STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES

Transcription

1 STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES IN RE: PETITION FOR ARBITRATION The California Club Condominium Association, Inc., Petitioner, v. Case No Marilyn Ralby, Elyse Ralby, Alan Page, Simon Dalal and Jean Marc Maltrait, Respondents. / SUMMARY FINAL ORDER This order is entered pursuant to Rule 61B , Florida Administrative Code, which permits the arbitrator to enter a summary final order where there are no disputed issues of material fact. On December 6, 2002, The California Club Condominium Association, Inc., petitioner, filed a petition for mandatory non-binding arbitration, naming Marilyn Ralby, Elyse Ralby and Alan Page as respondents. The petition alleges that the respondent/tenant, Alan Page, affixed a satellite dish to the railing of his condominium balcony in violation of section of article X and section of article of XIV of the declaration of covenants and paragraph 4 of the rules and regulations. Specifically, the association contends that the satellite dish is fastened to a two-by-four piece of wood that is attached to the balcony railing and extends 1

2 outward approximately two (2) feet from the railing of the balcony, which violates installation guidelines set forth in the condominium documents. On February 6, 2003 and February 24, 2003, respondents Marilyn Ralby and Elyse Ralby and Alan Page, respectively, filed answers with the arbitration section contending that Mr. Page installed his satellite dish with permission from the board of directors and in conformity with all condominium documents. Additionally, the arbitrator was informed that Simon Dalal and Jean Marc Maltrait are the current owners of the condominium unit in question. Due to this alleged ownership interest, these individuals were joined as necessary party respondents and served with an order requiring answer on or before March 17, As of the date of this order, respondents Dalal and Maltrait have failed to file an answer or other response to the arbitrator s order. The association s procedures for installing satellite dishes are set forth in section 10.0, article X of the declaration of covenants: Antennas and Aerials. Except upon approval by the Board, no antenna or aerial shall be placed by an Owner upon the Common Elements or affixed to the exteriors of an Apartment, and no antenna or aerial placed or affixed within an Apartment shall extend or protrude beyond the exterior of an Apartment or the planes of such exteriors. Additionally, paragraph 4 of the rules and regulations, entitled Antennas and Aerials provides: Antennas and Aerials. Except upon approval by the Board, no antenna or aerial shall be placed upon or affixed to any exterior of an apartment and no antenna or aerial placed or affixed within an apartment shall extend 2

3 or protrude beyond the exteriors of the apartment or the planes of such exteriors. While the respondents contend that Mr. Page was given permission to install his satellite dish and has installed it in the manner required by the board of directors, it is clear from the photograph submitted by the association, the accuracy of which is not disputed by the respondents, that the installation does not conform to the provisions set forth above. The association argues that the dish extends outward from the balcony railing approximately two (2) feet and that this manner of installation results in not only a violation of the condominium documents, but a safety hazard as well. It is clear from the photograph that the dish extends outward from the balcony railing, resulting in both an installation violation and a safety hazard. It is noted that Mr. Page s answer references an association letter, dated February 11, 2000, which sets forth guidelines for the installation of satellite dishes. Mr. Page contends that while he followed those guidelines precisely, they failed to include the provision prohibiting any extension or protrusion beyond the exterior of the apartment. However, as a tenant, Mr. Page is required to comply with all condominium documents, even if the association fails to inform him of every provision. It is the responsibility of both unit owners and tenants to read the condominium documents thoroughly and act in compliance with them. Had Mr. Page read these sections of the condominium documents, he would have been aware of all of the requirements for installing a satellite dish properly. 3

4 Accordingly, the arbitrator finds that the installation of Mr. Page s satellite dish fails to comply with the requirements set forth in the condominium documents and grants the relief requested by the association. Based on the foregoing, it is ORDERED: Within thirty (30) days of the date of entry of this order, the respondents shall remove the satellite dish from the balcony railing and restore the railing to its original condition. If the respondents choose to re-install the satellite dish, they shall do so in compliance with the condominium documents and with approval of the board of directors. DONE AND ORDERED this 1 st day of May 2003, at Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. Melissa Mnookin, Arbitrator Department of Business and Professional Regulation Arbitration Section Northwood Centre 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida Certificate of Service I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing summary final order has been sent by U.S. Mail to the following persons on this 1 st day of May 2003: Laura M. Manning, Esq. Siegfried, Rivera, Lerner, De La Torre & Sobel, P.A. 201 Alhambra Circle, Suite 1102 Coral Gables, Florida

5 Howard Ralby A Ashbourne Lane Boca Raton, Florida Alan Page 770 NE 195 th Street Unit 219 North Miami Beach, Florida Simon Dalal Jean Marc Maltrait S.W. 131 st Avenue Miami, Florida Melissa Mnookin, Arbitrator Right to Appeal As provided by section , F.S., a party which is adversely affected by this final order may appeal by filing a petition for trial de novo with a court of competent jurisdiction in the circuit in which the condominium is located, within 30 days of the entry and mailing of this final order. This order does not constitute final agency action and is not appealable to the district courts of appeal. Attorney s Fees As provided by section , F.S., the prevailing party in this proceeding is entitled to have the other party pay its reasonable costs and attorney s fees. Rule 61B , F.A.C., requires that a party seeking an award of costs and attorney s fees must file a motion seeking the award not later than 45 days after rendition of this final order. The motion must be actually received by the Division within this 45-day period and must conform to the requirements of rule 61B , F.A.C. The filing of an appeal of this order does not toll the time for the filing of a motion seeking prevailing party costs and attorney s fees. 5