Your HOA has a duty to enforce the CC&Rs in a manner that is not arbitrary or capricious, as well as by “procedures which are uniformly applied.” Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, condo owners frequently find that the board members of their condominium association’s “serve” because they enjoy the power that being on the board gives them, or they like to tell people what to do. These people are the ones who treat their HOAs like their own personal fiefdoms, often granting themselves and their friends privileges that they deny to other members. Such selective enforcement is illegal.

You may have a claim against your HOA for selective enforcement if your HOA:

• allows a board member to enjoy a perk or privilege denied to other similarly situated condominium owners;
• denies your application for an improvement to your condo after having already approved applications from other similarly situated condominium owners;
• strictly enforces certain rules against you while ignoring similar violations of other members; or
• arbitrarily enforces certain rules while ignoring others.

If you’d like to learn more about selective enforcement in California HOAs, read the following Articles & Fact Sheets:

• How to Prove Selective Enforcement in California HOAs
• HOA Selective Enforcement in California: What It Is and How Homeowners Can Fight Back.
• Examples of Selective Enforcement in California HOAs: Uneven Rule Enforcement
• Selective Enforcement in California HOAs: What It Is and Why It’s Illegal

Contact Us to Discuss Your HOA Dispute By Calling: (949) 691-3317

In this episode of HOA HELL, California HOA attorney and pioneer in homeowner-side HOA law, Michael Kushner, breaks down one of the most common (and most destructive) forms of HOA abuse in California: selective enforcement. If your HOA fines you while letting neighbors slide for the same thing, or if your HOA allows others to build things on their properties but denies you permission to build the same type of thing, then your HOA is engaging in selective enforcement, and that’s against the law. In this episode, Kushner explains how to recognize and deal with selective enforcement when it’s happening to you.

In simple terms, negligence is the failure to act reasonably in a given situation. If your HOA and/or neighbor cause damage to you or your property as a result of unreasonable conduct on their part(s), you may file a claim for negligence.

For example, you may have a strong negligence claim against your HOA/neighbor in any of the following types of situations:

• while watering their balcony, an upstairs neighbor allows an unreasonably excessive amount of water to flow onto your balcony, causing damage to your property;
• your HOA fails to reasonably maintain the common areas, resulting in expensive replacements and repairs; or
• you report a roof leak in your condominium building that the HOA either ignores or delays before taking action, causing damage to your property.

Contact Us to Discuss Your HOA Dispute By Calling: (949) 691-3317

When water leaks into your home, most homeowners are told one of two things: the HOA has to pay for everything, or go through your own insurance. Both answers are often wrong. In Part 1 of this two-part HOA HELL episode, California HOA lawyer and pioneer in homeowner-side HOA law in California, Michael Kushner, breaks down why water intrusion disputes are so common in California HOAs, and why bad boards and managers give oversimplified answers that can cost homeowners thousands of dollars.

You can find Part 2 of that episode here.

Your HOA’s common areas refer to areas that are owned by the HOA (rather than by any particular member(s) of the HOA). (Civ. Code, § 4095.) While many HOAs have in common certain typical kinds of common areas, such as greenbelts/landscaping, sidewalks/walkways, gyms, swimming pools, pickleball courts, tennis courts, and club houses, the other types of common areas you’re likely to see in an HOA have more to do with the type of association you joined.

For example, in typical stacked structure communities (e.g., condominiums and townhomes), where the HOAs typically own everything but the air space in the individual units, the common areas you tend to find include things like roofs, hallways and staircases, parking lots/carports, HVAC systems, buildings, and plumbing/electrical.

You also tend to find exclusive use common areas in condos and townhomes, which describe common areas accessible by only a single unit (balconies being the most common example of this).

Regardless, because an association’s common areas are considered amenities by the members, and because they are often very expensive to construct and maintain, frequent common area-related disputes between condominium owners and their HOAs arise regarding things like an HOAs:

• failing to make necessary repairs to the common areas;
• failing to reasonably maintain the common areas;
• neglecting a condo owner’s damage to or destruction of the common areas;
• neglecting to take action against a condo owner who has taken exclusive control over a portion of a common area;
• facilitating the transfer of some portion of the common area to a condominium owner without membership approval; or
• allowing the destruction of a portion of the common area.

