In article ,
Travis Jordan wrote:
D. Gerasimatos wrote:
Yeah, your property value is rising at twice the rate. Hahaha! You are
hilarious! In a few years your house will be worth 10x as much as an
identical house without an HOA!

Actually, you are the funny guy (and you obviously didn't do well in
math).


I don't know a thing about math!


Our average existing home in our SMSA is increasing at about 15%
annually. Based on recent sales in our community, ours are increasing
at 29% year over year. You can do the math, but there isn't any way
ours will be worth 10x as our neighbors anytime in the near future.
There isn't any way for that to happen, regardless of price.


The point is the same. In 5 years your neighbor's house will double in
price while yours will be worth 3.7x as much (worth almost twice as much)
- all because of an HOA! I'll believe it when I see it!


Dimitri

In article .com,
wrote:

Yeah, well, the man is entitled to live in a quiet neighborhood.
That's why he bought the house in a neighborhood with a HOA. Most
people are aware of the restrictions in the neighborhood before they
move in. If they don't like them, nobody made them live there.
Richard is entitled to peace and quiet in the "totalitarian state" he
lives and you are entitled to all the noise in the world on your hippie
commune. Or wherever you play your out of tune guitar and make noise
until midnight, along with the Garage Singers (and out of Richard's
neighborhood). By the way, I didn't see anything about "no kids" in
any of the posts, or by Richard. But "no noise" and "no bands" I
totally agree with - where I live is often referred to as a "bedroom
community" for a reason. We want it quiet so we can sleep, among other
things. You don't have to live here!


There are HOAs that prevent people with kids from moving in. Kids are
certainly loud and obnoxious. I don't have an HOA, but your idea of what
living in a place without one is like is laughable. If someone is having
a party at 4am we call the police! Do HOAs kill brain cells?


Dimitri

There are HOAs that prevent people with kids from moving in. Kids are
certainly loud and obnoxious. I don't have an HOA, but your idea of what
living in a place without one is like is laughable. If someone is having
a party at 4am we call the police! Do HOAs kill brain cells?


The "Garage Singers" have 11 children between them, ranging in age
from 2 to 19 years old. All of them behave better and are quieter than
their parents!

I sometimes think that kids are blamed too much when the adults are
the real problem.

In article ,
(D. Gerasimatos) wrote:

There are HOAs that prevent people with kids from moving in.

If they have kids, do they have to move out? ;-)

Seriously though, you've come up with a reason to move into an HOA
community!!! Wow, I never thought I'd see the day someone would come up
with a good HOA "restriction"....

ROFL,
Kendall

--
Kendall P. Bullen http://www.his.com/~kendall/
kendall@---^^^^^^^

Never e-mail me copies of Usenet postings, please.
I do read the groups to which I post!

In article ,
richardsfault wrote:

The "Garage Singers" have 11 children between them, ranging in age
from 2 to 19 years old. All of them behave better and are quieter than
their parents!

I sometimes think that kids are blamed too much when the adults are
the real problem.

Your experince sounds like a fluke. I've yet to see nice, quiet kids
with loud, obnoxious parents. I'm not saying it can't happen,
obviously, but that's *SO* the exception....

Kendall

--
Kendall P. Bullen http://www.his.com/~kendall/
kendall@---^^^^^^^

Never e-mail me copies of Usenet postings, please.
I do read the groups to which I post!

In article ,
"Travis Jordan" wrote:

Our average existing home in our SMSA

SMSA???

is increasing at about 15%
annually. Based on recent sales in our community, ours are increasing
at 29% year over year.

Well, you can't generalize to what'll happen next year, and I'm
skeptical of your numbers, but I'm curious as to what part of the
country you live in.

Kendall

--
Kendall P. Bullen http://www.his.com/~kendall/
kendall@---^^^^^^^

Never e-mail me copies of Usenet postings, please.
I do read the groups to which I post!

Kendall P. Bullen wrote:
SMSA???

http://teachmefinance.com/Financial_...ical_Area.html

Well, you can't generalize to what'll happen next year, and I'm
skeptical of your numbers, but I'm curious as to what part of the
country you live in.

Coastal Florida.

D. Gerasimatos wrote:
The point is the same. In 5 years your neighbor's house will double in
price while yours will be worth 3.7x as much (worth almost twice as
much) - all because of an HOA! I'll believe it when I see it!

