Content maintained by an independent unit owner for documentation and transparency purposes during active litigation.
While the events described are accurate and based on the documentary record, certain names of associations and individuals purporting to be board members have been omitted or changed due to pending litigation. This is a documentation of experience and raises potential legal questions for review—not a statement of actual violations.
PROLOGUE
Between 2020 and 2026, one unit owner moved from association president to plaintiff, from auditor to outcast. What began as a routine financial review evolved into contested board appointments, disputed insurance claims, a reclassified patio, and a storm that finally broke through a roof that had been leaking for years.
Under Palm v. 2800 Lake Shore Drive Condo. Ass’n, the Illinois Condominium Property Act (765 ILCS 605/), and the Illinois General Not For Profit Corporation Act (805 ILCS 105/), procedural compliance and fiduciary accountability are foundational to lawful condominium governance. The following timeline raises questions about whether those standards were met. No conclusions are drawn. The record speaks for itself.
CHAPTER ONE: The Audit and the Aftermath (2020–2021)
September 5, 2020 – A unit owner is elected President of the Condominium Association (hereinafter “the Condo Association”). Upon assuming the role, he conducts an immediate, comprehensive audit of both the Condo Association and its related Master Association (hereinafter “the Master Association”).
September – December 2020 – The audit reveals significant financial discrepancies. The Condo Association’s reserves are critically low—approximately just over $1,000. Meanwhile, the Master Association holds reserve balances exceeding $17,000. The audit identifies misclassified expenditures, improper fund allocations, and incomplete accounting practices, including failures to properly account for legal fees, reserve transfers, and insurance proceeds.
Potential legal question – Section 9(c)(2): This disparity and lack of transparency may raise questions under Section 9(c)(2), which requires boards to provide reasonable reserves for capital expenditures and deferred maintenance. The failure to maintain adequate reserves or to properly account for reserve fund allocations may implicate the board’s duty to prepare and distribute detailed annual budgets under Section 18(a)(6).
December 10, 2020 – The Master Association Treasurer admits to accounting errors in the reserve funds, acknowledging irregularities in shared governance funds.
February 11, 2021 – At a Master Association meeting, legal counsel confirms that funds collected for reserves must be used for their stated purpose. Counsel directs that nearly $10,000.00 be refunded to the Condo Association for its Common Element Maintenance Reserve Account—funds that had been improperly held or allocated by the Master Association.
February 28, 2021 – The unit owner resigns as an officer of both associations, citing ongoing disputes, financial mismanagement, improper assessments, unilateral decisions, and loss of peaceful enjoyment. He remains a voting member of both associations. During his tenure, the Condo Association’s reserve account increased from approximately $1,401 to over $10,000.00.
Potential legal question – Sections 18.4(a) and 18.4(i): Later claims that the unit owner caused financial depletion may raise questions under Section 18.4(a) (duty to provide for operation, care, and maintenance of common elements) and Section 18.4(i) (duty to keep detailed, accurate records of receipts and expenditures). Under Palm, board members must exercise the care required of a fiduciary. The restoration of funds through audit may call into question subsequent claims of mismanagement.
CHAPTER TWO: The Leaks and the Legal Fees (2022–2023)
February 26, 2022 – Through counsel, the unit owner formally demands that the Board authorize repairs to common element building envelope defects, including a skylight leak documented since 2019 and inoperable windows. He learns that an individual purporting to be a board Treasurer had used association funds for identical repairs to his own unit without board vote or owner notification.
Potential legal question – Section 18.4(a) and Section 18.4(h): This disparity in repair reimbursement may raise questions under Section 18.4(a) (maintenance of common elements) and Section 18.4(h) (adoption of rules and regulations after meeting with notice). Selective enforcement of repair obligations may also implicate the board’s fiduciary duty to act uniformly and in good faith.
June 15, 2022 – A Master Association resident aggressively approaches the unit owner’s lawfully parked vehicle off association property, banging on the vehicle and making threatening gestures. The unit owner later seeks medical attention and is diagnosed with a general anxiety disorder. (A court will later find one incident of stalking established.)
June 27, 2022 – The Condo Association Board confirms that repairs for “sky light/roof leaks” and other building envelope issues are formally added to the agenda for the July 13, 2022, owner meeting.
