Michigan Condo Resale Disclosure Calculator — 10-Business-Day Records Access + Practical Custom (MCL Sec. 559.192)

How this calculator works

This is a Michigan condominium resale-package timeline and fee-reasonableness analyzer. Michigan does not have a UCIOA-style statutory resale-certificate regime, so the calculator models the practical Michigan framework: the MCL 559.192(3) co-owner records-access right plus the customary 7- to 10-day delivery clause in standard Michigan purchase agreements.

Given the purchase-contract date, the seller's resale-package request date, and the fee the association charges, it returns:

1. The statutory records-access deadline — request date plus 10 business days under MCL 559.192(3).
2. Two practical-delivery targets — request date plus 7 calendar days and request date plus 10 calendar days, reflecting common Michigan purchase-agreement document-delivery clauses.
3. The contract-to-request interval, which highlights late-request scenarios where the package will not arrive before the buyer's contractual review window.
4. A reasonableness assessment of the fee against typical Michigan ranges (150 to 400 dollars standard, with rush surcharges of 50 to 150 dollars) and the 500-dollar threshold at which Michigan small-claims and circuit-court challenges have arisen.
5. The records-access scope under MCL 559.192(3) — the document categories the seller can access as a co-owner, which typically defines the resale-package contents.

Use the calculator when submitting the resale-package request, when reviewing the association's invoice, when coordinating with the closing officer on the document-delivery clause, and when documenting a records-access dispute.

The two clocks run differently. The statutory deadline is business days — Monday through Friday, excluding federal holidays. The practical deadlines are calendar days. A request made on a Friday produces a statutory deadline roughly 14 calendar days out and practical deadlines 7 and 10 calendar days out; confirm which clock the specific purchase agreement uses.

The relevant statute / framework

Michigan resale practice sits on two legs: a statutory records-access right that supports the package preparation, and a contractual delivery clause that governs the closing timeline.

MCL 559.192(3) — The Michigan Condominium Act records-access right. Requires the association to make its books, records, contracts, and financial statements available for inspection by a co-owner within 10 business days of a written request. Applies to all co-owners, including selling co-owners. The statutory hook that supports resale-package preparation in the absence of a UCIOA-style regime.

MCL 559.193 — The Michigan Condominium Act board fiduciary duty in records maintenance. Reinforces the records-access framework and supplies the attorney-fee remedy for willful refusal to honor a records request.

MCL 559.101 et seq. — The Michigan Condominium Act generally. Does NOT include a resale-certificate provision analogous to UCIOA section 4-109 (Washington RCW 64.34.425 / 64.90.640; Connecticut CGS 47-270; Colorado CRS 38-33.3-316). This absence is the central feature of Michigan resale practice.

Standard Michigan purchase-agreement custom — Most Michigan residential purchase agreements (the Realtors of the East Central form and analogous regional forms) include a condo-document delivery clause that conditions the buyer's closing obligation on receipt of association documents within a contractually-specified window, typically 7 to 10 calendar days from the contract date.

Key thresholds and gotchas

There is no Michigan statutory resale-disclosure regime. Practitioners moving from a UCIOA state (Washington, Connecticut, Colorado) often expect a 10- or 14-day statutory clock with a specified content list and a binding buyer-reliance protection. Michigan has none of that. The package contents, the turnaround, and the post-closing liability framework are governed by the bylaws, the purchase agreement, and the implied reasonableness standard rather than by statute.

The 10-day MCL 559.192(3) window is BUSINESS days. Roughly 14 calendar days when the period spans no holidays, longer if a holiday falls in the period. The 7- and 10-day purchase-agreement custom windows are CALENDAR days. The two timelines produce different end dates; confirm which clock controls the specific transaction.

No statutory fee cap; the implied standard is reasonableness. Typical Michigan ranges run 150 to 400 dollars for a standard preparation with rush surcharges of 50 to 150 dollars. Fees in that band are virtually never challenged. The 400- to 500-dollar band is defensible if the package includes enhanced content (full reserve study, recent audit, multi-year board minutes). Fees at or above 500 dollars have been challenged as unreasonable in Michigan small-claims and circuit court. Boards should adopt a written fee schedule and apply it uniformly to avoid pricing-discrimination claims.

The package is a SNAPSHOT as of preparation date. There is no statutory update obligation. Best practice is to date-stamp the package and include a disclaimer that material changes occurring after preparation are not reflected. Some Michigan purchase agreements expressly require an update if more than 30 days pass between package delivery and closing — confirm the contract terms.

Refusal to prepare the package is not an option. The MCL 559.192(3) records-access right is mandatory on a written request from a co-owner. Refusal exposes the association to a records-access action and attorney-fee liability under MCL 559.193. Some bylaws purport to authorize withholding pending payment of the seller's delinquency; Michigan courts have generally refused to enforce such withholding to the extent it conflicts with the statutory records-access right. Better practice is to deliver the package and disclose the unpaid-assessment ledger fully — the buyer's lender will require payoff at closing.

Late delivery can kill the sale. Even though there is no statutory penalty for late resale-package delivery as such, the contract-termination risk under the document-delivery clause is substantial. A buyer who does not receive the documents within the contract window may terminate without penalty. Boards should assign a manager or director to confirm the deadline on every request.

What this calculator does NOT model

This calculator implements the MCL 559.192(3) records-access timing and the practical purchase-agreement custom for resale-package delivery. It does NOT:

• Apply a UCIOA-style statutory resale-certificate framework — Michigan does not have one.
• Validate the substantive accuracy or completeness of any delivered package.
• Identify undisclosed material issues in the association's records.
• Compute the buyer's contractual document-review contingency period.
• Model bylaw-specific content requirements above the records-access scope.
• Compute estoppel payoff or unpaid-assessment payoff for the closing settlement statement.
• Model damages from late delivery or from a buyer's termination under the document-delivery clause.
• Model federal or Michigan state holiday observance in the business-day count.
• Model the records-access remedy or attorney-fee recovery under MCL 559.193.

For any Michigan condo closing, retain Michigan counsel to coordinate the package delivery with the purchase-agreement timeline and to review the package on the buyer's behalf.

Sources

Last reviewed: 2026-05-16 against:

• MCL 559.192(3) (Michigan Condominium Act records-access right; 10 business days from a co-owner's written request).
• MCL 559.193 (board fiduciary duty in records maintenance; attorney-fee remedy for willful refusal).
• MCL 559.101 et seq. (Michigan Condominium Act generally; confirms the absence of any statutory resale-certificate provision).
• Realtors of the East Central and analogous Michigan regional purchase-agreement forms with condo-document delivery clauses.
• State Bar of Michigan Real Property Law Section materials on condo resale practice.
• Comparison to UCIOA section 4-109 (Washington RCW 64.34.425 / 64.90.640; Connecticut CGS 47-270; Colorado CRS 38-33.3-316).
• Michigan small-claims and circuit-court decisions on resale-package fee reasonableness.