wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 08:53:59 -0500, Norminn
wrote:

One thing that associations CAN do is require the units to be owner
occupied.

I've got no problem with that. One of the main reasons we moved last summer
was than the 2BR house next to our old place sold and the new owner finished
the upstairs and put 2BR's in the basement and was suddenly renting out a
5BR house. Talk about putting 10 pounds of **** in a 5 pound bag.

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 16:15:41 -0500, wrote:


Up until a few years ago it was illegal to park a "commercial vehicle"
forward of the building line anywhere on a residential property in
Kitchener Ontario.

However, that bylaw got changed when it was proven unenforceable.
What constitutes a "commercial vehicle"? In years past ALL pickup
trucks were required to have the owner's name on them in Ontario. They
were all registered as commercial vehicles. Now names are no longer
required and they can be registered for personal use.

Wow. You should check out Texas, where all kinds of people drive
pickups, many for no apparent reason.

I live in a middle income townhouse n'hood. By now, it may be lower
middle income. But one guy drove a van, a panel truck, with his
company's name and phone number on the two front doors. And some of
the n'bors didn't like it. Did they have jobs any better than his?

He was a surveyor. A real one, not a surveyor's helper. Doesn't that
take quite a bit of training, and pay pretty well?

I finally solved the problem, at the HOA meeting. I suggested he get
a plain white -- his truck was white -- magnetic sheet, and cover the
writing on the doors when he got home at night. It was so stupid. I
wanted to tell the complainers how stupid I thought it was, but hey, I
have to live near these people.

Still not supposed to park a moving van. tow-truck, livestock
carrier, etc in front of the house, but vans, pickups, and SUVs are
now allowed.

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
"[FLORIDA] The board of directors representing The Eagles, a deed
restricted community in Odessa, was trying to keep A.J. Vizzi from parking
his Ford pickup truck in his home's driveway. HOA rules state all trucks
must be parked in a garage."

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/most...9&provider=top
Odd,
I followed your link and then followed the link to read the full decision by
the Judge.

My reading of the decision was pretty much different from your first link's
reporting. The result of the decision may be the same, but there were sure
a lot of other side issues. My hat is off to the judge who sorted out all
side issues and came up with a fair and just decision.

From my reading of the decision: a contract approved by both sides is
binding. Changing the contract later without the approval of both sides is
a big No-No. HOA are not legal Government entities, HOA's exist as
contracts between homeowner and the association. Enforcement of a contract
must follow specific guidelines and procedural steps. Ignore the procedure
steps to enforce compliance is also a No-No. Stepping over the line between
being one party of a contract and perceiving the HOA is a government entity
will result in nasty fines or court costs.

By the way, as the Judge pointed out, a SUV, and a Mini-Van are also
"Trucks" by the manufactures for Federal safety regulations reasons, and
thus the law regards SUV and Mini-Vans as trucks also. The HOA was
selective in their enforcement.

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 08:46:46 -0500, Norminn
wrote:

Nate Nagel wrote:

SteveB wrote:

Nevada has such a law.

Now, a new subdivision or condo bunch may not be built without the
builder forming a HOA, and then turning it over to members.


Meh? Did you mean that in the whole state of Nevada, a developer HAS
to form a HOA? Or was that referring to the previous paragraph?

(sounds like a good argument for buying your own lot and hiring your
own contractor)

nate


There was recently a news story in Florida about a family that purchased
a home in new subdivision. The
developer went broke, few homes were built, but as I understand it the
association is still responsible for
maintenance.....mowing lots, etc. Lots were overgrown and IRRC the gist
of the story was that the family
had safety issues with the condition of the neighborhod........animals,
loitering, etc.

I hate it when animals loiter.

The articles of incorporation of our HOA said, perhaps required by
law, that the home owners wouldn't take over responsibility until
somethin glike 75 percent of the hosues were sold. Until then it was
the developers responsibility. Of course if he goes broke, it doesn't
really matter that it's his responsibility!

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 07:42:34 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

"[FLORIDA] The board of directors representing The Eagles, a deed restricted
community in Odessa, was trying to keep A.J. Vizzi from parking his Ford
pickup truck in his home's driveway. HOA rules state all trucks must be
parked in a garage."

Judge renders declaratory judgment in favor of truck owner, says HOA is
insane and must pay about $100,000 in legal fees. Take drug test.

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/most...9&provider=top



When house shopping I found a single (unatttached) house that fit my
needs and more. But when I inquired about the pond in the backyard
property, I was told that the entire community can use the pond. I
guess the backyard is not private at all! I got a 14 page summary of
HOA rules. After thinking about this, I decided that HOAs can be a
very bad thing for a home owner. And then it makes it can be more
difficult to sell (if and) when that time arrives.

On Dec 17, 7:40*pm, "Sanity" wrote:
He only has a case if the docs and bylaws were not presented to him. And I
guaranty he signed that he received and reviewed them before closing.

It's not unusual in a new development for HOA agreements to only be
partially complete when the first homes are sold. They add the rules
after the fact.

Unfortunately, you sign a document that says, "and any other rules
that this HOA may deem appropriate in the future" or some such
boilerplate.

"Phil-In-Mich." wrote in message
m...
"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
"[FLORIDA] The board of directors representing The Eagles, a deed
restricted community in Odessa, was trying to keep A.J. Vizzi from
parking his Ford pickup truck in his home's driveway. HOA rules state all
trucks must be parked in a garage."

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/most...9&provider=top
Odd,
I followed your link and then followed the link to read the full decision
by the Judge.

My reading of the decision was pretty much different from your first
link's reporting. The result of the decision may be the same, but there
were sure a lot of other side issues. My hat is off to the judge who
sorted out all side issues and came up with a fair and just decision.

From my reading of the decision: a contract approved by both sides is
binding. Changing the contract later without the approval of both sides
is a big No-No. HOA are not legal Government entities, HOA's exist as
contracts between homeowner and the association. Enforcement of a
contract must follow specific guidelines and procedural steps. Ignore the
procedure steps to enforce compliance is also a No-No. Stepping over the
line between being one party of a contract and perceiving the HOA is a
government entity will result in nasty fines or court costs.

By the way, as the Judge pointed out, a SUV, and a Mini-Van are also
"Trucks" by the manufactures for Federal safety regulations reasons, and
thus the law regards SUV and Mini-Vans as trucks also. The HOA was
selective in their enforcement.

Thank you ever so much in your reporting in a much more accurate and in
depth manner of the judge's decision. This gives me information I can take
to several HOA people I know who are in this battle.

Steve

wrote in message
...
On Dec 17, 7:40 pm, "Sanity" wrote:
He only has a case if the docs and bylaws were not presented to him. And I
guaranty he signed that he received and reviewed them before closing.

It's not unusual in a new development for HOA agreements to only be
partially complete when the first homes are sold. They add the rules
after the fact.

Unfortunately, you sign a document that says, "and any other rules
that this HOA may deem appropriate in the future" or some such
boilerplate.

reply:

We do surveys all the time of properties that are not "built out". It is
impossible to get the projected areas 100% correct, but they have us do it.
On the one hand, this is a good thing, as the buyers of undeveloped
properties will have something to look at regarding projected costs and
dues, but on the downside, the people who already own do not have
established dues, and are buying a pig in a poke. In Nevada, the dues by
law can not increase more than 25% of the previous year's dues for the next
year. The other down side is that we may figure too high a dues fee, and it
is unlikely that any HOA will reduce their dues for any reason.

Steve

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:52:28 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Dec 17, 8:42?am, "HeyBub" wrote:
"[FLORIDA] The board of directors representing The Eagles, a deed restricted
community in Odessa, was trying to keep A.J. Vizzi from parking his Ford
pickup truck in his home's driveway. HOA rules state all trucks must be
parked in a garage."

Judge renders declaratory judgment in favor of truck owner, says HOA is
insane and must pay about $100,000 in legal fees. Take drug test.

