More than 65 homeowners at The Residences at Villa Medici in west Orlando are demanding financial records and answers from their condominium association after the board hit them with a special assessment of between $5,000 and $10,000 per unit. The residents filed a lawsuit against their homeowners association, and a judge has already stepped in to halt collection of the fee while the case plays out.
The 131-page lawsuit, filed in August 2025, seeks not just to challenge the assessment but to remove the board entirely, according to Fox 35 Orlando. A Florida judge ruled that the HOA’s meeting notice for the assessment violated state law because it was not postmarked at least 14 days before the meeting and improperly claimed the assessment had already been approved, the station reported.
Notice Violation Triggers Legal Win for Homeowners
That 14-day mailing requirement is not a technicality residents invented — it is written into Florida law. Under Section 718.112 of the 2026 Florida Statutes, condominium associations must mail, deliver, or electronically transmit written notice to unit owners at least 14 days before any meeting where a nonemergency special assessment will be considered. The Villa Medici board’s failure to meet that standard, combined with its claim that the assessment was already a done deal, formed the legal basis for the judge’s ruling.
Court proceedings also surfaced conflict-of-interest allegations against board leadership. Per the same Fox 35 Orlando account, the HOA director and treasurer served simultaneously as the property manager and paid tens of thousands of dollars to his own company for trash collection, along with more than $500,000 to a friend’s maintenance firm, without obtaining competitive bids. The director claimed hiring his own company was a cost-saving measure, the report noted.
Bank Records Show Luxury Retail Spending
HOA bank records presented in court showed spending at luxury retailers including Victoria’s Secret, Burberry, and Macy’s, the station reported. The director claimed in court that some of those retail charges were fraudulent and had been refunded…