I really need some feedback on whether I should pursue this...

[RaisetheBar]

This is an ethical concern about an attorney fighting me in a Home Owner's dispute. It just went to small claims court, I made my pt. (they had no right to claim such charge) but this is not a court of record. The judge awarded them the legitimate fees for 2003 that were conceded, and attorneys fees and interest (about $100 so not a big deal).

My only pt. remains: this Home Owners assoc. and the attorney representing them, insisted that I owed them $185 from the year 2002. They had got a judgement in small claims court for HOA fees for the year 2002. This was duly paid. After it had been paid, they sent out more bills for the $185 plus interest, etc.

They had a judgement, it was paid, they insisted on more money. They gave no explanation as to why. Isnt this pursuing a course of action an attorney knows to be wrong/impossible?

I wrote four letters asking for explanation. No response. These charges were of course tacked onto the bill for 2003. Completely incensed at this, I did not pay the 2003 and went to small claims court. The judge threw out the idiotic $185, allowed the HOA fee for 2003 (no contest there) and also awarded attorney's fees, interests and costs.

Previously they had returned checks to me if the payment was not made in full. I had no reason to think they'd accept a lower amount (i.e. just pay the 2003 fee w/o mentioning the extra charge).

THe small claims court is a court of no record. The only way to prove this on the record would be to appeal to the district court.

I would contest the award of attorney's fees and interests for the appeal, since it was the intransigence of the attorney that prevented it from setting sooner. That would be my contention.

The ethical case is: this attorney had no reason to think the charge of $185 was legit. The witness/treasurer of HOA even admitted this in small claims court! They only send out one bill per year, it was the subject of a lawsuit and it was paid. They knew this course was illegal and unethical.

The public issue is this: How many other home owners have been ripped off by this practice of simply claiming that which the HOA has no right to and the walking away from it in court? If this is allowed to go, then the HOA and their attorney's have a free bite at the apple. Stick to the homeowners, and give back nothing if they are called out in court.

Here's my dilemma. This is will be a waste of effort if no one at the bar takes this issue seriously and/or none of the consumer groups cares about this issue (the free bite they are getting away with).

if neither the state bar or consumer groups will back me, then forget but what do you guys think? Is this worth pursuing?

 

[Michael Wechsler]

I'm a little confused but I think you are claiming that the issue of 2002 was resolved in court. Let me ask you this -- what is on the complaint that was sent to you with regard to this case? That is a matter of record and might indicate what was resolved.

Additionally, it would seem difficult for the attorney to claim that he didn't resolve this matter in the hearing you had but would needless use up more of the court's time in resolving it separately. I could see an attorney getting chastised for it and even condescended to by a judge for not consolidating -- or claiming to not have consolidated -- the entire action in one claim. It seems only logical that the 2002 and 2003 amounts were resolved at the same time since they arose from the same claim -- these being the key words the "arose from the same claim."

Originally posted by RaisetheBar
This is an ethical concern about an attorney fighting me in a Home Owner's dispute. It just went to small claims court, I made my pt. (they had no right to claim such charge) but this is not a court of record. The judge awarded them the legitimate fees for 2003 that were conceded, and attorneys fees and interest (about $100 so not a big deal).

My only pt. remains: this Home Owners assoc. and the attorney representing them, insisted that I owed them $185 from the year 2002. They had got a judgement in small claims court for HOA fees for the year 2002. This was duly paid. After it had been paid, they sent out more bills for the $185 plus interest, etc.

They had a judgement, it was paid, they insisted on more money. They gave no explanation as to why. Isnt this pursuing a course of action an attorney knows to be wrong/impossible?

I wrote four letters asking for explanation. No response. These charges were of course tacked onto the bill for 2003. Completely incensed at this, I did not pay the 2003 and went to small claims court. The judge threw out the idiotic $185, allowed the HOA fee for 2003 (no contest there) and also awarded attorney's fees, interests and costs.

Previously they had returned checks to me if the payment was not made in full. I had no reason to think they'd accept a lower amount (i.e. just pay the 2003 fee w/o mentioning the extra charge).

THe small claims court is a court of no record. The only way to prove this on the record would be to appeal to the district court.

I would contest the award of attorney's fees and interests for the appeal, since it was the intransigence of the attorney that prevented it from setting sooner. That would be my contention.

The ethical case is: this attorney had no reason to think the charge of $185 was legit. The witness/treasurer of HOA even admitted this in small claims court! They only send out one bill per year, it was the subject of a lawsuit and it was paid. They knew this course was illegal and unethical.

