💸 HOA Budget vs. Reality: Management Forgave $3,500 in Late Fees (Exceeding What Was Billed)

Focusing on Authority and Discretion: Management Exercised Unauthorized Discretion by Crediting More Fees Than Were Charged, Creating a Structural Governance Failure.

Late fees are not a clerical afterthought.

They are a governance mechanism, a budgeted revenue source, and a test of whether a board actually enforces its own declaration.

At 175 East Delaware Place HOA at the former John Hancock Center — Sudler Property Management’s handling of late fees has crossed a critical line. What might be dismissed elsewhere as “administrative inconsistency” has become something far more serious:

A structural governance failure that undermines the board’s authority, the declaration, and the adopted budget, while quietly redistributing financial consequences among owners.

This is not about a few waived charges.
It is about who holds power, who exercises discretion, and who ultimately pays when governance breaks down.

---

📉 Late Fees: From Policy to Fiction

For the current fiscal year, the association budgeted $32,000 in late-fee income.

That number is not symbolic. Budgets are policy documents. By approving that figure, the board told owners, lenders, auditors, and prospective buyers that late fees would be:

• Regularly applied
  

• Consistently enforced
  

• A meaningful component of association revenue
  

Now compare that promise to reality.

Through the first four months ended December 31, 2025:

• Actual late-fee income: $750
  

• Unfavorable variance: ($9,916.68)
  

That is not a timing issue.
That is not suddenly perfect payment behavior.
That is a policy collapse.

---

🔄 The Month Where Forgiveness Beat Enforcement

The most recent month makes the problem unmistakable:

• Late fees billed: $3,250
  

• Late-fee credits issued: $3,500
  

More late fees were forgiven than charged.

A line item designed to enforce payment discipline and generate revenue ended up producing a net loss.

That outcome does not happen accidentally. It happens when late fees are applied and erased at management’s discretion, not under clear, board-directed authority.

---

🧨 From the $250 Late-Fee Trap to Quiet Credits

This dysfunction did not appear overnight.

On August 20, 2025, the association’s $250 late-fee trap was documented:

• Any balance at or above $250 could trigger a recurring $250 monthly late fee
  

• Modest delinquencies could rapidly escalate
  

• Serious concerns existed about:
  

  • Proportionality
    

  • Notice
    

  • Whether the policy was ever properly adopted
    

Owners were exposed to a draconian regime on paper.

Now the pendulum has swung — not toward transparent reform — but toward quiet forgiveness.

Neither extreme reflects healthy governance.
Both reflect rule-by-exception, which is the opposite of fiduciary discipline.

---

🧾 Who Has the Authority to Waive Late Fees?

(It Isn’t Management)

The declaration is clear: late fees must be charged when accounts are delinquent.

What is not automatic is the authority to forgive money owed to the association.

That authority belongs to the board.

Core governance principles apply:

• Management executes policy; it does not create exceptions
  

• Forgiving debt is a fiduciary decision affecting equity and income
  

• Waivers require documented board approval
  

• Owners must request relief in writing
  

When a management company issues $3,500 in late-fee credits in a month where only $3,250 was billed — without documented board approvals — it is exercising authority it does not lawfully or ethically possess.

---

🔍 The SNAPP Issue: A Practice With No Basis in the Rules

This is where the governance failure becomes unmistakable.

The association’s House Rules do address both late fees and SNAPP — but they do not authorize automatic late-fee waivers for enrolling in SNAPP.

What the Rules Actually Say

• Section 3.2 (“Fees, Fines and Assessments”) confirms owners’ obligation to pay assessments and acknowledges that fees or fines may be imposed under the governing documents.
  It does not tie late-fee waivers to any payment platform.
  

• SNAPP is referenced only as a payment option (electronic or automatic payments).
  It is not identified as a basis for forgiving, waiving, or crediting late fees.
  

That distinction matters.

If owners are being told — formally or informally — that late fees will be waived if they enroll in SNAPP, then that is not a rule-based policy. It is a practice communicated outside the four corners of the House Rules.

In governance terms, that is not an interpretation.
That is unauthorized modification.

---

⚠️ Why This Raises the Risk, Not Lowers It

An extra-textual SNAPP waiver regime creates multiple failures at once:

• Unauthorized enforcement: Late-fee outcomes depend on a condition not authorized in the Rules.
  

• Unequal treatment: Owners are treated differently based on enrollment in a management-run system.
  

• Budget distortion: Late-fee income is reduced without disclosure or amendment.
  

• Authority confusion: It is unclear whether the board approved this practice, or whether management implemented it unilaterally.
  

Even if well-intentioned, a practice that contradicts or supplements the Rules without amendment or notice is a governance breach.

---

🚨 Internal Control Failure = Fiduciary Risk

This is not cosmetic.
It is an internal control breakdown.

Sound financial governance requires:

• Separation between charging fees and forgiving them
  

• Independent review of credits
  

• Immediate scrutiny when credits exceed charges
  

The board’s fiduciary duties include:

• Enforcing the declaration consistently
  

• Protecting association income
  

• Ensuring leniency is justified, uniform, and documented
  

When late-fee income quietly evaporates through unauthorized practices, owners who pay on time subsidize unapproved forgiveness for others.

That is not fairness.
That is governance failure.

---

🛠️ What the Board — and Owners — Should Demand Now

1️⃣ Transparency

• A detailed aged delinquency report
  

• A late-fee charges and credits report showing:
  

  • Unit number
    

  • Fee date and amount
    

  • Credit date and amount
    

  • Stated reason
    

2️⃣ Authority

• Written confirmation of where (if anywhere) SNAPP-based fee forgiveness is authorized
  

• Adoption of a formal Late Fee Waiver & Write-Off Policy requiring board approval and minute documentation
  

3️⃣ Alignment

Decide — openly — whether the association will:

• Enforce late fees as written and budgeted, or
  

• Amend the Rules and budget transparently
  

The current state is indefensible:

• Harsh rules on paper
  

• Unauthorized practices in reality
  

• A budget divorced from both