Don't have to produce an HoA citation which contains such a clause -- the condo complex just existing means that the owners of the individual units have to pay for their share of the common asset overhead/operational costs which the condo association needs take care of in order to provide for proper care and maintenance of the common areas of the complex for which it is responsible for...
All common expenses in a condo complex are paid for by the unit owners -- there is no external source of revenue nor is there a management company/single owner/landlord paying for all those costs like in an apartment complex... Each unit owner in a condo complex owns a specific percentage of interest in the common elements of the complex but there is no actual "owner" of the common lands and property other than the not-for-profit condo association corporation...
Let me re-quote this again, because this is my main dispute.
You are aware that companies exist that are contracted to operate condominiums, like Atlantic Pacific or CMA or Citadel for example? They are paid by the condominium tenants through dues. Property management, as it's known. If one of their employees loses the key, they're paying for it - not the tenants. What about companies like Allied Barton which provide security? If one of their employees loses the key, they're paying for it. Then you have hotel/condominiums buildings, like the Four Seasons. Do you think the home owners pay for a re-key if a Four Seasons employee loses the key? The homeowner's dues pay for the management companies, the security companies, and the hotel/condo employees (such as housekeeping for common areas). Going by your logic, their dues will go up if a contracted company or management misplaces the key. Not the case, no matter what you say. You're making these statements, the burden of proof is on you. If this happens as often as you allude, you shouldn't have had a hard time finding it.
Again, if you can't provide evidence, through either a civil suit (where someone disputed the charge) or a homeowners agreement where unexpected events like that are the homeowners responsibility, it's your understanding of the situation vs. mine, and we can't both be right.
I could cite HOA after HOA that doesn't stipulate such responsiblity but all it takes is one to prove me wrong - then it'd be a matter of majority.
I don't care anymore, Evan. You win. Now, let's get back on topic.
Back on topic:
Has anyone seen
how Yale help's prevent this attack? I love the snap-off section. I'm sure someone could improvise with some careful cutting. Same concept as with mult-section screws. Score the material enough so that it breaks along the lines when enough force is applied. I like.