The public issue is this: How many other home owners have been ripped off by this practice of simply claiming that which the HOA has no right to and the walking away from it in court? If this is allowed to go, then the HOA and their attorney's have a free bite at the apple. Stick to the homeowners, and give back nothing if they are called out in court.

Here's my dilemma. This is will be a waste of effort if no one at the bar takes this issue seriously and/or none of the consumer groups cares about this issue (the free bite they are getting away with).

if neither the state bar or consumer groups will back me, then forget but what do you guys think? Is this worth pursuing?

 

[RaisetheBar]

Hello professor: Thanks for attempting to give me some input, I really have to think hard about pursuing this.

The complaint filed in early 2002 was not very specific and merely alleged "HOme owner's fees." They attached a billing statement for 2001 but later filed for the 2002 fee as well. This was in a small claims court that is not a "court of record." It mostly all oral.

However, in small claims court last week, both the attorney and the secretary/treasures of the HOA admit that the 2002 judgement was for HOA fees for 2001 and 2002.

I asked the treasurer:

There is only one bill and one charge you give to each homeowner each year, correct?

A: "Yes."

So if the judgement in 2002 was for both 2002 and 2001 and that judgement was paid, was there any other possible charges the HOA could have been billing me for in 2002?

A: "I told you we make a mistake..."

See? That is how it went, neither the treasurer or the opposing attorney knew their way around a courtroom. They kept jumping in and interrupting me when I made this pt.

The judge understood this pt, he would not allow them to claim the $185 but he did allow the 2003 HOA fees (which I concede) and he also allowed attorneys' fees and interest.

On this pt. I vehemently object, it was their own intransigence that led to the lawsuit.

That is the main pt of contention. The second pt. is a matter of public policy, this HOA is probably doing this to lots of homeowner's browbeating them for more money they are not entitled to. By not penalzing the HOA, the court is encouraging them to commit fraud w/o any risk to them.

Thank you for your interest, hope this explains it. I could really use the feedback from a disintersted party.

 

[Michael Wechsler]

Hmmm... small claims court may be recorded if you make an appearance before the judge (at least orally from my understanding.) You should check that out if you haven't already.

If you feel that the actions were malicious and it was this clear, then I cannot say I blame you for putting forth a complaint. I don't know why the association and the attorney would do this unless they were so sloppy they were trying to cover up their own incompetence. You could be right and in the event you are, then the bar doesn't need attorneys who could do such a bad act like this and then irritate you further using the system.

My only caveat is always to make sure that you can appreciate what you are doing and it isn't done solely by emotional response without the logic and good reason.

Originally posted by RaisetheBar
Hello professor: Thanks for attempting to give me some input, I really have to think hard about pursuing this.

The complaint filed in early 2002 was not very specific and merely alleged "HOme owner's fees." They attached a billing statement for 2001 but later filed for the 2002 fee as well. This was in a small claims court that is not a "court of record." It mostly all oral.

However, in small claims court last week, both the attorney and the secretary/treasures of the HOA admit that the 2002 judgement was for HOA fees for 2001 and 2002.

I asked the treasurer:

There is only one bill and one charge you give to each homeowner each year, correct?

A: "Yes."

So if the judgement in 2002 was for both 2002 and 2001 and that judgement was paid, was there any other possible charges the HOA could have been billing me for in 2002?

A: "I told you we make a mistake..."

See? That is how it went, neither the treasurer or the opposing attorney knew their way around a courtroom. They kept jumping in and interrupting me when I made this pt.

The judge understood this pt, he would not allow them to claim the $185 but he did allow the 2003 HOA fees (which I concede) and he also allowed attorneys' fees and interest.

On this pt. I vehemently object, it was their own intransigence that led to the lawsuit.

That is the main pt of contention. The second pt. is a matter of public policy, this HOA is probably doing this to lots of homeowner's browbeating them for more money they are not entitled to. By not penalzing the HOA, the court is encouraging them to commit fraud w/o any risk to them.

Thank you for your interest, hope this explains it. I could really use the feedback from a disintersted party.

 

[RaisetheBar]

Yeah that sounds like good advice. I filed the appeal anyways, we'll see what happens.

There's what is right and ethical and then there is the real life way things are handled in certain locales. I dunno why the judge didnt even seem to care about what this firm was doing; one would think he would see Home Owner's lawsuits every so once in a while and be aware of practices that border on the unethical.

I say this because w/o experience it's hard to know what the climate is in certain legal jurisdictions.

did you see in Philadelphia where there's a was a federal sting on widespread corruption? I think it was w/ state officers but dont know if it was courthouse too. Did anyone see or read anything else about this?