For more information, you can read any of various Fact Sheets and Articles written by Michael Kushner:

• “Who Pays for California HOA Common Area Repairs? Understanding Civil Code 4775”
• “Why California HOAs Are Legally Required to Maintain Common Areas and What Happens When They Don’t”
• “When Your HOA Won’t Repair or Maintain: Legal Tools to Force Action”

Contact Us to Discuss Your HOA Dispute By Calling: (949) 691-3317

Some HOAs are failing to perform the most basic duty they owe to their members: maintaining, repairing, and replacing common area elements. In this episode of HOA HELL, leading California homeowner-side HOA attorney, Michael Kushner, breaks down why so many California HOAs fall short, how that failure puts YOU at legal and financial risk, and what red flags you should be watching for if your board is dragging its feet. From cracked stairways and leaking roofs to ignored inspection reports and deferred slope repairs, Kushner walks listeners through the most common scenarios where HOA neglect creates real danger. He also outlines exactly what steps you can take to force action before your property value—and your safety—are at risk.

Most HOA disputes between California homeowners and their HOAs (or fellow homeowners) never reach a courtroom. The Davis-Stirling Act encourages homeowners and associations to attempt to resolve disagreements without having to file a lawsuit, either through Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR) or Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).

IDR is an informal, face-to-face meeting between the homeowner and the board to discuss the dispute and explore settlement options. Either side may request IDR, but only the association is legally required to participate if a homeowner requests it. IDR is free, and it’s mandatory when a homeowner properly demands it (Civil Code § 5915).

If IDR fails or isn’t productive, the next step is ADR. Under Civil Code § 5930, ADR is mandatory on both sides if the dispute involves enforcement of the governing documents, and (i) the only claims are for declaratory, injunctive, and/or writ relief, or (ii) the suit consists of one or more of those claims, along with monetary relief of no more than $12,500.

Here’s what every California homeowner needs to know about the legal pathways for resolving HOA conflicts before they turn into full-scale litigation.

• The purpose of pre-litigation settlement. The Davis-Stirling Act encourages homeowners and HOAs to resolve disputes before resorting to the courts, saving time, expense, and unnecessary conflict.
• IDR. IDR is an informal, face-to-face meeting between a homeowner and members of the board to discuss the dispute and explore potential settlement. Either side may request IDR, but only the association is required to participate when a homeowner properly demands it (Civil Code § 5915). The process is free, and any agreement reached must be in writing and signed by both parties to be binding.
• ADR. If IDR fails or isn’t productive (or the homeowner opts not to bother), the next step is ADR. Under Civil Code § 5930, ADR is mandatory before filing certain types of enforcement actions involving the governing documents. These include: (i) claims for declaratory, injunctive, or writ relief; and (ii) claims combining one or more of those remedies with monetary relief of no more than $12,500.
• What “ADR” means in practice. In the Davis-Stirling context, ADR almost always means mediation. Mediation is an informal, confidential settlement discussion facilitated by a neutral professional, often a retired judge or experienced attorney. There are no witnesses, no evidence, no rulings, and no obligation to settle. Either side may leave at any time or refuse to negotiate. Each side participating in mediation pays half of the mediator’s fees, and if they have their own attorneys, they each pay for their own attorneys as well.
• Consequences for skipping ADR when it’s required.  Failure to comply with an ADR demand when ADR is required by the Davis-Stirling Act has consequence (which is why HOAs rarely reject a properly prepared ADR demand). First, when mediation is required and a party refuses to participate, there can be real consequences. Civil Code § 5960 authorizes the court to consider that refusal when deciding how much to award in attorney’s fees and costs (which Civil Code section § 5975(c) requires the court to award to the prevailing party in an enforcement action). A refusal to mediate when required can result in the judge significantly, though not completely, reducing the prevailing party’s right to recover attorney’s fees if that party failed to participate in ADR when it was required under the Davis-Stirling Act. Another consequence of failing to engage in mandatory ADR (under Civil Code § 5930) is Civil Code § 5950, which requires the party filing suit to include, with the initial pleading, a certificate stating that ADR has been completed or that the other side refused to participate. If that certificate is missing, the defendant can demur and ask the court to dismiss the case for non-compliance. In practical terms, this means that even if you are the plaintiff and you fail to offer ADR, or you refuse to participate when the HOA offered it, your case could be derailed before the court ever reaches the merits. Although the derailment might only be temporary, because you could complete ADR and then refile, you will still have wasted time and money unnecessarily.
• ADR is almost always a good idea even if it’s not required. Even when mediation isn’t legally required, however, we almost always recommend it. The reasons are straightforward:
  • Mediation is orders of magnitude less expensive than litigation.
  • Using the legal processes that I developed when I pioneered this niche area of the law, my firm’s settlement rate at the pre-litigation stage increased to well over 50%. That fact, coupled with a strategic benefit that most homeowners don’t think about, makes ADR an excellent investment in terms of money and time.
  • What are those strategic benefits? We can often negotiate remedies that a court could never order, even if you were to win at trial. For example, we have successfully negotiated the removal of abusive or disruptive directors, sometimes permanently and sometimes for a set period of time, as part of resolving a dispute via a settlement agreement negotiated during the pre-litigation ADR process. This is not a remedy a judge or jury could grant in a typical enforcement lawsuit unless there was an explicit statutory basis for that person’s inability to serve. Courts generally don’t interfere with an HOA’s “democratic process.” But in settlement, the parties can agree to anything that’s lawful and mutually acceptable. That kind of flexibility, combined with the cost savings and higher likelihood of early resolution, makes ADR a good investment in most situations. Plus, if the case doesn’t settle, and instead proceeds to trial, under the Davis-Stirling Act, the prevailing party will be entitled to their pre-litigation attorneys’ fees, so they’ll be able to recoup the money spent during the ADR process.
• Settlement agreements. Any settlement reached in IDR or mediation must be documented in a written agreement signed by both parties. A well-drafted settlement should:
  • Identify the issues being resolved and how they are resolved.
  • Specify timelines for each party’s performance.
  • Clarify any issues excluded from settlement.
  • Address attorneys’ fees (waived for negotiation; prevailing-party clause for breach).
  • Include an integration clause confirming it is the full agreement.
  • Include a general release and a Civil Code § 1542 waiver.
  • Avoid binding arbitration provisions unless the governing documents already require them.
• The role of legal counsel. Once IDR fails, homeowners should retain qualified HOA-counsel before participating in ADR. Attorneys not only ensure that the ADR demand, which has statutory requirements attached to it, is prepare correctly, but also that the settlement terms are enforceable, properly drafted, and protect against future disputes. MBK Chapman’s attorneys are highly qualified HOA experts and we’ve helped thousands of clients resolve their disputes through the ADR process.
• Advantages of resolving disputes before litigation. Early settlement through IDR or mediation can save substantial legal costs, shorten resolution time, preserve privacy, and maintain community stability.