Without giving you the specific numbers, I will state the facts of
history relatively.

I sold a 2500 sq ft home outside the deed restricted community in 1996
for $100K and moved a few minutes away to my current development,
purchasing a home here for $122K. Neither home has had any significant
improvements, just normal maintenance (new roofs, etc.), nor have there
been any unusual changes to the immediate surrrounding areas.

According to the county tax assessor the Jan 1, 2005 market valuation of
my old home is $144K and the market value of my current home is $255K.
Over the nine year period the average annual appreciation rate for my
old home is 4.7% and the rate for my new home is 9.7%.

I attribute the difference in appreciation to the demand for homes in my
current neighborhood, which is regarded by some as the best place to
live in the city because it is tightly deed restricted and extremely
well maintained. In my old neighborhood there are boats and RV's parked
in people's driveways and on the street (not allowed where I currently
live) and overgrown empty lots (here such lots are mowed by the
asssociation). I could go on with other examples, but either you get
the point or you don't.

In article , Travis Jordan
says...

D. Gerasimatos wrote:
The point is the same. In 5 years your neighbor's house will double in
price while yours will be worth 3.7x as much (worth almost twice as
much) - all because of an HOA! I'll believe it when I see it!

Without giving you the specific numbers, I will state the facts of
history relatively.

I sold a 2500 sq ft home outside the deed restricted community in 1996
for $100K and moved a few minutes away to my current development,
purchasing a home here for $122K. Neither home has had any significant
improvements, just normal maintenance (new roofs, etc.), nor have there
been any unusual changes to the immediate surrrounding areas.

According to the county tax assessor the Jan 1, 2005 market valuation of
my old home is $144K and the market value of my current home is $255K.
Over the nine year period the average annual appreciation rate for my
old home is 4.7% and the rate for my new home is 9.7%.

I attribute the difference in appreciation to the demand for homes in my
current neighborhood, which is regarded by some as the best place to
live in the city because it is tightly deed restricted and extremely
well maintained. In my old neighborhood there are boats and RV's parked
in people's driveways and on the street (not allowed where I currently
live) and overgrown empty lots (here such lots are mowed by the
asssociation). I could go on with other examples, but either you get
the point or you don't.




I could see how this is true in many cases, but this sort of thing really
depends on the details. As in, what was the neighborhood practice where you
came from, exactitudes of the location like road proximity (both good and bad).

Where I am, it's a circle street; there is no HOA or covenant, there are two
boats but they're kept neatly, two properties on the street are a little run
down, being owned by older retirees, but the rest show a lot of TLC. Other
factors have driven the price way up comparatively - mostly, just that they're
moderately priced homes in an increasingly upscale area. But, someone can work
on a car in their driveway or have guests for a week, some folks in the trades
have their work vehicles neatly parked, a couple of us can go a little overboard
at Christmas time, and I'm allowed to have my home painted a love-it-or-hate-it
sandy pink :-)

So it depends on the details, what your expectations are vs. someone else's,
etc. etc etc.

I'd rather *not* have an HOA, but if I lived in an area that tended to get
trashy without HOA's, then I'd go with the HOA and deal. And paint my house
taupe, take down the wind chimes, whatever...

It really isn't an issue to get polarized over.

Banty

In article .com,
says...



D. Gerasimatos wrote:
In article ,
Travis Jordan wrote:

But if you had a deed restriction that prohibited bands from living
there (or making noises that can be heard across their property line, or
consuming beverages outside their home, or whatever) then you would at
least have some power to manage your environment. All the HOA does is
help to uniformly enforce the covenants that everyone has already agreed
to.


This sounds like a totalitarian state. No bands. No kids. No noise. No nothing,
except what you like. If your interests should change, then you are SOL.


Yeah, well, the man is entitled to live in a quiet neighborhood.
That's why he bought the house in a neighborhood with a HOA. Most
people are aware of the restrictions in the neighborhood before they
move in. If they don't like them, nobody made them live there.
Richard is entitled to peace and quiet in the "totalitarian state" he
lives and you are entitled to all the noise in the world on your hippie
commune. Or wherever you play your out of tune guitar and make noise
until midnight, along with the Garage Singers (and out of Richard's
neighborhood). By the way, I didn't see anything about "no kids" in
any of the posts, or by Richard. But "no noise" and "no bands" I
totally agree with - where I live is often referred to as a "bedroom
community" for a reason. We want it quiet so we can sleep, among other
things. You don't have to live here!