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/most...yid=96159&prov...

why anyone buys into deed restricted communities leaves me at a
loss........

my home means if I want a purple flamingo in the front yard no one
should be able to do a thing about it

In many areas the only new homes you can buy are in deed
restricted/HOA areas. There is a desire by cities to foist off on the
property owners the "governing" of themselves so they city can escape
as much financial involvement as possible. I don't think it's even
possible in the larger cities in AZ to find a new home that isn't
under an HOA. When we bought our home new about 20 years ago it was
in one of the few subdivisions that did not have an HOA. There are
"deed restrictions", but not too bad, but no real enforcement method.
there are provisions for the property owners to form an HOA if they
wish but if they chose to do so they cannot assess any dues. I've
never understood why anyone would want an HOA. The typical dues are
anywhere from $100 to $200 a month and I've heard of them as high as
$600 a month. At $100 a month it's like adding around $20,000 to your
mortgage. Why not just buy a house in a $20,000 better neighborhood.

On Dec 17, 3:38*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:52:28 -0800 (PST), "

wrote:
why anyone buys into deed restricted communities leaves me at a
loss........

my home means if I want a purple flamingo in the front yard no one
should be able to do a thing about it

There are people who don't want anyone around them to upset their
little world with anything different than what their narrow mind finds
acceptable.
I wouldn't be shocked if this case is appealed. This fires a shot
across the bow of every HOA in Florida.

BTW truck restrictions are not that rare around here. In Cape Coral
you can't have a truck in your driveway by city ordinance.

Many of the idiots that I have known would fit right in.

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT

On Sat 20 Dec 2008 01:46:48a, Too_Many_Tools told us...

On Dec 17, 3:38*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:52:28 -0800 (PST), "

wrote:
why anyone buys into deed restricted communities leaves me at a
loss........

my home means if I want a purple flamingo in the front yard no one
should be able to do a thing about it

There are people who don't want anyone around them to upset their
little world with anything different than what their narrow mind finds
acceptable.
I wouldn't be shocked if this case is appealed. This fires a shot
across the bow of every HOA in Florida.

BTW truck restrictions are not that rare around here. In Cape Coral
you can't have a truck in your driveway by city ordinance.

Many of the idiots that I have known would fit right in.

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT


Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our "controlled"
neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of you. We should both
be happy! :-)

Plebe

On Dec 20, 3:02*am, Plebe wrote:
On Sat 20 Dec 2008 01:46:48a, Too_Many_Tools told us...





On Dec 17, 3:38*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:52:28 -0800 (PST), "

wrote:
why anyone buys into deed restricted communities leaves me at a
loss........

my home means if I want a purple flamingo in the front yard no one
should be able to do a thing about it

There are people who don't want anyone around them to upset their
little world with anything different than what their narrow mind finds
acceptable.
I wouldn't be shocked if this case is appealed. This fires a shot
across the bow of every HOA in Florida.

BTW truck restrictions are not that rare around here. In Cape Coral
you can't have a truck in your driveway by city ordinance.

Many of the idiots that I have known would fit right in.

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT

Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our "controlled"
neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of you. *We should both
be happy! :-)

Plebe- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Of course it would be your loss. ;)

TMT

"Plebe" wrote in message

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT


Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our "controlled"
neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of you. We should both
be happy! :-)

Plebe

My next door neighbor would be penalized by any HOA. He has 2 cars, van, two
trucks, camper, snowmobile, motorcycle, tractor, wood pile, probably a few
things I'm forgetting.

He cuts my lawn, raises our vegetables, blows my leaves. I hope he never
moves away.

Plebe wrote:


Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our
"controlled" neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of
you. We should both be happy! :-)

Plebe

It doesn't have to be a choice between an HOA and a slum - there's a third
alternative.

If you have a neighbor who doesn't muster up to the majority opinion
regarding decorum, a few neighbors can visit the miscreant and beat him so
badly he can't even moan.

This technique is cheaper and more effective than the legal machinations and
expense of an HOA. And infinitely more satisfying...

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

On Dec 17, 3:38 pm, wrote:


On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:52:28 -0800 (PST), "

wrote:


why anyone buys into deed restricted communities leaves me at a
loss........


my home means if I want a purple flamingo in the front yard no one
should be able to do a thing about it


There are people who don't want anyone around them to upset their
little world with anything different than what their narrow mind finds
acceptable.
I wouldn't be shocked if this case is appealed. This fires a shot
across the bow of every HOA in Florida.

BTW truck restrictions are not that rare around here. In Cape Coral
you can't have a truck in your driveway by city ordinance.



Many of the idiots that I have known would fit right in.

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT


After living in condo hell, I agree. There are good HOA's especially
for seniors, which
probably rise to the level of "assisted living" - club houses with
activities for all, pool, lawn
games, playing cards or chess, shopping trips. But then one overweight
dog can ruin
the scheme.

On Sat 20 Dec 2008 02:10:20a, Too_Many_Tools told us...

On Dec 20, 3:02*am, Plebe wrote:
On Sat 20 Dec 2008 01:46:48a, Too_Many_Tools told us...





On Dec 17, 3:38*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:52:28 -0800 (PST), "

wrote:
why anyone buys into deed restricted communities leaves me at a
loss........

my home means if I want a purple flamingo in the front yard no one
should be able to do a thing about it

There are people who don't want anyone around them to upset their
little world with anything different than what their narrow mind
finds
acceptable.
I wouldn't be shocked if this case is appealed. This fires a shot
across the bow of every HOA in Florida.

BTW truck restrictions are not that rare around here. In Cape Coral
you can't have a truck in your driveway by city ordinance.

Many of the idiots that I have known would fit right in.

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT

Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our "controlled"
neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of you. *We should bo
th
be happy! :-)

Plebe- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Of course it would be your loss. ;)

TMT

I doubt it.

Plebe

On Sat 20 Dec 2008 05:37:08a, Ed Pawlowski told us...


"Plebe" wrote in message

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT


Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our "controlled"
neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of you. We should
both be happy! :-)

Plebe

My next door neighbor would be penalized by any HOA. He has 2 cars, van,
two trucks, camper, snowmobile, motorcycle, tractor, wood pile, probably
a few things I'm forgetting.

He cuts my lawn, raises our vegetables, blows my leaves. I hope he
never moves away.

I suppose a lot depends on how you grew up and what expectations you have.
I grew up in an upper middle class neighborhood where the lawns were
manicured, homes were well-maintained, cars/vehicles were in the garage,
neighbors were friendly, and strangers were civil. People that had wood
burning fireplaces did have woodpiles, but they were discretely place
somewhere in the back yard. An overflow of vehicles and other "grown up"
toys were kept somewhere off site. If people had vegetable gardens, those
were also in an appropriate location in the rear of the yard.

There was no HOA and no need for one. It was simply a matter of people
having dignity, self-respect and respect for others, and an appropriate
sense of values.

I have been fortunate to live in similar neighborhoods most of my life, and
only two of them had HOAs. One of those was a brand new community where
the HOA was overly zealous and even tried to impose "rules" that didn't
exist in the by-laws or in the CC&R. I was secretary on the board of that
HOA and witnessed at lease two such rediculous attempts. This was a small
community of 36 unique "French country homes". One home owner had a very
attractive weathered copper weathervane installed on their brick chimney.
The board president sent a letter stating that it had to be removed. The
homeowner was quite upset and came to me to discuss it. We sat together
looking for any evidence prohibiting such an addition, but could find none.
I brought this to the attention of the board, but they maintained their
position. Although the community was fully wired for cable and everyone
used it, there was a provision in the CC&R that allowed for television
antennas that could be as large as 3 x 4 feet and on a mast as high as 20
feet above the roof. I privately pointed this out to the homeowner and
suggested that they tell the board they would be happy to remove the
weathervane, and instead, install the maximum allowed antenna. The board
relented. In another case, a decorated WWII veteran was told to remove a
20 ft tall flagpole bearing the American flag. The board's rationale was
that there was a flag mounted in the center of each cul-de-sac. I pointed
out to the board that there was no reference to this in the CC&R and that,
furthermore, it was probably illegal to prevent an American citizen from
flying the flag, they again relented. After those two incidences, the
board's demeaner changed altogether, and it was a very pleasant place to
live.

The other community with an HOA where I lived was much older and had either
never had these growning pains or had long ago outgrown them. They simply
did their job, and quite reasonably. My only encounter with them was when
I applied for a permit to build a shed in the back yard. The only
requirements they had was that the shed had to be built of wood, have
roofing that was compatible with the roofing of the house, and that it had
to be within the sight lines of the house when looking from the street. I
did not find that to be unreasonable.

