Defending Property Rights Against Unlawful “Double-Dipping” Assessments
Stok Kon + Braverman has filed a lawsuit challenging what we believe is a sweeping and unauthorized fee scheme implemented by Fisher Island Community Association, Inc. (FICA), in coordination with Fisher Island Club, Inc.
At the center of the dispute is a fundamental legal question:
Can a community association impose annual assessments on individuals who are not property owners, not members, and have no contractual relationship with the association?
Our position is clear: No.
What’s Happening on Fisher Island?
According to the court filings, FICA has attempted to collect substantial annual assessments from individuals who do not own residential units on Fisher Island. These include:
- Tenants
- Temporary occupants
- Non-resident club members
- Even short-term hotel guests
Yet FICA’s own governing documents limit assessment authority to residential unit owners.
In the motion filed in the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, our attorneys explain that FICA is attempting to collect a fee from someone who:
- Is not a FICA member
- Does not own property subject to FICA’s Master Covenants
- Has no contractual relationship with FICA
Despite these admissions, FICA seeks to impose liability by selectively invoking the bylaws of a separate corporate entity — the Fisher Island Club — while omitting its own Master Covenants that define and limit its authority.
We believe this approach is legally defective.
Why This Matters
This case is not just about one individual.
It is about protecting:
- The economic rights of residential owners
- The viability of rental activity on the island
- Fair hospitality operations
- The limits of association authority
If allowed to stand, this structure would effectively:
- Chill short-term rentals
- Distort hotel and hospitality operations
- Impose duplicative annual fees tied to a single residential unit
- Expand assessment authority beyond ownership
In practical terms, it creates what we describe as a de facto cash-extraction program — untethered to property ownership or contractual privity.
Florida law is clear: community associations derive their authority from their governing documents and applicable statutes. They cannot expand that authority by implication or litigation strategy.
The Core Legal Issues
The lawsuit challenges the fee scheme on multiple independent grounds:
1. Lack of Standing
FICA is attempting to enforce obligations that arise, if at all, from a separate entity’s bylaws. The real party in interest — the Club — is not even joined in the action.
2. No Contractual Privity
There is no contract between FICA and the individual being charged. Florida law requires contractual privity or valid third-party beneficiary status — neither exists here.
3. Ultra Vires Assessment Authority
FICA’s Master Covenants authorize assessments against residential units — not against non-owner occupants or guests. Attempting to collect more than one annual assessment tied to the same unit exceeds that authority.
4. Illusory Financial Obligations
The alleged fee lacks negotiated material terms such as price structure or limitation. Florida courts do not enforce open-ended, unilateral financial obligations imposed after the fact.
5. Unjust Enrichment Theory Fails
Any benefits received flowed through Club membership — not through any direct relationship with FICA. Indirect benefit is not enough under Florida law.
These are structural defects, not technical ones. As argued in the filing, the deficiencies cannot be cured by amendment.
What This Case Is Really About
Community associations play an important role in maintaining property values and shared amenities. But with that authority comes limits.
When assessment power expands beyond ownership and into rental activity, hospitality operations, and short-term occupancy, it raises serious legal and economic concerns.
Our firm believes associations must operate within the four corners of their governing documents.
Property rights cannot be diluted through creative billing practices.
Why Clients Turn to Stok Kon + Braverman
At Stok Kon + Braverman, we are not afraid to litigate complex, high-stakes matters against powerful associations or institutions.
We:
- Analyze governing documents line by line
- Identify structural legal defects others overlook
- Challenge ultra vires actions
- Protect economic and contractual rights
- Litigate aggressively when necessary
This case reflects our commitment to defending property owners, business operators, and individuals against overreach.
When associations attempt to expand their authority beyond what the law permits, we step in.
Following the Case
The matter is currently pending in the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County. We will continue to advocate vigorously for our client and for the proper application of Florida law.
If you have questions about community association assessments, rental restrictions, or governance disputes, our team is here to help.
Stok Kon + Braverman
Strategic. Relentless. Results-driven.
Call Now: (954) 237-1777