Law Offices of Tracy Ettinghoff

CALL FOR A CONSULTATION
949-363-5573

  • Home
  • About
  • Practice Areas
    • Interpretation & Enforcement of CC&Rs
    • Construction Defect Litigation
    • Easements
    • Escrow Disputes
    • Foreclosures
    • Real Estate Fraud
    • HOA Assessment Collections
    • Real Estate Litigation
    • Real Estate Transactions
    • Short Sales
    • Unlawful Detainers
  • Legal Updates
  • Clients
    • Resources
  • Consultation
  • Contact Law Office of Tracy Ettinghoff

September 1, 2011 By Tracy Ettinghoff Leave a Comment

The Cost for Providing HOA Docs to Buyers Must Now be Disclosed in Advance

Governor Jerry Brown signed AB 771 today, a bill that prevents home buyers in a common interest development (CID), such as a condominium or townhome, from being charged excess document fees.

Homeowner associations (HOAs) are required to provide specific documents to prospective purchasers of homes in a CID — a form of real estate ownership in which each homeowner has an exclusive interest in a unit and a shared
interest in the common area property. In addition to the standard residential property disclosures, purchasers of a unit within a CID must receive basic information about the structure, operation and management of the HOA that operates the CID.

Current law requires that this information come from the HOA and prohibits it from charging fees in excess of what is “reasonable,” not to exceed the actual cost of processing and producing these documents. HOAs generally have provided the documents for approximately $75 to $250. Increasingly, HOAs have been delegating document preparations to third party vendors or contractors who, under a 2007 court decision, are exempt from this fee limitation. This delegation of responsibility by HOAs sometimes resulted in home purchasers being forced to pay additional fees, as much as $1,000, for other documents which were “bundled” with the required documents.

Assembly Bill 771 (Betsy Butler, D-Torrance) addresses this situation by specifying that only fees for the required documents may be charged when such documents are provided, effectively prohibiting any “bundling” of fees for other documents with these fees. The bill also creates a new form detailing which documents are required, and requires the provider to disclose the fees that will be charged for the documents before they are provided. The seller of a CID must complete this form and transmit it to the prospective purchaser along with the required documents. This will eliminate any uncertainty for the prospective purchaser as to exactly which documents are being provided and the precise fees being charged for those documents.

Filed Under: Brokers, Contract Disputes, Homeowner Association Law Tagged With: Brokers, Contract Disputes, HOA Law, Homeowner Associations

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Practice Areas

  • Construction Defect Litigation
  • Easements
  • Escrow Disputes
  • Foreclosures
  • Interpretation & Enforcement of CCRs
  • HOA Assessment Collections
  • Real Estate Fraud
  • Real Estate Litigation
  • Real Estate Transactions
  • Short Sales
  • Unlawful Detainers

Categories

  • Brokers (18)
  • Contract Disputes (13)
  • Foreclosures (8)
  • Homeowner Association Law (9)
  • Real Property Taxation (1)
  • Short Sales (8)
  • Uncategorized (2)

Contact Us

Let us help you with your legal matter. Fill out the information below to begin your consultation.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Law Offices of Tracy Ettinghoff
Orange County Real Estate Attorney

30011 Ivy Glenn, Suite 121
Laguna Niguel, California 92677
Phone: (949) 363-5573
Fax: (949) 363-1306
Email: te@ettinghoff.com

Copyright © 2025 · Privacy Policy · Disclaimer · Contact Us · Photo Credits
The information on this website is for general information purposes only.
Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation.
This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.