Although a homeowners’ association has discretion to decide whether, and in what manner, to enforce the governing documents, this discretion must be exercised consistent with its fiduciary duties and the plain language of the CC&Rs. (Ekstrom v. Marquesa at Monarch Beach Homeowners Assn. (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 1111, 1121-25; Ritter & Ritter, Inc. Pension & Profit Plan v. The Churchill Condominium Association (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 103, 122.)
HOAs “must exercise their authority to approve or disapprove an individual homeowner’s construction or improvement plans in conformity with the declaration of covenants and restrictions” and that they must do so in good faith, consistent with their fiduciary obligations to the homeowners. (Cohen v. Kite Hill Community Assn. (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 642, 650-51; see also Nahrstedt v. Lakeside Village Condominium Assn. (1994) 8 Cal.4th 361, 383.)
When an association seeks to enforce its CC&Rs to compel an act by one of its owners, the association must show that (i) it followed its own standards and procedures prior to pursuing such a remedy, (ii) those procedures were fair and reasonable, (iii) its substantive decision was made in good faith and was reasonable, not arbitrary or capricious.