Preserve Strong Communities with Housing Mediation

Thanks to donations received through our Housing Mediation project, Center for Conflict Resolution volunteers are able to mediate cases like the one described below:

David had been living with his grandfather, Elijah, since he was 18. Over the last 5 years their relationship had become strained and, after many fights and threats, Elijah had filed a case in eviction court to get David to move out of the house. The parties arrived at court and had a chance to meet with a mediator from CCR before seeing the judge.

During the mediation both men talked about how hard it was to live in the house together. Elijah thought that his grandson was irresponsible, that he was doing drugs, and that he was making poor decisions in his life. David was insulted by Elijah’s accusations and insisted that he had only experimented with drugs a little and that he was an adult. David made it clear that although he might not be making the best decisions, he was entitled to make decisions for himself.

It was clear to the mediator that the conversation between the men was not a new one. David and Elijah said they’d been having this fight, on and off, for most of the last 3 years. In fact, a similar conflict between David and his mother is what resulted in him living with his grandfather in the first place. Through conversation, the mediator helped the parties determine what was most important to them. They both agreed that the living arrangement could not continue and that they needed a change. David said that he was willing to move out of the house, but needed time to save some money and make a plan. Elijah said he was in no rush to move David out of the house, but that he wanted a firm date set.

In addition to helping the parties develop their basic plan for David to move out, the mediator facilitated a conversation about the living arrangement and about their relationship. David was very hurt to have been sued by his grandfather and feared that the court case would have an impact on his credit. Elijah expressed his regret about filing the court case, but said that he had felt desperate to find a resolution, noting that his previous conversations with David had not yielded any results.

At the end of the mediation the parties had a plan in place that included a move-out date for David as well as details about how the two would interact in the time they still lived together. Due to mediation, the parties were able to avoid court and leave together.

Conflict between unit owners and condominium associations is very common, and mediation can be a great resource for resolving it. Center for Conflict Resolution's Housing Mediation program regularly serves parties with this type of dispute. Here is a recent example:

Dorothy was a condo owner who had a dispute with her condo association that took 14 months to finally resolve.

Dorothy was very surprised one day to find an invoice in her mailbox for $900 in plumbing repairs, even though she had no damage to her unit. The letter stated that the leak occurred in a wall that was part of her unit; therefore she was responsible for the cost. Nothing had been communicated to Dorothy about the work, and when the work was done, the plumber never entered her condo. Dorothy believed the leak occurred in a common area and that she was not responsible for the charges.

Dorothy communicated her disagreement to the Condo Association and held off on paying the plumbing bill while she waited for an answer. She was initially frustrated that she had not been informed of any of the plumbing problems, but then she felt increasingly disrespected by a lack of response from the Condo association. Dorothy decided to withhold her monthly assessment of $215. Several months went by without any action on the part of the Condo Association. Then Dorothy received notice that she was being taken to court.

Dorothy realized she needed a lawyer, which took time to find and added expense. There were 3 different court appearances over the 14 months, and each time the Condo Association was represented by a different attorney and the case continued. By the time this case came to court for the 4th time, Dorothy was being asked to pay almost $8,000 in late charges, attorney fees, court costs and of course, the initial $900 for the plumbing problem. Both parties agreed to mediation the morning they were set to go to trial.

After initial statements, both parties expressed a willingness to try to resolve the matter. By this time, Dorothy had a different understanding of the meaning of “common area” and acknowledged that she had withheld her monthly assessments due to frustration about the lack of communication she received from the Condo Association. The Condo Association’s attorney acknowledged that they were willing to negotiate lesser amounts for attorney’s fees and some charges.

During the initial negotiation the parties grew angrier as both sides made offers that were deemed too low or too high by the other party. The mediator worked to reframe the offers on the table, acknowledging that the parties were both interested in settlement and that both parties acknowledged their responsibility in the escalation of the conflict. The mediator’s presence and perspective kept the discussion focused and the parties were able to agree on a total that they both thought was fair. Additionally, the terms of payment were discussed and a payment plan extending for 24 months was approved by both parties.

Both parties left the mediation on good terms and were relieved that the matter had been resolved.