August 19, 2022 – A severe hailstorm causes damage to the roof of the main building and an adjacent gymnasium structure.
October 5, 2022 – An insurance claim is filed with a third-party adjusting company.
October 13, 2022 – An insurance adjuster inspects the property and authorizes repairs for a scope of work corresponding to the east side of the main building. The authorized scope also includes chimney and skylight flashing repairs for the west side. However, the west-side work is not performed during construction.
Potential legal question – Section 18.4(a) and Section 12: The omission of west-side repairs while authorizing east-side work may raise questions under Section 18.4(a) (duty to maintain common elements) and Section 12 (insurance and application of proceeds). The selective repair of common elements—particularly where the east side contained units owned by individuals purporting to be board members—may implicate breach of fiduciary duty and potential self-dealing.
November 16, 2022 – The Master Association receives a roof repair insurance claim check. The Master Association treasurer issues the majority of the funds to the Condo Association and a smaller portion to another party for purposes other than those for which the insurance proceeds were intended.
March 1, 2023 – The unit owner submits a formal complaint to the individuals purporting to be the Condo Association Board citing failure to segregate reserve funds, lack of financial transparency, and individuals purporting to be board members misconduct involving unauthorized repairs and dues evasion.
March 3, 2023 – An individual purporting to be the Condo Association Treasurer admits she personally paid for skylight repairs to her own unit and subsequently received reimbursement from association funds—all without board approval, notice, or a proper vote.
Potential legal question – Section 18(a)(7) and Section 18.4(d): This reimbursement without board approval may raise questions under Section 18(a)(7) (annual itemized accounting of common expenses) and Section 18.4(d) (collection of assessments). Unauthorized expenditures from association funds may also implicate the Illinois Not For Profit Corporation Act regarding ultra vires acts.
July 15, 2023 – The unit owner notifies individuals purporting to be board members that their prolonged failure to address the worsening roof leak at his unit constitutes a breach of good faith and may violate state law by obstructing the property’s sale.
CHAPTER THREE: The Voice Vote and the Voidable Contract (September 2023)
September 6, 2023 – An individual purporting to be a board member circulates an agenda for a September 8, 2023, Condo Association open board meeting, including a topic to discuss new rules for board eligibility.
September 8, 2023 – At a self-declared regular board meeting—not a properly noticed annual or special election—a motion is carried by voice vote to appoint certain individuals as President, Treasurer, and Secretary. A second motion enacts a new rule making members with delinquent fees or violations ineligible for the board. No written resignations exist from the prior board members, whose terms had not yet expired.
Potential legal question – Section 18(a)(13) and Section 18(b)(5): This voice vote election at a regular meeting—rather than an annual or special meeting called for that purpose—may raise questions under Section 18(a)(13) (method of filling vacancies on the board) and Section 18(b)(5) (special meetings called by president, board, or 20% of unit owners). Under Palm, board actions taken without proper authority may be void ab initio. The Illinois Not For Profit Corporation Act (805 ILCS 105/108.10) requires written resignations for director vacancies.
September 14, 2023 – Two individuals purporting to be board members unilaterally execute a contract with a roofing company. The contract is based on a permit incorrectly issued for an unrelated parcel, resulting in no scheduled inspections. The scope of work includes the west-slope roof above the unit owner’s unit.
September 14, 2023, at 6:43 PM – The unit owner emails the board advocating for a comprehensive roof repair plan, including documented inspection of flashings, skylights, and chimneys.
September 15, 2023, at 1:46 PM – An individual purporting to be board member responds that the decision was made a year ago, that the adjuster’s report covers skylight screens and gutter guards, and that the unit owner’s input is only sought on shingle color.
Potential legal question – Section 18(a)(8) and Section 18.4(a): The unilateral execution of a contract without board vote or owner approval may raise questions under Section 18(a)(8) (notice of budget and assessment meetings) and Section 18.4(a) (board’s duty to provide for maintenance of common elements). Such unauthorized contracting may constitute ultra vires conduct under the Illinois Not For Profit Corporation Act.
September 16, 2023 – The same individual purporting to be a board member, signing as “Condo Association Treasurer,” unilaterally appoints herself and four others as temporary board members, assigns officers, imposes fines, and announces rule changes—all without owner vote or legal authority.
