Chances are, God did not break the sprinklers

Question: My board is easily sold almost anything, including an automated sprinkler system we didn’t need. The board spent tens of thousands of dollars installing a complicated system merely because the gardener said we needed one. Due to the hard sell and exorbitant amount of money spent, our board refuses to listen to owners who complain about it.

Rain or shine, the system goes on two to three times every evening. It wakes people up in the middle of the night and soaks everything. The water pools, causing algae growth that has turned our walkways green, slippery and dangerous.

Yet, at every meeting, owners must endure the board’s boasting about “thriving vegetation.” Vegetation did thrive shortly after the system was first installed, but since then, water accumulation in the soil and on the vegetation has caused mold, killing root systems and shrubbery.

Several sprinkler heads were defective and blew up, causing damage to units. When owners requested reimbursement, the association’s attorney stated it “was an act of God, therefore it is the owner’s responsibility.”

The soil is now the consistency of quicksand and has contracted a fast-growing fungus that the board refuses to treat, saying it’s an “act of God.”

If these are an “act of God,” who’s responsible for fixing them?

Answer: God works in mysterious ways, but it is doubtful one of them includes blowing up sprinkler heads or causing fungal growth on vegetation.

The legal definition of an “act of God” is “an act occasioned exclusively by forces of nature without the interference of any human agency.” Examples include abnormal weather, quakes, hurricanes or other events that could not be prevented by humans. Attempts to avoid liability for poor decision-making by asserting an “act of God” are wrong legally and do not justify their actions or failures to act.

Once the board takes the initiative to install a sprinkler system on the association’s common property, its responsibility is twofold. Under Civil Code Section 1364(a), it is responsible for repairing, replacing or maintaining the common areas, including installations such as sprinkler systems. It is also the board’s responsibility to follow the law, and through that obligation it becomes liable for any damage caused by that sprinkler system.

In this case, those on the board who authorized the sprinklers bear the burden of supervising its installation and maintenance and are responsible for the damage it may cause, regardless of any excuses they put forth. It is the board’s duty to correct the over-watering problem and repair buildings and walkways damaged by the faulty sprinklers. Failure to do so is a breach of duty and a violation of the board’s obligations under the Davis-Stirling Act.

It takes only one person to slip and fall on the slimy walkways, subjecting the entire association to liability. The association’s insurance carriers may or may not choose to make the injured party whole or pay for the defense of board members who had knowledge of the dangerous conditions but refused to rectify them. The insurance claims alone may result in a cancellation of policies or higher insurance premiums.

Should any of that occur, the board may wish to consider bringing a cause of action against the attorney for possible malpractice, as the “act of God” excuse is one he or she should have known was legally lacking.

Send questions to P.O. Box 11843, Marina del Rey, CA 90295 or e-mail noexit@mindspring.com.