When handled correctly, pre-litigation resolution allows homeowners to protect their rights while avoiding the financial and emotional toll of litigation.

You can read more about IDR and ADR in the various articles and Fact Sheets written by Michael Kushner, including:

• “How to Prepare for IDR With Your California HOA and What to Expect When You Get There”
• “HOA Dispute Resolution in California: Mediation, Arbitration, and Litigation Explained”
• “California HOA Disputes and Settlement Before Litigation”
• “Denied by Your California HOA? How to Challenge or Appeal Architectural Decisions”
• “How to Handle California HOA Disputes Before Hiring a Lawyer”

Contact Us to Discuss Your HOA Dispute By Calling: (949) 691-3317

Under the Davis-Stirling Act, some HOA disputes can’t go straight to court. In certain cases, you first have to go through Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) before filing a lawsuit. In this HOA HELL Clip, California’s foremost HOA attorney (on the homeowner-side), Michael Kushner, explains Civil Code § 5930 in plain terms. ADR is mandatory if you’re suing to enforce governing documents and the relief sought is injunctive relief, declaratory relief, or a writ. It’s also mandatory if you combine one of those claims with money damages under $12,500. But if the monetary claim is above that threshold, ADR is not required. Watch the full episode containing this Clip to see why ADR is still almost always recommended even where it’s not technically required. 

You can watch that episode here.

When it comes to governing over California homeowners associations, the Davis–Stirling Act empowers the board of directors as the central authority. Management companies, by contrast, are third-party contractors hired by the board to handle certain administrative and operational tasks. They are not elected, they do not answer directly to homeowners, and they owe no fiduciary duty to members.

Problems arise when boards delegate too much to managers. A disengaged, or cowed, board can allow management companies to assume too much control over enforcement, communications, and even governance decisions. When that happens, the HOA risks financial loss, legal violations, and declining homeowner trust. And managers that allow that to happen are best described as bad HOA managers.

Here are the key things California homeowners need to know about HOA management companies and the red flags of mismanagement:

Authority rests with the HOA board. The Davis–Stirling Act gives boards, not management companies, the power to govern HOAs. Managers are hired vendors with no independent authority.