Potential legal question – Section 18(b)(13) and Section 18.4(l): This self-appointment without proper election or vacancy procedures may raise questions under Section 18(b)(13) (matters requiring 2/3 vote of unit owners) and Section 18.4(l) (authority to impose fines after notice and hearing). Under Palm, such actions may be void ab initio for lack of authority.
CHAPTER FOUR: Trespass, Vandalism, and Reclassification (September 2023)
September 17, 2023 – Individual purporting to be a board member unlawfully enters the unit owner’s private patio area—historically treated as part of his unit’s exclusive use—with an individual later found to have committed stalking. Local police arrive and remove both individuals for trespass. The board member issues baseless threats of liens. (Video evidence.)
Potential legal question – Section 4.1(a)(5) and Section 18.4(j): This entry onto a limited common element without authorization may raise questions under Section 4.1(a)(5), which defines patios, balconies, and porches as limited common elements appertaining exclusively to a single unit. Section 18.4(j) grants board access only for maintenance, repair, or emergency—not for trespass or intimidation.
September 19, 2023 – The unit owner discovers that the signage designating his private patio area has been removed. His patio furniture, pots, and plants are damaged and vandalized. A 4-foot wood swing gate, ordered weeks earlier, has been installed without board notice, budget allocation, or vote. The gate later fails fire inspection and remains noncompliant.
September 19, 2023 – Another individual purporting to be a board member disseminates a written statement to third parties falsely accusing the unit owner of “illegal trespass and illegal occupation of the common area.” This accusation is made despite association records later confirming the patio is a limited common element, and despite a notarized letter from a Condo Association member stating that the patio is indeed a limited common element.
Potential legal question – Section 2(s) and Section 26: The reclassification of a limited common element as a common area without proper amendment may raise questions under Section 2(s) (definition of limited common elements) and Section 26 (transfer of limited common elements requires amendment executed by affected parties). Unilateral reclassification without recorded amendment may be void.
September 20, 2023 – The unit owner obtains a temporary Stalking No Contact Order.
September 21, 2023 – An individual purporting to be a board member replies to the unit owner’s repair inquiries: “We have no money for the roof.”
September 24, 2023 – The same board member provides a spreadsheet that materially characterizes legal fees as a general fee increase rather than disclosing litigation expenses related to the stalking incident.
Potential legal question – Section 19(a)(9) and Section 19(b): This characterization of legal fees may raise questions under Section 19(a)(9) (requirement to maintain itemized and detailed records of all receipts and expenditures) and Section 19(b) (unit owner’s right to inspect records within 10 business days). Failure to provide accurate, itemized records may constitute a denial under the Act.
September 25, 2023 – A individual purporting to be a board member states that current photos of old water stains from leaks “will help justify our insurance claim” from the previous year.
September 26, 2023 – New association rules are enacted without unit owner vote, quorum, or proper notice, modifying delinquency procedures, imposing fines, authorizing lien filings, and disqualifying the unit owner from becoming a board member.
Potential legal question – Section 18.4(h): The enactment of rules without proper notice or a meeting called for that purpose may raise questions under Section 18.4(h), which requires a meeting of unit owners called for the specific purpose of discussing proposed rules and regulations, with the full text of proposed rules included in the notice.
CHAPTER FIVE: The Admission and the Assault (November 2023)
November 1, 2023, at 7:38 AM – A representative of the roofing company informs the unit owner that the roofing contract covers only the east-slope roof—not his west-slope unit. The east slope is where certain individuals purporting to be board members own their units.
November 1, 2023, at 5:58 PM – An individual purporting to be a board member emails the unit owner “evidence of proprietary actions on behalf of the current board,” attaching the roofing contract and insurance claim documents. He states: “Creative financing was needed to get the repairs done that the previous board did not get done.”
November 1, 2023, at 9:01 PM – The same individual purporting to be a board member asserts that the unit owner “is and continues to be on the board” and “was on the board when the work was approved.“
Potential legal question – Section 18.4 (fiduciary duty) and Illinois Not For Profit Corporation Act 805 ILCS 105/108.70: These statements, if inaccurate, may raise questions regarding breach of fiduciary duty under Section 18.4, which requires board members to exercise the care required of a fiduciary. False statements about board composition may also implicate ultra vires conduct under the Not For Profit Corporation Act.
