![]() In 2019, According to the Washington Post, the president of the Champlain condominium board resigned, partly in frustration over the association’s slow response to the report. Four other members of the board also resigned that year, one of whom indicated there was significant infighting among members which contributed to the delay. In November of that year, a Surfside town inspector met with residents of the building and assured them the building was “in very good shape.” This conflicted with the Morabito Consultants’ report. Did it give residents and some of the board a sense of security and confidence in the building’s safety? The condominium board knew that Champlain Towers South in Surfside, Florida needed major repairs. It will be argued that the board did not know that the circumstances were dire. In October of 2018, a report by Morabito Consultants prepared in anticipation of the 40-year recertification warned that the building’s failed waterproofing of its pool deck was causing “major structural damage.” The report did not warn of any imminent danger. At that time, the cost of the repair was estimated to be $9 million. This is the hardest duty to evaluate. Board members are not required to have financial, management, engineering, or planning expertise or training. Thus, the reasonably prudent person standard is an appropriate one. ![]() ![]() Did the directors exercise competent oversight of the association in a deliberate and knowledgeable manner using the standard of care of a reasonably prudent person in a similar position in similar circumstances?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |