Illinois Condo Repair Dilemma: Will the Association Pay or Is It Coming Out of Your Pocket?

Illinois Condo Repair Dilemma: Will the Association Pay or Is It Coming Out of Your Pocket?

(Emily Cabadas is a Merlin Law Group attorney in the Chicago, Illinois office)

In Illinois, Section 12 of the Illinois Condominium Property Act (765 ILCS 605/12) requires condominium associations to have property insurance that covers the common elements and units. This includes the limited common elements and, except as otherwise determined by the board of managers, the bare walls, floors, and ceilings of the unit.

More specifically, 765 ILCS 605/12 states:

(a) Required coverage. No policy of insurance shall be issued or delivered to a condominium association, and no policy of insurance issued to a condominium association shall be renewed, unless the insurance coverage under the policy includes the following:

(1) Property insurance. Property insurance (i) on the common elements and the units, including the limited common elements and except as otherwise determined by the board of managers, the bare walls, floors, and ceilings of the unit, (ii) providing coverage for special form causes of loss, and (iii) providing coverage, at the time the insurance is purchased and at each renewal date, in a total amount of not less than the full insurable replacement cost of the insured property, less deductibles, but including coverage sufficient to rebuild the insured property in compliance with building code requirements subsequent to an insured loss, including: Coverage B, demolition costs; and Coverage C, increased cost of construction coverage. The combined total of Coverage B and Coverage C shall be no less than 10% of each insured building value, or $500,000, whichever is less. (internal emphasis added)

But what does this mean for unit owners? In Illinois, the division of insurance responsibilities between unit owners and condominium associations is primarily dictated by the condominium association’s bylaws, beyond what is stated in the Statute. Generally, unit owners are responsible for everything beyond the studs. This typically includes interior walls, paint, drywall, flooring, fixtures, appliances, electrical wiring, and plumbing. However, because bylaws vary, disputes frequently arise between unit owners and condominium associations regarding coverage.

See also  The best epoxy garage floor coating kits of 2023

In one Illinois case, Jasinska v. Briar Hill II Condominium Association, 1 the unit owner sued her condominium association and homeowners insurance company after her unit was damaged by water due to a leaking pipe beneath her floor. The unit owner argued that the pipe was a common element under the condominium’s governing documents and, therefore, the association was responsible for the repairs, including floor damage.

The case centered on whether the leaking pipe served multiple units, making it a common element maintained by the association, or whether it exclusively served the unit owner’s unit, in which case she was responsible for repairs. While the court stated that the association is responsible for maintaining common elements, which typically includes pipes serving multiple units, because the unit owner did not present any evidence that the leaking pipe was considered a common element under the association’s governing documents, they ruled in the association’s favor.

This blog has frequently discussed the issue and how States differ in determining when condominium associations are responsible for repair and casualty loss damage to the interior of individual condominium units.

Some relevant posts include:

All of the above underscores that state-specific laws and condominium declarations dictate the exact division of responsibilities, leading to variations in outcomes across jurisdictions. In Illinois, Jasinska v. Briar Hill II Condominium Association highlights the importance of clearly establishing whether a damaged component falls under the condominium association’s responsibility or the individual unit owner’s obligations. The case also reinforces that unit owners bear the burden of providing sufficient evidence when disputing repair costs under their association’s bylaws.

See also  UnitedHealth outbids Option Care for home-health provider Amedisys

1 Jasinska v. Briar Hill II Condo. Assoc., 2018 IL App (2d) 170307-U (Ill. App. Jan. 26, 2018).