 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Lawyers square off in MTCA records dispute
10-Mar-08 – The attorney for a west tower resident involved in a dispute with Marina Towers Condominium Association about access to financial records has accused MTCA of reneging on a settlement reached in late January. In a letter to MTCA attorney Ellis Levin, Leo G. Aubel, attorney for Mindy Verson, writes, “Exclusion of records from Ms. Verson’s examination of financial books and records for calendar year 2007 was never part of our settlement agreement.” Aubel says he will inform the City of Chicago Department of Consumer Services that the dispute is unsettled. This could result in another hearing being scheduled and, according to Aubel, a possible fine against MTCA of $300 per day. “I will be taking the position,” he writes, “that the Board has been out of compliance since the date this matter was ostensibly settled.”
Consumer fraud complaints filed against MTCA Verson has filed complaints with the Department of Consumer Services, claiming MTCA has not provided financial documents she has requested. A Chicago municipal code section requires a condominium association to allow unit owners to inspect its financial books and records within three days after a written request is made. MTCA has not only fought such access by unit owners at Marina City, but in at least one case the association has threatened to bill a resident for legal expenses incurred responding to the request. Verson contacted residential property manager David Gantt in November 2007, saying she was considering the purchase of a second unit at Marina City and wanted to see MTCA financial records. Getting no response, she filed a complaint with the city on December 18, claiming consumer fraud. In late December, she received a letter from MTCA attorney Levin, saying a copy of the 2006 MTCA Audit Report, completed in April 2007, would be available to her. In the meantime, the Department of Consumer Services scheduled an informal hearing with Verson and MTCA for January 30. Verson still wanted to see financial records for 2007, and two days before the hearing she was contacted by MTCA attorney Jacqueline Satherlie, asking Verson to submit this request in writing. Satherlie wanted Verson to specify the documents and the purpose for seeing them.
Just prior to the hearing, the matter was apparently settled when MTCA agreed to a schedule for allowing Verson to see financial records. Although she was eventually allowed to see summaries from 2006 and 2007 – but not allowed to make copies – she wanted to see detailed records of attorney fees paid by the association. On February 22, Verson again wrote to residential property manager Gantt, requesting copies of all legal bills to MTCA since 2005 and all 1099 forms sent to lawyers for the association. She had made a similar request while viewing the financial summaries, and was told by Gantt and Satherlie that her request would be forwarded to MTCA board president Donna Leonard. Verson says she was suspicious of amounts paid to Levin because she had heard Levin claim, on three separate occasions, he was paid three different amounts for work on a lawsuit Verson and six other residents filed against MTCA in 2006. The lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice in October 2006. Marina City Online has reported on other incidents involving Levin in which legal expenses incurred by MTCA appear to be exorbitant. Second complaint filed in February Six days later, Verson filed her second complaint with the City of Chicago Department of Consumer Services, saying MTCA had failed to provide the financial records she requested. According to Verson, while she was viewing financial summaries on February 11, she was told by residential property manager Gantt that MTCA had paid the legal bills of Shari Vass, a Realtor and property manager at Marina City who was a co-defendant in the 2006 lawsuit. Verson made this claim in the cover letter to department director Barbara Gressel, accompanying her formal complaint. “I believe this to be [of] fraudulent nature and a breaking of the fiduciary responsibility of the board,” says Verson in the cover letter. A lawyer and expert on Illinois condominium law, who asked not to be identified, says while it is common in litigation for a defendant to pay an unrelated defendant’s legal fees – if the second defendant was not going to defend or give a weakened defense that would hurt the overall case – it should have been made public. On February 28, Verson received another letter from MTCA attorney Levin, declining her request to see copies of legal bills and 1099 forms. Levin said Verson had not given a “proper purpose” for the request, “or, indeed, any purpose for the request.” Levin notes in his reply that a similar request was made in 2003 by another resident, also a plaintiff in the 2006 lawsuit, that was denied. He says legal bills are subject to attorney-client privilege and not available to unit owners. Claiming that Verson already knew this, a claim she denies, Levin says in his letter he will recommend she be charged for legal costs to review and respond to her request. Levin also notes that Verson’s original reason for viewing financial records, that she was considering the purchase of a second unit at Marina City, was no longer applicable since in the meantime she had purchased a second unit at another condominium. And, citing Black’s Law Dictionary, Levin argues that copies of his invoices to MTCA are not included in the definition of “financial books and records” of the association. The consumer fraud complaint filed on February 28 is still pending.
Lawyers square off in MTCA records dispute |
