Fwd: [EXTERNAL] Vaux Water Shutoff Problem & Question

[DIANA DREW-FLEMING]

Hello All,

    I find Jason's argument  logical and well-reasoned.  I have no dispute with his conclusion(s).  This could potentially be a serious problem for the association that needs to be addressed.

Diana

Begin forwarded message:

From: DIANA DREW-FLEMING <ddrewf...@icloud.com>

Subject: Fwd: [EXTERNAL] Vaux Water Shutoff Problem & Question

Date: Nov 5, 2025 at 11:24 AM

To: ICE <ronw.f...@gmail.com>

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: wor...@finitearts.com

Date: November 5, 2025 at 11:19:16 AM PST

To: Joe Mack <jmmc...@gmail.com>, Tim Ackley <tim.ack...@gmail.com>, DIANA DREW-FLEMING <ddrewf...@icloud.com>, Paul Block <bloc...@gmail.com>

Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL]  Vaux Water Shutoff Problem & Question



Hello, BODers again — more from Jason —

 

(Please take any discussion to vauxofficers — do not do “reply all”)

 

— H

 

 

From: Jason L. Grosz <j...@vf-law.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2025 1:58 PM
To: wor...@finitearts.com
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Vaux Water Shutoff Problem & Question

 

I don’t think you can just cut a hole in someone’s drywall ceiling (even if it is a closet) and leave it open.  If I was an owner I’d be upset about that.  I think we need to pay for a hatch to be installed…

 

 

 

Jason L. Grosz| Attorney

VF Law

6000 Meadows Road, Suite 500 | Lake Oswego, OR 97035

Main:  503.684.4111 | Direct: 503.210.3091 | Fax: 503.905.2557

Email: j...@vf-law.com | Website: www.vf-law.com 

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or privileged information. If you have received this message by mistake, please do not review, disclose, copy, or distribute the e-mail. Instead, please notify us immediately by replying to this message or telephoning us.  If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply at j...@vf-law.com and delete the message.

Tax Advice Notice: IRS Circular 230 requires us to advise you that, if this communication or any attachment contains any tax advice, the advice is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties. A taxpayer may rely on professional advice to avoid federal tax penalties only if the advice is reflected in a comprehensive tax opinion that conforms to stringent requirements.

 

FDCPA Notice: This communication is from a debt collector attempting to collect a debt. Any information obtained will be used for that purpose. Reply “Stop Email Communication” to opt out of further email communication.

 

 

From: wor...@finitearts.com <wor...@finitearts.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2025 12:24 PM
To: Jason L. Grosz <j...@vf-law.com>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Vaux Water Shutoff Problem & Question

 

Hi, again:

 

I still need some guidance for this possible scenario regarding water shutoffs:

 

>>> So we have a flawed bit of construction that seems might be remedied by simply cutting a hole in the ceiling drywall where the shutoff valve is actually located (assuming we can figure that out), and not closing the hole with another hatch or removing the useless hatch. That would restore functionality at least. Since this would happen in a closet maybe no one cares about the resulting appearance. What then? <<<

 

— Hal

 

 

 

From: Jason L. Grosz <j...@vf-law.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2025 2:13 PM
To: wor...@finitearts.com
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Vaux Water Shutoff Problem & Question

 

It’s my pleasure, Hal

 

<image001.png>

 

 

Jason L. Grosz| Attorney

VF Law

6000 Meadows Road, Suite 500 | Lake Oswego, OR 97035

Main:  503.684.4111 | Direct: 503.210.3091 | Fax: 503.905.2557

Email: j...@vf-law.com | Website: www.vf-law.com 

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or privileged information. If you have received this message by mistake, please do not review, disclose, copy, or distribute the e-mail. Instead, please notify us immediately by replying to this message or telephoning us.  If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply at j...@vf-law.com and delete the message.

Tax Advice Notice: IRS Circular 230 requires us to advise you that, if this communication or any attachment contains any tax advice, the advice is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties. A taxpayer may rely on professional advice to avoid federal tax penalties only if the advice is reflected in a comprehensive tax opinion that conforms to stringent requirements.

 

FDCPA Notice: This communication is from a debt collector attempting to collect a debt. Any information obtained will be used for that purpose. Reply “Stop Email Communication” to opt out of further email communication.

 

 

From: wor...@finitearts.com <wor...@finitearts.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2025 1:38 PM
To: Jason L. Grosz <j...@vf-law.com>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Vaux Water Shutoff Problem & Question

 

Hi, Jason — thanks for getting into this — yup, tricky — problem. 

 

First — yes, the shutoff valve is for the unit water line.

