http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=106535
RS 9:1121.101
PART II. LOUISIANA CONDOMINIUM ACT
(snipped)
RS 9:1123.107
§1123.107. Upkeep of the condominium
Except to the extent provided by the declaration, or Section 1123.112, the association is responsible for maintenance, repair, and replacement of the common elements, and each unit owner is responsible for maintenance, repair and replacement of his unit. (Added by this author - Please note that the word "replacement" obviously means the complete rebuilding/replacement of the interior of the unit as if destroyed by fire, flood, storm, etc.)
(snipped)
RS 9:1123.112
§1123.112. Insurance
A. Commencing not later than the time of the first conveyance of a unit to a person other than a declarant, the association shall maintain, to the extent reasonably available:
(1) Property insurance on the common elements and units, exclusive of improvements and betterments installed in units by unit owners, insuring against all risks of direct physical loss commonly insured against. The total amount of insurance after application of any deductibles shall be not less than eighty percent of the actual cash value of the insured property, exclusive of land, excavations, foundations, and other items normally excluded from property policies; and
(2) Comprehensive general liability insurance, including medical payments insurance, in an amount determined by the executive board but not less than any amount specified in the declaration, covering all occurrences commonly insured against for death, bodily injury, and property damage arising out of or in connection with the use, ownership, or maintenance of the common elements.
B. If the insurance described in Subsection A is not maintained, the association promptly shall cause notice of that fact to be hand-delivered or sent prepaid by United States mail to all unit owners. The declaration may require the association to carry any other insurance, and the association in any event may carry any other insurance it deems appropriate to protect the association or the unit owners.
C. Insurance policies carried pursuant to Subsection A must provide that:
(1) Each unit owner is an insured person under the policy with respect to liability arising out of his ownership of an individual interest in the common elements or membership in the association.
(2) The insurer waives its right to subrogation under the policy against any unit owner of the condominium or members of his household.
(3) No act or omission by any unit owner, unless acting within the scope of his authority on behalf of the association, will void the policy or be a condition to recovery under the policy, and
(4) If, at the time of a loss under the policy, there is other insurance in the name of a unit owner covering the same property covered by the policy, the policy is primary insurance not contributing with the other insurance.
D. Any loss covered by the property policy under Subsection A(1) shall be adjusted with the association, but the insurance proceeds for that loss shall be payable to any insurance trustee designated for that purpose, or otherwise to the association, and not to any mortgagee. The insurance trustee or the association shall hold any insurance proceeds in trust for unit owners and lien holders as their interests may appear. Subject to the provisions of Subsection G, the proceeds shall be disbursed first for the repair or restoration of the damaged common elements and units, and unit owners and lien holders are not entitled to receive payment of any portion of the proceeds unless there is a surplus of proceeds after the common elements and units have been completely repaired or restored, or the condominium is terminated.
E. An insurance policy issued to the association does not prevent a unit owner from obtaining insurance for his own benefit.
F. An insurer that has issued an insurance policy to the association under this Section shall issue certificates or memoranda of insurance, upon request, to any unit owner or mortgagee. The insurance may not be canceled until thirty days after notice of the proposed cancellation has been mailed to the association, each unit owner and each mortgagee to whom certificates of insurance have been issued.
G. Any portion of the condominium damaged or destroyed shall be repaired or replaced promptly by the association unless (1) the condominium is terminated, (2) repair or replacement would be illegal under any state or local health or safety statute or ordinance, or (3) eighty percent, or such other percentage provided in the declaration, of the unit owners vote not to rebuild. The cost of repair or replacement in excess of insurance proceeds and reserves is a common expense. If the entire condominium is not repaired or replaced, (1) the insurance proceeds attributable to the damaged common elements shall be used to restore the damaged area to a condition compatible with the remainder of the condominium, (2) the insurance proceeds attributable to units and limited common elements which are not rebuilt shall be distributed to the owners of those units and the owners of the units to which those limited common elements were assigned, and (3) the remainder of the proceeds shall be distributed to all the unit owners in proportion to their common element interest. If the unit owners vote not to rebuild any unit, that unit's entire common element interest, votes in the association, and common expense liability are automatically reallocated upon the vote as if the unit had been condemned under Section 1121.107, and the association promptly shall prepare, execute, and record an amendment to the declaration reflecting the reallocations. Notwithstanding the provisions of this Subsection, Section 1122.120 governs the distribution of insurance proceeds if the condominium is terminated.
