11 | 10 | 2008 Posted By Melissa M. Garcia

Recent Colorado Appellate Court Case Defines Meaning Of "Other Records" Allowed For Inspection By Members

As we all know, Colorado law requires an association to allow its members access to association records.  Among other Colorado statutes, C.R.S. Section 38-33.3-317(2)(a) provides that "all financial and other records shall be made reasonably available for examination and copying by any unit owner and such owner's authorized agents." In Glenwright v. St. James Place Condominium Association, the Colorado Court of Appeals defined what the phrase "and other records" could mean.

In Glenwright, the owner argued that he was entitled access to records that were "owned by the association, but maintained by its managing agent".  The Colorado Court of Appeals agreed, and concluded that any records "owned or possessed" by an association clearly fall within the plain and ordinary meaning of "and other records."  The Court further stated that records in the possession of an association's agent (i.e., management company) are "other records" if they "reflect the activity of the agent in performing any of the association's powers or responsibilities under either CCIOA, the association's declaration or bylaws, or its agreement with that agent." The Court further stated that an association "owned" a particular record, if the management agreement recognizes that the records are among those owned by the association.
 
In summary, the Court stated that if a managing agent's records were "created, used, received, or maintained by the manager in the manager's performance of the association's statutory or contractual duties," C.R.S. 38-33.3-317 would require their production for inspection by a member.  This would be particularly true if the management contract recognizes that the records are "owned" by the association.

 

Written By:Joe Felice On November 13, 2008 2:33 PM

I can't believe it took a court ruling to tell us this. I think most good managers have already been operating under this premise.

But we recently had a request from an Owner (who is suing the HOA) to produce all records for the past-5 years, including electronic communication and everything in the management's computer. We argued that the request was too broad and overreaching, and too cumbersome. Can you imagine how many boxes that would be? And who would have time to copy all that? The court agreed, and denied his request. Obviously, he was on a fishing expedition. I think the request must be for a particular, pertinent purpose.