Now I live in a neighborhood with no HOA in an atmosphere where "anything
goes", and believe me it does. Many homes have numerous vehicles parked
all other the yards, many yards are unkempt, usually full of weeds and
unmown grass. The area is generally unsightly. It's no wonder that anyone
who comes to our house (visitors, service and construction people, etc.)
always tell us we have the best looking house/yard in the neighborhood. I
don't even consider this a compliment since it is just what I consider
average. For nearly six months the neighbor directly across the street
kept a tractor trailer parked in front of their house. We could barely get
out of our driveway. Other neighbors had complained about it to the owner,
but with no results. I finally called the sheriff's department and they
were told to remove it immediately and permanently. All this in a
neighborhood where the least expensive home sold for ~$200K. We are
fortunate, however, to have very nice neighbors immediately on either side
of us. They are friendly, kind, and helpful.

I think it was a mistake for us to move here, but financially we can't move
in the forseeable future. If we ever do, it will definitely be to a
community where there is an HOA. I'd rather deal with those issues than
with the ones I'm dealing with.

Plebe

On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 09:02:31 GMT, in alt.home.repair, Plebe
wrote:

On Sat 20 Dec 2008 01:46:48a, Too_Many_Tools told us...
I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our "controlled"
neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of you. We should both
be happy! :-)

I live in a 1960s era subdivision with no HOA. It's a pretty nice
neighborhood, most everyone takes reasonable care of their house and yard.

The city has ordinances about the basics, keeping up your yard, not being a
junkyard, not parking on the grass, etc. No nosy nitpicky crap about how
tall the grass must be, what color the house can be, what you can park in
your driveway, etc. There are RVs and boats parked here and there, there's
at least one house painted yellow and purple (that's mine!), yards range
from bowling greens to waterless desertscapes. It's an interesting
neighborhood with lots of variety. I'm OK with how my neighbors keep their
property, and they're OK with how I keep mine. As it should be.

I wouldn't be happy if my neighbors were trailer trash, but they're not. I
also wouldn't be happy with neighbors who NEEDED to have an HOA FORCING them
to act like decent neighbors...mine manage to do it all on their own. I
like that.

On Dec 18, 11:27*am, "SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote:
"Sanity" wrote in message

...







"Harry K" wrote in message
....
On Dec 17, 4:40 pm, "Sanity" wrote:
"Nate Nagel" wrote in message

...

Sanity wrote:
"Harry K" wrote in message
...
On Dec 17, 1:38 pm, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:52:28 -0800 (PST), "

wrote:
why anyone buys into deed restricted communities leaves me at a
loss........ my home means if I want a purple flamingo in the
front yard no one should be able to do a thing about it
There are people who don't want anyone around them to upset their
little
world with anything different than what their narrow mind
finds acceptable. I wouldn't be shocked if this case is appealed.
This fires a shot across the bow of every HOA in Florida.

BTW truck restrictions are not that rare around here. In Cape Coral
you can't have a truck in your driveway by city ordinance.

Wonder what kind of stroke the HOA would have were one to buy a
junker car, chop the top back off and remove the trunk lid, viola! a
Pickup but the registration will show it is a car.

Harry K

Explain something to me. Someone buys a home in an HOA. Prior to
buying they are given the docs and sign a statement to abide by them.
Then all of a sudden they scream, kick and cry when one of the regs
from the docs are enforced. Please explain why that person bought in
an HOA in the first place if he didn't want to follow their rules.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like HOA's but I sure wouldn't buy in one
if I disagreed with the docs and had no intention of following them..

I believe in the case that hit fark.com recently (I assume that that is
what this thread is about) the home moaner actually did check out the
requirements before buying, but the ones being enforced are not the
same
ones given to him to review pre-purchase. I think that he does have a
case if the facts are as represented in the article I read.

Oh, and HOA's suck.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

He only has a case if the docs and bylaws were not presented to him. And
I
guaranty he signed that he received and reviewed them before closing.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And if he was given a false copy of the rules and signed thinking they
were correct?

Harry K

Another conspiracy theory. * You are GIVEN a copy of the docs *and you
sign off that you received them. *No one slips a mickey to you.

And if they are faulty, you merely hire an attorney and spend $100,000 to
get it fixed. *What's the problem?

Steve- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No problem for the HOA...they would simply use their fees to pay the
lawyers (including the fee from the "troublemaker") and fight
forever...because if they ran out of money they would just increase
the fees charged the entire HOA membership...including the
"troublemaker".

A classic case of a few abusing the many...because the many allow it
to happen.

Just say no to Lawn Nazis.

TMT

On Dec 18, 3:44*pm, wrote:
On 18 Dec 2008 03:47:32 GMT, Jim Yanik wrote:





"SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote in
:

I wouldn't be shocked if this case is appealed. This fires a shot
across the bow of every HOA in Florida.

Because of the state of things in Florida, the ripple effect has been
felt as far away as Nevada. *Because HOA members wanted
accountability, Florida enacted the first law requiring a full reserve
study be done by a state licensed and approved reserve specialist.
This study includes a 30 year projection of all costs of common areas
and appurtenances, depreciation of same, interest rates earned on
money collected and deposited in interest bearing accounts, and bottom
line, what the HOA dues per owner will be to meet the 30 year plan.

Nevada has such a law.

Now, a new subdivision or condo bunch may not be built without the
builder forming a HOA, and then turning it over to members.

I love watching this stuff. *We do the inspections on these
properties, the largest one being 1200 acres. *Smallest one 7 houses..
It's about $80 an hour for our work.

We love HOAs, but I wouldn't live in one for anything, even if I got
old and couldn't mow the yard. *Right now, I live at the end of a dirt
road. *I can **** off the front step whenever I want to and shoot
coyotes out of the back acreage. *I live in AG1 agricultural zoning,
and can do almost anything. Still have to get permits for new
construction, but that's all.

I do own a cabin where there is a HOA. *But the dues are $25 per year,
and there has never been a meeting, and not $1 of dues has been
collected. *When we need something done, we get the 7 cabin owners
together, and do it. *Like it should be.

Steve

and what do you do if your neighborhood votes to form a HOA,and then you
have to abide by their restrictions?
Or,when you sell your property,then it falls under the HOA's rule.

Never heard of an HOA being imposed after the fact. If you own your
property free and clear before an HOA is formed, you are, by
definition, NOT part of the HOA. If they don't like you being there
they have TWO choices. Develop elsewhere or buy you out at your price.

Unless your property violates municipal bylaws- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It happens...you just need the majority to amend the local law
(covenant in many places) that apply to the subdivision.

TMT

On Dec 19, 11:17*am, "SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Dec 17, 7:40 pm, "Sanity" wrote:

He only has a case if the docs and bylaws were not presented to him. And I
guaranty he signed that he received and reviewed them before closing.

It's not unusual in a new development for HOA agreements to only be
partially complete when the first homes are sold. They add the rules
after the fact.

Unfortunately, you sign a document that says, "and any other rules
that this HOA may deem appropriate in the future" or some such
boilerplate.

reply:

We do surveys all the time of properties that are not "built out". *It is
impossible to get the projected areas 100% correct, but they have us do it.

On Dec 20, 2:27*am, Ashton Crusher wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:52:28 -0800 (PST), "





wrote:
On Dec 17, 8:42?am, "HeyBub" wrote:
"[FLORIDA] The board of directors representing The Eagles, a deed restricted
community in Odessa, was trying to keep A.J. Vizzi from parking his Ford
pickup truck in his home's driveway. HOA rules state all trucks must be
parked in a garage."

Judge renders declaratory judgment in favor of truck owner, says HOA is
insane and must pay about $100,000 in legal fees. Take drug test.

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/most...yid=96159&prov....

why anyone buys into deed restricted communities leaves me at a
loss........

my home means if I want a purple flamingo in the front yard no one
should be able to do a thing about it

In many areas the only new homes you can buy are in deed
restricted/HOA areas. *There is a desire by cities to foist off on the
property owners the "governing" of themselves so they city can escape
as much financial involvement as possible. *I don't think it's even
possible in the larger cities in AZ to find a new home that isn't
under an HOA. *When we bought our home new about 20 years ago it was
in one of the few subdivisions that did not have an HOA. *There are
"deed restrictions", but not too bad, *but no real enforcement method.
there are provisions for the property owners to form an HOA if they
wish but if they chose to do so they cannot assess any dues. *I've
never understood why anyone would want an HOA. *The typical dues are
anywhere from $100 to $200 a month and I've heard of them as high as
$600 a month. *At $100 a month it's like adding around $20,000 to your
mortgage. *Why not just buy a house in a $20,000 better neighborhood.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Again a good discussion.

