Circumstances force woman from her home
 
By Dan Kulin 
Article Courtesy LAS VEGAS SUN
Posted February 10, 2004

It was an agonizing choice for Judi Burns -- risk $45,000 and hope two courts would rule in her favor so she could keep her Henderson home; or give up her house, hold onto what cash she had and hope for the best in court.

Burns had already lost Round 1 in court to the homeowners association that sold her house because she stopped paying her monthly association dues.
 

A $45,000 bond would have let Burns and her family of four stay in their home while appealing the District Court ruling. But if she
lost the appeal she would also lose the $45,000, and Burns felt that was too much to risk on top of possibly losing her home, so she decided she really only had one choice.

 

"Basically I had to give up the house, or I could I have lost that $45,000 too and then I'd have nothing," Burns said. Burns, her fiance, two stepchildren and their dogs moved out of the house last Thursday and now live in a rental house in Henderson.

  

"I still cry every time I leave the house, every time I come home, every time I walk into a room. It's hard. It's very hard," Burns said as she prepared to leave the home she bought for about $130,000 in 1994.

 

The forced move is the result of
a years-long battle between Burns and her Pebble Creek Homeowners Association, which sold Burns' home at a March 2000 auction for $10,100 

because she stopped paying the $25-a-month association dues.

JUDITH Burns watches as movers pack up
and carry her belongings to their truck.
Burns' house was sold by her homeowner
association for fines and nonpayment of dues. 

Burns, 53, said she stopped paying the dues in January 1999 to get the association and management company to respond to her complaints that she was wrongly fined by the association for vehicle registration and parking violations. Burns said the
vehicles were not hers.

She could have prevented the sale up until the auction began
by paying the association for the fines, back dues, late fees and penalties, all of which added up to about $2,100 by the time of the sale, Burns attorney Hal Taylor said.

Knowing what she does now, Burns said she would tell others heading into a similar dispute to pay whatever money they are accused of owing, or put that money into an escrow account, and then continue fighting their association.

Eldon Hardy, the state ombudsman for common interest communities, gave similar advice.

"If you owe $2,000 or $3,000, find a way to get the money together to pay it off and pay it under protest. ... and never stop paying your monthly assessment," Hardy said.

Burns fought the sale of her home in court, claiming the association wrongly combined her unpaid fines and association dues. Homeowners associations are allowed to foreclose on someone's home for nonpayment of dues, but not for unpaid fines. She also argued that she was not given adequate notice of the sale of her home.

But District Judge Sally Loehrer ruled against Burns. Loehrer also said Burns could post a $45,000 bond to stay in the home pending an appeal.

Just before Christmas Burns appealed Loehrer's decision to the state Supreme Court, but without the $45,000 Burns and her family had to move out.

Taylor said Burns agreed to move her family out of the house and give up her claims to the house in return for the buyers dropping their legal challenges to Burns' appeal.

Taylor said under a best case scenario, unless there is a settlement in the case, the Supreme Court will return the case to District Court where it will go to trial. If Burns is ultimately successful she would be entitled to the value of her lost house plus attorney's fees.

But Taylor said it could be a year before the Supreme Court hears the case.

"I can't just give up," Burns said. "It's what I've worked for my whole life."

Hardy said Burns' case could be a good test of the law that prohibits associations from mixing homeowners' bills for fines and association dues.

"I think it has a chance," Hardy said about the appeal. "It may be a good test case to set a precedent on."

Attorneys for the homeowners association and two management companies that have run the association could not immediately be reached for comment.