Selective enforcement is the argument that an association can't pick and choose who has to follow a rule: fine you for a satellite dish, a pet, or a parked car while letting the same thing slide two units down, and the fine itself becomes suspect, independent of whether you actually broke the rule. Massachusetts doesn't have a section of chapter 183A titled "selective enforcement," but the statute's own structure supports the argument. Section 10(b)(5) only authorizes the organization to levy fines for violations of the master deed, bylaws, restrictions, rules, or regulations, and § 11(e) requires bylaw restrictions on unit and common-area use to be designed to prevent unreasonable interference between owners. An association that enforces a restriction against you while knowingly tolerating identical conduct elsewhere in the building is straining both of those anchors: it's hard to call selective enforcement either a genuine application of an adopted rule or something aimed at preventing interference, when the interference, if there is any, is being tolerated everywhere except your unit.
Massachusetts courts, like courts in most states, have long recognized equitable defenses to the enforcement of restrictive covenants and condominium rules, including waiver and estoppel, when an association lets violations slide broadly or singles out one owner while ignoring the same conduct elsewhere. None of that erases the underlying restriction. It's a defense to enforcement of it against you specifically, and like any equitable defense, it lives or dies on documentation, not on how unfair the situation feels.
Your records right is the tool that proves the pattern
This is where the § 10(c) records right stops being abstract and becomes genuinely useful. The minute book the organization must maintain, and make available to owners by email on request, can show whether other violations were raised at board meetings and quietly dropped. The financial records the organization must keep current, including anything reflecting fines actually assessed, can show whether enforcement has landed unevenly across units. Request both before your hearing or appeal, not after; a documented pattern is worth far more than your own account of what you've noticed around the building.
The authority
The statutes behind this
Cited by name as authority, for your own reading. Informational only, not legal advice.
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 183A, § 10(b)(5)
Ties the organization's fining power to actual violations of the master deed, bylaws, restrictions, rules, or regulations, the framework uneven enforcement strains.
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 183A, § 11(e)
Requires bylaw restrictions to be designed to prevent unreasonable interference, a standard that's hard to square with tolerating the same conduct elsewhere in the building.
Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 183A, § 10(c)
Gives owners the records access, minutes and financial records, needed to document a pattern of inconsistent enforcement.
Step by step
How to document and raise selective enforcement in a Massachusetts condo
Build the evidentiary record that supports a selective-enforcement or waiver defense to a Massachusetts condo fine.
- 01
Identify the exact restriction and its source
Confirm which clause of the master deed or which adopted bylaw the association says you violated, under § 10(b)(5). Selective enforcement is restriction-specific; you need to know precisely what's being applied unevenly.
- 02
Photograph and date comparable violations
Document other units with the same condition that were never cited. Note unit numbers or addresses, not the names of the owners living there, and date-stamp everything.
- 03
Request the minute book and financial records
Use your § 10(c) inspection right to ask for the minutes and financial records. Minutes can show whether other violations were discussed and dropped; financial records can show whether fines only ever landed on certain units.
- 04
Raise the pattern before the fine becomes final
Present your comparables in writing to the board before or during whatever appeal your bylaws provide, since chapter 183A itself doesn't guarantee you a state-mandated hearing to fall back on.
- 05
Preserve everything in case the fine turns into a lien
If the board won't budge, your documented pattern becomes the raw material for a waiver or selective-enforcement defense if the fine is later folded into a lien under § 6(a) and the association moves to enforce it.
Straight answers
Common questions
Is selective enforcement a real defense in a Massachusetts condo?
It can be. Massachusetts courts recognize equitable defenses like waiver and estoppel when an association applies a restriction unevenly, and chapter 183A's own structure, fines tied to actual violations under § 10(b)(5) and restrictions required to prevent unreasonable interference under § 11(e), reinforces that arbitrary or uneven enforcement sits outside what the statute authorizes.
What's the difference between waiver and selective enforcement?
Waiver argues the association let a restriction lapse so broadly across the building that it can no longer enforce it at all. Selective enforcement is narrower: the rule may still be alive, but singling you out while ignoring the same conduct elsewhere is inequitable. They often come up together in the same dispute.
What evidence do I actually need?
Dated photos of comparable, uncited violations, and the association's own minute book and financial records under § 10(c) if they show a pattern of inconsistent citations or fines. A documented pattern carries the argument, not a single example.
Should I name the neighbors who weren't cited?
No. Document the units or addresses involved, not the individuals living there. Keep the focus on the association's own inconsistent enforcement, not on your neighbors.