November 2, 2023, at 8:58 AM – The unit owner clarifies for the official record: “I had no prior involvement in or knowledge of any board-approved ‘creative financing’ or ‘proprietary’ transaction.”
November 14, 2023 – The unit owner demands detailed financial records, meeting minutes, and voting records, including documentation of “creative financing” and the unauthorized patio alterations.
Potential legal question – Section 19(b) and Section 19(e): The denial or delay of statutory records requests may raise questions under Section 19(b) (failure to make records available within 10 business days deemed a denial) and Section 19(e) (member’s right to inspect records for purposes relating to the association). Under Palm, the failure to maintain verifiable, accessible records undermines the transparency required by law.
November 17, 2023 – The Condo Association holds its first valid election of the new Board of Managers. Certain individuals are elected. One board member resigns. During the annual meeting, the unit owner is barred from board membership under newly enacted rules that were adopted without a meeting of unit owners called for that specific purpose or proper notice of the full text of the proposed rules. An individual purporting to act as a board member states, “Two positions remain unfilled at this time, with no known eligible volunteers.” When the unit owner questions the handling of the roofing contract—specifically why the scope of work excluded his west-slope unit while covering the east-slope units owned by certain individuals purporting to act as a board members—he is verbally and physically confronted by board members. Audio recordings document the confrontation, including admissions that the scope of work was known to be incomplete only days before construction began.
Potential legal question – Section 18(b)(1), Section 18.4(h), and Section 18.4(l)Section 18(b)(1), Section 18.4(h), and Section 18.4(l): The physical confrontation may raise questions under Illinois assault statutes. The exclusion from board membership under rules enacted without proper notice may raise questions under Section 18(b)(1) (quorum requirements) and Section 18.4(l) (fines only after notice and opportunity to be heard).
November 17, 2023 – An individual purporting to act as a board member admits she became aware the scope of work excluded portions of the roof only two days before construction began—directly contradicting her prior representations of full coverage.
November 23, 2024 – An individual purporting to act as a board member responds to a demand letter by accusing the unit owner of “extortion through the use of defamation,” a statement later cited in a defamation claim.
CHAPTER SIX: The Patio and the Contradiction (2023–2025)
December 8, 2023 – An individual purporting to act as a board member emails the unit owner stating, “You also were serving on the board and voted on the matter at the September 8th.” Later that same day, she writes: “The meeting notes from August 16, 2023 and Sept 8, 2023 are mostly from memory as I was not on the board at that time and I simply wanted to document that it occurred.” This admission directly contradicts her prior statement at the November 17, 2023, Annual Meeting, where she acknowledged that two board positions remained unfilled with “no known eligible volunteers.” In the same December 8, 2023, email, the individual also confirms that the unit owner has no liens, fines, or violations, stating: “The only Condo Association assessments that are due for the unit owner are regular monthly assessments. There are no liens, fines, or violations for unit owner from Condo Association at this moment.”.
Potential legal question – Section 18(a)(7) and Section 18.4: These materially contradictory statements—claiming the unit owner both served on the board and voted (morning email) while admitting she was not on the board and fabricated minutes from memory (evening email)—may raise questions under Section 18(a)(7) , which requires the board to annually supply an itemized accounting of common expenses and maintain accurate minutes, and under Section 18.4, which imposes a fiduciary duty of good faith, honesty, and care. The simultaneous admission of no violations affecting the unit owner, despite previously being barred from board membership under newly enacted rules, further calls into question whether those rules were applied in bad faith or as a pretext for exclusion. Under Palm v. 2800 Lake Shore Drive Condo. Ass’n, board actions taken without proper authority or in bad faith may be void ab initio.
February 21, 2025 – That same individual purporting to be a board member submits a sworn affidavit stating she served as secretary from August 2023 until her resignation in December 2023. The affidavit directly contradicts her prior admission that she was not on the board.
Potential legal question – Section 27(b)(1) and Illinois Supreme Court Rule 191: This material contradiction may raise questions under Section 27(b)(1) (correction of omissions, errors, or inconsistencies in condominium instruments) and Rule 191 regarding affidavit accuracy. Actions taken under claimed but contradicted authority may be void ab initio.