• Defined by contract. The scope of a management company’s duties are set out in contracts approved by the board. Most management agreements fall into two categories:
  • Full-service contracts, covering communications, maintenance coordination, recordkeeping, elections (if delegated), and notices. These are the most common.
  • Financial-only contracts, covering billing, collections, accounting, and financial disclosures.
• Non-delegable powers. Even broadly-worded management agreements cannot give managers powers exclusively reserved by law to the board. Such non-delegable powers include making binding decisions on behalf of the HOA, fining a homeowner or rejecting an architectural application without express board authorization, or denying a records request unless instructed by the board and supported by the law.
• How managers are hired and fired. Boards hire and fire management companies by contract. Homeowners cannot vote them out directly, but under Civil Code 5200, members are entitled to inspect contracts and board minutes approving them.
• Typical management contract provisions. Most management contracts:
  • Run for one to three years.
  • Contain automatic renewal clauses.
  • Require 30–90 days’ notice for termination.
• Liquidated damages clauses. Some management contracts include early-termination penalties. Under Civil Code 1671 (as well as case law interpreting that statute), liquidated damages provisions are unenforceable if they are deemed punitive. They are only valid if they reasonably estimate the actual damages that the non-breaching party could’ve anticipated would result from a breach. This is why your HOA’s management contracts should always be reviewed by the HOA’s attorneys before the board signs them.
• Red flags of mismanagement. Common red flags you can look out for to indicate a problem you’re your management company include the following (for a full explanation of what these mean, refer to the main article referenced above):
  • Routine delays in responding to homeowner inquiries.
  • Missing or withheld records despite the Civil Code 5200 right of inspection.
  • Repeated accounting errors or unexplained late fees.
  • Inconsistent or selective enforcement of rules.
  • Poor communication of meetings, notices, or agendas.
  • Managers inserting themselves into recalls, elections, or board decision-making.
  • Repeated no-bid vendor renewals or apparent kickbacks.

Homeowners cannot discipline or remove a management company directly, but they can act through the board. Practical steps include:

• Demanding contracts and board minutes under Civil Code 5200.
• Reviewing whether contracts were competitively bid or simply rubber-stamped.
• Organizing neighbors to press the board or use recall rights if directors refuse to act.
• Pressing the board to re-bid contracts even before renewal dates.
• Using Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR) under Civil Code 5910 to force face-to-face discussions about mismanagement.

Ultimately, the board is responsible for addressing these red flags. If directors refuse to supervise managers properly, the solution is to replace the directors who enabled the problem.

You can read more about bad management companies and managers in the various articles and Fact Sheets written by Michael Kushner, including:

• “How to Deal with a Bad HOA Management Company in California: Your Legal Rights and Options”
• “California HOA Management Companies: Red Flags That Signal Mismanagement”
• “California HOA Manager Misconduct: What Homeowners Need to Know”

Contact Us to Discuss Your HOA Dispute By Calling: (949) 691-3317

In this episode of HOA HELL, California’s homeowner-side leading HOA lawyer, Michael Kushner, exposes the often-overlooked role that management companies play in California HOAs and how that role can spiral into abuse, neglect, or outright misconduct if left unchecked. Kushner walks listeners through exactly how management companies are hired, what their contracts say, and what they’re legally allowed, and not allowed, to do. He breaks down common red flags that signal mismanagement, and explains what tools homeowners can use to fight back even though the management company doesn’t report to them directly. This episode arms homeowners with a powerful roadmap to spot missteps, request critical documents, organize fellow members, and demand board accountability. It also explains why you usually can’t sue the management company directly and why that doesn’t mean you’re powerless to stop the abuse.

AB 130, which went into effect in California on June 30, 2025, made several important changes to California law that affect property owners, and more particularly, HOA members and boards. For example, AB 130 revised the following Civil Code sections:

• Civil Code § 5850. Caps HOA fines at $100 per violation unless the violation poses a health or safety impact. Higher fines allowed only if the board makes a written finding in an open board meeting documenting the health or safety impact.
• Civil Code § 5855. Expands procedural protections in HOA disciplinary hearings. Requires homeowners be given an opportunity to cure violations before discipline is imposed. If more time is needed, members may provide a financial commitment to cure. Hearing notices must include the alleged violation, any damage, and notice of the right to attend and address the board (including in executive session). Boards must issue written notice of their decision within 14 days.
• Civil Code § 2924.13. Adds protections for borrowers with subordinate (junior) mortgages. Defines unlawful servicing practices such as failing to communicate with borrowers, failing to provide notices of transfer, threatening foreclosure after discharge or expiration of statute of limitations, or failing to provide account statements. Requires servicers to record a certification with the county recorder when filing a notice of default, and to provide the borrower a copy. Borrowers can petition the court to stop a foreclosure sale if unlawful practices occurred, and may raise these issues as defenses in judicial foreclosure.
• Civil Code § 714.3. Makes unenforceable any covenant or restriction that effectively prohibits or unreasonably restricts construction or use of an ADU or JADU on a single-family lot. Clarifies that “reasonable restrictions” are those that don’t unreasonably increase cost or effectively prohibit construction, and specifically excludes financial requirements such as fees.