Acts 1979, No. 682, §1.
FCCA 2005 ANNUAL HOMEOWNERS MEETING FACTS AND QUESTIONS - (THESE ARE TYPED IN ALL CAPS, ONLY TO MAKE THEM EASIER TO READ)
(IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN AROUND THE PAST EIGHT MONTHS OR YOU HAVE NOT HAD ANY DIRECT INVOLVEMENT WITH "CHET'S BOARD", YOU CAN READ ALL ABOUT CHET AND THE BOARD BY GOING TO "THE FOUNTAIN OF INFORMATION" WEBSITE AT http://TheFountainOfInformation.Blogspot.com WHERE THERE ARE ALSO LINKS TO THE BYLAWS, MONTHLY REPORTS, LETTERS AND ALL PAST EDITIONS OF "THE FOUNTAIN OF INFORMATION"... THE NON-BOARD NEWSLETTER FOR THE TRUTH AT FOUNTAIN COURT CONDOMINIUMS)
WHY DID CHET AND THE BOARD REFUSE TO HOLD ANY OPEN MEETINGS SINCE HURRICANE KATRINA OR ANSWER THE UNIT OWNER'S QUESTIONS? (THE FIRST LETTER DID NOT COME OUT UNTIL 10/17/06, NEARLY TWO MONTHS AFTER KATRINA). NEARLY ALL OF THE HURRICANE AFFECTED OWNERS AND NON-AFFECTED OWNERS WOULD HAVE BEEN GREATLY HELPED BY OPEN MEETINGS WHERE THEY COULD ASK QUESTIONS AND GET ANSWERS AND INFORMATION FROM CHET AND THE BOARD AND THEY COULD HAVE ALSO EXCHANGED INFORMATION WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN INVALUABLE TO EACH OTHER. THE ROOFING COMPANY, FLEUR DE LIS CONSTRUCTION, WANTED TO HOLD OPEN MEETINGS TO ANSWER QUESTIONS BUT CHET AND THE BOARD REFUSED TO ALLOW THEM TO HOLD ANY MEETINGS AS WELL. CHET ULTIMATELY CURSED THEM OUT IN THE OPEN REAR COURTYARD IN FRONT OF SEVERAL OWNERS. THIS REFUSAL TO HOLD MEETINGS AND CHET'S CURSING AT PEOPLE AND HIS GENERAL ATTITUDE TOWARDS PEOPLE ARE SOME OF THE REASONS WHY THE ROOFING COMPANY WALKED OFF THE JOB. WHY DID CHET AND THE BOARD ILLEGALLY CANCEL THE ANNUAL MEETING FROM BACK IN DECEMBER 2005 WHEN IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HELD... WHEN SO MANY PEOPLE NEEDED AND STILL NEED INFORMATION AND ANSWERS?
WHY DID IT TAKE NEARLY TWO MONTHS FOR CHET AND THE BOARD TO ISSUE THE FIRST LETTER TO THE OWNERS... A LETTER THAT WAS AMBIGUOUS AND PROVIDED ALMOST NO VALUABLE INFORMATION? IT SURE SEEMS LIKE THERE COULD HAVE BEEN WEEKLY MEETINGS IN THE COURTYARDS OR IN SOMEONE'S HOME TO PROVIDE INFORMATION AND ANSWERS BUT CHET AND THE BOARD DID NOT AND DO NOT WANT TO ANSWER YOUR LEGITIMATE AND PERFECTLY LEGAL QUESTIONS.
WHY DID CHET AND THE BOARD REFUSE TO DO MONTHLY REPORTS FOR FOUR MONTHS AFTER KATRINA? A TIME WHEN PEOPLE WERE DESPERATE FOR INFORMATION BUT CHET AND THE BOARD POINT BLANK REFUSED TO DO THE MONTHLY REPORTS... WHICH ARE SUPPOSED TO CONTAIN THE MONTHLY SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION. WHY ARE THEY STILL NOT PROVIDING ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT SHOULD BE PROVIDED? WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?
