Communication is vital to running a successful condo or co-op building. So what happens when homeowners complain that board members are not listening, and—even worse —ignoring their complaints and problems?

Well, you can bet it will not foster warm, fuzzy open lines of discourse. Instead, it can create animosity and even more problems for a board that comes across as indifferent to the views of its constituency. It doesn’t have to be that way, of course. With a few strategies and techniques, boards can handle homeowner complaints and queries—ranging from noise, odors, pet waste, late-night furniture rearranging to leaks and squeaks—and owners can understand what to reasonably expect from their boards when it comes to resolving problems.

Here’s how it can work to the benefit of both parties to make problem solving not necessarily easier, but more realistic.

The Who

Board members serve at the pleasure of the community as a whole, but they're not personal servants for each unit owner either. While board members should learn how to best respond and act on complaints from unit owners, unit owners should also learn how to approach board members if they truly want to have the best chance of getting their problems fixed. There are myriad variables that reflect how, when, and why a board may deliver a response to the query of an owner or a resident. It's helpful to remember that a condominium or co-op board consists of people from different walks of life who are more likely than not otherwise employed; thus handling community affairs is not their primary gig. Because of this, it helps to approach them respectfully, and during operating hours. Accosting a board member at home, over the phone, or when she's out going about her private business is not likely to get your question answered in an expedited fashion.

Josh Koppel, president of HSC Management in Yonkers, attests that, while “most boards would like to respond to every shareholder inquiry, one has to remember that they are volunteers and have professions and lives. It’s a selfless and unappreciated position that people take on; time and effort is required.”

From a legal perspective, according to David Berkey, a partner with the law firm of Gallet Dreyer & Berkey, LLP in Manhattan, board members are fiduciaries, charged with protecting a condominium’s assets, preserving unit values and managing the property by acting in a reasonable fashion. “In order to perform these obligations,” Berkey says, “it often is necessary to learn of unit owner concerns, so that issues may be resolved before they cause physical harm or financial loss to the condominium.”

Under New Jersey’s Condominium Act, in the advent of a true housing-related dispute that involves complex financial issues, the board must provide an alternative dispute resolution, or ADR, says Scott Piekarsky, managing member of Piekarsky & Associates, LLC in Wyckoff. “The board must offer a mechanism where the conflicting parties can sit down, discuss their issue and resolve it short of having to attend court. If the board doesn’t afford this, then the aggrieved homeowner can file a complaint in Trenton with the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs (DCA), which would then demand that the association make a true attempt at resolving the issue.”

A Man with a Plan

The responses to individual communications with various unit owners should definitely be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, but this isn’t to say that it’s not worth having a general protocol in place as to how a board deals with the questions and concerns of its constituents. In fact, the exact opposite is true. The more that a board attempts to follow a well thought-out chain of command, the better all parties involved feel about the proceedings.

“In most buildings, we recommend that a shareholder first contact an agent,” says Koppel. “Then the agent will get an answer from the board—unless the question cannot be answered as it stands. If the [unit owner] is complaining about the agent, most board members make their email addresses available, so they can be reached out to in these cases. The board should be able to trust that the agent is passing on the [unit owners’] questions, complaints or concerns. Our policy is to pass along all info, good, bad or indifferent.”

If a community does not have a specific protocol in place, Berkey advises that a unit owner present his or her complaint to the building superintendent or managing agent in writing. “After a reasonable time has elapsed,” he says, “if the unit owner has not received any response, then he or she should ask the superintendent or managing agent what actions have been taken in regard to the complaint. If the unit owner does not receive a satisfactory response, then a call or letter addressed to the board seeking such information would be appropriate.”

Waiting Game

While it was advised above that owners and residents remain patient when waiting on a reply to a concern or query from the board—as most boards are acting in good faith and are truly attempting to address said concern in the most thorough and beneficial nature—residents should still be able to expect their questions to be answered in a timely fashion. Should that not be possible given the complex nature of the request, then they should be able to expect updates as to why the process needs to be prolonged.

The length of time deemed “reasonable” for a question to linger depends on the severity of the issue at play, according to Dov Treiman, a partner with Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., in Manhattan. “Emergencies should be handled immediately. Non-emergencies should be handled in a reasonable period of time, without the law defining ‘reasonable.’ A minor leak in a wall warrants a week. A gushing leak warrants an hour. A leak requiring repointing warrants waiting until the weather allows repointing.”

Koppel notes that his firm responds to an owner’s outreach within 24 hours, and often faster than that. “If a [unit owner] doesn’t receive a response, they should be persistent and make sure they get one,” he says. “The [unit owner] can always slip a note under a board member’s door should no other contact info be available. A response within 24 hours is reasonable depending on the nature of the complaint. An emergency should be much faster, but anything after 24 hours is too long.” And one can simply acknowledge that they’ve received an owner’s request, and that you’ll get back to them as soon as you have a firm answer. Just keeping the line of communication open can go a long way.

If a board’s response time is regularly deemed lacking, Koppel advises that owners remain persistent. “Most board members like to be reminded that something wasn’t addressed, and it’s the agent’s job to follow up and ensure that all matters are handled. Getting back to the resident will alleviate their fears of not being heard, even if you don’t have a solid answer for them yet.”

In the most extreme cases, should an owner exhaust every resource and explore all available options at addressing a problem, yet find themselves continually rebuffed by the board, he can sue. But community affairs rarely reach such a boiling point, as they invariably prove costly for all involved. As Piekarsky explains, “The homeowner pays for his or her own legal fees, and also ends up contributing to the fees of the association as a member. But sometimes owners feel legal action is necessary in order to get things moving.”

As with many aspects of communal and cooperative living, there’s no one right way to approach communication between boards and owners. But honesty and openness are good places to start. Putting up walls, acting secretively and failing to address owners’ concerns is a great way to spread seeds of discontent among neighbors, and that is no way to live at all.     

Mike Odenthal is a staff writer for The Cooperator. Cynthia Allegrezza helped with the reporting of this article.