|
THE
FIGHT FOR EVEN MORE OF YOUR MONEY
By
Eric Glazer, Esq.
Published April 20, 2015
This
year’s legislative session is boring to say the least, when it
comes to pending community association legislation.
There is one bill however, Senate Bill 736, which is
generating a lot of noise. In
sum, when someone is selling a home or a condo unit, it is
imperative for the buyer to obtain what is commonly referred to
as an estoppel certificate.
This certificate is relied upon by the buyer, so that the
association gets paid in full when the new buyer takes ownership
of the property and ensures that the new buyer is starting with
a clean slate.
The
law has always allowed for a “reasonable” charge for the
preparation of an estoppel certificate.
The definition of “reasonable” was left to the
imagination and needless to say, there were those who believed
they were charged exorbitant fees for the preparation of an
estoppel certificate and were in fact being held hostage by the
association until payment was received.
This year, Senator Stargell thought that the term
reasonable needed some clarification.
As a result, Senate Bill 736 was filed.
The proposed legislation now says:
the fee for
the estoppel certificate may not exceed $250 if on the date the
certificate is issued, no delinquent amounts are owed to the
association for the applicable unit. If an estoppel certificate
is requested on an expedited basis and delivered within 3
business days after the request, the association may charge an
additional fee of $100. If delinquent amounts are owed to the
association for the applicable unit, an additional fee for the
estoppel certificate may not exceed $100. The association may
not charge a fee for an estoppel certificate that is issued more
than 10 business days after it receives the request for the
certificate.
Even
under this proposed legislation, one can be charged up to
$450.00 when the association supplies them with an estoppel
letter. Remember, if
an association is keeping proper books and records, they should
be able to tell you almost instantaneously how much a unit owner
owes in assessments. Even
if the file is with the attorney, it’s not exactly rocket
science to figure out what is owed.
Here
are some recent e-mail exchanges between myself, a President and
a community association manager about our thoughts on the
proposed legislation. I
won’t comment any further.
Read the exchange and just post any thoughts that come to
mind.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
Roger Kesselbach, (President:
Space
Coast
Communities)
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 2:00 PM
To: Glazer, Eric
Subject: RE: Glazer & Associates PA Event
Importance: High
Eric,
I
am wondering what is your position on the Senate bill # SB 736.
SCCA is fighting hard for this bill not to get through the
process.
_____________________________________________
HERE
IS MY REPONSE:
From:
Glazer, Eric [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2015 9:23 PM
To: Roger
Subject: RE: Glazer & Associates PA Event
Why
do you believe the bill is so bad?
Shouldn’t
someone be able to get an estoppel certificate they can rely on
within a reasonable time and at a reasonable rate?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here
is Roger’s response:
From:
Roger
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 10:25 AM
To: Glazer, Eric
Subject: RE: Glazer & Associates PA Event
I
cannot believe you asked this question. I agree that the title
companies should have a time frame for the Estoppel letter but
with some additional time granted for the units that have
litigation and other more complex closings. Also we feel that a
reasonable rate should be set that is why we fought to get the
fees adjusted so as to be fair to all involved not just a select
few.
That
being said we do not believe that associations that are NOT part
of the closing should be involved financially if the closing
does not happen. We the associations have not the time or the
desire to put a lean on a unit because it did not sell within
the 60 day time and the association has to pay the bill
for what should be the new buyers problem. We are non for profit
with boards of volunteers we do this so we can maintain the
property value of the association and should not be involved
with the buying and selling of real estate. Our documents
mandate that we produce the estoppel letter and we have been
doing this with NO complaints from the title companies if there
are a few that are taking advantage of the system then go after
them and let the associations take care of more pressing issues
that they face on a daily basis.
____________________
So
I write back:
From:
Glazer, Eric [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 10:34 AM
To: Roger
Subject: RE: Glazer & Associates PA Event
Respectfully, perhaps you are not aware of the ridiculous
charges that some people get hit with when simply asking for an
estoppel letter. An
association should easily be able to tell what is owed on a unit
within a ten day period. In fact, these numbers should be
ready at the press of a button by both the association and the
association’s counsel, EVEN IF A CASE IS IN LITIGATION.
This is a bill about putting the brakes on protecting innocent
people who simply want to sell or buy a home in a timely manner
without getting ripped off.
That’s
what the real fight in
Tallahassee
is all about. People who want little or no restrictions on
what is charged to people who simply want a pay-off letter on
their home--- and if you don’t get that -----I can’t believe
you don’t.
________________________________________________
Then
it gets weird. I get
the following e-mail from
David
Furlow at Leland Management:
From:
David Furlow
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 9:33 PM
To: Alan Garfinkel, Esq.; Rebecca Furlow; Gary Vanderlaan;
Frank Pelot
Cc: Glazer, Eric;
Subject: RE: Glazer & Associates: "Why do you
believe the bill is so bad?"
Alan
I
am struck by the lack of information and understanding by many
individuals involved in the estopple discussion such as Mr.
Glazer. Given his involvement in the industry he
should have a better understanding of the issue.
He
shows serious lack of understanding about what it really takes
to prepare an estopple for a community association.
Association mangers would be negligent if all they did was
simply supply the balance on a ledger.
Unfortunately, this is the over simplified version of estopple
preparation that is being presented by those proposing the new
estopple legislation. It is absolutely an inaccurate
characterization of the work involved and the liability
associated with the preparation of estopples.
There
is much more information and work required for a proper
estopple than is being portrayed by realtors and closing agents.
I have attached some information that might be helpful to
enlighten others about the what is actually required for the
preparation of estopples and ownership transfers for a community
associations.
I
would be more than happy to have a conversation with Mr. Glazer
about this issue.
____________________________________________________
To
Which I respond:
I
am struck by the lack of your ability to simply spell the word
estoppel correctly, having misspelled it so many times in one
e-mail.
Yet
--- I don’t understand the situation. You can’t even
spell it.
Hysterical.
Your
thoughts are welcome.
|
