Is It Legal To Install A Camera In A Condominium

Editor's note: Attorneys at Goede, Adamczyk, DeBoest & Cantankerous answer to questions most Florida community association constabulary. With offices in Naples, Fort Myers, Coral Gables and Boca Raton, the house represents community associations throughout Florida and focuses on condominium and homeowner association police, existent manor law, litigation, manor planning and business law.

Q:Tin an owner install a security photographic camera to monitor his entrance surface area in a condo complex and can the board approve this as an calendar item?

S.M., Greatcoat Coral

Attorney Richard D. DeBoest is a shareholder at the law firm of Goede, Adamczyk, DeBoest & Cross.

A:Information technology depends on the governing documents for the condominium. More often than not, an owner has no right to alter the common elements without the approving of the board. Most governing documents have a provision that does allow such improvements with board approval, providing the owner is responsible for the maintenance of the item. If the documents contain such authority, and so the respond is yes, the lath could permit this. However, allowing owners to make improvements to the mutual elements is by and large non a good idea. Also, the owner should be aware that whatsoever alteration they are allowed to make does not change the fact that the area in question is still a common element which all owners are entitled to utilise.

Q:Our master homeowners association (HOA) in Bonita Springs follows very detailed procedures in our documents for candidates who apply for ballot to the main board and the voting takes place earlier our annual meeting. Is in that location any land law requiring united states to also take nominations from the floor at our almanac meeting, later the voting under our documents has already occurred?

Thousand.Z., Bonita Springs

A:Chapter 720 of the Florida Homeowner Association Human activity contains very picayune regarding elections. Information technology essentially provides that elections are to exist conducted co-ordinate to the bylaws. It goes on to say that if there is a procedure in identify to allow nominations in advance of the meeting then nominations from the floor are not required. So, if in your case nominations are allowed prior to the election, and so the clan would not be required to let nominations from the flooring. All the same, some will fence if the bylaws provide that nominations from the floor shall be allowed, then you would still have to permit them. If ballots have already gone out and returned, a candidate nominating themselves from the floor of the meeting volition have little chance of success.

Q:Commodity VII, Section 2, Directors' Meetings, of the bylaws of our HOA states that "Regular meetings may be held without find." Nevertheless, my neighbor maintains that the provision is illegal. He cites Florida Statute 720.303(2)(c)(1) which states "Notices of all board meetings must be posted in a conspicuous place in the community at least 48 hours in advance of a meeting, except in an emergency." I disagreed and pointed out that his citation is preceded past the qualifier that "The bylaws shall provide for giving notice to parcel owners and members of all lath meetings and, if they do not exercise so, shall exist accounted to provide the following." Who is correct?

1000.H., Estero

A:I believe your neighbor is right. Equally you correctly indicate out, the police force provides that "The bylaws shall provide for giving discover to parcel owners . . . and if they practice non practice and then shall be deemed to provide the following." In your example, your bylaws provide that no discover is required. Giving no notice is the same every bit not giving discover as addressed in the statute. I believe this provision of the statute is intended to address exactly your state of affairs in that your owners are not given discover of lath meetings and the law provides that they should be given observe.

Q:I am on the compliance committee of a homeowners' association in a large community in Florida. When there are dominion violations in this community, the board of directors states the violation on their coming together agenda and refers to the violator as Mr. Ten. Mr. X is never notified past the board that his violation is to exist heard by the lath and the board takes up the violation at their meeting and determines a fine and/or break of privileges. Mr. X is then notified by certified mail that the board has levied a fine and/or break and the matter is being referred to the compliance committee for a hearing on a date approximately 20 days from the mailing of the certified letter.

I question whether the violator has been afforded due process in that he had no notice of the hearing of the thing before the board or opportunity to defend himself. Florida Statute Chapter 720.305 (2)(b) says a fine may non be imposed by the board without xiv days' notice to the person sought to be fined or suspended. Does that notice utilise only to the hearing before the compliance committee or does it likewise apply to the initial hearing of the matter by the board?

R.R., Naples

A:I will take your last question offset. The xiv-mean solar day detect requirement does not apply to the lath meeting at which the fine is initially discussed. It applies to the fining hearing, which is essentially an appeal hearing of the board'southward conclusion to impose the fine. When you say the board meeting agenda identifies the violator every bit "Mr. X," I am not sure if you hateful that literally so that the person'south name is non identified on the agenda or the person'due south bodily name which is identified on the agenda. If it is the latter, I think that is sufficient and the violator would be on constructive find of the meeting because the observe will have been posted on the property. If it is the old, while being a little foreign, I don't call back it is illegal but I do think it may be counter productive because the owner should be fabricated aware that the lath is because fining him or her. If they came to the coming together, perhaps the matter could be resolved then and there. In any case, in the minutes of the meeting, where the board votes to impose the fine, some identifying information would be necessary so that i knows exactly which person or belongings is being fined. This could be a proper noun, address or lot number.

Q:When is the annual Community Associations Institute trade show held this twelvemonth?

S.Fifty., Naples

A:The local chapter of the Community Associations Institute will host a trade show on Th, April half dozen from 9 a.one thousand. to 1 p.chiliad. It is at Germain Loonshit in Estero and is free to the public. There is also a gratis food courtroom. For more information, visit http://caisgcc.squarespace.com/

Attorney Richard D. DeBoest is a shareholder at the law firm of Goede, Adamczyk, DeBoest & Cross. Visit the website at www.gadclaw.com or ask questions well-nigh your bug for time to come columns by sending an enquiry to: info@gadclaw.com. Goede, Adamczyk, DeBoest & Cantankerous is a full-service law firm with a focus on condominium and homeowner association law, existent estate constabulary, litigation, manor planning and business law. With offices in Naples, Fort Myers, Coral Gables and Boca Raton, the house represents community associations throughout Florida. The data provided herein is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. The publication of this article does non create an attorney-client human relationship between the reader and Goede, Adamczyk, DeBoest & Cross or whatever of our attorneys. Readers should not act or refrain from interim based upon the information contained in this commodity without kickoff contacting an attorney, if yous take questions nigh any of the problems raised herein. The hiring of an attorney is a decision that should not exist based solely on advertisements or this column.