A call to DFBLS resulted in being told that they are no longer accepting HOA complaints based on Judge Downey’s Maricopa Superior Court appeal, Troon Village v.Waugaman, LC2007-000598.
This is ourageous! Under the statute, DFBLS must hear and accept complaints. Apparently, the Director is making law, violating the separation of powers (the same that the Judge found had occurred in the Troon case), when he decided that a trial court decision was precedent and binding on all all persons. The AG’s Office hasn’t even had a chance to file an Appeal.
Stay tuned while we try to get to clarify this matter.
See And Justice For All, except for AZ homeowners filing HOA complaints relating to Feb. 2007 fee increase.
George,
While it is an interesting turn of events that the DFBLS is not currently accepting complaint packages, I think the DFBLS is in a tough position. Every filing fee they accept with a complaint will be forfeited to the state since every case will be appealed and there is no reason to think that the superior court judge hearing the administrative appeals is going to rule differently. Do you think that homeowners should be risking $550 or $2000 in the meantime while the courts finish sorting this out? I suspect that one way or another this issue is going to the court of appeals and a stay will be issued to prohibit the DFBLS from accepting filings until it is ruled upon by the higher court. It is in my opinion prudent of the DFBLS to stop accepting cases and it does, in fact, protect homeowners from financial folly.
Comment by J. E. Smith — October 7, 2008 @ 5:26 pm |
You have a valid point, but does the Director, being subject to APA statutes, have authority to unilaterally make that decision in violation of the statute?
Also, in the interest of doing justice, the Director could have informed homeowners (100% of the complaints were by homeowners) that it was urging special action appeal by the AG (expedited appeal to resolve the issue), its lawyer, asking what to do?
BTW, the AG’s had filed a brief to the opposite, that the statute was constitutional.
This was not doneby DFBLS, reflecting the arguments in my book, “Establishing the New America of independent HOA principalities.” You can view it at YouTube.com/hoagov.
Comment by pvtgov — October 7, 2008 @ 5:51 pm |
Perhaps the AG has advised the DFBLS that it is going to appeal and seek a stay of the hearings until further resolution. To the best of my knowledge, the DFBLS has not issued any official policy or statement on the issue but only some information provided by a staffer over the phone, so we don’t know that the Director of the DFBLS has actually exceeded his authority, at least not through an official action. Nevertheless, the Director’s legal counsel is the AG’s office. A different section of the AG’s office submitted a brief (the Solicitor General’s section) on the constitutional argument while the DFBLS’s attorney at the AG’s office appeared as a formality only, so I don’t think the DFBLS is “going rogue” and opposing the AG’s position on the matter. Unfortunately, it is just going to take more time to fully and finally resolve the dispute.
Comment by J. E. Smith — October 7, 2008 @ 8:06 pm |
In fact, it says nothing on its Home page about HOAs, and the viewer must click on Administration to get any info.
If, indeed, Director Barger did not give orders, then who told Emma Robertson to say such things? If she’s misleading the people, she should be fired! In any event, we must demand answers as to why she is making these statements, and what is DFBLS’s position.
See the wrongful attempt, in my view, to raise the filing fee to $2,000 from $500 in February 2007: “Arizona HOA complaint filing fee returns to $550″ at http://pvtgov.wordpress.com/2007/04/06/arizona-hoa-complaint-filing-fee-returns-to-550/
Comment by pvtgov — October 8, 2008 @ 7:20 am |
Notwithstanding the judiciousness of Downie’s decision in Troon Village v. Waugaman/DFBLS, what might Arizona’s Solicitor General say about the DFBLS’s decision (based on a Lower Court of Appeals decision) not to accept further petitions re homeowner association contested matters in contravention with A.R.S. § 33-1803(E), “At any time before or after completion of the exchange of information pursuant to this section, the member may petition for a hearing pursuant to section 41-2198.01 if the dispute is within the jurisdiction of the department of fire, building and life safety as prescriber in section 41-2198.01, subsection B?”
Comment by Samantha — October 8, 2008 @ 5:00 pm |
Mr. Staropoli,
Your articles are excelent, I will to tell you about my case, you have to know how the HOA with help from the judges and other authority abuses their members in York South Carolina. Please let me know how I can get in touch with you.Thank you! “J”
Comment by jason — July 12, 2009 @ 7:21 pm |