Laurels Condominium Association (# 1) aka The Laurels Condominium Association v. Tanya Hinds and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee (2011)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

This matter came on for hearing before the court on March 3, 2011.   The plaintiff's complaint seeks a foreclosure of its condominium charge lien pursuant to C.G.S. section 47–258, as well as a judgment of strict foreclosure, interest costs and attorneys fees.

An examination of the file revealed that a Motion for Default for failure to appear was filed on August 31, 2009 as against Deutsche Bank, Trustee, which judgment was granted by the court on September 14, 2009.   This default was never reopened, probably because Deutsche Bank held the defendant Hinds mortgage which was paid to date through the trial of this case.

At the time that suit was instituted para. 6 of the complaint claims that the defendant owed common charges in the amount of “$2,565.00, inclusive of late fees and charges, plus interest accruing at 10% per annum.”   As of the date of trial, the defendant had reduced this amount to $440.00.

The defendant took title to her unit on March 11, 2006 by warranty Deed. Plaintiff's Exhibit H. Thereafter, she found that, in strong rainstorms, water came in damaging her carpet.   In addition she experienced a gas leak and mildew smell in her bedroom.   She, without knowledge of the law, thought that she could withhold payment of her common charges until these problems were attended to by the Condominium Association.   She was mistaken, Equitable Defenses are permitted, but they are limited to those which attack the making, validity or enforcement of the lien, rather than some act or failure to act of the lien holder.   National Mortgage v. McMahon, Superior court, judicial district of New Haven at New Haven, Docket No. 349246 (February 18, 1999) Celotto, J. 9 (scr 300).   Therefore, the problems she was experiencing were no excuse for holding back and not making timely payments of her common charges.   At the time of the initial hearing, the defendant had repaid over 90% of the common charges originally owed by her.

The parties were before the court again on April 15, 2011, at which time the court was informed that the defendant had fully paid any and all common charges owed by her prior to this date.   The plaintiff is now seeking attorneys fees in the amount of $5,148.50, and has submitted an affidavit attesting to this amount.   Plaintiff's Exhibit F. Therefore, the attorneys fees is the sole amount that the defendant owed following trial of this case.   The court does not believe that attorneys fees of $5,146.50 is a reasonable fee for the collection of an original claim of $2,565.00.

Judgment of strict foreclosure may enter in the sum of $1,500.00 representing a fair and equitable attorneys fee, with a law day for the defendant of September 30, 2011.

So ordered.

Skolnick, J.T.R.

Skolnick, David W., J.T.R.