Contact Us to Discuss Your HOA Dispute By Calling: (949) 691-3317

You can read more about AB 130 in the various articles and Fact Sheets written by Michael Kushner, including:

• “How California’s AB 130 Limits HOA Fines and Enforcement”
• “AB 130’s ‘Financial Commitment’ Loophole: Why It’s a Problem”
• “California’s AB 130: Why the $100 Fine Cap Is Already Causing Chaos”
• “Why Celebrating AB 130 Is a Mistake: The Still Obvious Risks of California’s $100 HOA Fine Cap”
• “AB 130 in California: Table of Statutory Changes Affecting HOAs and Homeowners”

California’s new law capping HOA fines at $100 per violation is being celebrated by some as a win for homeowners. But in this episode of HOA HELL, California’s leading homeowner-side HOA attorney, Michael Kushner, breaks down why AB 130 is not the reform it appears to be, and why those so-called experts who support the law didn’t think through the consequences Kushner discusses. Based on his deep dive into the statute and its fallout, Kushner exposes how the law’s vague language, unintended consequences, and political underpinnings will actually create more chaos, more litigation, and more costs for homeowners across the state.

You might also like to watch a follow-up episode of HOA HELL titled, “California AB 130 Update: Predictions Come True as HOA Chaos Unfolds,” where Kushner revisited AB 130 just weeks after it went into effect, and confirmed that the fallout was happening exactly as he predicted. From client consultations, to opposing counsel discussions, to upcoming press coverage, the consensus is clear: AB 130 has already created confusion, lawsuits, and unintended consequences.

In California, the recall petition is the document that forces an HOA board to schedule a recall election. It is not an informal letter of complaint. Rather, it is a legally binding demand under both the Davis-Stirling Act and the California Corporations Code. To succeed, a recall petition must be drafted and executed with precision. A single procedural misstep can give the board a pretext to reject the petition or derail the recall election.

Once a valid recall petition is submitted, California law requires the HOA to schedule and conduct a recall election. This election must follow strict procedures under Civil Code § 5100 and related sections. Boards often try to control the process, but when homeowners understand the required steps, they can hold directors accountable and make sure the election is fair.

Here are the key signature (i.e., petition) rules and requirements every California homeowner must know before starting a recall effort:

• Signature Threshold. For most HOAs, signatures from 5% of the total membership are required to compel a recall election (Corp. Code § 7510(e)). For stock cooperatives, the threshold is 10%.
• Owners of Record Only. Only owners of record may sign a recall petition. Co-owners on the same title count as one signature. The signatures of tenants, non-owner spouses, and other residents not on title will not count. An owner with multiple units may sign once for each unit.
• Pocket Deeds. An unrecorded deed (sometimes called a “pocket deed”) does not establish ownership rights under the Davis-Stirling Act. Consequently, a grantee on an unrecorded deed cannot sign. Boards will challenge these signatures, and they will not count toward the threshold.
• Petition Content. A valid petition must clearly state which director(s) (or the entire board) are subject to recall. It must include printed names, property addresses, and original signatures. Extra language, narratives, or personal attacks create opportunities for the board to argue that the petition is defective.
• Original Signatures Required. Photocopies, scans, and e-signatures do not meet the statutory requirement. Best practice is to collect blue-ink signatures to avoid disputes.
• Delivery of the Petition. Delivery must be made either in person or by certified mail to the board, a director, or the managing agent (Corp. Code § 7511(a)-(b)). Certified mail provides a reliable paper trail. In-person delivery should be documented with a signed acknowledgment. You should also always email the completed petition, with a note referring to the other delivery method.

When drafting and circulating a recall petition, precision is critical. Each of these requirements must be met for the petition to be considered valid.

Once a valid recall petition is submitted, California law requires the HOA to schedule and conduct a recall election. This election must follow strict procedures under Civil Code § 5100 and related sections. Boards often try to control the process, but when homeowners understand the required steps, they can hold directors accountable and make sure the election is fair.

The recall election process follows a series of legal steps that must be completed in order.

• Notice of Meeting Must Be Sent. Once the board receives a valid recall petition, it must notice a special meeting of the members for the recall vote. The notice must go out at least 20 days before the meeting.
• Inspector of Elections Is Required. The board cannot count the ballots itself. A neutral inspector of elections must be appointed to oversee the process.
• Secret Ballot Rules Apply. Just like regular board elections, recalls must use the double-envelope secret ballot system. This prevents intimidation and ensures anonymity.
• Quorum Requirements Control Validity. The association’s bylaws usually set a quorum percentage that must be met for the recall to proceed. Without quorum, the recall fails—even if a majority of ballots favor removal.
• Majority of Members Voting Determines the Outcome. If quorum is met, directors can be recalled by a majority of the members who cast ballots, not the majority of the entire membership.
• Replacement Directors May Be Elected. Some recalls elect replacements on the same ballot, while others require a separate election. The bylaws and governing documents determine which applies.
• Election Timeline Cannot Be Manipulated. Boards may not delay the election beyond what the Civil Code and governing documents allow. Attempts to stall can be challenged.

