The WEHOA's defense of their double billing policy rests basically on one document: the 3rd Supplemental Amendment to the Declaration filed in 1997, in which certain Lots (which were later combined by the builder) were described as separate lots. It was always within the WEHOA's power to reference the updated Subdivision Plans in either the 3rd Amendment in 2008 or the 4th Amendment in 2016.
As recently as 2014, Murry filed a Subdivision Plan revising a 2010 Subdivision Plan which reduced the number of Lots. Are these homeowners going to be charged fractional lots based on the original Plans?
To prove that the seventeen are single lots, the Homeowners will show:
Revised Subdivision Plans which superseded the originals.
Deeds for the supposed "double lots" which clearly describe single lots.
County tax records billing single lots.
Invoices and closing documents from WEHOA which fail to describe or explain "double lots" or why these homeowners have bills higher than everyone else's.
Definitions in the WEHOA Declarations which clearly define a "Lot" and "Uniform Billing."
If the homeowners win the lawsuit–which you should be able to see from documentation is likely–the WEHOA will pay whatever restitution the judge orders in addition to all the legal fees for both sides. All the costs will end up being paid by–you guessed it–YOU, the homeowners. The WEHOA members will pay the costs of the Board of Directors electing to defend a bad decision that could have been easily resolved years ago with 17 homeowners.
If the WEHOA were willing to negotiate a settlement, it would cost all the WEHOA members far less.
Instead of 17 homeowners paying double what their neighbors are paying (roughly $624 more per year), the WEHOA would simply collect the same amount from everyone (as it always should have). Calculated on the 2016 dues amount, it would be about $36 more per property per year, excluding whatever attorney's fees are spent on the case.
Settling the Dues Problem using 2016 numbers
The overpaid amounts from past years (which is a total of at least $8,000 per "double lot" homeowner, a total of over $135,000 for all of these lots combined) could be negotiated with individual homeowners, and might be given as a credit toward future dues, rather than a lump sum payment. Some homeowners may not want to be reimbursed for their overpayment, and that would be their choice. The fact is that all the other homeowners were getting a $3/month "break" for 15 years that was paid for by the 17 homeowners who were overcharged. In the interest of fairness, the overcharges should be happily repaid. Everyone needs to understand that a minority was being overcharged and a majority was being undercharged for years due to the negligence of the board.
The legal costs of continuing to defend this position will end up costing all homeowners, and is wasted dollars.
Only one person benefits financially from defending the position of WEHOA double-billing select homeowners. That person is the attorney for WEHOA. She is paid, win or lose. She is paid by all the homeowners, including the homeowners who have been paying double for over 15 years. It is to her benefit–and her benefit alone–to defend this case instead of working with homeowners to settle it.
If the WEHOA Board has never gotten a second opinion on this case from a neutral attorney, maybe they ought to.