when there is no power but not the whole complex.
Most "come around" when they see improvements being made on a regular basis that benefit all and no-one is allowed to take advantage of the others.
 

Fabio J. Guzman

DR1 Expert
Jan 1, 2002
2,359
252
83
www.drlawyer.com
Ken said:
is it permissible to include in the Rules of a Condominium that the Administrator will be protected if sued by an angry person for some administrative decision or recommendation to the assembly that displeased the person? Likewise, can there be language that protects owners participating in an assembly?

This is a principle of corporate governance. An officer of a corporate entity, acting on behalf of that entity, is not personally responsible for his acts provided he has not gone beyond his duties. For example, a condo administrator has the right to collect maintenance fees from any condo owner in default. He can sue him, put a lien on his condo and eventually foreclose on the property. He cannot be sued by the condo owner for trying to collect what's due. However, if the administrator threatens a condo owner with bodily harm if he does not pay, or slaps him in the face, then, the condo owner has the right to file a complaint against him. Also, I'm assuming that the action taken by the condo vs. the recalcitrant owner is legal. Let's say that the condo owners decide in an assembly meeting to prevent him from entering his premises or to cut his utilities without due process. In that case, the condo owner has the right to go against the administrator and the other owners individually.

You can certainly include language that protect the administrator in situations like this in the condo bylaws. The same goes for owners just exercising their rights to vote in an assembly.
 

Ken

Platinum
Jan 1, 2002
13,884
495
83
Follow up questions for Fabio

Thanks, Fabio. If I understand correctly, language can be included to protect owners who are sued because of their participation in an assembly of the condo. Would this protect an owner if a litigious person, deciding the owner was an enemy because he spoke and/or voted in favor of a proposal that he felt was harmful to him, brought a personal lawsuit against the owner?

Also, what about a situation where someone uses personal lawsuits against owners to discourage them from participating in an assembly or to either abstain on votes that are detrimental to him or to vote in his favor? Can the language be broad enough to cover this.

I realize that situations like this seldom arise, but they can. I'd like to think that it is possible to protect the owners as well as the administrators so that a litigious person can't work his will by using the tactic of personal lawsuits.
 
Last edited:

Escott

Gold
Jan 14, 2002
7,716
6
0
www.escottinsosua.blogspot.com
You will still have to defend yourself. A condo cant hold owners harmless in the US and probably not in the DR. It can hold the Administrator/Manager harmless and protect him from suit.

I own a condo in the US for 10 years and my wife has been on the board so I am a little bit familiar with the workings of them.

You do something that this guy doesnt like and you will have to defend yourself if he starts an action against you personally. How did you **** this guy off? Was it attitude?
 

MommC

On Vacation!
Mar 2, 2002
4,056
7
0
dr1.com
Jazz....it should be so simple.......

How about an owner in a fourth floor unit that has a large bloodhound that howls 24/7? Condo regulations say owners have a right to maintain pets on their property providing the pet does not pose a health threat or a nuisance to "los vicinos" (those closeby). We won't even bother getting into the rights of use and noise regulations. We politely asked her to muzzle the animal when she's not home to prevent it from howling and she refused. Also to keep beter control of it when she's leaving the grounds with it as it has "lunged" at several people and other owners are afraid to enter the stairwll and even the grounds when the animal is loose. She refused.
This animal is "penned" on the balconey 23/24 and does it's "business" there. The maid scoops and "flushes" with cloro and water which run out the balconey drains and down the side of the building, right over the top of the bedroom windows of the three floors below. We've petitioned the health authorities, laid a complain with the police, been to the tribunal de la tierra to no avail. She's been told by the Health Authorities to "clean up" her act and dispose of the waste in a "sanitary" manner. Her solution - sue the condo to pay for installing drains that would run on the outside of the building from her balconey to the septic tanks. She lost!
In desparation we did the only thing we could and passed a "bylaw" that "pets" were not allowed in the common area for health and safety reasons. Which meant she had to carry the animal down 4 flights of stairs and across 60 ft. of grounds to get outside the gate to exercise the animal. Not an easy task when the animal weighs about 80 lbs and she weighs maybe 110. Problem solved....she found a good home for the dog that she can "visit" and she got a small "lapdog" as a pet. It's yapping can be tiresome at times but it doesn't last long, there's no fecal matter and dog dander running down the side of the building anymore and no-one is afraid to enter/exit their units while the dog is in transit from her unit to the outside.
She's also altered the facade or her unit (contrary to condo rules) and refused to take corrective action when asked to do so by the administrator, so the administrator got a "writ" from the proper authorities and had it rectified at her expence. When she didn't pay a lien was placed against her title so the condo will recupe the money owed plus interest when she sells (she paid!).
Life in a condo can be great if all work together and when one tries to push their personal "wants" on the group, group action can be very effective. If you want to have things your way - buy a single family home....not a condo. Condo's bring new meaning to the "one for all" with NO "all for one".
 

Escott

Gold
Jan 14, 2002
7,716
6
0
www.escottinsosua.blogspot.com
Mommc, you know the old expression, "Doodie happens".

I think that Kens situation is not all that it seems according to the posts here.

A condo can hold an employee or administrator harmless for things that he/she does on the behalf of the Condo but Ken doesn't want to have to defend himself and have the Condo defend him instead. This is something I don't think will happen.

I still wonder what he has done to **** this guy off:) Who knows, but I suspect that there is another side of the story. I don't serve on boards for the simple reason I would jump over the table and strangle pains in the ass's instead of being polically correct. Hence my wife serves on the boards that we are invited on. When they ask me why I won't serve I simply tell them the truth. I don't serve on boards of non profits either.
 

Fabio J. Guzman

DR1 Expert
Jan 1, 2002
2,359
252
83
www.drlawyer.com
Ken, you cannot prevent somebody from filing a frivolous suit against you. Even assuming the condo association will back you up, you cannot prevent the guy from suing you. The only effective defense in that kind of situation is to counterattack, to sue him back precisely for abusing his right to sue.