10 Common Defenses to Actions to Enforce Governing Documents

Homeowners associations often assume that if a homeowner violates the governing documents, the association automatically has the right to enforce them.

That is not always the case.

Many HOA enforcement actions fail because the association:

• exceeded its authority,
• enforced rules inconsistently,
• delayed enforcement too long,
• failed to follow proper procedures,
• or acted in a manner a court later determined was unreasonable.

In some situations, homeowners are able to defeat enforcement actions entirely by raising legal and equitable defenses that expose weaknesses in the association’s conduct and enforcement process.

One of the most common defenses involves a lack of authority. If the association never properly adopted the rule being enforced, failed to obtain required approvals, or pursued enforcement without proper board authorization, the homeowner may challenge whether the association even had the legal right to take the action in the first place.

Another major issue involves unreasonableness. Even where a restriction itself is valid, homeowners frequently argue that the association’s interpretation, application, or enforcement of the restriction is arbitrary, overly aggressive, or unfair under the circumstances.

These are only two of the defenses that can arise in HOA enforcement disputes.

Continue reading for a breakdown of 10 common defenses raised against HOA enforcement actions—including selective enforcement, waiver, estoppel, bad faith enforcement, balancing of equities, and other issues that can significantly impact an association’s ability to enforce its governing documents.