WHY HAS CHET AND THE BOARD REFUSED TO PUBLISH THE DEPOSITS AND BALANCES OF INSURANCE MONEY RECEIVED AND DISBURSED SINCE KATRINA? THESE AMOUNTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ON THE MONTHLY REPORTS BUT THEY ONLY LIST THE REGULAR ACCOUNT BALANCES AND THEY DO NOT EVEN SHOW ANY BASIC SUMMARY OF HOW MUCH CAME IN (DEPOSITS) AND HOW MUCH WAS SPENT (WITHDRAWALS) EACH MONTH.. AMOUNTS THAT ARE INCLUDED ON EVERY MONTHLY BANK STATEMENT.
WHY DOES CHET AND THE BOARD ATTACK ANYONE WHO TRIES TO AVAIL THEMSELVES OF THEIR RIGHTS UNDER THE BYLAWS? MY LETTER TO THE BOARD WAS A SIMPLE AND LEGAL REQUEST TO REVIEW THE FINANCIAL RECORDS AND WHAT DID CHET AND THE BOARD DO???? NOT GIVE ME A SIMPLE YES OR NO ANSWER IN WRITING.. .THEY DECIDED TO MAKE FCCA LIABLE FOR LIBEL, SLANDER AND DEFAMATION BY PUTTING OUT THE TWO PAGE LETTER FULL OF LIES. (CHET AND THE BOARD HAVE STEADFASTLY REFUSED TO SHOW THE FINANCIAL RECORDS TO MANY, MANY OWNERS AND PREVIOUS OWNERS SINCE KATRINA. SEVERAL PREVIOUS OWNERS SOLD OUT OF FCC, IN PART DUE TO CHET AND THE BOARD'S REFUSAL TO FOLLOW THE BYLAWS. WHAT DO THEY HAVE TO HIDE?????)
CHET HAS PUBLISHED IN HIS MONTHLY REPORT THAT HE HIRED THE FIRST TRASH REMOVAL COMPANY AND APPARENTLY HE NEVER DID ASK THEM "HOW MUCH?" OR GET ANYTHING IN WRITING BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOW CHARGED YOU, THE UNIT OWNERS, $29,000.00 FOR THREE (3) DAYS OF WORK.. NEARLY $10,000.00 A DAY FOR TWO WORKERS AND A FEW DUMPSTERS. WHY DIDN'T CHET ASK THEM FOR A BID OR AT LEAST ASK "HOW MUCH?" BEFORE HE AGREED TO LET THEM START HAULING THE TRASH????? (SEE THE FEBRUARY 2006 MONTHLY REPORT)
WHY DID CHET AND THE BOARD TRY TO HIDE OVER $200,000.00 OF FLOOD INSURANCE PROCEEDS FROM THE REAR COURTYARD FLOOD VICTIMS? WHY WON'T CHET AND THE BOARD SHOW ANYONE THE "FIRST ESTIMATE" WHICH WAS FOR NEARLY $500,000.00 AND YET CHET AND THE BOARD ONLY OFFERED THE FLOOD VICTIMS $321,000.00????? CHET AND THE BOARD OFFERED ONLY $12,000.00 FOR A 1BR, $15,000.00 FOR A 2BR AND $24,000.00 FOR A 3BR YET THE ITEMIZED ESTIMATE WAS FOR MUCH, MUCH MORE. ULTIMATELY, AFTER THEIR MISDEEDS WERE EXPOSED AND LENNY OBTAINED A COPY OF THE ACTUAL ESTIMATE, IT WAS REVEALED THAT THE ACTUAL ESTIMATE WAS FOR OVER $500,000.00 AND THAT A 1BR WOULD BE GETTING AROUND $20,000.00, A 2BR WOULD BE GETTING AROUND $25,000.00 AND A 3BR WOULD BE GETTING AROUND $36,000.00 JUST FROM THE FOUR FEET DOWN FLOOD DAMAGE CLAIM.
