I am having a hard time seeing how an HOA could be held liable for vandalism. In fact, I bet the OP is going to take his complaint to them, and they're going send back a copy of the Covenant with a section highlighted, something like Section 17, subparagraph B-13 which states the HOA can't be held responsible for damage or theft to personal property. Even if they had security measures up and running, I"m betting there's no guarantee implied anywhere that they guarantee that no one in the community will be robbed or have their property damaged or stolen.

That's by design.

 

You're absolutely correct, if such a disclaimer exists. However, that wouldn't/doesn't shield them completely especially if as the OP has mentioned they were negligent by failing to install security measures that they charged residents for.

 

Well, about that, if I were the OP, I'd be making concretely sure that in fact that's the fact of the matter. If he shows up with a letter in hand making demands, and then the HOA shows a schedule with some security company where they're waiting for installation of security measures, he's going to be out of luck. And again, it absolutely will not be an open and shut case that having or not having security measures (whatever it is those were supposed to be) would have prevented the vandalism. In fact, if the HOA's lawyer could prove that their planned security measures would in fact not have prevented the vandalism, OP's once again out of luck.

To be candid, I'm not even sure what security measures in place would have actively prevented vandalism to a car parked outside.

 

The overarching point is that he certainly has a claim for the repairs and the diminished value. Who pays for those, ultimately, no one's knows at this point. If anything he could file the claim against his own insurance and then his insurance company can decide whether to go after the HOA if they believe that they are in some way liable.

 

Yes, I know very well how HOAs work, including liability and insurance.

In this case, let's recap what we know from the OP: His car was vandalized. He thinks it wouldn't have happened if the HOA had adequate security measures in place that he thinks are the responsibility of the HOA. He (apparently) doesn't want the HOA to pay for repairs to his car (which I find a bit strange) but does want the HOA to pay for diminished value to his car. He has admitted it's really all about "punishing" the HOA for past sins against him that he won't divulge than it is about recovering damages.

If the damage to his car really was the HOA's fault, why not ask them for reimbursement for the cost to repair it? Why only ask for diminished value? What proof exists that the vandalism wouldn't have happened if the security measures were in place? (The last point is key in proving a civil case - I'd offer that there is no proof of a negative, making the OP's case extremely difficult.)

 

Ding, ding, ding! Correct answer. But that wouldn't "punish" the HOA like the OP says he wants to do.

 

Interesting thread.
We may not have the complete story.

None the less, diminished value is real and needs to be implemented into insurance policies.
Today DV is ignored and made difficult to collect including filing suit against the other party directly to force the insurance company to the table.
With a desire to have factual amounts, the ins. co could create a reserve so once DV is confirmed, even if the vehicle is sold 15 years later, it can make the victim whole.

 

If your car is fixed, I think you will have problems proving diminished value. If you had to pay a deductible, maybe you can go after the HOA for that, but I can't see how diminished value can come into effect if your car is repaired and not totaled.

If this was a classic like a C1 or C2 I could see it, but this is a late model assembly line car.

But I am not an attorney. We have had people discuss this in the past though, I cannot recall anyone getting compensated for "diminished value" on late model cars.

 

With a $10,000 assessment it sounds like there was some serious catch up on funding. A question, with this large of an annual budget, is there a property management firm at fault here, or is it the HOA is self-run. You will need to prove negligence here and discovery could get very expensive. It would interesting to hear more of the fact situation here.

 

You are absolutely correct. At no point does the OP give any argument other than the HOA "should" have fixed the security measures. Simply his opinion and not a fact. I fail to see how the HOA Board is found liable for something they "should" have done once the litigation starts. If they spent available money on other items it would be a simple judgement call and not actionable.

One thing the OP fails to mention and he needs to find out is whether his State even recognizes the concept of diminished value. Not all states do.

 

Evidently you did not serve very effectively if you did not learn the HOA was community governance vs. "a business". By your account you are assuming every resident in the community is at fault for the OP's vandalism damage and therefore must pay their share to make him whole. There is no legal severance of the individual from a mandatory HOA. While a member can in fact sue the HOA for a rules interpretation, they cannot sue because of decisions made by an elected board of how money is spent... as long as there is no misappropriation of funds.

 

This makes perfect sense to me.. Value of your car as clean and then value w/ repaired damage. If dealer could provide a hard copy showing the difference, I would include that as a part of my claim.

 

Look dude, I call BS again. I know I'm wasting my time here because apparently you know everything, but while HOAs may certainly be 'communal' bodies in the sense that the members are made up of the community or residents of a neighborhood or subdivision, aside from that they operate no different than any other non-profit business or entity. The elected officers are responsible for the day to day operation, and if at some point in time a motion was made and passed by the e-board to charge residents either one time or on an ongoing basis for security improvements, and then that motion was put forth to the rest of the residents and enacted, then the board is responsible for both the execution of said motion and ensuring that whatever funds were allocated to that project are spent as approved. If they don't execute the motion properly then they are liable as a body not individually to the rest of the members. The OP made clear that his beef is that they charged homeowners for security improvements that they never made. That could be negligent and/or misappropriations depending on why they haven't made said improvements that they charged residents for. You can try and work yourself into a pretzel trying to impress who I don't know but I'm fairly confident in telling you that you're full of crap. Non-profits are businesses in every legal sense. The fact that they are operated by a board and its members get to vote yes or no on certain things doesn't relieve it from any responsible to said members or anyone else it does business with. An HOA member has every right and legal standing to bring action against their board, and it happens everyday, for a number of reasons no different than HOAs are constantly putting liens on their members for failure to abide by the by-laws.

 

The loss get's realized when you sell and it might be more, it might be less but it will be something for certain. This was a showroom car, not a Toyota Corolla, the expectations are little higher for Corvette buyers and that should be taken into account imo.

This isn't really about the money so its funny to see the threads on that. I already tried being reasonable and they basically laughed in my face when I suggested https://www.knightscope.com/ to secure the premise. So yeah, until they get slammed, there will be criminal gangs on our private property. That's obviously not acceptable.

 

Most insurance companies use what is called Formula 17C. Essentially it gives you pre-damage value, after-damage value. The way I keep seeing the formula, it equates to about 10% of pre-damage value. Example, your GS was worth $60k pre-damage. 10% equates to $6k in diminished value. That's it. No more.
Did a representative of the HOA come over and fu** up your car? No? Yeah, good luck.

 

I can see the interest on the HOA part and I’ll post an update once it’s all clear. I’m just trying get a handle on the diminished value of the car. For now the details have to be kept quiet.

 

Yes, yes that's exactly what I'm going to prove and I have the evidence. Again details here matter and I of course can't give the details. I wouldn't assume that a HOA is never responsible though.