How much do you spend a year on up-keep?

[Nancyg56]

Well, it will probably be less expensive overall for the association to fix YOUR roof permanently (electric coils or just being diligent about cleaning your roof) then it will be to pay for increased rates for insurance, etc. Hopefully they are financially savvy enough to realize that. Also, it may come to the point where their insurance company FORCES them to do something permanent or they will get dropped completely. They CAN do that too. In every insurance contract there is a simple statement that the owners must take reasonable care for the upkeep of the property. If you have issues one year with ice dam, fine, it happens, have them for 2 or 3 years and the insurance company is going to squawk at that (and THEY just might pay for a permanent solution too because in the long run it saves them money).

This is the arguement to present becasue dollars to donuts the association will try to back away from correcting the problem. If there is sufficient pressure to make the correction I imagine it will be done. If they are cancelled for refusal to take reasonable care the cost to be reinstated or to be accepted by anpther carrier will be higher.

Roofs are a real reason for cancellation and if there are recurring problems it may only be a matter of time before the structure is compromised.

 

[bicker]

What Nancy said there really crystallizes the situation for me. A board member came over last night, and while he was here he looked at all the damage. He climbed up to the ceiling of our garage and poked a few holes in the plasterboard, because he was concerned that there was still water above it. He looked at the small horizonal crack in the foundation and didn't seem too concerned about that. He was typically non-committal. Apologetic, but reinforced that they had put down the super-duper ice dam protection last summer, a full three feet up the roof. He acknowledged that there will be a discussion tonight about it. However, beyond that, my wife couldn't get him to commit to any specific work, to preclude recurrence in the future.

 

[NHdisneylover]

This would be the hill that I die on. This needs to be fixed. You .............them.................either way it is compromised now. If they refuse to fix it I would want it in writing that they will not and that they will not let you fix it and that they will correct any interior issues. This should be the topic at the meeting..............the impasse and the ramifications. This could be an issue any owner encounters adn should be of interest to them.

I agree

Just for future reference, start your thread with this and let us know the issues and we can be of more help.
.

Absolutely would have helped


Good luck tonight. I hope you will post an update tomorrow on how it goes.

 

[bicker]

I still am keeping my expectations for tonight very low. I think they're going to stonewall, but that's why my wife's going to handle it. I truly hope somehow someone can get the association to turn around and start deluxing the building upkeep.

 

[Nancyg56]

I still am keeping my expectations for tonight very low. I think they're going to stonewall, but that's why my wife's going to handle it. I truly hope somehow someone can get the association to turn around and start deluxing the building upkeep.

But as an owner you are between a rock and a hard place. This is not really about raising the fees for everyone, the issues you have do not apply. This is about maintaining the integrity of the structures that are impacte by severe winters.

If I was going to present an argument I would ask what would happen to those units impacted by trees that were presenting problems to only 3 owners. Do we forgo paying for tree service which may include removal because not every owner is subjected to the damage? Today there may only be mold and damage to windows and trim that leads to rot but after a period of time? Who then is responsible?

In the end it is clear that while a permanant repair to the structure may be expenive all of the owners benefit. No rick to insurance adn their own property values remain strong. You may be a responsible owner who maintains the property you own but there are some who would let the whole darn thing rot and once that happens word gets around. Your nast unit is up for sale and eventually sells low that wil impact their property value. This is really a village thing.

 

[bicker]

But as an owner you are between a rock and a hard place. This is not really about raising the fees for everyone, the issues you have do not apply. This is about maintaining the integrity of the structures that are impacte by severe winters.

That reminds me of something he said last night. When I reminded him that we've had these problems for years, he asked me how long. When I told him at least three years and perhaps as much as six years, he said "No worries." He then apologized for making light of the damage we've had, but made it clear that such a short period of time wouldn't result in structural risk. He's one of the two board members who own construction companies, so I don't see how any unit owner could contradict him successfully, assuming contradiction is warranted.

 

[Nancyg56]

That reminds me of something he said last night. When I reminded him that we've had these problems for years, he asked me how long. When I told him at least three years and perhaps as much as six years, he said "No worries." He then apologized for making light of the damage we've had, but made it clear that such a short period of time wouldn't result in structural risk. He's one of the two board members who own construction companies, so I don't see how any unit owner could contradict him successfully, assuming contradiction is warranted.

He should take a good look at my son's place. He is going to need a lot of work.

 

[daisax]

Based on my own association experience (as an owner and Board member) I know that in our place while we are responsible from "studs in" and the association from "studs out" it is understood that damage to individual units from association property is the responsibility of the association.

I would suggest that despite the attractive proposition of using on-site contractors, that you avoid doing so. The conflict of interest is staggering, as we found out at our place when a licensed carpenter owner built a deck for another owner with the consent of the Board and then the owner was injured on it. The owner/contractor declared he was an agent of the association, the injured owner declared he was an agent of the association, and the association tried to claim he was privately hired by the injured owner. Obviously in the end the association paid, big time. And as owners, both of them shared in paying for it, but the other owners were NOT amused. The drama could have been avoided. A single lawsuit will eat any savings you've gotten from somebody volunteering their services, especially if the services end up being subpar in any way.

On a related note, we had a roofer out to clear our roofs last week and asked if he installed the gutter wire melter things. He said he did, but that honestly given his 20 years of experience, they would only have been useful 3 winters, so he didn't know if the expense was justified. I only live a few towns away from you, so our climate is not too different.

 

[bicker]

Just a quick clarification: The board members are strictly prohibited from ever doing any construction work for the association for pay. If they do anything, it's absolutely gratis. When the board member poked those holes in my garage ceiling, yesterday, it is my understanding that he did so as an agent of the association.