Community Update

Perils and Pitfalls of Social Media in Community Associations

By: Jennifer L. Biletnikoff

Social media has transformed the way people communicate. In restaurants you can look around and see people “dining together” while on their cell phone. I was at a movie theater this weekend and even noticed the white glow of cell phone screens lighting up during the film. Social media, which provides an instantaneous platform to a large number of “viewers,” can wreak havoc in community associations, especially in situations where members of a community association create a “neighborhood” Facebook page or social media group. It is important to understand the potential pitfalls associated with social media use in community associations in order for board members to implement strategies that may help prevent the community from going “viral.” 

Click here to read more!

Can 55+ Communities Avoid Compliance With Federal Laws Which Prohibit Age and Familial Status Discrimination?

By: Michael O. Dermody

In 1988, Congress added “familial status” – defined to include those family groups with children under 18 – to the list of protected groups under the Fair Housing Act (“FHA”). Since that time, condominiums and homeowner’s associations have been discovering that their various rules regulating or prohibiting youngsters’ use of the association’s facilities may run afoul of this area of federal anti-discrimination law. Rules once considered common — that is, rules which employ a specific age to regulate minor residents’ use of the pool, gym, or other areas — can result in legal action against the association. To accommodate FHA guidelines and remain enforceable, such restrictions should be re-crafted by legal counsel to specifically address an identifiable concern related to the specific activity, rather than prohibiting its use by a specific age group. However, this protection against age discrimination does not apply in all cases.

Click here to read more!

Condominium Termination: Don’t Let the End Catch You by Surprise

By: Joseph Arena

We all know how condominiums begin—with renderings, design and finishing selections, friendly sales agents, and, of course, so many documents. However, once a condominium becomes an aging project, particularly one rife with escalating maintenance needs and expenses, it is worth considering how the condominium may be terminated. As background, multi-family dwellings reflecting a shared investment in infrastructure and underlying lands can be tricky to terminate both politically and legally because the owners involved have not agreed ahead of time as to how and when the project’s end will come, and differing attitudes on the subject can pervade. Nevertheless, Florida is beginning to have aging condominium projects in sufficient numbers to provide a basis for the study of when the optimal time to terminate might be and what factors should drive the exploration of termination and redevelopment options.  

Click here to read more!

Charterhouse Associates, LTD., Inc. v. Valencia Reserve Homeowners Ass’n, Inc.
262 So.3d 761 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)

By: Joseph Markovich

Understanding invitees and licensees is at the heart of THIS CASE. Homeowners in the Valencia Reserve community invited a personal trainer to accompany them to the homeowner association’s (HOA) fitness center. The HOA, having enacted a rule prohibiting private trainers from working in the fitness center, argued that the trainer was a licensee who could be excluded. However, the homeowners claimed the trainer was their invitee, permitted under the HOA’s declaration.

The declaration allowed owners, their guests, and invitees access to the fitness center. Despite this, the HOA enforced its rule, leading to a legal dispute. The trial court sided with the HOA, but the appellate court disagreed, focusing on the proper classification of the personal trainer under Florida law.

The appellate court found that the trial court incorrectly used an “economic benefit test” to classify the trainer as a licensee due to their paid services. Instead, the court emphasized that the “invitation test” was the correct standard. The evidence showed that the trainer was expressly invited by the homeowners, was present only when they were, and did not seek business from other residents, making them an invitee under the declaration. This meant that the trainer’s presence was in line with the purposes outlined in the HOA’s declaration, which granted invitees access to the fitness center. As a result, the HOA’s rule prohibiting private trainers was found to be in direct conflict with the declaration.

This case serves as a pivotal reminder for condominium and homeowners associations to ensure that their rules align with their governing documents. Associations should regularly review their declarations and rules to avoid exceeding the authority granted to them. Property owners should also be fully aware of their rights under the declaration, particularly concerning the invitation of guests and professionals to use association property.

If you are uncertain whether your governing documents have sufficient language to authorize Board enacted rules and regulations, consulting with your association’s legal counsel can help clarify these complex issues and draft rules that are enforceable and aligned with the community’s governing documents.