In many areas, having a HOA will cause potential buyers to NOT buy
into an area.

And in this housing market (and for the foreseeable future), that is
the kiss of death to anyone who wants to sell their home.

TMT

On Dec 20, 7:33*am, Norminn wrote:
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Dec 17, 3:38 pm, wrote:

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:52:28 -0800 (PST), "

wrote:

why anyone buys into deed restricted communities leaves me at a
loss........

my home means if I want a purple flamingo in the front yard no one
should be able to do a thing about it

There are people who don't want anyone around them to upset their
little world with anything different than what their narrow mind finds
acceptable.
I wouldn't be shocked if this case is appealed. This fires a shot
across the bow of every HOA in Florida.

BTW truck restrictions are not that rare around here. In Cape Coral
you can't have a truck in your driveway by city ordinance.

Many of the idiots that I have known would fit right in.

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT

After living in condo hell, I agree. *There are good HOA's especially
for seniors, which
probably rise to the level of "assisted living" - club houses with
activities for all, pool, lawn
games, playing cards or chess, shopping trips. *But then one overweight
dog can ruin
the scheme.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Or any number of gassy seniors. ;)

TMT

On Dec 20, 11:25*am, Plebe wrote:
On Sat 20 Dec 2008 05:37:08a, Ed Pawlowski told us...







"Plebe" wrote in message

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT

Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our "controlled"
neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of you. *We should
both be happy! :-)

Plebe

My next door neighbor would be penalized by any HOA. He has 2 cars, van,
two trucks, camper, snowmobile, motorcycle, tractor, wood pile, probably
a few things I'm forgetting.

He cuts my lawn, raises our vegetables, blows my leaves. * I hope he
never moves away.

I suppose a lot depends on how you grew up and what expectations you have.. *
I grew up in an upper middle class neighborhood where the lawns were
manicured, homes were well-maintained, cars/vehicles were in the garage,
neighbors were friendly, and strangers were civil. *People that had wood
burning fireplaces did have woodpiles, but they were discretely place
somewhere in the back yard. *An overflow of vehicles and other "grown up"
toys were kept somewhere off site. *If people had vegetable gardens, those
were also in an appropriate location in the rear of the yard. *

There was no HOA and no need for one. *It was simply a matter of people
having dignity, self-respect and respect for others, and an appropriate
sense of values.

I have been fortunate to live in similar neighborhoods most of my life, and
only two of them had HOAs. *One of those was a brand new community where
the HOA was overly zealous and even tried to impose "rules" that didn't
exist in the by-laws or in the CC&R. *I was secretary on the board of that
HOA and witnessed at lease two such rediculous attempts. *This was a small
community of 36 unique "French country homes". *One home owner had a very
attractive weathered copper weathervane installed on their brick chimney. *
The board president sent a letter stating that it had to be removed. *The
homeowner was quite upset and came to me to discuss it. *We sat together
looking for any evidence prohibiting such an addition, but could find none. *
I brought this to the attention of the board, but they maintained their
position. *Although the community was fully wired for cable and everyone
used it, there was a provision in the CC&R that allowed for television
antennas that could be as large as 3 x 4 feet and on a mast as high as 20
feet above the roof. *I privately pointed this out to the homeowner and
suggested that they tell the board they would be happy to remove the
weathervane, and instead, install the maximum allowed antenna. *The board
relented. *In another case, a decorated WWII veteran was told to remove a
20 ft tall flagpole bearing the American flag. *The board's rationale was
that there was a flag mounted in the center of each cul-de-sac. *I pointed
out to the board that there was no reference to this in the CC&R and that,
furthermore, it was probably illegal to prevent an American citizen from
flying the flag, they again relented. *After those two incidences, the
board's demeaner changed altogether, and it was a very pleasant place to
live.

The other community with an HOA where I lived was much older and had either
never had these growning pains or had long ago outgrown them. *They simply
did their job, and quite reasonably. *My only encounter with them was when
I applied for a permit to build a shed in the back yard. *The only
requirements they had was that the shed had to be built of wood, have
roofing that was compatible with the roofing of the house, and that it had
to be within the sight lines of the house when looking from the street. *I
did not find that to be unreasonable.

Now I live in a neighborhood with no HOA in an atmosphere where "anything
goes", and believe me it does. *Many homes have numerous vehicles parked
all other the yards, many yards are unkempt, usually full of weeds and
unmown grass. *The area is generally unsightly. *It's no wonder that anyone
who comes to our house (visitors, service and construction people, etc.)
always tell us we have the best looking house/yard in the neighborhood. *I
don't even consider this a compliment since it is just what I consider
average. *For nearly six months the neighbor directly across the street
kept a tractor trailer parked in front of their house. *We could barely get
out of our driveway. *Other neighbors had complained about it to the owner,
but with no results. *I finally called the sheriff's department and they
were told to remove it immediately and permanently. * All this in a
neighborhood where the least expensive home sold for ~$200K. *We are
fortunate, however, to have very nice neighbors immediately on either side
of us. *They are friendly, kind, and helpful.

I think it was a mistake for us to move here, but financially we can't move
in the forseeable future. *If we ever do, it will definitely be to a
community where there is an HOA. *I'd rather deal with those issues than
with the ones I'm dealing with.

Plebe * *- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You make a good argument for when laws need to be applied...and when
they should not be.

My opinion is that ones interest should STOP at your property line and
means of access to your property. If someone is blocking your
access...that is a problem. If someone wants to use their property in
a certain manner (which they are paying taxes on..not you or the HOA),
then they should be left alone. In my experiences over the years, it
is ALWAYS the busybodies of the neighborhood who are the first to
scream about their neighbor while ignoring the fact that they are the
worst offenders.

If I EVER am forced to form a HOA, I will have it stated in the bylaws
that the HOA can be sued for harassment and the legal costs of the one
bringing the suit will be paid by the HOA. When you have something to
lose, everyone behaves better.

TMT

On Dec 20, 11:25*am, Plebe wrote:
On Sat 20 Dec 2008 05:37:08a, Ed Pawlowski told us...







"Plebe" wrote in message

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT

Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our "controlled"
neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of you. *We should
both be happy! :-)

Plebe

My next door neighbor would be penalized by any HOA. He has 2 cars, van,
two trucks, camper, snowmobile, motorcycle, tractor, wood pile, probably
a few things I'm forgetting.

He cuts my lawn, raises our vegetables, blows my leaves. * I hope he
never moves away.

I suppose a lot depends on how you grew up and what expectations you have.. *
I grew up in an upper middle class neighborhood where the lawns were
manicured, homes were well-maintained, cars/vehicles were in the garage,
neighbors were friendly, and strangers were civil. *People that had wood
burning fireplaces did have woodpiles, but they were discretely place
somewhere in the back yard. *An overflow of vehicles and other "grown up"
toys were kept somewhere off site. *If people had vegetable gardens, those
were also in an appropriate location in the rear of the yard. *

There was no HOA and no need for one. *It was simply a matter of people
having dignity, self-respect and respect for others, and an appropriate
sense of values.

I have been fortunate to live in similar neighborhoods most of my life, and
only two of them had HOAs. *One of those was a brand new community where
the HOA was overly zealous and even tried to impose "rules" that didn't
exist in the by-laws or in the CC&R. *I was secretary on the board of that
HOA and witnessed at lease two such rediculous attempts. *This was a small
community of 36 unique "French country homes". *One home owner had a very
attractive weathered copper weathervane installed on their brick chimney. *
The board president sent a letter stating that it had to be removed. *The
homeowner was quite upset and came to me to discuss it. *We sat together
looking for any evidence prohibiting such an addition, but could find none. *
I brought this to the attention of the board, but they maintained their
position. *Although the community was fully wired for cable and everyone
used it, there was a provision in the CC&R that allowed for television
antennas that could be as large as 3 x 4 feet and on a mast as high as 20
feet above the roof. *I privately pointed this out to the homeowner and
suggested that they tell the board they would be happy to remove the
weathervane, and instead, install the maximum allowed antenna. *The board
relented. *In another case, a decorated WWII veteran was told to remove a
20 ft tall flagpole bearing the American flag. *The board's rationale was
that there was a flag mounted in the center of each cul-de-sac. *I pointed
out to the board that there was no reference to this in the CC&R and that,
furthermore, it was probably illegal to prevent an American citizen from
flying the flag, they again relented. *After those two incidences, the
board's demeaner changed altogether, and it was a very pleasant place to
live.

