Overview

Homeowners who discover that their HOAs broke the law frequently look for the state agency that they can complain to. Some look for a state office that licenses HOAs or a hotline that takes complaints, and others might look for the state regulator that audits HOA books and voids rigged elections. No such offices exist. California licenses cosmetologists, locksmiths, and pest control operators, but it leaves the governance of roughly 65,000 HOAs to nobody at all. In short, when it comes to 99.9% of all HOA-related wrongdoing, there is no state agency to turn to for answers or solutions.

Instead, the Legislature wrote enforcement directly into the Davis-Stirling Act and handed it to homeowners. The Davis-Stirling Act attaches monetary penalties to specific violations, frequently forces HOAs to pay homeowners’ attorneys’ fees when homeowners win, and routes several claims through small claims court where homeowners need no lawyer at all. Homeowners themselves are the enforcement mechanism for ensuring that HOAs follow the law and their governing documents.

California does keep a list of HOAs, and homeowners who hear about it reasonably assume that this “HOA registry” brings supervision with it. But the Davis-Stirling Act has required every HOA to file that information with the Secretary of State since 2003 (the requirement is now found in Civil Code 5405). Most people have no idea what that requirement is for or what it accomplishes. I’ll start with what it isn’t: it isn’t a supervisory body, and it doesn’t relieve homeowners of the responsibility to compel their HOAs to follow the law. The HOA registry gives the State a little bit of information about how many HOAs operate in California, where they sit, and who runs them. [I’ll be writing a separate Fact Sheet on the HOA registry in the near future, so keep a lookout for that.]

Of course, there are a few exceptions related to the lack of state agency oversight for HOAs, including complaints related to things like criminal conduct, discrimination, or building code violations. But every other complaint about how an HOA runs itself offers homeowners exactly one place to turn: themselves, through the courts.

In this Fact Sheet, I explain how far the absence of state regulation goes, what the Davis-Stirling Act requires homeowners to do in the absence of a regulator, and the hurdle that some homeowners have to clear before they can file a lawsuit.

Key Points

California has no HOA regulator. That single fact controls where 99.9% of homeowner complaints can go, and a lot of homeowners learn it only after months of writing to State offices that have absolutely no authority over the problem. The Davis-Stirling Act puts enforcement in homeowners’ hands and backs it with civil penalties, fee shifting, and small claims access.

• No California agency licenses, audits, or supervises HOAs. California regulates real estate brokers through the Department of Real Estate, contractors through the Contractors State License Board, and insurers through the Department of Insurance. The Department of Real Estate even reviews subdivision public reports while developers still control a project, but its role ends when the developer sells out. No state agency, however, reviews HOA budgets, audits HOA reserves, investigates HOA wrongdoing, or removes HOA directors who engage in self-dealing or otherwise violate the law or the HOA’s governing documents. Even HOA managers escape state licensing. [The exceptions sit outside HOA governance. Housing discrimination goes to the California Civil Rights Department or the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. Theft/embezzlement goes to local police and the district attorney. Building and fire code violations go to city or county code enforcement. But none of them touches a rigged election, a concealed budget, or an HOA board ignoring its own CC&Rs.]
  • The HOA registry collects addresses, not conduct. Civil Code 5405 requires every HOA in California, incorporated or not, to file identifying information with the Secretary of State for a fee capped at $30. HOAs report their name, office addresses, president’s contact information, managing agent, county and city, nearest cross street, development type, and number of separate interests. Civil Code 5405 requires no governing documents, no budgets, no reserve studies, no audits, no minutes, and no election results. At best, the Secretary of State knows where California’s roughly 65,000 HOAs can be found, but nothing about how they operate.
• Every enforcement action against your HOA starts with you filing it. The Davis-Stirling Act gives homeowners standing to sue their own HOAs, and that right covers the full range of HOA misconduct rather than some narrow slice of it. Homeowners sue over budgets, assessments, architectural denials, common area repairs, meetings, records, elections, and rule enforcement. Civil Code 5975 supplies the broadest tool, because it makes the covenants and restrictions in a declaration enforceable equitable servitudes that any owner of a separate interest can enforce against the HOA directly. Other provisions target specific misconduct, such as Civil Code 5145 for election violations, Civil Code 5235 for withheld records, Civil Code 4350 for unreasonable rules, Civil Code 4765 for arbitrary and capricious architectural decisions, or Civil Code 4925 for HOA boards that shut members out of meetings that they’re entitled to attend. Bad HOAs count on homeowners never learning that those rights exists. [For the full range of claims homeowners can bring against their HOAs, read my Fact Sheet, “Grounds for Suing Your California HOA: Legal Reasons Homeowners Can Sue.” You might also want to read “How to Sue Your California HOA: A Step-by-Step Guide,” or watch Sam and me discuss that topic during our HOA HELL podcast.]

