Suppose you’re on the board of directors of a condominium. In the middle of the night you receive a call that Unit 201 has a broken gas line. The gas line poses significant health, life and safety issues for the other owners. Can the manager or a board member enter the unit to turn off the gas or fix the line? It’s not always a clear-cut answer. Owners have an expectation of privacy on their lots, in their units, and in their homes. However, many governing documents contain a right of entry provision. This provision allows agents of the association or board members to enter property or condominium units to prevent damage to other areas of the property or to ensure compliance with the governing documents. For example, planned community associations (if authorized by the governing documents) often exercise the right of entry to remedy landscaping violations. Typically, the association’s governing documents allow all related expenses to be charged to the owner.
Here is an example of a right of entry provision in a planned community Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, which allows the association to:
Enter the Lot or Living Unit in which or as to which such violation exists and to summarily abate and remove, at the expense of the Owner, any thing or condition that may exist therein contrary to the intent and meaning of said provisions, and the Board shall not thereby be deemed in any manner of trespass[.]
In the condominium context, issues which require immediate attention to prevent damage to property or injury to other owners may give rise to an easement of necessity. This is similar to the legal right granted by a right of entry provision in the governing documents. However, the circumstances must be severe and immediate. In an Ohio Court of Appeals case involving an association’s right of entry, the court stated:
In reviewing a decision by a board of managers to enter a residential unit in a condominium to spray insecticides, the trial court…applies the test of reasonableness, that is, whether under all the facts and circumstances in evidence, the decision to enter was reasonable. This test subsumes three major questions: (1) whether the decision was arbitrary or capricious; (2) whether it was nondiscriminatory and even-handed; and (3) whether it was made in good faith for the common welfare of the owners and occupants of the condominium. River Terrace Condo Ass’n v. Lewis, 514 NE 2d 732 (1986).
In deciding whether to exercise the association’s right of entry, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, consult with legal counsel. Significant liability could result if the circumstances do not warrant using the right of entry or if the process is not followed correctly.