DID CHET AND THE BOARD TRY TO HIDE THE FEMA/NFIP FLOOD INSURANCE SETTLEMENT BECAUSE IT WOULD MAKE THEM LOOK RIDICULOUS SINCE THEY SETTLED THE SCOTTSDALE CLAIM FOR THE UPSTAIRS ROOF VICTIMS FOR SO MUCH LESS????? CHET AND THE BOARD'S ATTITUDE IS THAT THE MONEY BELONGS TO THE BOARD TO "DISPERSE AS THEY SEE FIT" (SEE THE JANUARY 2006 MONTHLY REPORT) BASICALLY, THEY THINK THAT THEY COULD KEEP OVER $200,000.00 OF FLOOD VICTIMS INSURANCE SETTLEMENT MONEY AND NOT TELL THEM ABOUT THAT HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY THEY WERE HIDING. HOW MUCH ARE THEY HIDING FROM THE REST OF THE KATRINA VICTIMS? HAVE YOU SEEN THE FINANCIAL RECORDS OR INSURANCE SETTLEMENTS?????
WHY HAS THE BOARD ALLOWED CHET TO TREAT YOU, THE UNIT OWNERS IN SUCH A DEGRADING WAY? CHET HAS CURSED OUT MORE THAN A DOZEN PEOPLE AT FCC SINCE KATRINA. CHET EVEN CURSED OUT A MOM IN FRONT OF HER CHILDREN WHEN SHE DARED ASK CHET A LEGITIMATE QUESTION ABOUT THINGS GOING ON THAT AFFECTED HER UNIT. CHET CURSED OUT BOTH MEN AND WOMEN.. HE DOESN'T DISCRIMINATE WHEN HE GOES ON ONE OF HIS TIRADES. WOULD ANY EMPLOYEE BE ALLOWED TO CURSE OUT THE OWNERS OF THE COMPANY WITHOUT BEING FIRED???? THAT'S RIGHT... YOU, THE UNIT OWNERS, ARE THE OWNERS OF FCCA AND CHET WORKS FOR YOU!!!! HE SEEMS TO THINK THAT HE WORKS FOR THE BOARD AND HE IS THE PROPERTY MANAGER AND YOU ARE MERELY TENANTS THAT HAVE TO FOLLOW HIS DICTATES. AND THEN HE TRIES TO INTIMIDATE AND SILENCE ANYONE WHO STANDS UP FOR THEIR RIGHTS!!!!! I'VE HEAR MANY OWNERS COMPARING CHET TO A MINI-HITLER AS IF FCC IS HIS COUNTRY AND YOU ARE HIS MINIONS.
WHY DIDN'T CHET APPLY FOR FEMA ASSISTANCE WITH THE TRASH REMOVAL? INSTEAD, HE AND THE BOARD JUST WANT TO PASS THIS HUGE EXPENSE ON TO YOU, THE UNIT OWNERS. I HAVE PUBLISHED THE FACT THAT THE BOARD COULD HAVE APPLIED FOR FEMA ASSISTANCE... EITHER AN OUTRIGHT FREE GRANT OR LOW INTEREST SBA LOAN TO PAY THIS NEARLY $100,000.00 EXPENSE AND IF THEY DID NOT GET THE ACTUAL FREE GRANT, THEY COULD HAVE TURNED DOWN THE LOAN BUT AS FAR AS CHET HAS REPORTED, THEY DID NOT EVEN APPLY FOR THE GRANT OR SBA LOW INTEREST LOAN... WHICH FCCA WOULD HAVE HAD TO APPLY FOR AS PART OF BEING CONSIDERED FOR A GRANT.
WHY DIDN'T CHET GIVE EACH OWNER A COPY OF THEIR ITEMIZED ESTIMATE SO THEY COULD REVIEW IT FOR ERRORS PRIOR TO CHET AND THE BOARD ACCEPTING THE FINAL SETTLEMENT? I KNOW OF AND HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF MISSED ITEMS AFFECTING THE INDIVIDUAL UNITS AS WELL AS THE TRASH REMOVAL EXPENSES BUT CHET HAS REFUSED TO FILE FOR AN AMENDED CLAIM WITH FEMA/NFIP/FIDELITY INSURANCE.
