Differences Between An Additional Assessment And A Special Assessment

Since there is a contractual liability for the lessee to perform general repair and maintenance, the maintenance requirement provision may be assumed as a present economic obligation, not just a future commitment. If the fair value estimate of future maintenance expense can be measured with sufficient reliability, the provision may lead to recognition of an accrued liability for the repair and maintenance performance obligation at the inception of the lease. The accrued liability for the repair and maintenance can be reversed when payment is made or liability is created through the performance of the required repair and maintenance.

Cedar 28 Condominium Association (“the Association”) makes the following Litigation Disclosure Statement pursuant to Minnesota Common Interest Ownerships Act, Minn. Stat. § 515 B.4-107(b). The Association makes this disclosure in good faith based upon the best of its knowledge.

Note: (1) The building is subject to a nonrecourse liability of $10,000, which is assumed by the partnership.

In contrast, the 2016 amendments to MCL 559.167, which became effective on September 21, 2016, created a new “reversion” process to eliminate “need not be built” units after the expiration of the six (6) year or ten (10) year statutory time periods. Newly created MCL 559.167(4) now requires 2/3 of the co-owners that are in good standing to vote to approve a “reversion” of “need not be built” units to common elements by adopting a declaration that will be recorded in the register of deeds after the expiration of the statutory time periods. If 2/3 co-owner approval is obtained, the condominium association must then send the declaration to a developer or successor developer at its last known address. The developer or successor developer may withdraw the land on which the units were to be located or amend the master deed to make the units “must be built” within the sixty (60) day time period. If the developer or successor developer fails to withdraw the land or amend the master deed within sixty (60) days, the condominium association may record the declaration, which becomes effective upon recording and the right to construct the “need not be built” units will be eliminated.

Generally speaking, the Master Deed, Bylaws or other restrictive covenant will charge the Board of Directors with enforcing these documents. Similarly, the terms of the governing documents and the Michigan Condominium Act require every owner to “…comply with the master deed, bylaws, and rules and regulations of the condominium project…” MCL 559.165. Accordingly, as a general rule, the Board of Directors of a Condominium Association or Homeowner Association is required to enforce the governing documents as written.

The appellant, Parkview Queensland Pty Ltd (“Parkview”), is a building contractor who commenced construction of a residential property development under a standard form building contract with Fortia funds Management Ltd (“Fortia”), the developer. Fortia financed the construction under a loan facility with the Bank of Western Australia Ltd (“BankWest”).

ASC 410-20-15-3(e) also states that the lessee’s obligation to perform a retirement activity shall be recorded as ARO unless the payment meets the definition of minimum lease payments or contingent rentals under the lease accounting literature (ASC 840, Leases). Per ASC 840-10-25-5, the minimum leases payment is any costs obligated to make in connection with the leased property. However, the lessee’s obligation to restore the leased asset to the original condition is related to the leasehold improvement, not directly related to the leased asset. Accordingly, the cost of removing the leasehold improvements is not part of the minimum lease payment. In addition, due to the ‘no renewal option’ and ‘no ability to negotiate for the renewal’ under the lease agreement, it is certain that NeedsLease will incur costs to restore the leased property to its original condition in 10 years, which excludes the ‘contingency’. Therefore, the cost of reinstating to the property’s original condition should be accounted as ARO in accordance with ASC 410-20. Per ASC 410-20-25-4, ARO should be recognized at its fair value of reasonably estimated future cash flows and to offset the liability, the lessee capitalize the

The types of assessment records which would be used to meet organizational and external requirements

In Mt. Veron Park Association v Chantelle Clark, Michigan Court of Appeals Docket No. 323445 (December 29, 2015) (Unpublished), the Michigan Court of Appeals held that a Condominium Association could not create rules and regulations that were inconsistent with the maintenance responsibilities set forth in the Master Deed and Bylaws. Specifically, the Mt. Veron Park Association adopted a rule and regulation that indicated that all co-owners must paint must have their front doors painted dark brown. The Association requested that the co-owner paint her door dark brown. The co-owner argued that the Master Deed and Bylaws placed the responsibility for the cost of maintenance, repair and replacement of the door on the Association, even though

I, (“Unit Three Owner”), and I, _____, (“Unit Two Onwer”), both with an interests in 650 Huron Ave Condominium enter into this agreement. In consideration of the mutual agreements set forth below, and for other good and valuable consideration, the adequacy and sufficiency of which the Parties acknowledge, and intending to be legally bound, the Parties agree as follows:

The roles of the assessor may not be strictly that of a teacher but more of a mentor guiding a Learner to there eventual goal of gaining the qualification by giving appropriate feedback.

d. purchase insurance that covers the replacement cost of your possessions but does not cover the building structure

In this matter, the Co-Owners have no relationship with the Byrne. Of course, Byrne contends that the Co-Owners are “comprised of every person, firm or corporation which owns any condominium unit within the [complex],” and that the Co-Owners are responsible for “the care, upkeep and surveillance of all the buildings.” (Compl. ¶¶ 4, 10). Byrne, however, is not a person who “owns any condominium.” The only conduct alleged

Defendant Council of Co-Owners of the Tecumseh Condominium (the “Co-Owners”), by and through Craig D. Roswell, Esq., Bryant S. Green, Esq., and Niles, Barton & Wilmer, LLP, and hereby files this Reply in Support of its Motion to Dismiss, and in support thereof, states as follows:

Now the basis for all future transactions relating to this building would also be at its cost, i.e. $12 million. For example: The depreciation would be charged on $12 million and not on $15 million. Similarly when the asset is sold in future, the profit or loss on sale would be based on the cost price actually paid for it. Since the original or