The other community with an HOA where I lived was much older and had either
never had these growning pains or had long ago outgrown them. *They simply
did their job, and quite reasonably. *My only encounter with them was when
I applied for a permit to build a shed in the back yard. *The only
requirements they had was that the shed had to be built of wood, have
roofing that was compatible with the roofing of the house, and that it had
to be within the sight lines of the house when looking from the street. *I
did not find that to be unreasonable.

Now I live in a neighborhood with no HOA in an atmosphere where "anything
goes", and believe me it does. *Many homes have numerous vehicles parked
all other the yards, many yards are unkempt, usually full of weeds and
unmown grass. *The area is generally unsightly. *It's no wonder that anyone
who comes to our house (visitors, service and construction people, etc.)
always tell us we have the best looking house/yard in the neighborhood. *I
don't even consider this a compliment since it is just what I consider
average. *For nearly six months the neighbor directly across the street
kept a tractor trailer parked in front of their house. *We could barely get
out of our driveway. *Other neighbors had complained about it to the owner,
but with no results. *I finally called the sheriff's department and they
were told to remove it immediately and permanently. * All this in a
neighborhood where the least expensive home sold for ~$200K. *We are
fortunate, however, to have very nice neighbors immediately on either side
of us. *They are friendly, kind, and helpful.

I think it was a mistake for us to move here, but financially we can't move
in the forseeable future. *If we ever do, it will definitely be to a
community where there is an HOA. *I'd rather deal with those issues than
with the ones I'm dealing with.

Plebe * *- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You do realize that having the "nicest looking house" means $$$ when
you sell in the future?

Perhaps you should thank the "troublemaker next door". ;)

In all seriousness when you mention the entire neighborhood is
unkempt, is this the condition it was in when you moved into the area?

In the economic times we live in now (and for the foreseeable future),
many areas are not being able to support the maintainance of the
neighborhood. Entire subdivisions are being left to rot because the
HOAs cannot collect thier fees. Homes owned by banks are some of the
worst offenders.

TMT

On Sat 20 Dec 2008 10:34:03a, Scott told us...

On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 09:02:31 GMT, in alt.home.repair, Plebe
wrote:

On Sat 20 Dec 2008 01:46:48a, Too_Many_Tools told us...
I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our "controlled"
neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of you. We should
both be happy! :-)

I live in a 1960s era subdivision with no HOA. It's a pretty nice
neighborhood, most everyone takes reasonable care of their house and
yard.

The city has ordinances about the basics, keeping up your yard, not
being a junkyard, not parking on the grass, etc. No nosy nitpicky crap
about how tall the grass must be, what color the house can be, what you
can park in your driveway, etc. There are RVs and boats parked here and
there, there's at least one house painted yellow and purple (that's
mine!), yards range from bowling greens to waterless desertscapes. It's
an interesting neighborhood with lots of variety. I'm OK with how my
neighbors keep their property, and they're OK with how I keep mine. As
it should be.

I wouldn't be happy if my neighbors were trailer trash, but they're not.
I also wouldn't be happy with neighbors who NEEDED to have an HOA
FORCING them to act like decent neighbors...mine manage to do it all on
their own. I like that.

You are fortunate. What you describe is certainly reasonable and
acceptable.

On Sat 20 Dec 2008 01:07:59p, cshenk told us...

"Scott" wrote

I wouldn't be happy if my neighbors were trailer trash, but they're
not. I
also wouldn't be happy with neighbors who NEEDED to have an HOA FORCING
them
to act like decent neighbors...mine manage to do it all on their own.
I like that.

Same here. No HOA and none needed. Local Neighborhood association (not
the same but serves us well) to help out folks. 100% voluntary.



That sounds like a good idea!

On Sat 20 Dec 2008 11:49:50a, ktos told us...

Plebe wrote in
:

On Sat 20 Dec 2008 01:46:48a, Too_Many_Tools told us...

On Dec 17, 3:38*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:52:28 -0800 (PST), "

wrote:
why anyone buys into deed restricted communities leaves me at a
loss........

my home means if I want a purple flamingo in the front yard no one
should be able to do a thing about it

There are people who don't want anyone around them to upset their
little world with anything different than what their narrow mind
finds acceptable.
I wouldn't be shocked if this case is appealed. This fires a shot
across the bow of every HOA in Florida.

BTW truck restrictions are not that rare around here. In Cape Coral
you can't have a truck in your driveway by city ordinance.

Many of the idiots that I have known would fit right in.

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT


Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our
"controlled" neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of you.
We should both be happy! :-)

Plebe





HOA = robotic brain dead idiots.
Wait until the HOA tells you what color hair you can have. Or they just
don't like your face.

oooooo, then baby will cry, cry, cry.


Been there. Not a problem. Would do it again.

On Sat 20 Dec 2008 11:08:52a, Too_Many_Tools told us...

On Dec 20, 11:25*am, Plebe wrote:
On Sat 20 Dec 2008 05:37:08a, Ed Pawlowski told us...







"Plebe" wrote in message

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT

Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our
"controlled
"
neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of you. *We should
both be happy! :-)

Plebe

My next door neighbor would be penalized by any HOA. He has 2 cars,
van
,
two trucks, camper, snowmobile, motorcycle, tractor, wood pile,
probabl
y
a few things I'm forgetting.

He cuts my lawn, raises our vegetables, blows my leaves. * I hope he
never moves away.

I suppose a lot depends on how you grew up and what expectations you
have
. *
I grew up in an upper middle class neighborhood where the lawns were
manicured, homes were well-maintained, cars/vehicles were in the garage,
neighbors were friendly, and strangers were civil. *People that had woo
d
burning fireplaces did have woodpiles, but they were discretely place
somewhere in the back yard. *An overflow of vehicles and other "grown u
p"
toys were kept somewhere off site. *If people had vegetable gardens, th
ose
were also in an appropriate location in the rear of the yard. *

There was no HOA and no need for one. *It was simply a matter of people
having dignity, self-respect and respect for others, and an appropriate
sense of values.

I have been fortunate to live in similar neighborhoods most of my life,
a
nd
only two of them had HOAs. *One of those was a brand new community wher
e
the HOA was overly zealous and even tried to impose "rules" that didn't
exist in the by-laws or in the CC&R. *I was secretary on the board of t
hat
HOA and witnessed at lease two such rediculous attempts. *This was a sm
all
community of 36 unique "French country homes". *One home owner had a ve
ry
attractive weathered copper weathervane installed on their brick
chimney.
*
The board president sent a letter stating that it had to be removed. *T
he
homeowner was quite upset and came to me to discuss it. *We sat togethe
r
looking for any evidence prohibiting such an addition, but could find
non
e. *
I brought this to the attention of the board, but they maintained their
position. *Although the community was fully wired for cable and everyon
e
used it, there was a provision in the CC&R that allowed for television
antennas that could be as large as 3 x 4 feet and on a mast as high as
20
feet above the roof. *I privately pointed this out to the homeowner and
suggested that they tell the board they would be happy to remove the
weathervane, and instead, install the maximum allowed antenna. *The boa
rd
relented. *In another case, a decorated WWII veteran was told to remove
a
20 ft tall flagpole bearing the American flag. *The board's rationale w
as
that there was a flag mounted in the center of each cul-de-sac. *I poin
ted
out to the board that there was no reference to this in the CC&R and
that
,
furthermore, it was probably illegal to prevent an American citizen from
flying the flag, they again relented. *After those two incidences, the
board's demeaner changed altogether, and it was a very pleasant place to
live.

