A Delaware homeowner representing herself won part of a default judgment against her community’s developer; the court ordered pond and ditch maintenance and disclosure of records behind an alleged $44,329.59 HOA loan

Representative Image (AI-generated)

A Delaware homeowner who represented herself in court has secured part of the relief she sought from her community’s developer, but not everything she asked for. The court ordered the developer to address maintenance problems involving ponds and ditches and provide information and documents concerning an alleged $44,329.59 loan involving the homeowners association. According to an October 5, 2026 order from the Delaware Court of Chancery, the ruling came after the developer failed to defend the case, leading to a partial default judgment. The court’s order, in Colston v. The Greens at Wyoming Homeowners Association, Inc., also rejected some of the homeowner’s other requests, including certain books-and-records claims.

Homeowner took the case to court herself

The dispute involved Gwendolyn Colston, a homeowner in The Greens at Wyoming community in Delaware, and the community’s homeowners association (HOA) and developer. Colston represented herself in the litigation, meaning she proceeded without an attorney. Her lawsuit raised several issues involving the community, its homeowners association and the developer, including the condition and maintenance of ponds and drainage ditches. She also sought information concerning a $44,329.59 loan that she alleged was connected to the HOA.According to the Delaware Court of Chancery’s October 5 order, the developer failed to appear, plead or otherwise defend the case, leading Colston to seek a default judgment. A default judgment does not automatically mean every allegation made by a plaintiff is accepted or that every remedy requested must be granted. The court still has to determine what relief is legally available based on the claims and evidence before it.

Court orders pond and ditch maintenance

One of the main areas where Colston obtained relief concerned the community’s ponds and ditches. The court found that the applicable Delaware environmental provisions supported injunctive relief requiring maintenance. As a result, the developer was ordered to take steps concerning the maintenance of the community’s ponds and ditches.The order is significant because Colston had sought action over conditions affecting drainage and water-management features within the development. Rather than awarding her money for those claims, the court directed the appropriate maintenance-related relief. The distinction matters. The court specifically explained that the statutory provisions at issue allowed for injunctive relief but did not provide a private right of action for monetary damages. Therefore, Colston could obtain an order requiring action, but she could not use those provisions to secure a financial award for the alleged violations.

Dispute over the $44,329.59 HOA loan

Another part of the case focused on an alleged loan of $44,329.59. Colston sought information and documents relating to the loan, including records that could help explain the transaction and its connection to the homeowners association. The court granted relief requiring the developer to confirm whether it had taken out such a loan and, if so, provide information and documents concerning it. That gives Colston a way to obtain records that she said were relevant to understanding the HOA’s financial dealings.The loan issue was separate from the court’s ruling on the broader books-and-records claim. The court did not simply order the defendants to turn over every HOA record requested by Colston.

Not every claim was successful

Although Colston won important portions of the case, the ruling was not a complete victory. The court rejected her books-and-records claim because it was directed against the wrong party and did not meet the requirements under Delaware law. That means the default judgment did not give Colston everything she had sought in the lawsuit.The court’s approach also illustrates the limits of a default judgment. Even when a defendant fails to contest a case, the plaintiff still has to establish a legal basis for the particular remedy being requested.

What the ruling means for the community

For residents of The Greens at Wyoming, the order addresses practical issues involving the development’s infrastructure as well as questions surrounding an alleged HOA loan. The pond and ditch provisions could require the developer to take action to keep those features properly maintained. Meanwhile, the disclosure concerning the $44,329.59 loan could provide additional information about the financial transaction at the centre of that part of the dispute. The case also highlights how a homeowner representing herself can pursue claims in the Delaware Court of Chancery, while showing that success on one part of a lawsuit does not necessarily extend to every claim or remedy.The October 5 order therefore leaves Colston with a mixed result: she obtained court-ordered relief concerning pond and ditch maintenance and secured disclosure tied to the alleged $44,329.59 loan, but the court declined other requests. The ruling came from the Delaware Court of Chancery, which handled the dispute and determined the scope of relief available under the claims before it.