Understanding these steps is essential to ensure your recall election is legally valid. Your HOA board’s failure to comply with any of these requirements can result in your having the election results thrown out.

You can read more about director recall elections in the various articles and Fact Sheets written by Michael Kushner, including:

• “HOA Recalls in California: The Power to Remove Your HOA Board”
• “HOA Recalls in California: How Homeowners Can Remove Their HOA Board”
• “HOA Recall Petition in California: Signature Rules and Requirements”
• “HOA Recall Election in California: Step-by-Step Guide for Homeowners”
• “HOA Board Recall Challenges in California: How Homeowners Can Respond When Boards Resist”
• “Will an HOA Collapse If You Recall the Board?”

Contact Us to Discuss Your HOA Dispute By Calling: (949) 691-3317

In this episode of HOA HELL, homeowner-side HOA lawyer and legal pioneer, Michael Kushner, breaks down the legal process for recalling your HOA board in California and why it can be one of the most effective tools for holding directors accountable. He explains the exact signature threshold required, what must be in a valid petition, how the recall election works, and how to counter common board tactics designed to stall or derail the process. Kushner also covers the strategic decision between targeting individual directors versus the entire board, how cumulative voting affects partial recalls, and why organizing your community beforehand can be the difference between success and failure. Whether your board is violating the law, ignoring members, or simply unfit to lead, this episode gives you a practical roadmap for making a change.

Under the Davis-Stirling Act, every California HOA must prepare a reserve study at least once every three years (Civil Code § 5550). These studies are required to make sure the association sets aside enough money for major repairs and replacements of the HOA’s major common assets (or components), such as roofs, balconies, plumbing, and streets. They are not optional. They are a legal safeguard built into the statute to protect homeowners from surprise special assessments and financial mismanagement.

California HOAs are legally obligated to plan ahead for long-term repairs and replacements of the HOA’s major components (assets) by conducting reserve studies.

• Reserve studies are required every three years. The Davis-Stirling Act requires HOAs to prepare a formal reserve study at least once every three years (Civil Code § 5550).
• Annual disclosures must be provided. Each year, the HOA must send members a Reserve Funding Disclosure Summary as part of the Annual Budget Report (Civil Code § 5570). This summary includes critical data like the current reserve balance, projected costs, and the very important “percent funded” figure.
• Reserve studies cover major components. The study evaluates big-ticket items the HOA must maintain, such as roofs, plumbing, balconies, elevators, and roadways, not routine maintenance or landscaping.
• Physical inspection and cost estimates are required. A proper reserve study includes on-site inspection, an inventory of components, useful life estimates, replacement costs, and inflation adjustments (Civil Code § 5550).
• The “percent funded” figure is important. This number shows whether the HOA is financially on track to meet future obligations (Civil Code § 5570). Figures above 70% usually indicate healthy reserves. Figures below 60% suggest risk of special assessments. Figures below 50% spell almost certain future special assessments.
• Boards cannot skip or manipulate studies. Failing to conduct reserve studies, withholding the required disclosures, wrongful manipulation of useful life estimates, delisting components, or falsifying assumptions are almost always evidence of fraud.

Reserve studies are not just technical documents. They are your HOA’s financial roadmap. When done correctly, they protect your pocketbook by showing whether the HOA is responsibly planning ahead. When ignored or manipulated, they leave homeowners exposed to devastating special assessments that can cost tens of thousands of dollars per household.

You can read more about reserve studies in the various articles and Fact Sheets written by Michael Kushner, including:

• “Everything You Wanted to Know About Reserve Studies”
• “HOA Reserve Studies in California: How Boards Manipulate the “Percent Funded” Number”
• “HOA Reserve Studies in California: Understanding the ‘Percent Funded’ Number”
• “California HOA Reserve Study Requirements: How Often They’re Required and What Must Be Included”
• “How California HOAs Manipulate Reserve Studies and What Homeowners Can Do to Protect Themselves”

Contact Us to Discuss Your HOA Dispute By Calling: (949) 691-3317

Most homeowners know their HOA is supposed to set aside money for future repairs, but few understand how those funds are calculated, what they’re actually for, or what the “percent funded” number on their annual budget summary really means. In this episode of HOA HELL, which is Part 1 of 2, California’s leading authority on homeowner-side HOA law, attorney Michael Kushner walks you through the core elements of a reserve fund and reserve study, explains how they’re structured under California law, and breaks down exactly what your reserve study should be telling you. From “Useful Life” and “Remaining Life” to “Current Replacement Cost,” Kushner explains how to spot red flags in your reserve disclosures and why underfunding can be a sign of serious financial mismanagement or even fraud.

