Neither the Uniform Condominium Act nor the Uniform Planned Community Act has a section titled 'selective enforcement,' and this guide isn't going to invent one. But the argument still has statutory footing. Section 3302(a)(11) (condo) and § 5302(a)(11) (planned community) only let the board fine 'violations of the declaration, bylaws and rules and regulations' after notice and a hearing, which frames enforcement as something that is supposed to be rule-based and even-handed, not arbitrary. A board that cites you for a parked trailer, a fence, or a rental while knowingly leaving identical conduct alone next door is straining against that framework, even if no single sentence in the statute uses the word 'selective.'
Pennsylvania courts, like most states, also recognize equitable defenses to covenant enforcement, including waiver and inconsistent enforcement, when an association applies a restriction unevenly over time. None of that is legal advice about how your specific case will come out; it's a description of the kind of argument available. What actually decides these disputes is documentation.
Use your records right to build the pattern
This is where the records guide connects directly to enforcement. Condo owners can use § 3316 to request the association's own violation and enforcement history, comparing it against your citation. If the board stonewalls that request, § 3103's cross-reference to the Bureau of Consumer Protection gives condo owners a named regulator to escalate a records dispute to, which doubles as leverage in an enforcement fight. Planned community owners don't have as clean a records-statute citation to point to, but can still request the association's financial and disclosure documents under § 5407 and press, in writing, for the enforcement history directly.
The authority
The statutes behind this
Cited by name as authority, for your own reading. Informational only, not legal advice.
68 Pa.C.S. § 3302
Ties condo fines to notice, a hearing, and an actual violation of the declaration, bylaws, or rules, the framework arbitrary or inconsistent enforcement cuts against.
68 Pa.C.S. § 5302
The planned community (HOA) mirror of § 3302's notice-and-hearing fine framework.
68 Pa.C.S. § 3316
The condo records-access right you can use to pull the association's enforcement and violation history and document a pattern.
Step by step
How to document and assert selective enforcement in Pennsylvania
Build the evidentiary record that supports a selective-enforcement or inconsistent-enforcement argument against a Pennsylvania condo or HOA fine.
- 01
Identify the exact rule
Pin down the specific declaration or bylaw provision the association says you violated. A selective-enforcement argument only works against a real, identified rule.
- 02
Photograph comparable violations
Document other properties with the same violation that haven't been cited. Date-stamp the photos and note addresses or lot numbers, not owner names.
- 03
Pull the association's enforcement records
Condo owners: request the violation and enforcement history under § 3316. Planned community owners: request the same history in writing, and use the § 5407 document channel for the financial and disclosure side of the picture.
- 04
Raise it at your § 3302 / § 5302 hearing
Present the comparables and any enforcement history at the hearing the fine statute requires, and ask that the inconsistency be recorded in the minutes.
- 05
Escalate a stonewalled request
If a condo board won't produce its own enforcement records, the Bureau of Consumer Protection complaint path referenced in § 3103 is available for records disputes. Keep everything dated either way, for the board, for the regulator, or for counsel.
Straight answers
Common questions
Is selective enforcement a real defense to an HOA or condo fine in Pennsylvania?
It's an equitable argument, not a named statutory defense. It draws structure from § 3302(a)(11) / § 5302(a)(11), which ties any fine to notice, a hearing, and an actual rule violation, a framework that arbitrary or uneven enforcement conflicts with.
What evidence do I need?
Dated photos of comparable, uncited violations and the association's own enforcement history. Condo owners can pull that history using the § 3316 records right. Patterns, not a single example, carry the argument.
Should I name the neighbors who weren't cited?
You generally don't need to. Addresses or lot numbers establish the comparison. Keep the focus on the association's enforcement pattern, not on identifying individual neighbors.
What if the board won't hand over its enforcement records?
For condo owners, a stonewalled § 3316 request over records ties directly into the Bureau of Consumer Protection complaint path named in § 3103. Document the request and non-response either way, since that timeline is itself part of your case.