Unit owner is responsible for roof maintenance expense Online Real Estate Investment Real Estate Today

24
Feb

Unit owner is responsible for roof maintenance expense

Dear Poliakoffs: I live in a high-rise condominium and recently had to call a repairman to determine why my A/C was not working. The compressor is on the roof and the air handler is in a closet in my unit.

The repairman determined that the coolant line from the compressor to the air handler was leaking right where the line penetrates the roof. Since the repairman stated that his company would only work on lines that were readily accessible (in other words, they would not cut away any part of the roof), the manager insisted that the only person he would allow to cut open the roof (lightweight concrete approximately 14 inches thick) was the company that had just replaced the roof two years ago so the roof warranty would not be void.

He additionally told me I would have to bear the expense since this line services only my unit. Our documents are not specific in this case. Who is responsible to pay the roofer to cut away the roof around the line and then repair it? – G.L.

Dear G.L.: Your question points out an interesting contradiction within the Condominium Act. A condominium association has certain responsibilities to insure elements against casualty, even if those elements service only a single unit.

So if the compressor, located on the roof or other parts of the common elements, were to be damaged by a casualty (such as a fire, flood, or storm), the association would be responsible for its repair or replacement. However, the maintenance of the compressor, when it services only a single unit, is the responsibility of the unit owner. And unfortunately, that would include the costs of repairing any incidental damage to the common elements caused by the repair.

Dear Poliakoffs: We have a 48-unit condominium and it is in our declaration that we are allowed to rent the units. We also have it in our declaration that you cannot run a business out of the condominium.

We have an owner who insists that we are violating our declaration because some rental units are renting to businesses. One particular business is a fitness camp where the customers pay by the week and, therefore, are under the guidance of a weight trainer, a chef and a program director. The foods are prepared on site, and they accept delivery of bikes, mats and water. Participants are transported to and from the condo for specific exercise, massages and recreation.

Depending on how many customers, they can rent one to three units from spring to fall. They charge by the room of double occupancy to private occupancy so up to six customers can share one condo.

When I look up their website, it does not mention our condo by name, nor does it show a business address. It only advertises a local and toll-free phone numbers with online registration. Are we in violation of our declaration? – D.L.

Dear D.L.: Well, let’s put it a different way – how would this renter not be in violation of your declaration? The declaration states that you cannot run a business out of the condominium. The renter is, in fact, running a business out of the condominium. And it’s not just one of these modern gray area, at-home-Internet-based businesses that straddle the line.

The business you’ve described is a full-fledged commercial operation that presents your community with insurance risks, overloads the common elements with invitees that were never contemplated and, frankly, creates a security situation. So no question at all – the declaration is being violated, as is no doubt the local zoning ordinance.

The board has a responsibility to enjoin this conduct to preclude the association from waiving its right to enforce the “no business” restriction in the future.

Failing to do so, the members will wake up one day to find that their residential condominium has been transformed into a hodgepodge of commercial units, with no way to stop the activity.

Online Real Estate Investment