You can watch Part 2 of that series here, in which Kushner exposes how some boards don’t just underfund reserves, they engage in actual fraud. Kushner details the deceptive tactics bad HOAs use to manipulate reserve studies, inflate their “percent funded” numbers, and avoid disclosing the true financial condition of their HOAs. From delisting major components and tampering with useful life calculations, to simply skipping reserve contributions altogether, Kushner walks listeners through how these schemes work, and how to recognize them. He teaches homeowners what kinds of financial red flags to watch for in their HOA’s disclosures, how to compare reserve summaries and full reserve studies, and what legal obligations HOA boards have to maintain and report truthfully on their HOA common areas.

When you buy a home in a California HOA, you’re putting trust in the people elected to run your community. These HOA board members are volunteers. But they’re not just volunteers. They are also fiduciaries, which means that the law holds them to the highest duty of trust and responsibility. In other words, HOA board members owe what’s called fiduciary duties to their HOAs and its members.

Here are the key rules, expectations, and remedies tied to fiduciary duty in California HOAs—from what it means, to how boards should uphold it, to what you can do if they don’t.

• What fiduciary duty means. At its core, fiduciary duty means acting for the benefit of others while putting aside personal interests. California courts confirm that HOA directors owe this duty to all members. Corporations Code 7231 defines and imposes these duties on corporate directors.
• Two core duties. HOA board members’ fiduciary duty includes:
  • The duty of care. A fiduciary duty of care which requires HOA board members act diligently, in good faith, and to make informed decisions.
  • The duty of loyalty. A fiduciary duty of loyalty requires HOA board members to put the HOA’s interests first, conserve and care for HOA funds, and avoid self-dealing and conflicts of interest.
• Duty of Care in practice. Directors must:
  • Attend meetings, which means that they must participate in the governance of their HOAs.
  • Review financials and contracts, which means that they must prepare for and then make reasonable decisions regarding the governance of finances of the HOA.
  • Ask questions and rely on experts where appropriate, which means that they not only need to seek out appropriate expertise to guide them, but also to follow that advice when it’s given.
  • Keep accurate records, which includes taking accurate minutes of all meetings and meticulously tracking all spending.
  • Enforce rules, and do that consistently, which means that board members have to have a working knowledge of the governing documents that they’re supposed to be enforcing, and then apply those rules fairly across the board.
• Duty of Loyalty in practice. Directors must:
  • Avoid self-dealing, which means that board members must avoid the appearance of impropriety and avoid siphoning benefits to themselves, their families, or their friends at the expense of other HOA members.
  • Keep confidential information confidential, which means not divulging private information from executive session matters, attorney-client communications, and member discipline.
  • Protect and preserve HOA assets.
  • Continue to honor confidentiality even after leaving the board.
• Common breaches. Bad boards members often breach their fiduciary duties by:
  • Ignoring reserve studies and professional advice.
  • Selectively enforcing rules.
  • Using HOA money for personal gain.
  • Refusing to produce records under Civil Code 5200.
  • Neglecting obvious maintenance or safety issues.

Fiduciary duty isn’t just legal jargon. It’s the standard that keeps HOA boards honest. When boards follow it, communities thrive. When they break it, homeowners pay the price.

You can read more about HOA board members’ fiduciary duties in the various articles and Fact Sheets written by Michael Kushner, including:

• “California HOAs and Fiduciary Duty: What It Means and Why It Matters”
• “California HOA Board Conflicts of Interest: What Homeowners Should Know”
• “California HOA Board Misconduct: What Counts as Overreach Under California Law”
• “California HOAs and Crime: What is my HOA required to do to Protect Me?”
• “California HOA Board Misconduct: What It Means and How Homeowners Can Fight Back”

Contact Us to Discuss Your HOA Dispute By Calling: (949) 691-3317

In this episode of HOA Hell, HOA lawyer and California’s leading expert on homeowner-side HOA law, Michael Kushner, breaks down what “fiduciary duty” actually means for California HOA boards and why it matters to your rights, your money, and your quality of life. You’ll hear plain-English examples of the two duties that make up the fiduciary duty in the HOA setting (i.e., the duty of care and the duty of loyalty), and you’ll learn how transparency defeats self-dealing, what confidentiality really requires, and the specific steps homeowners can take when they spot red flags.

California law protects homeowners not only from discrimination by their HOA, but also from retaliation when they assert their rights. Retaliation occurs when an HOA board takes adverse actions against a homeowner because that homeowner filed a complaint, requested an accommodation, demanded records, or otherwise exercised a legal right. Recognizing retaliation is important because it is illegal and can expose both the HOA and individual board members to serious liability.