 

The problem under review is a hatch misplaced because it could not be installed where a sprinkler water line is in the way. The builders stuck a hatch in the ceiling anyway, just beyond the end of the sprinkler line and sprinkler head.

 

So we have a flawed bit of construction that seems might be remedied by simply cutting a hole in the ceiling drywall where the shutoff valve is actually located (assuming we can figure that out), and not closing the hole with another hatch or removing the useless hatch. That would restore functionality at least. Since this would happen in a closet maybe no one cares about the resulting appearance. What then?

 

Gotta say, I’ve read the bylaws and declaration many times, and I can never actually memorize them and often never really understand them. Thanks for helping me - !

 

— Hal

 

 

From: Jason L. Grosz <j...@vf-law.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2025 10:42 AM
To: wor...@finitearts.com
Cc: Kesarah Rhine <Kesara...@vf-law.com>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Vaux Water Shutoff Problem & Question

 

Hal –

 

Hope you are doing well. 

 

The short answer to the question is that I think creating a new hatch is the Association’s responsibility.  But this is a pretty tricky issue – so I will give you my whole analysis below. 

 

One peripherally related question:  is the shutoff valve on the fire suppression system line or is it on the water supply line for the unit?  That wasn’t entirely clear to me from your email. 

 

Let’s start with a little bit of basic background here, because I think it will help inform the answers to your questions: 

 

The basic rule in Oregon condominium associations is that the Association is responsible for “maintenance, repair and replacement” of all common elements – which is paid for out of “common expenses” (Assessments).  The Owner is legally responsible for all “maintenance, repair and replacement” of anything within the legal boundaries of the unit.  That rule is laid out in the Oregon Condominium Act (ORS chapter 100).  It is also laid out in the Vaux Bylaws (Section 8.1): 

 

 

 

 

 

So as you can see – owners are responsible for the units, Association is responsible for common elements.  What makes this tricky is the language I highlighted in Section 8.1.1 – “In addition, each owner of a Primary Unit shall be responsible for…  plumbing, heating or air conditioning fixtures…  that may be in his or her primary unit” [Emphasis added]

 

These shutoffs are, arguably, a plumbing fixture.  But they are also on a common element pipe, duct, flue chute or conduit (which is defined as a common element as you’ll see below).  So I think the real question here is are the water shutoffs within the boundary of the Unit, or are they part of the common elements.  For the answer to that – we look to the Condominium Declaration.  Units are defined as follows:

 

 

 

From your description – these are in the ceiling above the unit.  And since the outer boundary of the unit is the interior surface of the ceiling – I believe these water lines (and the shutoffs) are part of the common elements.  That is consistent with how the common elements are defined: 

 

 

So, valve itself is the Association’s responsibility.  It’s a water shutoff valve, outside the boundaries of the unit and on a common element plumbing line.  That’s why I conclude the Association is responsible for the “maintenance, repair and replacement” of the water shutoffs. 

 

Now the hatches are a different issue.  The hatches are essentially a hole in the interior surface of the unit.  So you would think that those are part of the unit and the owner’s responsibility.  So, if, for example, a handle or a lock needed to replaced – I would conclude that those are owner responsibility. 

 

But in this case – some of the hatches appear to be located in the wrong position.  There is a hatch but not in a location that makes the water shutoff accessible.  If we need to create or cut a new hatch so that the someone can shut off the unit-level water in the case of a flood or emergency – the function of that hatch is really to give the Association access to it’s common element water shutoff.  Put slightly differently, “but for the Association’s need to access water shutoffs, that hatch wouldn’t need to be installed”.  So, I would say installation of a new hatch would be the Association’s responsibility. 

 

Anyway – sorry for the tortured analysis but this is a pretty tricky question.  Let me know if this makes sense and, of course, if you want to discuss – I’m happy to go through it with you on the phone or in a meeting. 

 

Jason

 

<image001.png>

 

 

Jason L. Grosz| Attorney

VF Law

6000 Meadows Road, Suite 500 | Lake Oswego, OR 97035

Main:  503.684.4111 | Direct: 503.210.3091 | Fax: 503.905.2557

Email: j...@vf-law.com | Website: www.vf-law.com 

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or privileged information. If you have received this message by mistake, please do not review, disclose, copy, or distribute the e-mail. Instead, please notify us immediately by replying to this message or telephoning us.  If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply at j...@vf-law.com and delete the message.

Tax Advice Notice: IRS Circular 230 requires us to advise you that, if this communication or any attachment contains any tax advice, the advice is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties. A taxpayer may rely on professional advice to avoid federal tax penalties only if the advice is reflected in a comprehensive tax opinion that conforms to stringent requirements.