The other community with an HOA where I lived was much older and had
eith
er
never had these growning pains or had long ago outgrown them. *They sim
ply
did their job, and quite reasonably. *My only encounter with them was w
hen
I applied for a permit to build a shed in the back yard. *The only
requirements they had was that the shed had to be built of wood, have
roofing that was compatible with the roofing of the house, and that it
ha
d
to be within the sight lines of the house when looking from the street.
*I
did not find that to be unreasonable.

Now I live in a neighborhood with no HOA in an atmosphere where
"anything
goes", and believe me it does. *Many homes have numerous vehicles parke
d
all other the yards, many yards are unkempt, usually full of weeds and
unmown grass. *The area is generally unsightly. *It's no wonder that
anyone
who comes to our house (visitors, service and construction people, etc.)
always tell us we have the best looking house/yard in the neighborhood.
*I
don't even consider this a compliment since it is just what I consider
average. *For nearly six months the neighbor directly across the street
kept a tractor trailer parked in front of their house. *We could barely
get
out of our driveway. *Other neighbors had complained about it to the ow
ner,
but with no results. *I finally called the sheriff's department and the
y
were told to remove it immediately and permanently. * All this in a
neighborhood where the least expensive home sold for ~$200K. *We are
fortunate, however, to have very nice neighbors immediately on either
sid
e
of us. *They are friendly, kind, and helpful.

I think it was a mistake for us to move here, but financially we can't
mo
ve
in the forseeable future. *If we ever do, it will definitely be to a
community where there is an HOA. *I'd rather deal with those issues tha
n
with the ones I'm dealing with.

Plebe * *- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You make a good argument for when laws need to be applied...and when
they should not be.

My opinion is that ones interest should STOP at your property line and
means of access to your property. If someone is blocking your
access...that is a problem. If someone wants to use their property in
a certain manner (which they are paying taxes on..not you or the HOA),
then they should be left alone. In my experiences over the years, it
is ALWAYS the busybodies of the neighborhood who are the first to
scream about their neighbor while ignoring the fact that they are the
worst offenders.

I can't argue with those rights, until someone else's lifestyle is imposed
on mine.

If I EVER am forced to form a HOA, I will have it stated in the bylaws
that the HOA can be sued for harassment and the legal costs of the one
bringing the suit will be paid by the HOA. When you have something to
lose, everyone behaves better.

I totally agree.



--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)
************************************************** **********************
Date: Saturday, 12(XII)/20(XX)/08(MMVIII)
************************************************** **********************
Countdown till Christmas Day
4dys 2hrs 10mins
************************************************** **********************
I saw it in a cartoon, but I'm pretty sure I can do it.
************************************************** **********************

On Sat 20 Dec 2008 11:14:07a, Too_Many_Tools told us...

On Dec 20, 11:25*am, Plebe wrote:
On Sat 20 Dec 2008 05:37:08a, Ed Pawlowski told us...







"Plebe" wrote in message

I will NEVER..NEVE..NEVER live where I have to deal with a HOA.

TMT

Then those of us who prefer some order and civility in our
"controlled
"
neighborhoods won't have to put up with the likes of you. *We should
both be happy! :-)

Plebe

My next door neighbor would be penalized by any HOA. He has 2 cars,
van
,
two trucks, camper, snowmobile, motorcycle, tractor, wood pile,
probabl
y
a few things I'm forgetting.

He cuts my lawn, raises our vegetables, blows my leaves. * I hope he
never moves away.

I suppose a lot depends on how you grew up and what expectations you
have
. *
I grew up in an upper middle class neighborhood where the lawns were
manicured, homes were well-maintained, cars/vehicles were in the garage,
neighbors were friendly, and strangers were civil. *People that had woo
d
burning fireplaces did have woodpiles, but they were discretely place
somewhere in the back yard. *An overflow of vehicles and other "grown u
p"
toys were kept somewhere off site. *If people had vegetable gardens, th
ose
were also in an appropriate location in the rear of the yard. *

There was no HOA and no need for one. *It was simply a matter of people
having dignity, self-respect and respect for others, and an appropriate
sense of values.

I have been fortunate to live in similar neighborhoods most of my life,
a
nd
only two of them had HOAs. *One of those was a brand new community wher
e
the HOA was overly zealous and even tried to impose "rules" that didn't
exist in the by-laws or in the CC&R. *I was secretary on the board of t
hat
HOA and witnessed at lease two such rediculous attempts. *This was a sm
all
community of 36 unique "French country homes". *One home owner had a ve
ry
attractive weathered copper weathervane installed on their brick
chimney.
*
The board president sent a letter stating that it had to be removed. *T
he
homeowner was quite upset and came to me to discuss it. *We sat togethe
r
looking for any evidence prohibiting such an addition, but could find
non
e. *
I brought this to the attention of the board, but they maintained their
position. *Although the community was fully wired for cable and everyon
e
used it, there was a provision in the CC&R that allowed for television
antennas that could be as large as 3 x 4 feet and on a mast as high as
20
feet above the roof. *I privately pointed this out to the homeowner and
suggested that they tell the board they would be happy to remove the
weathervane, and instead, install the maximum allowed antenna. *The boa
rd
relented. *In another case, a decorated WWII veteran was told to remove
a
20 ft tall flagpole bearing the American flag. *The board's rationale w
as
that there was a flag mounted in the center of each cul-de-sac. *I poin
ted
out to the board that there was no reference to this in the CC&R and
that
,
furthermore, it was probably illegal to prevent an American citizen from
flying the flag, they again relented. *After those two incidences, the
board's demeaner changed altogether, and it was a very pleasant place to
live.

The other community with an HOA where I lived was much older and had
eith
er
never had these growning pains or had long ago outgrown them. *They sim
ply
did their job, and quite reasonably. *My only encounter with them was w
hen
I applied for a permit to build a shed in the back yard. *The only
requirements they had was that the shed had to be built of wood, have
roofing that was compatible with the roofing of the house, and that it
ha
d
to be within the sight lines of the house when looking from the street.
*I
did not find that to be unreasonable.

Now I live in a neighborhood with no HOA in an atmosphere where
"anything
goes", and believe me it does. *Many homes have numerous vehicles parke
d
all other the yards, many yards are unkempt, usually full of weeds and
unmown grass. *The area is generally unsightly. *It's no wonder that
anyone
who comes to our house (visitors, service and construction people, etc.)
always tell us we have the best looking house/yard in the neighborhood.
*I
don't even consider this a compliment since it is just what I consider
average. *For nearly six months the neighbor directly across the street
kept a tractor trailer parked in front of their house. *We could barely
get
out of our driveway. *Other neighbors had complained about it to the ow
ner,
but with no results. *I finally called the sheriff's department and the
y
were told to remove it immediately and permanently. * All this in a
neighborhood where the least expensive home sold for ~$200K. *We are
fortunate, however, to have very nice neighbors immediately on either
sid
e
of us. *They are friendly, kind, and helpful.

I think it was a mistake for us to move here, but financially we can't
mo
ve
in the forseeable future. *If we ever do, it will definitely be to a
community where there is an HOA. *I'd rather deal with those issues tha
n
with the ones I'm dealing with.

Plebe * *- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You do realize that having the "nicest looking house" means $$$ when
you sell in the future?

Perhaps you should thank the "troublemaker next door". ;)

In all seriousness when you mention the entire neighborhood is
unkempt, is this the condition it was in when you moved into the area?

Not exactly. While it was obvious there were a few properties not quite
"up to standard", we purchased the land in the middle of winter. Yards
were not so much in disarray and few vehicles around, as many people were
not at home. The true nature wasn't obvious.

In the economic times we live in now (and for the foreseeable future),
many areas are not being able to support the maintainance of the
neighborhood. Entire subdivisions are being left to rot because the
HOAs cannot collect thier fees. Homes owned by banks are some of the
worst offenders.

We don't have an HOA here, and there are no vacant homes nor any up for
sale. As far as I know, there are none presently owned by banks.



--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)
************************************************** **********************
Date: Saturday, 12(XII)/20(XX)/08(MMVIII)
************************************************** **********************
Countdown till Christmas Day
4dys 2hrs 8mins
************************************************** **********************
There's a fine line between courage and foolishness. Too bad it's
not a fence.
************************************************** **********************

On 19 Dec 2008 06:11:20 GMT, RobertPatrick wrote:

What happens if you have some friends over for the evening and they have
trucks?

Or out of town visitors come in a truck?

We don't need that kind of people. They have a half hour to get out
of town.

