BERDING | WEIL News
Law Review
Links & Events
$2,350,000 settlement for Berding|Weil Condominium Conversion Client
A Fremont, CA condominium conversion case settled on March 19, 2010 just before Berding|Weil partner Randy Paul was to give his opening statement to the jury in Alameda County Superior Court. This is an excellent result for the client, which faced the usual array of difficulties for a condo conversion case which encountered fierce resistance from the defense and their insurance carriers. The trial team of Randy Paul, Allison Andersen and Elizabeth Bassett built on the efforts of partner Scott Barton, associates Andy Baugh, Jordan Rojas, and paralegals Lisa Bertorello and Laurie Schremp. All performed arduously in this hotly contested construction defect and budget underfunding matter. This settlement will enable the homeowner association client to fund repair of critical building components.
$800,000 Settlement for Pasadena, CA, Condominium Conversion
On March 2, 2010, Berding|Weil Litigation Partner Jan A. Kopczynski settled a complex construction-defects lawsuit for the Del Mar Terrace Homeowners Association in Pasadena, California. This 39-unit development was originally built as apartments in the late 1980s, but it was converted into condominiums in 2003. By the time they brought suit, the development was experiencing severe water intrusion and consequential damages. Given that the Association was time-barred from pursuing the original developer, the case posed many factual and legal challenges. Not only did the converter defend itself aggressively, but the insurance coverage was also very problematic and the Association had to fight through the converter's bankruptcy. It wasn't until defense counsel had exhausted their legal challenges, and with a October 2010 trial date on the horizon, that the converter agreed to settle the case. The end result was $20,513 per unit. Litigation associates Matt Malone and Chad Thomas, as well as paralegals Robyn Evans and Lisa Gozo, were instrumental in resolving the case.
Berding|Weil Attorneys Score $2.4 Million Verdict on February 1
Berding and Weil Partner Paul Windust and Associate Andrew Baugh emerged victorious against a nationally known real estate investment company based in Cupertino, California and a national commercial real estate brokerage based in Palo Alto, California. After a three week jury trial, the jury returned a 12-0 verdict in favor of our client, awarding $2.447 million in damages against both defendants arising from the seller's and broker's failure to disclose plumbing defects in a 218 unit apartment complex in Concord, California. The verdict is particularly noteworthy because the case was tried in Santa Clara County Superior Court, the defendants' home turf.
Most home sellers and buyers are familiar with the duty to disclose unseen defects in residential real property. Less clear is what that duty is in the context of the sale of commercial property between two sophisticated/investor parties. Further, nondisclosure cases are difficult because they present complex issues and rely heavily on witness and expert testimony. Paul and Andrew efficiently organized these concepts and materials and presented a clear and concise case to the jury. Making this case even more challenging was the defendants' numerous pre-trial and trial motions based on exculpatory and disclaimer provisions in the purchase and sale agreement. They argued persuasively to the Court that exculpatory and disclaimer provisions are no defense to fraud and deceit claims."
The jury`s verdict, handed down on February 1, confirms that the duty to disclose is alive and well and requires affirmative action by a seller of real property, regardless if the property is residential or commercial. Congratulations to Paul, Andy and the team!"
$7.25 Million Settlement for Brisbane Condominium Complex
Berding|Weil Attorneys Tyler Berding and Chad Thomas put a $7.25 Million settlement on the record of the San Mateo County Superior Court on January 26, 2010, shortly before trial was to commence. The talented team of attorneys and staff had fully prepared the case for trial. Chad in particular had deposed dozens of expert witnesses and had worked tirelessly with our team of experts to investigate the project and prepare for trial. The settlement was obtained for the Altamar at the Ridge Owners Association which is responsible for the maintenance and repair of the 214-unit condominium complex located in Brisbane, California. The case was vigorously defended by the developer and subcontractors and presented more than the usual array of factual, legal and insurance issues. Congratulations to the Board of Directors who worked with us tirelessly for four years to obtain this great result.
$1.6 Million Settlement for Berding|Weil Client
B|W Attorneys Randy Paul and Allison Andersen settled a construction defect suit for Cielo Gardens for $1,675,000 in Santa Clara Superior Court on Friday, January 22, 2010. The settlement obtained for this 25 unit community association averages $67,000 per unit. Settlement was reached just prior to the commencement of depositions in advance of a trial date of April 6, 2010. The settlement occurred just two and one half years after the notice required by California Civil Code 1375 and two years from filing of the complaint. Congratulations to Randy, Allison and their staff for this great result.
B|W Conversion Case makes the Front Page
Cal HOA & Condo News
Industry News
Legal & Legislative News
 
FEATURED ARTICLE
 

"E" is for Efficiency

Delivering Association Budgets and Other Documents by E-mail

by Melissa Bauman Ward, Esq.

