Osowski Law Office LLC

"I sued Cordova Square HOA. Pam Snow is the property manager and Shane Osowski is the lawyer representing them. The HOA ended up paying me about $18,000 and they spent over $59,000 in legal fees. Here’s what the Judge said: “The ongoing breach allowed 47 unit owners to receive new windows between 2013-2019 at a small fraction of the actual cost; illegally paid for with HOA dues collected from all 141 unit owners.“ “[T]he HOA argues that it informed the unit owners that the project had been canceled at the November 12, 2019 Homeowners Annual Meeting. The Court disagrees. The Court finds that the meeting minutes indicate that the Board was going to address the project at a later time. Further, the minutes from the Board of Directors Meeting held later that evening make no mention of the project being discussed. More significantly, the December 30, 2019 Board memo to the unit owners regarding the special assessment, indicated that the window project was ongoing, and that it would be paid out of regular HOA dues. Specifically, it stated: "The Special Assessment is the lowest amount we could come up with that pays for the most pressing expenses while still requiring very careful budgeting for "normal" revenue from dues to fund daily operations and maintenance plus other big ongoing projects like window replacement." “[Pam] Snow testified that the Board intentionally put this language in the note, despite informing the owners otherwise at the annual meeting. She acknowledged that after reading the note, an owner would be safe to assume that the window project was ongoing. She went on to say that it would be unfair for a unit owner to be told by the Board that they were going to get their windows replaced, if the project had been cancelled. The Court finds that even if the Board intended to cancel the project, the opposite was communicated …” “Thus, their statements were made either to mislead him, or were simply lies; either of which constituted a breach of their statutory obligations to the association and fiduciary duty.” “The Court finds that the totality of the evidence shows that the Board breached its ongoing contractual obligations … by initiating and implementing the window replacement project; allowing the installations to be paid for with HOA dues until 2019; holding out to the unit owners that the project would continue, and be paid for with HOA dues; and collecting those dues for another three years before telling the unit owners that the project was illegal, despite receiving legal advice in 2019 that it was illegal. In making this finding, the Court finds the HOA's argument that the "former Board" misunderstood the Declarations is not believable.” “[I]t misrepresented to … others that the project was ongoing; continued to collect dues partially based on this misrepresentation; and spent the money elsewhere.” “[Pam] Snow was asked, for instance, why Ken Hudson, a Board member, who had sheet rock damage due to roof leaks, had the repairs paid for by the HOA. She responded that it was because he requested that the HOA make payment. She acknowledged that the Declarations stated unit owners were responsible for damage repairs inside their own units.” “Based on the Board’s ongoing violations of the Declarations for ten years; evidence of the HOA’s apparent practice of improperly paying repair invoices for some unit owners through 2021; and [Pam] Snow’s discovery of “years, and years, and years” of apparent financial improprieties; the Court will not presume that these HOA dues were spent on other legitimate HOA expenses.” “The HOA argues that the current Board and unit owners should not be financially punished for the former Board's actions. This argument incorrectly assumes that the "present Board" is a distinct entity which is not responsible for the actions of the "former Board." The Court disagrees. The HOA Board is an ongoing entity established by the Declarations, which owes a continuing fiduciary duty to unit owners; regardless of changing makeup of the individuals serving on it over the years.”"

"At the recommendation of a trusted and well-respected real estate professional in town, I reached out to Shane regarding a complicated transaction. I ended up emailing him a summary of the situation and within a couple of business days, he replied with a very well-reasoned assessment of the matter. He clearly laid out where he found flaws in my own argument and went into clear detail with his honest appraisal of the situation. I really appreciated his frank candor and the strength of his arguments. He seemed very ethical and clearly outlined the limits of the feedback he was providing -- and all of this was just a free consultation that he provided to a complete stranger. I was definitely impressed by him and would be comfortable both referring friends to him and approaching him again in the future, if I have a situation that requires legal advice. All this to say, I think it's fair and reasonable to disregard a lot of the negative reviews of this man and his business. I can't help but think they're either spam or were posted by aggrieved renters or someone else unhappy with their own situation. Between the good reputation that he seems to enjoy with actual, respected professionals; the quality of his assessment of my situation; and the tremendous work ethic he demonstrated through the thoroughness of his response to my questions, I think he's more than proven his value."

"This man is an awful attorney. Good luck getting a hold of his office and if you are lucky to get through be prepared for his snooty attitude and lack of help. Do not leave a voicemail, he will not return your call then claim he never got the message. If you saw the piles of case laying all over his office you'd be shocked. I worry about my privacy and no wonder he can't find anything. It's all about lining his pocket, not protecting yours. Run as fast as you can to another attorney. None can possibly be this bad."

"Called there office to pay a bill and would not accept a payment for late fees for my condo association, specifically for lawyer fees. I didn’t get a straight answer why law offices were even nessecary when I paid my association dues, I feel like I’m being ripped off with out anyone sticking a gun in my face. I think this law office is practicing strong armed robbery, who protects American citizens from dirty law offices like this one? Anyone know?"

"I would give him one star if I could. He is a disguising individual and he is TERRIBLE. Do no hire him and do not work with him. He does NOT answer phone calls when a client is trying to call for information about a contract or a payment. He will gouge defendants to the point were he could legally get in trouble. He is a snake and a slum lord and I pray no one EVER has to be involved with him on either side."