I'm with you mostly. Folks who like that will move there, folks who don't by
and large find what they want elsewhere. HOA's aren't evil.

The concerns I have, though, are that one can move in, then get new
restrictions, like against windchimes, or discover that not to remove the
magnetic trade sign from the car door overnight is a Big Sin, that one's garbage
container isn't quite up to snuff even for just one night a week on the curb
although it's quite new and neat, etc. etc. And neighbors start counting pets,
and number of days in a row for overnight guests, etc. etc. Depending on the
dynamic in any particular HOA, it can get yucky. Even for generally quiet and
neat folks.

The other concern is that it can get so locally one's chioces are 1. trashy, 2.
HOA Which isn't really a choice.

Banty

In article , Kendall P. Bullen
says...

In article ,
richardsfault wrote:

The "Garage Singers" have 11 children between them, ranging in age
from 2 to 19 years old. All of them behave better and are quieter than
their parents!

I sometimes think that kids are blamed too much when the adults are
the real problem.

Your experince sounds like a fluke. I've yet to see nice, quiet kids
with loud, obnoxious parents. I'm not saying it can't happen,
obviously, but that's *SO* the exception....

My immediate neighbors who just moved out (yay!) weren't loud, but it was a case
of nice enough kids, rude and intrusive parents (esp. the wife). Dog, property
intrusions (they sent pool party guests across my back lawn to reach another
house one day!), drainage problems for which they needed to be educated as to
their responsibilities, generally rude and unapprochable about any issue. We
don't have an HOA, but they were a pretty good argument as to why one has
ordinary town regulations on such things. (They did listen to the various
involved town officials, thank the diety of your choice.) Their boys never
presented a problem other than being standoffish (which isn't really a problem
by my recogning.)

Cheers,
Banty

Banty wrote:
It really isn't an issue to get polarized over.

Well said.

I guess that is what bothers me - if you don't want to live in a deed
restricted community, then don't. OTOH, if you buy into a deed
restricted community then you should be prepared to comply with the
restrictions. It bamboozles me how some people move into a community
with voluntary restrictions and then proceed to bitch all day about
their lot in life, or worse, say things like "all HOA's are bad and
should be banished".

Have a nice day.

In article , Travis Jordan
says...

Banty wrote:
It really isn't an issue to get polarized over.

Well said.

I guess that is what bothers me - if you don't want to live in a deed
restricted community, then don't. OTOH, if you buy into a deed
restricted community then you should be prepared to comply with the
restrictions. It bamboozles me how some people move into a community
with voluntary restrictions and then proceed to bitch all day about
their lot in life, or worse, say things like "all HOA's are bad and
should be banished".

Have a nice day.



Well, depends again. There are cases where a certain member of my family moved
to a rural-exurban area in Wyoming which had an HOA, then complained of the
"yuppies" who wouldn't let her family have (significantly!) more than the
specified number of horses per property. There are cases where the HOA members
get a little kuntrol-phreaky and new regs come up banning windchimes and such,
and/or depending on which specific neighbors you have, you get eyes on your
back about whether or not your visiting nephew has his car parked in the
driveway for an eighth day vs. the specified week.

I've seen both sides of this one. One reason why I can't get too polarized
about it :-)

Banty

When we were looking for a house about 18 months ago, everything recent
had a homowners' association.

We ended up with a 30-yr old place with only two pages of CC&Rs and no
HOA. People park boats, trucks, and vans with advertising on them in
their driveways or alongside their houses; there are a bunch of outside
TV antennas, at least one amateur radio tower and soon to be another; so
what? Nobody can tell us when or what color to paint our house or how
often to mow our lawn. If anybody causes a disturbance, I'm sure that
the police will take care of it if a complaint is lodged.

Perce


On 05/25/05 11:48 am Travis Jordan tossed the following ingredients into
the ever-growing pot of cybersoup:

I guess that is what bothers me - if you don't want to live in a deed
restricted community, then don't. OTOH, if you buy into a deed
restricted community then you should be prepared to comply with the
restrictions. It bamboozles me how some people move into a community
with voluntary restrictions and then proceed to bitch all day about
their lot in life, or worse, say things like "all HOA's are bad and
should be banished".

Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
We ended up with a 30-yr old place with only two pages of CC&Rs and no
HOA. People park boats, trucks, and vans with advertising on them in

Do I take it from this that the CC&Rs have restrictions against
commercial vehicles, antennas, etc. but that they just aren't enforced?

On 05/25/05 01:47 pm Travis Jordan tossed the following ingredients into
the ever-growing pot of cybersoup:

We ended up with a 30-yr old place with only two pages of CC&Rs and no
HOA. People park boats, trucks, and vans with advertising on them in

Do I take it from this that the CC&Rs have restrictions against
commercial vehicles, antennas, etc. but that they just aren't enforced?

No, the CC&Rs were brief enough not to hinder the normal activities of
everyday living and AFAIR did not prohibit any of the things I described
-- and that is fine with me.

But if those things *had* been prohibited by the CC&Rs, who -- in the
absence of a HOA -- would enforce the prohibitions?

Perce

Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
But if those things *had* been prohibited by the CC&Rs, who -- in the
absence of a HOA -- would enforce the prohibitions?

That's the problem with an inactive HOA. And once the HOA goes inactive
and fails to enforce the CC&R, then in most states it will be difficult
to enforce the restrictions going forward.

In article ,
Mark wrote:

On Tue, 24 May 2005 11:14:51 -0700, Robert Morien
wrote:

In article ,
Mark wrote:

On Sat, 21 May 2005 20:57:32 -0700, Robert Morien
wrote:


1) a proper sig is started by two dashes followed by a space and a return

You're more of an asshole than his loud neighbors with this repetitive
parrot ****.

Take your net-cop badge and shove it.

You wouldn't recognise a great idea

....bla bla bla.

Thanks for confirming I hit a nerve by calling you on your self-righteous
horse ****.

Now, shut your hole.

-------------

Sig for Bobbie to try and net-police.

Even an ignorant sod like you should be able to do better than that.

But then again I could be totally over-estimating your abilities.

On 05/25/05 02:33 pm Travis Jordan tossed the following ingredients into
the ever-growing pot of cybersoup:

But if those things *had* been prohibited by the CC&Rs, who -- in the
absence of a HOA -- would enforce the prohibitions?

That's the problem with an inactive HOA. And once the HOA goes inactive
and fails to enforce the CC&R, then in most states it will be difficult
to enforce the restrictions going forward.

In this case there may never have been a HOA: the CC&Rs did not provide
for one.

Perce

Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
In this case there may never have been a HOA: the CC&Rs did not
provide for one.

That would indeed defang any possible restrictions.

Fortunately our HOA is very benign, but also very active. We have
excellent cooperation and support from the residents. AFAICR, there has
only been one difficult situation in the last decade - a homeowner who
chose to ignore a rule about short term rentals (not allowed) and
started to rent their house out by the week during the winter season.
It took a 'lawyer letter' to get that stopped. Fortunately, we have two
lawyers on the board grin.

In article , Travis Jordan
says...

Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
In this case there may never have been a HOA: the CC&Rs did not
provide for one.

That would indeed defang any possible restrictions.

Fortunately our HOA is very benign, but also very active. We have
excellent cooperation and support from the residents. AFAICR, there has
only been one difficult situation in the last decade - a homeowner who
chose to ignore a rule about short term rentals (not allowed) and
started to rent their house out by the week during the winter season.
It took a 'lawyer letter' to get that stopped. Fortunately, we have two
lawyers on the board grin.



Uh - the HOA isn't very benign from the POV of the homeowner who wanted to do
the rentals...

Not that it's a bad rule (or that it's good, either, dunno the situation). And
not to defend someone for going against something if he agreed to it moving in.

But it's still worthwhile to consider exactly what's meant by "benign".

Banty

Banty wrote:
But it's still worthwhile to consider exactly what's meant by
"benign".

All in the eye of the beholder I suppose.

Good discussion, thanks for participating!

In article ,
"Travis Jordan" wrote:

http://teachmefinance.com/Financial_...ical_Area.html
....
Coastal Florida.

Thanks and thanks!

Kendall

--
Kendall P. Bullen http://www.his.com/~kendall/
kendall@---^^^^^^^

Never e-mail me copies of Usenet postings, please.
I do read the groups to which I post!