• • Fee-shifting provisions make homeowner enforcement worth pursuing. A right to sue means nothing to a homeowner who can’t pay a retainer or afford the high costs of litigation, so in several cases, the Davis-Stirling Act shifts that risk. For example, Civil Code 5975 awards reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs to whoever prevails in an action to enforce the governing documents. Two other examples of fee-shifting in the Davis-Stirling Act are Civil Code 5145 and Civil Code 5235. While several statutes also award homeowners with statutory penalties (e.g., Civil Code 5235 awards homeowners up to $500 per category of document demanded that an HOA refused to hand over), those are often too low to have real teeth. But fee-shifting statutes always have teeth.
  • Small claims court removes the lawyer from the equation. A few Davis-Stirling Act statutes allow homeowners to choose small claims court as a means of forcing HOA compliance. For example, Civil Code 5145 and Civil Code 5235 both authorize small claims actions when the demand fits within that court’s jurisdictional limit (i.e., where the damages sought are $12,500 or less). Filing fees stay low, hearings come fast, and homeowners argue their own cases. The parties can’t send attorneys to represent them in small claims court, so HOAs lose the advantage they buy with member money. Civil Code 5145 (related to election disputes) goes further by doing something completely unique. It awards prevailing homeowners their attorneys’ fees for consulting an attorney about the small claims action, so homeowners can pay for advice beforehand and recover that cost after they win. [For information about choosing between forums, read my Fact Sheet, “California HOA Small Claims Court or Superior Court: Which Forum Is Right for Your Dispute?”]
• Two statutes control what you have to do before you reach superior court. Civil Code 5910 requires HOAs to maintain a fair, reasonable, and expeditious internal dispute resolution (IDR) procedure, and HOAs must participate once homeowners invoke it in writing (but homeowners never have to engage in IDR, regardless of whether or not the governing documents say otherwise). HOAs can’t charge homeowners a fee to avail themselves of IDR, and written resolutions signed by both parties bind the HOA and become judicially enforceable. Civil Code 5930 then blocks enforcement actions in superior court until the parties have tried alternative dispute resolution (ADR), which in the context of Davis-Stirling Act-related disputes, means mediation. The ADR requirement, however, only actually comes into play if the lawsuit is seeking declaratory, injunctive, or writ relief, or is seeking any of those in conjunction with money damages of $12,500 or less. That same statute also exempts claims brought in small claims court. [For what to expect inside the IDR process, read my Fact Sheet, “How to Prepare for IDR With Your California HOA and What to Expect When You Get There.” To learn more about the Davis-Stirling Act’s ADR requirement, read “California HOA Mediation: When ADR Is Mandatory Under Civil Code 5930.”]
• If your HOA broke the law, don’t look to a state agency to help you because none exist. Instead, call the HOA attorneys at MBK Chapman. We are the most respected homeowner-side law firm in California for a reason. We have decades of combined experience forcing HOA boards to follow the Davis-Stirling Act, and we know which statutes carry penalties, which ones shift fees, and which ones produce results.

Homeowners are often surprised to hear that no state agency regulates HOAs. That surprise turns into resignation, and resignation is what bad HOA boards rely on. The Davis-Stirling Act puts the enforcement power in homeowners’ hands instead, and it gives them the right to take their HOAs to court and make them follow the law.

FAQs

About Michael Kushner

Michael Kushner is a California attorney with over 30 years of experience representing homeowners in disputes with their HOAs. He is widely regarded as California’s leading homeowner-side HOA attorney, and has built one of the state’s most prominent law practices dedicated to holding HOAs accountable under the Davis-Stirling Act and California law.

In addition to his law firm’s work, Michael is a recognized lecturer, author, and the host of the hit HOA HELL podcast, where he provides homeowners living in HOA-governed communities with clear, practical strategies for dealing with bad HOAs. He’s also the author of the best-selling book, HOA HELL | California Homeowners’ Definitive Guide to Beating Bad HOAs, which has become a go-to resource for both homeowners seeking real-world solutions to their HOA disputes, as well as those good HOA board members who are interested in doing a good job.

About MBK Chapman Fact Sheets

Homeowners searching for answers online will often come across articles that appear authoritative, but are actually written as search-engine marketing content rather than by an experienced HOA lawyer. These pieces tend to prioritize keyword density over clarity, accuracy, or legal context, which often leaves homeowners more confused than informed.

At MBK Chapman, our Fact Sheets are part of our HOA Law Library and are written by Michael Kushner, an HOA lawyer with decades of hands-on experience representing California homeowners. In fact, Michael Kushner is the HOA lawyer who pioneered the systems and strategies used by some of California’s most successful homeowner-side HOA law firms.

Each Fact Sheet is deliberately concise, statute-based, and designed as a quick-reference guide to help homeowners understand key HOA laws and enforcement rules at a glance.

AND DON’T FORGET TO TUNE INTO MY PODCAST, HOA HELL

YOU CAN ALSO ORDER MY GROUNDBREAKING BOOK

HOA HELL | California Homeowners’ Definitive Guide to Beating Bad HOAs

Amazon  |  Barnes & Noble