LITIGATION COSTS REPORT

A good board — acting in the best interests of the HOA — will prioritize dispute resolution through good faith negotiation. Regrettably, the Meister/Ackerley/Gauer/Jolivette board almost always chooses litigation over negotiation and settlement. In addition, they use attorneys for things that could and should be handled (for free) by board members working in-person with homeowners, as prescribed by our CC&Rs. Their approach leads to substantial, unnecessary, and avoidable litigation-related costs for homeowners. Note: These costs include Ogden charges, as well as court and filing fees.

All costs presented are derived from board-approved association records.

FIVE (!) CASES UNDER THE MEISTER/ACKERLEY BOARD

1.) Upon being elected, the Meister/Ackerley board crafted and implemented a community-wide septic policy. They did this outside of an open board meeting and in violation of our CC&Rs. They debited a homeowner $1,750. The homeowner disputed the charge and associated late fees. The Meister/Ackerley board would not settle, thereby forcing litigation. The board lost both claims because they violated three Arizona Statutes as well as our CC&Rs. TFE also paid $1,000 in court costs to homeowner and Ogden removed the inappropriate $1,750 debit from the homeowner ledger. Cost to the HOA: ($18,200).

2.) Based on the same undisclosed and improper community septic policy, and on the same date, the Meister/Ackerley board also took $250 from a different member account to double-pay an already-paid-bill. Homeowners (both of them, independently) reached out nearly twenty times to understand why $250 was taken from their account. The board ignored them. Homeowners filed in Small Claims court. Enticed by the potential for a massive windfall lawsuit (based on false information), the board accused the homeowners of embezzling $250 and raised case to Judicial Court. Case never made it to trial. Homeowners discovered and proved HOA’s accounting mistake. Homeowners recovered their $250. To save the HOA further litigation expense, Homeowners asked board to agree to mutual dismissal. The board refused. Homeowners asked for and obtained dismissal of their case from the Judge. Without homeowners asking for it, the judge spontaneously (and of his own accord) tossed all three Meister/Ackerley board claims. With the appeal deadline expired, litigation ended June 2, 2022. Afterward, Meister described their attorney’s work as “botched” and “screwed up.” Desperate, the Meister/Ackerley board filed a “motion to reconsider” — 3 months after the appeal deadline! Since deadlines matter, the Judge denied their motion and the board again FAILED TO PREVAIL.. Cost to the HOA: ~$9,000. A dozen homeowners filed complaint about HOA attorney Daniel Francom with the Ethics Committee of the State Bar of Arizona. Francom claimed he returned funds to TFE — amount undisclosed. Case history: click here.

3.) The Meister/Ackerley board failed to provide association records to a member within 10 business days, as required by law (ARS 33-1805). Member was then given some of the records and member offered to settle to avoid $500 fee to TFE and further litigation costs. CASE SETTLED. Cost to the HOA: NOT SPECIFIED BY BOARD.

4.) The Meister/Ackerley board claimed an Arizona law grants an attorney exception to the existing right-to-record laws (e.g., ARS 33-1804 and 13-3005). The board told homeowners that are recording the meeting to “STOP” because “it is against the law to do that in Arizona.” Despite several requests, neither the board nor their attorney cited the Arizona Statute to support their claim. Litigation cost to the HOA: about $45,000.

5.) The Meister/Ackerley board made misrepresentations that were damaging to the reputations of two homeowners and which subjected them to community ire. To avoid litigation, those homeowners appealed twice to the Meister/Ackerley board during open board meetings. The board ignored them — both times. To avoid litigation, the homeowners then issued a settlement notice, requesting a mutually-agreed-upon statement of facts be published. The board let the deadline pass, so, yet again, the board forced litigation. Left with no other choice, homeowners filed in Superior Court, alleging defamation and false light invasion of privacy. Note, the suit is against both TFE and Kurt Meister, personally — two separate defendants. The board switched attorneys two more times, and each time the homeowners expressed their interest to settle to avoid further litigation costs for TFE. The board refused or cancelled out of several settlement and/or mediation efforts. The homeowners withdrew the case in hopes the board would work amicably to settle the issues. Since the case was withdrawn and there was never a determination on the merits of the case, no party prevailed (i.e. no party “won”). Case history, click here. The HOA’s insurance company then cancelled the insurance policy and refused to renew. Subsequent insurance policies came at MASSIVE increases in both deductible (now FIFTY TIMES LARGER) and Premiums (now 750% higher!). This is all due to the POOR JUDGMENT of the board, who chose to litigate rather than simply (1) publishing a statement-of-fact as to what happened (2) publishing a simple retraction — without even admitting wrongdoing, or (3) issuing an apology for falsely accusing (and filing in court) that the homeowners embezzled $250 from the HOA.

6.) Next, the Dwight Jolivette board had this “fantastic” idea to convert every ADRE complaint (note, they are merely complaints, not “litigation”) into formal litigation. They did this for seven (7!) cases (8 complaints in total). Without a single one even being adjudicated, again, the insurance policy was denied renewal, and all members now suffer with massive increases in both deductibles and premiums. For perspective, the HOA insurance premium is now about $15,000/year more than it should be (due to the board’s poor judgment). Over the next three years that is the equivalent of NINETY ADRE complaints. Way to go Dwight Jolivette, Ken Riley, and Steve Gauer! When it comes to ADRE complaints, why does our board turn down every offer to settle (for free), mediate (for free), or simply concede (only $500)?