1200 Vine Street COA Violated Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act ,CCIOA, Denver, Colorado

The courts in Colorado are absolutely worthless when it comes to hearing complaints against a homeowners association. My association at 1200 Vine Street locked me out of the common areas without notice or a hearing.

I filed a lawsuit. At trial the association claimed I was never locked out but that the security system had failed and they were not able to lock me out. They also claimed that the system had been replaced due to problems with it. The company that installed the system testified that there were no problems with the system and that it was still in place and operational.

The association claimed that I was running water in my unit 24/7. Never happened. But because it is impossible to get a fair hearing in a Colorado court, the judge decided to believe the association and accepted their argument WITHOUT ANY PROOF whatsoever that the events took place or that it created an emergency situation.

The Denver Water Department representative told the court that although it had threatened to turn off the water to the entire building it had no intent to do so. Denver Water visited the unit on two (2) occasions for approximately 10 minutes each time and heard water running once. Based on these visits and a claim by a neighbor who despises me, the court accepted the claim that I was wasting water.

The association also claimed that water was a common element and therefore they had a right to act as they did. Nowhere in the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (CCIOA) or our governing documents are the common elements shown to include water. The association also claimed that the air in the building was a common element. The court accepted this ludicrous claim ignoring all the definitions contained in CCIOA and the governing documents.

The association also claimed that I was wasting heat in the common areas because I did not turn off the heating units when I left the room. It made no difference that I generally returned to the areas later in the day, sometimes more than twice a day, and since association board members were turning off the heat whenever they found it on, the rooms were very cold.

The court also ignored the Housing Authority rules that habitable areas were to be maintained at 70 degrees. These events took place during the winter of 2007-2008. It is my belief that most people do not turn off the heat in their homes when they leave for ten minutes, an hour, a couple of hours or in fact if they intend to return home the same day. The court obviously felt that it was improper to leave the heat on even when it was below 20 degrees outside. The rooms have a wall of windows and sliding glass doors that are all single pane glass since they were installed in 1959 when the building was first built.

Do you turn the heat off in your dwelling if you intend to return?

The association has adopted resolutions written by then Orten & Hindman, now HindmanSanchez that allow for the association to deviate from the policies adopted in response to SB05-100. The deviation clause essentially makes the policies totally worthless since the association can deviate to suit their interests.

The judge, Madden IV, accepted this argument while ignoring all the lies by the association board of directors that were made evident during the trial. As a friend had pointed out to me; judges refuse to enforce perjury against liars in a civil case. Furthermore, the deviation clause specifically states that it allows the association to deviate from the contents of the resolution. Judge Madden asserted that it allowed them to deviate period!

How is a homeowner to know what the policy is if the board of directors can deviate from it at will?

CCIOA has a provision, -123, that mandates that if an association fails to follow ANY of the provisions of CCIOA, its Declaration, its By-laws, its Rules and Regulations; then the aggrieved party can sue for damages. I had to retain an attorney to regain access to the common areas.

The evening before we were to appear in court seeking an injunction against the associations actions, my privileges were restored. I claimed that the attorney fees paid to regain access to the common areas PRIOR to the filing of the lawsuit were monetary damages. The court ruled that they were not since they were attorney fees.

Judge Madden totally ignored any and all arguments including that the board of directors acted WITHOUT a meeting, WITHOUT a written vote, WITHOUT maintaining any minutes of the meeting; all violations of CCIOA and the governing documents of the association. Hence, my assertion that the courts are totally worthless.

A warning to all potential buyers of ANY property that has a homeowners association (HOA or COA): DONT DO IT! The courts will not protect you at all! CCIOA and the governing documents are not for your protection. They will only be used against you.

Are the judges receiving compensation from the very attorneys that these associations hire to represent them? I have no proof of it; although the action of both Judge Madden here, and Judge Mullins in my previous rip-off report should give one pause.