Great Sales Presentation, Poor Follow-Through
The company…read moremade a strong impression during the sales process, led personally by Rachel (the owner), who presented a polished and convincing pitch. Unfortunately, that level of professionalism was not maintained once the contract was signed. After I began setting clear directives and requesting documentation, communication slowed and projects stalled. I also requested to review and approve anything sent to the association's attorney so correspondence accurately reflected board direction. Soon afterward, the company elected to terminate the contract with 60 days' notice during the holiday season rather than continue under that structure.
Context
Once accountability and follow-through outlined in the management agreement were enforced, responsiveness declined sharply. It became apparent that our smaller community required more attention than Rachel's firm was willing or able to provide, or that larger clients took precedence. Rather than address performance gaps, the company framed the termination as "board conduct," which did not align with the documented record of our communication.
Examples
* Budgeting:
Management proposed 15-20% increases to utilities and insurance without quotes or supporting data, citing that "other HOAs were doing the same," despite the fact that our association does not pay utilities and insurance had already renewed at the same rate.
* Funds Transfer:
The firm failed to obtain all reserve funds from the prior manager and initially instructed me to handle the transfer myself, even though I had just joined the board and lacked account access. It took over five months and repeated follow-ups to complete the transfer of approximately $34,000.
* Counsel Coordination:
Management sent a misframed request to the association's attorney using AI-generated meeting notes taken out of context and containing factual inaccuracies. The message incorrectly portrayed me as a sole board member attempting unilateral changes, despite having support from over 50% of the community and intending for all updates to be voted on once vacancies were filled. This resulted in generic legal caution rather than the targeted draft updates requested, delaying straightforward Rules & Regulations changes (clarifying an existing rental-cap policy by allowing one additional rental unit to improve tracking and transparency, adding a 12-month hardship clause, and advisory gutter-extension language). This miscommunication unnecessarily consumed significant time, shifting avoidable work onto me as a volunteer board president.
* Meeting Notice & Budget Handling:
Maintenance quotes were requested roughly two months before the budget meeting, which was held to review those quotes and finalize the 2026 budget. At the meeting, Rachel questioned why the meeting was being held, citing quorum concerns. A board vacancy was filled to proceed. Despite this, only one maintenance quote was available, the draft budget included unapproved miscellaneous items, and it exceeded projected income by approximately $5,000. No budget approval occurred. A single quote was delivered after the meeting, which did not change the outcome. The budget is now being rebuilt with the incoming management company using competitive bids.
* Property Knowledge:
Rachel relied on a one-size-fits-all approach to maintenance and vendor selection, often proposing unnecessary or redundant work due to limited understanding of the property's specific layout and history.
Conclusion
All of these responsibilities were part of the company's paid contractual duties. Instead of executing them, essential tasks were repeatedly pushed onto a volunteer board president, whose role is to provide direction--not perform management's operational work.
My actions were consistent with the Declaration, Bylaws, and Illinois law. This experience showed that a strong sales pitch means little without consistent execution, accuracy, and follow-through. I would not recommend Rachel's company to any HOA seeking reliable, accountable management.
