Selective enforcement is the argument that an association can't pick and choose who has to follow a rule: fine you for a fence or a parked trailer while ignoring the identical thing three lots down. Michigan doesn't have a section labeled selective enforcement, but the Condominium Act supplies real hooks for condo owners. MCL § 559.206 frames the fine remedy as running "after notice and hearing," a structure that sits uneasily with an association that enforces a rule against one owner while knowingly letting the same violation slide elsewhere. And MCL § 559.207 gives a co-owner an affirmative right to sue the association and its officers and directors to compel them to enforce the condo documents, the mirror image of a selective-enforcement claim: if the association can be forced to enforce evenly, uneven enforcement is itself the problem.
MCL § 559.215 backs this up further, letting anyone "adversely affected by a violation of or failure to comply with this act, rules promulgated under this act, or any provision of an agreement or a master deed" bring an action in court, with costs available to the prevailing party. Michigan courts, like courts in most states, also recognize equitable defenses to covenant enforcement, including waiver and inconsistent application, when an association lets a restriction lapse broadly or singles out one owner. Your case rises or falls on documentation either way.
Building the record with what the statute actually gives you
For condo owners, MCL § 559.157's inspection right is your practical tool: pull the association's books, records, and financial statements to see whether fines and enforcement actions landed only on certain units. Subdivision HOA owners don't have that same statutory lever, MCL § 450.2485's general corporate recordkeeping duty is thinner and doesn't guarantee the same kind of enforcement-pattern access, so lean harder on whatever your declaration's own inspection clause allows, plus dated, direct documentation of the pattern itself.
The authority
The statutes behind this
Cited by name as authority, for your own reading. Informational only, not legal advice.
MCL 559.206
Frames the condo fine remedy as running after notice and a hearing, a structure inconsistent, targeted enforcement cuts against.
MCL 559.207
Lets a co-owner sue the association and its officers or directors to compel enforcement of the condo documents, the flip side of a selective-enforcement claim.
MCL 559.157
Gives condo owners the records access needed to pull the association's enforcement and financial history and document a pattern.
Step by step
How to document and raise selective enforcement in Michigan
Build the evidentiary record that supports a selective-enforcement or waiver argument against a Michigan condo or HOA fine.
- 01
Identify the exact rule and where it comes from
Pin down the specific condo document or covenant provision the board says you violated. Selective enforcement is rule-specific, not a general complaint about fairness.
- 02
Photograph and date comparable violations
Document other units or lots with the same condition that were never cited. Note addresses or unit numbers, not the names of the people living there.
- 03
Pull the association's own records
Condo owners: use MCL § 559.157 to request books, records, and financial statements to see whether fines and citations landed unevenly. Subdivision HOA owners: request whatever your declaration's own inspection clause allows.
- 04
Raise it at the hearing before it becomes final
Present your comparables at whatever notice-and-hearing process MCL § 559.206 gives you, or your declaration's own review process, and ask that the inconsistency be recorded in the minutes.
- 05
Preserve it, and consider compelling even enforcement
If the fine stands, your documented pattern supports a court challenge under MCL § 559.215. Condo owners can also consider whether MCL § 559.207's right to compel enforcement cuts in their favor if the association is ignoring identical violations elsewhere.
Straight answers
Common questions
Is selective enforcement a real defense in Michigan?
It can be. Michigan doesn't have a statute named selective enforcement, but courts generally recognize equitable defenses like waiver and inconsistent application, and the Condominium Act's notice-and-hearing framing (MCL § 559.206) and its right to compel enforcement (MCL § 559.207) both cut against an association that picks and chooses who has to comply.
Can I sue to make my condo association enforce a rule against my neighbor too?
Possibly. MCL § 559.207 lets a co-owner sue the association and its officers or directors to compel them to enforce the condo documents, which can work in your favor if the association is knowingly ignoring identical violations elsewhere.
What evidence do I actually need?
Dated photos of comparable, uncited violations, plus, for condo owners, the association's own books and financial records under MCL § 559.157 if they show a pattern of uneven fines or citations. A pattern carries the argument, not one example.
Does this work the same way for a subdivision HOA that isn't a condo?
Not as cleanly. Michigan's Nonprofit Corporation Act doesn't address enforcement at all, so a subdivision HOA owner's selective-enforcement argument rests on general contract and equity principles and the declaration's own terms, not a records or compel-enforcement statute like condo owners have.