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 16:21:21 -0600, "tom" wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 08:53:59 -0500, Norminn
wrote:

One thing that associations CAN do is require the units to be owner
occupied.

What happens if the market is low, like now, and someone wants to
move? While the people staying don't want the apartment to be rented,
when they are in that situation, ready to move, retire, have to go to
assisted living, they may not like it when the rule impacts them.

I will agree that rental units are often not well taken care of, but
otoh if the price is low and that's the only reason the buyer can
afford to buy, that can be bad too.

Of the 110 houses in my 30 year old HOA, I think 15 or 20 are rentals
now and about 10 or 15 of them are owned by those who once lived here,
and most are in as good a condition as those resident owned. Of
course things vary widely.

I've got no problem with that. One of the main reasons we moved last summer
was than the 2BR house next to our old place sold and the new owner finished
the upstairs and put 2BR's in the basement and was suddenly renting out a
5BR house. Talk about putting 10 pounds of **** in a 5 pound bag.

That was probably illegal. Do you need certificates of occupancy where
you live? Did he have a C of O for two families?

Long before Barack Obama got to Hyde Park/Kenwood in Chicago, it was a
beuatiful neighborhood that was on the brink of being ruined by a
combination of speculators and people who could no longer afford to
live in their entire homes subdividing homes illegally to make room
for one or two more families. The n'hood got organized.

One of the tools they used to stop this was getting members of the
HPKCC, Hyde Park-Kenwood Community Conference to keep on the look-out
for plumbing trucks. Of course some people need plumbing repairs,
but if the truck was there for more than an hour, it was likely a
conversion, and that always meant an illegal conversion. Then
someone would call the building inspector, and I think in the 50's and
early 60's that have to hound him because he was often in on it.

Another tool was the House Tour. There are loads of these around th
ecountry now, but I think they originated in Hyde Park and Kenwood.
It's not just about pride and bragging. The purpose was to show how
beautiful the houses are inside so that people with money will buy one
in the area. Even where the houses aren't as fancy as the ones in
Kenwood, they are often much better than one's unseeing guess.

Anyhow, preventing illegal conversions and the other projects of the
HPKCC is why the n'hood looks as nice now as it did 50 and 80 years
ago. I'm not sure when the houses were built. www.hydepark.org

I used to live in Hyde Park, the part south of 51st St. In the dorm,
the fraternity, and two years sharing an apartment with friends. Just
a 2-bedroom with living room, dining room, large pantry, and sunporch.
Very common in Chicago.

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 08:53:59 -0500, Norminn
wrote:


We have eight units in our condo. Three are for sale, three have liens
for unpaid monthly assessments.
Only one has the owner living in the unit (four empty, three rented).
One owner doesn't live in the US.
The three who are in arrears on monthly assessments have NEVER resided
in the units they own. I
hope all the flippers burn in hell, slowly. They are the scum that tax
money is being poured on.

At least some proposals for mortgage aid are designed to exclude
investment properties. Sometimes it's hard to write a law that does a
good job targeting the intended target. But certainly it would
require that the owner reside in the property.

BTW, I know that Bush and Paulson deserve some of the blame for giving
money to banks which then didn't lend it to anyone (but bought other
banks or paid dividends with it) but does the Congress deserve blame
too. Were the restrictions supposed to be in the law, or in the
contracts drawn up by the executive branch to implement the law?

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:41:16 -0500, "Sanity" wrote:


"Zootal" wrote in message
...
Explain something to me. Someone buys a home in an HOA. Prior to buying
they are given the docs and sign a statement to abide by them. Then all
of a sudden they scream, kick and cry when one of the regs from the docs
are enforced. Please explain why that person bought in an HOA in the
first place if he didn't want to follow their rules. Don't get me wrong,
I don't like HOA's but I sure wouldn't buy in one if I disagreed with the
docs and had no intention of following them.


Just out of curiosity - do you have the right to refuse to sign the
agreement if you buy the house? IOW, can you buy a house in one of these
HOA neighborhoods, but refuse to sign or comply?

Nope. The main provision in buying is that you read and agree to follow the
docs and bylaws. Otherwise, why would they have them?

If we are still talking about the original case posted, and even if
we're not, here's some more information about that case from another
forum. I'm neither of the people discussing this.

My quote starts with the actual court decision, which was given I
think as a link in the news story:

---Start quote---

http://www.tampabays10.com/images/pd...ck-lawsuit.pdf

I'll be quoting from it, as it demonstrates a very common behavior
typical of the arrogant, out of control HOAs in operation these days,
which often disregard their own by-laws, remain in office while
refusing to hold elections, and purport to change the rules of the
HOA, without following the rules of the Association.

That is exactly what happened here.

The HOA's rules were doubtless in place when Vizzi bought his home in
the community, and were provided to him in writing before he settled
escrow,

Actually, this is in dispute, and the dispute was resolved in favor of
Vizzi. The Vizzis only received a "Windsor Park Declaration" relating
to the specific sub-part of the community they lived in, and allege
that they never received a copy of the "Eagles Master Declaration," a
document covering the larger set of communities, years after their
purchase. This is, sadly, all too common.

This was found by the court in this case to be undisputed. Therefore,
they were not on notice.

as part of the deed and title documentation, being covenants
running with the land which restricted his use of the land. While he
apparently then complained that the rules he bought into were unfair,

The rules he bought into were the ones he was actually provided a copy
of and upon which he conditioned his purchase of the home.
....
Incidentally, it is NOT the HOA in charge of Windsor Park Association,
where he lives, which is attempting to enforce this agreement against
him. It is an upper level HOA, in charge of the entire set of
communities, which is attempting to enforce it against him.

His actual neighbors have no complaint.
....
in
this case, there were two separate documents, both contracts. The
purchaser was only provided with one. The other was only provided
years later, and only years after that did they attempt to enforce it
against him. There's a very real question of detrimental reliance on
their inaction, even had the purchaser ever agreed to the Eagles
Master Declaration in the first place, which he didn't.
....
The only rule to which the homeowner had agreed was in the Windsor
Park agreement, which only prohibited parking vehicles in the driveway
which are "primarily used for commercial purposes." It said nothing
about pick-up trucks. The Eagles Declaration, the one that was never
provided to the homeowner, did list pick-up trucks as impermissible.
The Eagles Declaration also arguably forbids trucks in general from
being parked in driveways. If this were true, then all the residents
would be forced to get rid of their SUVs, which are, apparently, also
considered legally to be "trucks." A fine kettle of fish that would
be.
....
This isn't all. Even if the contract in question were enforceable
against this homeowner, there are doubts as to whether the officers of
the homeowner association in question were even duly elected. If they
were not duly elected, they have no business issuing fines or
enforcing rules against anyone. The plaintiff homeowner alleges that
the board has failed to hold elections at all, as required by the
bylaws, and that therefore, the current holdover board has no legal
right to hold office. This part of the suit is stayed pending
administrative proceedings on the same issue.

--- end quote ---

On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 09:13:33 -0600, Hell Toupee
wrote:

Zootal wrote:

Just out of curiosity - do you have the right to refuse to sign the
agreement if you buy the house? IOW, can you buy a house in one of these HOA
neighborhoods, but refuse to sign or comply?

An HOA is a corporate equivalent of a government, and it controls
the community. Signing the agreement is mandatory when purchasing
into the community.

Abiding by the terms are mandatory. In Maryland at the very least
there is no method of signing an agreement, at least for some HOAs,
but I'll bet all. A well organized HOA might want to make sure that
all prospective buyers knew there were covenants on the land, but the
seller would often want them not to know, depending on whether a buyer
would be happy with such covenants or unhappy to have them.

(My seller was afaict scrupulously honest, and he didn't say a word. I
don't know why not. It might have slippped his mind and I didn't
think to ask. Nor did his real estate agent tell me, but they may
have violated real estate law when I wanted to make an offer but they
said he wouldn't be interested. I should have insisted, because the
law required them to relay good-faith offers.)

And even if a state had an agreement, and somehow a buyer never signed
it, the conditions go with the land and are binding whether he signed
them or not, unless the owner can show that he didsn't know and
needn't have known about the terms. That's hard to show. In other
long post today by me, it turns out in the OP the owner knew about and
agreed to his local n'hhood's terms and had no reason to think there
were additional terms by a higher level HOA that his own local HOA was
a member of. How could he know there were two sets of documents?

