I've never paid HOA fees, but this sounds to me like hyperbole. It's not people clamoring for infinite services, but seeing how their monthly HOA gives them no value (common areas landscaped? Access to pool?). Special assessments suck as they tend to be higher cost, but at least you know exactly what they are paying for. It's not unlike people who complain about taxes when they drive over the same crumbling roads and highways all the time. I'm not saying who's right or wrong, but our nature is to believe we should get something for what we pay.Nearly universally people in the US bitch about their association fees and want them as low as possible, while having infinite services. So what happens? The obvious stuff get taken care of and all expensive maintenance is deferred, but that is exactly what the property owners vote for and in this case it cost them their property.
Morabito Consultants is an old, respected firm. Their 2018 report was pretty clear that additional water inundation would be a severe problem. I don't believe they ever said anything about risk of total collapse.I agree. From what I’ve read it seems like they were notified they had serious issues and didn’t take action.
They did a follow-up report earlier this year prior to the $15M in work being approved by the owners, and there is now some grumbling over that report. The report specifically said they tested some of the concrete and the results were "curious." WTF does that mean? Nobody knows, at least not from reading the report.
Secondly, with the nature of the damage they saw (it had gotten worse since 2018), they did not inform city officials. They aren't legally obligated to, and it's likely they didn't foresee total failure. I'd imagine for reputational reasons alone, they would have banged all drums and harassed all sorts of people if that was even a remote probability. They were somewhat constrained in this assessment because they were told the pool area would remain open to residents the whole time.
Morabito has been or will be sued for not being vociferous enough in their warnings. I don't know what their exposure is, legally.
I'm no expert, but it seems like they probably had a chance to fix things at major cost 3 years ago. No doubt the cost a decade or two ago would have been less than a building dropping. Sorry, bad pun. I suspect that by the time they finally started the roof repair, it was too late to save the building but they could have saved lives.Was this an issue that if detected and addressed before it became a threat, maybe 10 - 20 years ago, would have been a lot less expensive to drop on the residents?
Or even insurance if the issues are the result of long ago hurricane damage.