WHY DID CHET AND THE BOARD SETTLE FOR SUCH A SMALL AMOUNT FOR THE ROOF VICTIMS????? THE DOWNSTAIRS 3BR UNITS ARE GETTING AROUND $51,000.00 BETWEEN THE FLOOD INSURANCE AND SCOTTSDALE WHEREAS THE UPSTAIRS 3BR UNITS ARE ONLY GETTING AROUND $41,000.00. WHY IS THERE A $10,000 DIFFERENCE IN THE SETTLEMENT AMOUNTS? OR, MAYBE THIS IS THE REASON CHET AND THE BOARD TRIED TO HIDE AROUND $10,000.00 FROM EACH OF THE FLOOD VICTIMS... SO THEY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THE SAME AMOUNT AS THE UPSTAIRS UNITS... TO HIDE CHET'S INEPTITUDE IN ACCEPTING SUCH A SMALL SETTLEMENT. IF THERE HAD BEEN MEETINGS, EVERYONE WOULD HAVE KNOWN THESE THINGS AND CHET AND THE BOARD COULD HAVE REFUSED TO SETTLE FOR SUCH A LOW AMOUNT FOR THE UPSTAIRS VICTIMS.
CHET CONSTANTLY COMPLAINS ABOUT SO MANY PEOPLE NOT HAVING THEIR UNITS RENOVATED YET HE TOOK IT UPON HIMSELF TO NOT ALLOW FEMA TRAILERS ALONG THE BACK FENCE BY THE CANAL. IF THE DISPLACED OWNERS COULD HAVE HAD A FEMA TRAILER, THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN HERE TO OVERSEE THEIR CONTRACTORS AND RENOVATIONS. I ONLY KNOW OF SIX OWNERS WHO ASKED FOR FEMA TRAILERS SO THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN INCONSPICUOUSLY PARKED BY THE REAR FENCE AREA.... BLOCKING THE VIEW OF THE CANAL AND THE INTERSTATE.... WHICH NOBODY WANTS TO SEE ANYHOW!!!!!
FURTHER, THE WINDOWS ARE STILL NOT REPAIRED FROM THE HURRICANE, THE ROOFS ARE STILL LEAKING IN SPOTS AND THE BRICK WALLS HAVE BEEN LEAKING INTO THE DOWNSTAIRS UNITS IN THE REAR COURTYARD. HOW CAN THESE OWNERS BEGIN THEIR REPAIRS WHEN THEY ARE NOT SURE IF THEIR REPAIRS WILL BE REPEATEDLY DAMAGED DUE TO BROKEN WINDOWS, LEAKY ROOFS AND LEAKING BRICK WALLS. CHET DOESN'T ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS IN HIS MONTH PROPAGANDA REPORTS.
PURSUANT TO THE BYLAWS, ARTICLE III, WHY HASN'T THE BOARD GIVEN EACH OF YOU A COPY OF THE ANNUAL BUDGET WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BE PROVIDED TO EACH OWNER 30 DAYS PRIOR TO THE ANNUAL MEETING; AND FURTHER, WHY HAVEN'T THEY PROVIDED THE INDEPENDENTLY AUDITED ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR 2005, WHICH WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DONE WITHIN 90 DAYS AFTER THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR, 12/31/2005, AND MADE AVAILABLE FOR ANY OWNER OR MORTGAGEE TO INSPECT?????
WELL.. I COULD GO ON AND ON WITH QUESTIONS AND INFORMATION BUT YOU WILL NEED TO GO TO THE WEBSITE http://TheFountainOfInformation.Blogspot.com TO READ ALL ABOUT CHET'S TIRADES AND THE BOARD'S FAILURE TO FOLLOW THE BYLAWS, WILLFUL MISCONDUCT AND BAD FAITH OVER THE PAST EIGHT MONTHS.... AND NOW THEIR EXPOSING THEMSELVES TO A LIBEL, SLANDER, DEFAMATION, WILLFUL MISCONDUCT AND BAD FAITH LAWSUIT.... AND THEY CLAIM THAT THEY WILL ASSESS YOU FOR LEGAL FEES FOR THEIR MISDEEDS. I HOPE YOU STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS.
SINCERELY,
LENNY VASBINDER
UNIT #94 AND MORTGAGEE/ PROXY HOLDER FOR UNIT #76
www.NeighborhoodHomeServices.com
NHSNOLA@Gmail.com 504-621-1870
http://www.NeighborhoodHomeServices.com
Painting - Interior & Exterior, Hurricane Damage Cleanup,
Gutting & Tear-Outs, Sheetrock & Flooring Removal,
Handyman Repairs, Homeowner's Contractors Agent (HCA)
http://lennyvasbinder.blogspot.com
504-621-1870 eFax - 413-318-0742
NHSNOLA@Gmail.com LNVTM1@Gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment