I'd like to begin by stating that, as first-time homeowners, we were expecting to not hate our HOA like all the horror stories you hear about.
Unfortunately, that is not the case here today. We have had the displeasure of working with Jane, our property manager.
To begin with, a fence with a survey/plat and dimensions was submitted to and approved by the HOA. After the fence was erected, we were told it had encroached on common land. While we recognize the error, we felt that it was an oversight on behalf of the HOA to approve the fence in the first place. And so, we reached out for clarification on the covenants. At first, Jane was open to clarifications, asking for the specific sections of the covenants and stating that the HOA approval is strictly cosmetic (which seems contradictory to the covenant). I outlined the particular covenants for clarification and waited for a response. What we received was unprofessional at best; she threatened us with an attorney. I'm not sure we ever said we wouldn't rectify the issue. We asked for clarification to ensure this doesn't happen to us again or anyone else. I cannot recommend PMI Northeast Atlanta because of this; if this is who is employed as manager, I would have reservations about their integrity and professionalism.
*Spoiler read the email we're not alone.
***Update
I have read what Mr. Kent has responded. He seems like a much more agreeable person, one in which I think we could discuss where the shortcomings occurred. While I agree with some points made by Mr. Kent, I must also point out that one of the first approval points reads, "This approval is contingent upon the project being completed exactly as submitted. The third point discusses that the approval is aesthetic only, so why don't we start with that statement in the letter? Furthermore, why are plats/ surveys required for submission if the HOA doesn't consider them? It's like asking you for your social security at TSA checkpoints to ensure you have one when all I need is your ID.
I believe this circumstance could have been avoided by being clear and concise. There are multiple points within the very covenant that I pointed out to Ms. Jane that she disregarded, highlighting the nature of clear and concise. As stated, the corrections are being made. The review stands, however I am not unreasonable and am willing to amend my review fully if Mr. Kent or someone of equal, well-mannered temperament is willing to discuss how we can avoid this in the future. I await your response. Thank you. read more