Update – Case Stayed Pending Appeal

Sometimes it seems as though our Courts exist in geologic time. It’s unlikely I’ll have anything definitive to report about the ongoing and active lawsuit for another year or two, so here is some helpful information to consider prior to our Annual Meeting on Tuesday, 23 June 2009, 7 P.M. at Comanco, 2139 Defense Highway, Crofton MD.

Congratulations to MHA for their efforts to protect homeowners and ensure good association governance; here is an abbreviated list of Maryland state legislation they successfully shepherded through to passage:

HB687/SB541: Fidelity Insurance. This requires an Association to purchase fidelity insurance to provide for the indemnification of the community against loss resulting from fraud or criminal acts by any officer, managing agent or employee. Our budget allocates approximately $560.00 annually for fidelity insurance. It would be prudent to ask for a copy of this policy just to be certain Charing Cross Townhouse Association has purchased it and we’re all safely covered.

HB137: Association Books and Records. Your Association and Comanco must provide homeowners copies of books and records, board minutes, financial statements and employee salaries within 21 days of receiving a written request. The charge for copying books and records may not exceed the amount charged by MD courts (50 cents per page).

HB552/SB171: Closed Meetings of Board of Directors. Meetings can only be closed for consultation and discussion of legal matters, such as my ongoing and active lawsuit, and for discussions of delinquencies. MD law requires that “a statement of the time, place and purpose of any closed meeting, the record of the vote of each board member by which the meeting was closed, and the authority under this section for closing any meeting shall be included in the minutes of the next meeting of the board of directors.”

The Maryland Homeowners’ Association published the preceding Summary of Maryland Condo/HOA Legislation which supersedes anything in our Bylaws, Charter and other existing documents in their quarterly newsletter. They recommend that homeowners be wary of any attempts by a board to amend governing documents. Homeowners should make a thorough review of any new wording, comparing it to the existing wording and be sure the board clearly and unambiguously writes any amendments after a thorough, public explanation as to the reason for any amendments. Further, MHA cautions homeowners to be especially wary of any language that says homeowners should pay “all attorney fees actually incurred by the Board of Directors.”

Update – Motion for Sanctions and to Compel Discovery

On Friday, October 31, 2008 I filed my Request for Default Judgement on Motion for Sanctions and to Compel Discovery. The purpose is to gain the Court’s assistance in prying our Association records and other documents out of Comanco’s hands and into the light of day.  The request is only 2 pages long…shattering the myth that I can’t write anything under 10 or 20 pages. 8)

The request alleges that, so far, Defendants Comanco and Ruth Angell have failed and refused to respond in any way whatsoever to my request for discovery (that is, a request to see and/or get copies of documents and answers to interrogatories). They haven’t even responded with an objection. Just silence. The lawsuit alleges this is business as usual for these folks…ignore until problem disappears. Hmm.

Asking for a receiver

On Friday, October 31 (yep…Halloween), I filed my Motion for Receiver. It asks the Court to appoint a receiver to manage the Association during the lawsuit or until the members elect a legal board of directors that can comply with our governing laws. You can read it and make your own decision about it.

The motion alleges the current directors and Comanco have and are spending money (into the red) without legal votes, conducting private meetings, private votes, created a shadow 4-member board over the summer where they spent our money and took official actions without ever meeting openly or informing anyone (including your humble ex-director) of their activities…all of which has placed our Association at great risk of harm.

The facts presented are documented. Members should carefully review them and stand up for your rights and protect your property and Association from further risk and harm.

Filed: Motion for Sanctions and to Compel Discovery

I filed a Motion for Sanctions and to Compel Discovery on 10/10/08. This is because defendants have failed to disclose and inform of material facts and information as requested by my discovery requests dating from 8/28/08. This motion asks the court to sanction defendants for failing to respond to my discovery requests, and to compel them to respond.

For those of you who don’t know, discovery is a process by which the parties in litigation exchange and share all information pertinent to the case, or as requested. This is designed to openly provide the information necessary to prove allegations to both sides.

For example, much of the material facts and information related to the acts and behavior of the defendants resides in the Association’s records held by Comanco. My discovery requests directed defendants to answer a number of specific questions and to provide specified documents for review.

Well, if you’ve ever had any trouble getting straight answers out of this Board or Comanco, you are by no means alone. The lawsuit does allege that it takes patience and perseverance, stamina and endurance to wrest information all members are entitled to from this bunch.

Filed: Amended Complaint for Injunctive Relief

On Friday, 10/10/08, I filed my Amended Complaint for Injunctive Relief with the court. The Amended Complaint recombines my original complaint with the Ex Parte Motion (which were both filed and served the same day, 6/17/08). The facts underlying the complaint were in the Ex Parte Motion, while the charges were in the complaint itself.

The Amended Complaint updates the facts through Oct. 10th to account for the acts and behavior of the Board and Comanco. It also adds a number of charges based on allegations of financial improprieties, raising the total number of charges to 21.

These additional charges include: 1) Breach of fiduciary duty, 2) Fraud in the concealment and/or omission, 3) constructive fraud, 4) Civil conspiracy, 5) aiding and abetting, 6) Theft by unauthorized control over property and by deception, 7) Embezzlement – Fraudulent misappropriation by fiduciaries, 8.) Fraudulent misrepresentation by corporate officer or agent, 9) Defamation by libel and slander.