 

FDCPA Notice: This communication is from a debt collector attempting to collect a debt. Any information obtained will be used for that purpose. Reply “Stop Email Communication” to opt out of further email communication.

 

 

From: wor...@finitearts.com <wor...@finitearts.com>
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2025 3:56 PM
To: Jason L. Grosz <j...@vf-law.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Vaux Water Shutoff Problem & Question

 

Hi, Jason:

 

Here's a situation we have discovered in a 1-bedroom unit @ The Vaux:

 

Background —

Each Vaux unit has a master water shutoff valve located behind a hatch in the ceiling of a closet; laundry closet or hall closet, depending on the unit layout. Once that hatch is open, the owner should be able to reach in, turn a handle on a pipe and kill the unit water supply. Most units are so constructed.

 

Problem —

In Unit 221 (and possibly in others unknown) the hatch is a couple of feet away from the shutoff, placed there because a sprinkler line and sprinkler head are in the way. The owner (or almost anyone else) cannot reach the shutoff through the hatch, and we need to fix this.

 

The simple fix will be to cut a hole in the ceiling dry wall to expose the shutoff valve. But maybe the sprinkler line will still make turning the handle very difficult or impossible and some re-plumbing will be necessary.

 

This weird situation is an artifact of flawed original construction back in 2005-2006. My question is: After The Vaux Association performs a fix, who will pay? The unit owner or our Association?

 

-- Hal

(for The Vaux Board of Diectors)

[Paul Block]

I'm sorry Diana, but I don't see his words as any solution.  

I have never advocated that we cut a hole in the drywall and keep it open.  I say that the construction mistake in her apartment is not the responsibility of the COA to fix.  I didn't know Jason was being queried, or I would have liked to approve the wording of the query.  

The law:

Walls in: responsibility of the unit owner.  That's the law.

What is the rationale that calls for the COA to fix the drywall of the unit?  

She had an inspector here when she bought the unit.  Any problem she had should have been fixed by the people she bought the unit from.  Failing that, it's her responsibility.

-paul

--
Officers of The Vaux
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vauxofficers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vauxofficers...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vauxofficers/e51260f1-4550-4412-8edc-b756e77d1c15%40me.com.

[Tim Ackley]

Hi All,

I thought the issue put forward by Hal was on target. I strongly agree with and support the interpretation of our bylaws as rendered by Jason. 

At present, we do not know how many additional units may have the same flaw.

Let's first determine the cost of remediation of this one construction flaw before we move forward with potential action.

Tim

--

Tim Ackley

2335 NW Raleigh Street Unit 139

Portland, Oregon 97210

 

Cell: 480-694-7059

Email: tim.ack...@gmail.com

On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 12:54 PM 'DIANA DREW-FLEMING' via vauxofficers <vauxof...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

[wor...@finitearts.com]

I have surveyed the garage for Wi-Fi, and there is a small dead spot near the bicycle room. Anyone who wants to make an internet call can take about 5 steps and do it as is.  Cell service — that’s another matter except in certain magic locations (near my parking spots, for example.)  If we are ever going to have metered EV charging, we wil be forced to install a cell repeater (an amenity on its own, methinks).   — H



 

 

 

 

So as you can see – owners are responsible for the units, Association is responsible for common elements.  What makes this tricky is the language I highlighted in Section 8.1.1 – “In addition, each owner of a Primary Unit shall be responsible for…  plumbing, heating or air conditioning fixtures…  that may be in his or her primary unit” [Emphasis added]

 

These shutoffs are, arguably, a plumbing fixture.  But they are also on a common element pipe, duct, flue chute or conduit (which is defined as a common element as you’ll see below).  So I think the real question here is are the water shutoffs within the boundary of the Unit, or are they part of the common elements.  For the answer to that – we look to the Condominium Declaration.  Units are defined as follows:

 

 

 

From your description – these are in the ceiling above the unit.  And since the outer boundary of the unit is the interior surface of the ceiling – I believe these water lines (and the shutoffs) are part of the common elements.  That is consistent with how the common elements are defined: 

 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vauxofficers/CACBetPzZmu4BEPXLGXdbJzCQY%3DXbgVa4aPZ5%3DCCi5ktkWjETUA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Paul Block]

I continue to disagree with the lawyer's interpretation.  He claims the hatch is primarily for the COA's use.  I disagree.  But since I am alone in this, I will walk away from the issue.

-paul

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vauxofficers/CACBetPzZmu4BEPXLGXdbJzCQY%3DXbgVa4aPZ5%3DCCi5ktkWjETUA%40mail.gmail.com.