June 11, 2025 – An individual purporting to be a board member sends an email admitting that the prior year’s Board of Directors consisted entirely of other individuals—not the unit owner. The same email confirms that the patio area is a limited common element—not a common area. This contradicts prior claims that the unit owner was on the board, illegally occupied a common area, and that the patio was common property.
Potential legal question – Section 2(s) and Section 4.1(a)(5): The admission that the unit owner was never on the board during the relevant period may raise questions about the accuracy of prior representations. The confirmation of the patio as a limited common element aligns with Section 2(s) (definition) and Section 4.1(a)(5) (patios as limited common elements), calling into question prior contrary statements.
June 11, 2025 – The same email reveals an undisclosed and material insurance surplus—a significant sum that was never applied to the unit owner’s unrepaired unit.
Potential legal question – Section 9(c)(2) and Section 12: The failure to disclose or apply an insurance surplus may raise questions under Section 9(c)(2) (reserves for repair and replacement) and Section 12 (application of insurance proceeds to reconstruction). Insurance proceeds intended for common element repairs must be properly tracked and applied.
CHAPTER SEVEN: The Storm and the Damage (2026)
April 15, 2026 – A storm causes significant additional damage to the building. Water intrusion into the unit owner’s unit intensifies dramatically. Unresolved roof defects—including the west-slope chimney and skylight flashings omitted from the prior scope of work—allow water to penetrate ceilings, electrical fixtures, and ductwork. Mold growth accelerates. The unit owner incurs out-of-pocket expenses for remediation and temporary accommodations. See actual water intrusion here.
Potential legal question – Section 18.4(a) and Section 13: The continued water intrusion and property damage may raise questions under Section 18.4(a) (duty to provide for maintenance, repair, and replacement of common elements) and Section 13 (application of insurance proceeds to reconstruction). The failure to repair known defects despite available insurance proceeds may constitute a breach of fiduciary duty.
2025–2026 – Disputes continue over record production, insurance proceeds, reserve balances, and maintenance obligations. The unit owner asserts consequential damages including loss of income, business disruption, financial losses, and significant health impacts—stress-related conditions and emotional distress resulting from sustained conflict, property damage, and governance disputes.
EPILOGUE: Pending Proceedings and Legal Questions
Multiple matters remain pending before the local circuit court. The unit owner seeks to raise questions regarding:
- Whether board actions taken after the September 2023 voice vote are void ab initio under Section 18(a)(13) (vacancy filling procedures) and Section 18(b)(5) (special meeting requirements), as well as under the Illinois Not For Profit Corporation Act (805 ILCS 105/108.70) regarding ultra vires acts;
- Whether individuals who acted without proper authority can be held personally liable for breach of fiduciary duty under Section 18.4 (powers and duties of board of managers, including fiduciary standard of care);
- Whether the selective exclusion of one unit from common element repairs, while repairing units owned by board members, constitutes self-dealing and bad faith under Section 18.4(a) (duty to maintain common elements) and Palm v. 2800 Lake Shore Drive Condo. Ass’n;
- Whether the denial of statutory records requests violates Section 19(b) and Section 19(e) (right to inspect records within 10 business days), and whether such denial constitutes bad faith under Palm;
- Whether the reclassification of a limited common element without proper amendment raises questions under Section 2(s) (definition of limited common elements), Section 4.1(a)(5) (patios as limited common elements), and Section 26 (transfer of limited common elements requires recorded amendment);
- Whether the pattern of surveillance, threats, and physical confrontation meets the elements for a stalking no-contact order under Illinois law, and whether such conduct violates Section 18.4(j) (board access limited to maintenance, repair, and emergency).
Under Palm v. 2800 Lake Shore Drive Condo. Ass’n, the Illinois Condominium Property Act (765 ILCS 605/), and the Illinois General Not For Profit Corporation Act (805 ILCS 105/), procedural compliance and fiduciary accountability are foundational to lawful condominium governance. The record in this matter raises questions about whether those standards have been met.
This content is maintained by an independent unit owner for documentation and transparency purposes during active litigation. No conclusions of law or fact are asserted. All statements describe the unit owner’s experience and raise potential legal questions for review. Nothing herein constitutes a claim of actual violation. Names of associations and individuals have been omitted or changed due to pending litigation.