Retaliation often looks like ordinary rule enforcement, but the key difference is the board’s motive. When enforcement or penalties are triggered by a homeowner’s protected activity, that conduct may be unlawful retaliation.

• What retaliation means. Under the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), HOAs cannot punish or harass homeowners for exercising their anti–discrimination-related rights guaranteed to them by federal and state law. Protected activities include filing discrimination complaints, requesting reasonable accommodations or modifications, or participating in an investigation or proceeding.
• Examples of more common retaliatory conduct by HOAs. Although HOAs retaliate against homeowners who have stood up for the constitutional rights in a variety of ways, the most common forms of retaliation include:
  • Issuing sudden fines or violations after a homeowner requests records or files a complaint.
  • Selectively enforcing rules against a homeowner who challenged the board while ignoring similar violations by others.
  • Delaying or denying maintenance requests in response to protected activity.
  • Harassment or intimidation by board members or property managers aimed at discouraging further complaints.
• Legal protections. The FHA prohibits retaliation against individuals who oppose housing discrimination or help enforce housing rights. Likewise, California’s FEHA offers overlapping protections, with enforcement by the California Civil Rights Department (CRD). Both statutes allow homeowners to seek remedies through administrative complaints, mediation, or lawsuits.
• Consequences for HOAs. HOAs, and individual board members, who engage (or participate) in illegal retaliation face a variety of serious consequences, including civil penalties, damages, or injunctive relief requiring the HOA to stop retaliatory conduct. Courts may also order systemic policy changes or training for boards that engage in retaliation.

Retaliation by HOAs is prohibited under both federal and California law. Boards or individual board members that target homeowners for exercising their rights risk serious legal consequences (and in the case of board members, personal liability).

You can read more about retaliation in the various articles and Fact Sheets written by Michael Kushner, including:

• “HOA Retaliation in California: Illegal Board Conduct Explained”
• “HOA Discrimination, Retaliation, and Harassment in California: Homeowners’ Rights Under Federal and State Law”

Contact Us to Discuss Your HOA Dispute By Calling: (949) 691-3317

In this episode of HOA HELL, HOA lawyer and California’s #1 homeowner-side advocate, Michael Kushner, exposes one of the most disturbing recent legal tactics used by HOA-=side law firms today: labeling homeowners as “harassers” and threatening restraining orders against them for doing nothing more than filming rule violations, questioning unauthorized vendor activity, or demanding enforcement of the governing documents. Kushner walks viewers through two real cease-and-desist letters sent by two of California’s top HOA-side firms—letters that don’t just misstate the law, but intentionally distort it beyond recognition. One firm threatened to sue for tortious interference because a homeowner took pictures. Another claimed a homeowner “assaulted” a landscaper by asking questions. Both weaponized harassment law in ways that would never hold up in court, but might scare an uninformed homeowner into silence.

Simply put, an easement is an interest in someone else’s land which gives the “owner” of the easement a limited right to use the other’s property. There are many different types of easements (e.g., express, implied, by necessity, prescriptive, etc.). You’ll probably be surprised to learn that your property is subject to at least one easement, probably in favor of the power/utility companies. If you’re curious, obtain a title report for your property and take a look.

The most common disputes that occur concerning easements in HOA communities usually involve either the land owner interfering with someone else’s easement (onto the owner’s land), or the owner of the easement (the one who does not own the land) going beyond the rights granted in the easement. For example, if you live in an HOA neighborhood with zero-lot lines, it’s probable that you have an easement onto your neighbor’s property to permit you access to the exterior portion of your home sitting inches from the property line. If your neighbor were to prevent your access (to paint or make repairs to your home), or if you were to exceed the conditions of your easement, it could result in an easement-related dispute.

If you are the “owner” of an easement (i.e., you have a right to enter or use a defined portion of someone else’s property) who is being denied access, or if you are the property owner facing someone else who is violating the terms of an existing easement (or claiming to have an easement where none exists), you can obtain monetary and injunctive relief to enforce your rights.

Contact Us to Discuss Your HOA Dispute By Calling: (949) 691-3317

In this Part 3 of a 6-part Neighbor Dispute Series, HOA lawyer Michael Kushner tackles one of the most aggressive categories of neighbor conflict: trespass, easements, encroachments, grading manipulation, and spite fences. If you’ve ever discovered a fence or other structure built on your property, watched runoff destroy your landscaping, or had a neighbor claim rights to land you own, whether it’s an inch or much more than that, then this episode will give you the tools to fight back. Kushner unpacks how California law treats physical and structural invasions (both above and below ground), and they explain why old fences, plot maps, or casual agreements won’t protect your property rights.