HOA & condo fidelity bonds

Coverage & Requirements

How State Fidelity-Bond Requirements Differ

Compare common ways states define applicability, amounts, covered people, waivers, timing, and records.

Find Your Bond
Reading time
10 minute read
Published
Published
In summaryState fidelity rules differ along multiple dimensions, not just dollar amount. Association type, effective date, threshold, formula inputs, covered people, waivers, availability, and records can each change the analysis.

Applicability comes before arithmetic

A state may regulate condominiums and planned communities in different chapters. Formation date, number of units, residential use, expense level, statutory election, and who controls money may narrow the rule.

For example, Colorado's cited provision generally uses a 30-unit trigger and requires analysis of CCIOA status, community age, exemptions, and fund control. Delaware's DUCIOA framework contains formation-date and small-community qualifications. Neither should be reduced to a universal label.

Amount rules use different structures

California uses reserves plus three months of assessments for covered Davis-Stirling associations. Florida's cited HOA and condominium provisions use maximum funds in association or management-agent custody at one time. Delaware requires fidelity insurance to the extent reasonably available but states no dollar formula in the cited section.

Virginia uses a floor and a capped formula tied to reserves and annual assessment income. A method valid in one state may materially understate or overstate another state's rule.

StructureOfficial-source exampleKey question
Reserves plus assessmentsCaliforniaWhich reserve and assessment figures apply?
Peak custodyFloridaWhat is the supportable highest expected balance?
Availability without formulaDelawareHow is amount selected and availability documented?
Floor and capped formulaVirginiaWere the floor, formula, and cap applied in order?

People, perils, and waivers also differ

Some statutes list officers, directors, employees, managers, or everyone controlling or disbursing funds. Some expressly address computer or funds-transfer fraud. Others do not enumerate perils.

Waiver language is equally specific. Florida's Chapter 720 HOA provision allows an annual waiver through the described member vote, while its cited condominium provision has no parallel annual waiver. Oregon's official HOA and condominium provisions contain a post-turnover annual vote mechanism. Exact prerequisites matter.

  • Never infer a waiver from silence.
  • Do not transfer an HOA exception to a condominium provision.
  • Check whether unavailability triggers notice rather than waiver.
  • Record timing, vote, notice, and retention requirements.

Build a complete state comparison

For each potentially applicable provision, capture entity, applicability, amount, covered people and perils, waiver or exemption, timing, documentation, and ambiguity. Link directly to the official source and record the review date.

Use the current official text, association governing documents, and complete policy or bond wording together. Ask counsel to resolve uncertain applicability.

State-rule comparison checklist

  • Classify the entity and verify statutory applicability.
  • Record the formula exactly, including floor and cap.
  • Capture covered people, perils, exceptions, and waivers.
  • Check effective dates, notices, and record duties.
  • Link the current official source and note unresolved ambiguity.

Sources

Official and institutional sources for this guide:

Next step: Compare jurisdictions

Open official-source summaries organized by jurisdiction.

Compare jurisdictions