In our previous article in this series, “E-Delivery of Budget Packages,” Sandra Bonato described last year's amendments to the Davis-Stirling Act which allow community associations to deliver key documents to members electronically. Here we offer some practical and legal guidelines for an E-delivery program.

Is E-Delivery Right for You?

Before calling your association attorney to create an e-delivery policy, ask yourself if e-delivery is right for you. To use e-delivery, managers must keep accurate electronic records with a computer system capable of handling e-delivery requirements. The ability to scan1 sensitive documents such as budgets and other financial materials is required.

Similarly, if a majority of your members are not computer literate, distrust electronic delivery, or simply prefer to receive a hard copy, then the time and expense of setting up electronic delivery for just those members who can utilize it may not be worth it. But if the membership currently doesn't support electronic delivery, educate them. It's efficient and it's fast.

If you're ready to take the plunge, congratulations! Read on for more particulars to get you started.

Start with a Policy

Even though the Davis-Stirling Act authorizes electronic delivery of certain listed documents, your association Board of Directors should obtain and adopt a specific e-delivery policy. Your association counsel can insure that your policy meets the requirements of the statute. A written policy also insures that present and future board members have a template to follow. The policy should clearly lay out the association's legal responsibilities for communication, disclosures, and education of owners and residents.

Approve the policy and then decide on the details.

Choosing Your Preferred Method of E-Delivery

There are two basic ways in which to transmit documents electronically: (1) E-mail to members, or (2) a secure website.

If the Association's website is password-protected then creating a document depository is an easy choice. An additional benefit is that the website becomes a library of important documents which members can access at their convenience.

If a secure website isn't available or your members simply prefer getting their documents directly, then e-mail will work. Just remember, the documents need to be in read-only format to protect their integrity.

Owner Consent

There is one requirement of e-delivery which is absolutely essential: you must obtain the written consent of owners to accept electronic document delivery prior to delivering documents. We recommend a written explanation of the new law, the hardware and software requirements for accepting delivery, the particulars of your e-delivery system, contact information, a place for owners to submit their preferred e-mail address(es), and information pertaining to opting out of the e-delivery system once an owner has signed up for it. That information is not only helpful, it is essential. Why? Meaningful consent cannot be given without an understanding of what is being agreed to. Written consent is an absolute requirement of the statute which authorizes delivery of association documents by electronic means. If you do not obtain prior written consent of each individual owner, you cannot rely on electronic delivery of documents to that owner. Anyone who does not specifically consent to electronic delivery must still receive documents in hard copy by mail. In order to prevent confusion, we do not recommend any electronic delivery of documents to owners who have not consented to electronic delivery.

Essential Records

Currently, you probably keep records of owners' contact information as well as copies of all communications sent to the membership. Electronic delivery does not relieve you from these responsibilities. Indeed, in addition to the records you already keep, you now will have to obtain and keep on file owners' e-mail addresses and their written consent to receive documents electronically. Further, you should add the association to your e-mail list. When you receive that e-mail you will have some evidence that your electronic mailing was successful. Create an electronic file for your delivery records along with a paper backup.

Privacy, Safety, and Good E-Mail Practices

Finally, a few words about internet security. We've all heard the horror stories about hackers, mistaken distribution of private documents, altered documents being widely distributed, and other judgment errors resulting in everything from embarrassment to significant legal liability.

First, if you have a website, it must have a secure, password-protected area which is accessible only for members if you are going to use it for electronic delivery of sensitive documents. You have to check the website regularly to make sure that it remains secure. If you are not a skilled webmaster, you need to have someone else do that.

Secondly, do not forget that e-mail is not casual — the equivalent of a few spoken words; it results in a written record which can be forwarded infinitely and publicly. It is also admissible as evidence in the unhappy instance of a court proceeding. This bit of advice applies to every aspect of an association's business, not just to the transmission of documents. Do not send anything by e-mail that you wouldn't post in public or shout from the rooftops. Proofread carefully and definitely think twice before hitting “send,” especially if you're sending to hundreds of people.

Third, all documents must be in read-only format. Do not send anything to the membership in its original Word, Excel, or other format which can be modified by the recipient. It is vital that documents be sent in a format which cannot be changed and re-distributed.

You're On Your Way

Congratulations! By using electronic delivery of key documents, you can help your association communicate more effectively and efficiently and save a lot of trees in the process.

1 Or, in the alternative, using .pdf or other read-only formats.


Expand Article

 
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Site Map | Search
3240 Stone Valley Road West | Alamo, CA | 94507-1558 | P: 925.838.2090 | F: 925.820.5592 | Contact Us
©2010 BERDING | WEIL LLP. All Rights Reserved | Website Devolpment by CENTERGRAPHICS