For those people who wonder if government would
be better if it were run like a business, look at HOAs before
deciding if that alternative is preferable.

I agree with you here. The problem is in people more than the form of
government. That's why "checks and balances" are so important, why
each part of government being subject to investigation or overruling
by others is important.

A corrupt or badly informed HOA doesn't have much of that, except in
the civil courts, wyhich can be very expensive about cases which are
often "not that important".

Dissolving an HOA usually isn't as simple as voting it out of
existence. The development of the community carried a lot of costs
that were not born by the local governments but were carried up by
the developer, who passed that responsibility onto the HOA. Those
development expenses are usually only partly included in the costs
of the houses. A lot of it is also structured into the HOA fees,
along with the maintenance costs. Even if the HOA were dissolved,
the debts remain, and somebody has to pay them. The local
governments usually don't want to, which is why they encourage HOAs
in the first place.

"Plebe" wrote
cshenk told us...

Same here. No HOA and none needed. Local Neighborhood association (not
the same but serves us well) to help out folks. 100% voluntary.

That sounds like a good idea!

It is. I posted a longer note on it, but it's just a bunch of neighbors and
an email list (voluntary) where you ask for help with various things or
arrange to borrow tools.

There's about 8 kids (15-17 in age) who cut yards for 10$ (small city plots,
you provide gas). Stuff like that. A one time group deal with a roofer
(just for those who wanted in).

Simple and sane.

On Dec 20, 1:51*pm, wrote:
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 09:53:26 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools





wrote:
On Dec 18, 3:44*pm, wrote:
On 18 Dec 2008 03:47:32 GMT, Jim Yanik wrote:

"SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote in
:

I wouldn't be shocked if this case is appealed. This fires a shot
across the bow of every HOA in Florida.

Because of the state of things in Florida, the ripple effect has been
felt as far away as Nevada. *Because HOA members wanted
accountability, Florida enacted the first law requiring a full reserve
study be done by a state licensed and approved reserve specialist.
This study includes a 30 year projection of all costs of common areas
and appurtenances, depreciation of same, interest rates earned on
money collected and deposited in interest bearing accounts, and bottom
line, what the HOA dues per owner will be to meet the 30 year plan.

Nevada has such a law.

Now, a new subdivision or condo bunch may not be built without the
builder forming a HOA, and then turning it over to members.

I love watching this stuff. *We do the inspections on these
properties, the largest one being 1200 acres. *Smallest one 7 houses.
It's about $80 an hour for our work.

We love HOAs, but I wouldn't live in one for anything, even if I got
old and couldn't mow the yard. *Right now, I live at the end of a dirt
road. *I can **** off the front step whenever I want to and shoot
coyotes out of the back acreage. *I live in AG1 agricultural zoning,
and can do almost anything. Still have to get permits for new
construction, but that's all.

I do own a cabin where there is a HOA. *But the dues are $25 per year,
and there has never been a meeting, and not $1 of dues has been
collected. *When we need something done, we get the 7 cabin owners
together, and do it. *Like it should be.

Steve

and what do you do if your neighborhood votes to form a HOA,and then you
have to abide by their restrictions?
Or,when you sell your property,then it falls under the HOA's rule.

Never heard of an HOA being imposed after the fact. If you own your
property free and clear before an HOA is formed, you are, by
definition, NOT part of the HOA. If they don't like you being there
they have TWO choices. Develop elsewhere or buy you out at your price.

Unless your property violates municipal bylaws- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It happens...you just need the majority to amend the local law
(covenant in many places) that apply to the subdivision.

TMT

If you are there before the subdivision covenant, you are NOT bound by
the covenant.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I would disagree...if a majority votes to adopt a change, you are
stuck with it.

TMT

On Dec 20, 2:11*pm, "cshenk" wrote:
"Too_Many_Tools" wrote

In many areas, having a HOA will cause potential buyers to NOT buy
into an area.
And in this housing market (and for the foreseeable future), that is
the kiss of death to anyone who wants to sell their home.

That would be me. *I would never willing buy into a community with an HOA.
Far too subject to abuse by nitpicking neighbors with nothing better to do
than watch my grass grow too much in 5 days to suit them before the weekly
cutting.

Five days? LOL You better make that five HOURS.

In the past I have had two neighbors who would mow their lawn in the
morning and then in the late afternoon.

They both served on HOA boards and expected others to follow suit.

HOAs attract Lawn Nazis like a flame attracts moths.

TMT

On Dec 21, 12:11*am, mm wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2008 08:53:59 -0500, Norminn
wrote:



We have eight units in our condo. *Three are for sale, three have liens
for unpaid monthly assessments.
Only one has the owner living in the unit (four empty, three rented). *
One owner doesn't live in the US.
The three who are in arrears on monthly assessments have NEVER resided
in the units they own. *I
hope all the flippers burn in hell, slowly. *They are the scum that tax
money is being poured on.

At least some proposals for mortgage aid are designed to exclude
investment properties. *Sometimes it's hard to write a law that does a
good job targeting the intended target. *But certainly it would
require that the owner reside in the property.

BTW, I know that Bush and Paulson deserve some of the blame for giving
money to banks which then didn't lend it to anyone (but bought other
banks or paid dividends with it) but does the Congress deserve blame
too. * Were the restrictions supposed to be in the law, or in the
contracts drawn up by the executive branch to implement the law?

The Congress "trusted" the White House with the money...just like they
did with the vote for Iraq.

The problems of the money being misused in each case lies squarely
with the White House.

TMT

On Sun, 21 Dec 2008 12:32:20 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Dec 20, 1:51Â*pm, wrote:
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 09:53:26 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools





wrote:
On Dec 18, 3:44Â*pm, wrote:
On 18 Dec 2008 03:47:32 GMT, Jim Yanik wrote:

"SteveB" toquerville@zionvistas wrote in
:

I wouldn't be shocked if this case is appealed. This fires a shot
across the bow of every HOA in Florida.

Because of the state of things in Florida, the ripple effect has been
felt as far away as Nevada. Â*Because HOA members wanted
accountability, Florida enacted the first law requiring a full reserve
study be done by a state licensed and approved reserve specialist.
This study includes a 30 year projection of all costs of common areas
and appurtenances, depreciation of same, interest rates earned on
money collected and deposited in interest bearing accounts, and bottom
line, what the HOA dues per owner will be to meet the 30 year plan.

Nevada has such a law.

Now, a new subdivision or condo bunch may not be built without the
builder forming a HOA, and then turning it over to members.

I love watching this stuff. Â*We do the inspections on these
properties, the largest one being 1200 acres. Â*Smallest one 7 houses.
It's about $80 an hour for our work.

We love HOAs, but I wouldn't live in one for anything, even if I got
old and couldn't mow the yard. Â*Right now, I live at the end of a dirt
road. Â*I can **** off the front step whenever I want to and shoot
coyotes out of the back acreage. Â*I live in AG1 agricultural zoning,
and can do almost anything. Still have to get permits for new
construction, but that's all.

I do own a cabin where there is a HOA. Â*But the dues are $25 per year,
and there has never been a meeting, and not $1 of dues has been
collected. Â*When we need something done, we get the 7 cabin owners
together, and do it. Â*Like it should be.

Steve

and what do you do if your neighborhood votes to form a HOA,and then you
have to abide by their restrictions?
Or,when you sell your property,then it falls under the HOA's rule.

Never heard of an HOA being imposed after the fact. If you own your
property free and clear before an HOA is formed, you are, by
definition, NOT part of the HOA. If they don't like you being there
they have TWO choices. Develop elsewhere or buy you out at your price.

Unless your property violates municipal bylaws- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It happens...you just need the majority to amend the local law
(covenant in many places) that apply to the subdivision.

TMT

If you are there before the subdivision covenant, you are NOT bound by
the covenant.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I would disagree...if a majority votes to adopt a change, you are
stuck with it.

TMT
If you are there before a formal subdivision or development is
organized you ARE exempt. At least to a degree. It is not like a
municipal bylaw - but even there, there is such a thing as a
"grandfather clause" or a "variance" which makes non-compliant use
legal.


If, however, ALL parties in the proposed HOA are existing homes, you
would be correct.