"[FLORIDA] Kimberly, a 6-year-old in the custody of her grandparents, is
facing eviction by local law enforcement because her grandparents live in a
retirement community. The child has lived in the house her whole life, as
her mother is unable to care for her due to unspecified drug problems. Now
authorities plan to remove the girl from the only home she's ever known and
place her in foster care with strangers due to a homeowners association
policy."

I agree. 'God's Waiting Room' (Florida) is no place for a child!

http://www.inquisitr.com/43825/flori...ct-6-year-old/

HeyBub wrote:
"[FLORIDA] Kimberly, a 6-year-old in the custody of her grandparents, is
facing eviction by local law enforcement because her grandparents live in a
retirement community. The child has lived in the house her whole life, as
her mother is unable to care for her due to unspecified drug problems. Now
authorities plan to remove the girl from the only home she's ever known and
place her in foster care with strangers due to a homeowners association
policy."

I agree. 'God's Waiting Room' (Florida) is no place for a child!

http://www.inquisitr.com/43825/flori...ct-6-year-old/

Florida chose to develop itself via planned communities and HOAs, in
order to shift most of the costs of infrastructure development
initially onto the developer who builds the community, then assumed by
the homeowners who take on the debt not only for the home they buy,
but for the development's costs, too. That's the primary purpose of
the HOA - to collect funds for the debt payments and to keep their
community maintained. Making up additional rules is what they get to
do to make their community more appealing for those who believe rules
are for everyone else. If the citizens of that state keep bitching
about their big bad HOAs, they should vote to implement an income tax
on themselves, so the state will be able to fund infrastructure,
instead of forcing developers and homeowners to assume the debt via
homeowner's associations.

With regards to this particular case: the couple moved into a
seniors-only community and understood that when they purchased their
home. The community doesn't have to change because their life did.
Since they've had no luck selling it, they should see if the HOA rules
permit homes to be rented. If they can, just rent it out and move into
an apartment with the kid.

"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
HeyBub wrote:
"[FLORIDA] Kimberly, a 6-year-old in the custody of her grandparents, is
facing eviction by local law enforcement because her grandparents live in
a retirement community. The child has lived in the house her whole life,
as her mother is unable to care for her due to unspecified drug problems.
Now authorities plan to remove the girl from the only home she's ever
known and place her in foster care with strangers due to a homeowners
association policy."

I agree. 'God's Waiting Room' (Florida) is no place for a child!

http://www.inquisitr.com/43825/flori...ct-6-year-old/

Florida chose to develop itself via planned communities and HOAs, in order
to shift most of the costs of infrastructure development initially onto
the developer who builds the community, then assumed by the homeowners who
take on the debt not only for the home they buy, but for the development's
costs, too. That's the primary purpose of the HOA - to collect funds for
the debt payments and to keep their community maintained. Making up
additional rules is what they get to do to make their community more
appealing for those who believe rules are for everyone else. If the
citizens of that state keep bitching about their big bad HOAs, they should
vote to implement an income tax on themselves, so the state will be able
to fund infrastructure, instead of forcing developers and homeowners to
assume the debt via homeowner's associations.

With regards to this particular case: the couple moved into a seniors-only
community and understood that when they purchased their home. The
community doesn't have to change because their life did. Since they've had
no luck selling it, they should see if the HOA rules permit homes to be
rented. If they can, just rent it out and move into an apartment with the
kid.


It sounds like they DID understand that when they bought the home, and the
child ended up with them afterward. But none of that matters. I would've
liked to know the real reason the association wants them out. It's more than
just rules. Has the child caused problems? Many old people have nothing
better to do than complain about nothing at all.

I lived in an apartment complex for a couple of years, and one of the rules
stated that cars without license plates would be considered abandoned or
evil or some such thing. I sold my car, and on the day the buyer was picking
it up, I removed the plates. Within 15 minutes, the police were at my door.
I explained the situation. He said the police got 15-20 calls a week from
aimless, nosy old people in the complex. He said "Have a good day" and left.
I called the rental office. The nice lady said she had nothing to do with
the call.

Nosy old people used to sit at the front door of my building in nice weather
and inquire about the groceries I was carrying in or the trash I was
carrying out. This may be what the couple in Florida is up against, and if
so, the judge will hopefully spank the appropriate parties.

Hell Toupee wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
"[FLORIDA] Kimberly, a 6-year-old in the custody of her grandparents,
is facing eviction by local law enforcement because her grandparents
live in a retirement community. The child has lived in the house her
whole life, as her mother is unable to care for her due to unspecified
drug problems. Now authorities plan to remove the girl from the only
home she's ever known and place her in foster care with strangers due
to a homeowners association policy."

I agree. 'God's Waiting Room' (Florida) is no place for a child!

http://www.inquisitr.com/43825/flori...ct-6-year-old/


Florida chose to develop itself via planned communities and HOAs, in
order to shift most of the costs of infrastructure development initially
onto the developer who builds the community, then assumed by the
homeowners who take on the debt not only for the home they buy, but for
the development's costs, too. That's the primary purpose of the HOA - to
collect funds for the debt payments and to keep their community
maintained. Making up additional rules is what they get to do to make
their community more appealing for those who believe rules are for
everyone else. If the citizens of that state keep bitching about their
big bad HOAs, they should vote to implement an income tax on themselves,
so the state will be able to fund infrastructure, instead of forcing
developers and homeowners to assume the debt via homeowner's associations.

With regards to this particular case: the couple moved into a
seniors-only community and understood that when they purchased their
home. The community doesn't have to change because their life did. Since
they've had no luck selling it, they should see if the HOA rules permit
homes to be rented. If they can, just rent it out and move into an
apartment with the kid.

This particular case has been going on for a long, long time. Time
enough for the child's mother to finish rehab and be a mother again. My
condo does no background checks, and would be more inclined to welcome
those who fail than those who pass.....wonder what the HOA history is
with the mother of this child and whether there is bad blood because of
the mother. Not enforcing the bylaws could get the HOA sued for
discrimination, so solutions aren't always easy. If the grandparents
are willing to take such a heavy loss in selling their place, why not
just rent it out and live elsewhere? Their family problems may be
tragic, but the whole neighborhood doesn't need to pay the price.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


It sounds like they DID understand that when they bought the home, and the
child ended up with them afterward. But none of that matters.

It most certainly does matter. This couple *knowingly* violated their
HOA rules, and not for a short time, either - for the better part of
six years. I'm sure during that time the HOA tried many times to get
them to cooperate before bringing the law into it.

For that matter, the housing market was red-hot five to six years ago.
They had ample opportunity to sell their home and move somewhere that
would have no problem with a child in their home. Instead, they
decided they were entitled to enjoy the benefits of living in a
childfree community, while at the same time being entitled to be the
sole exception to the no-children rule. That makes them assholes.

I would've
liked to know the real reason the association wants them out. It's more than
just rules.

The rules are legally enforceable - as long as they are applied
consistently and without favoritism or discrimination. If the rules
are not upheld, or inconsistently upheld, the HOA loses the legal
right to enforce the rule. If they don't pursue the case against this
couple, then everyone can have children living with them. Which cheats
those people who bought into the community precisely _because_ of the
no-children rule.

You don't like it? Don't live there. But don't knock the people who
willingly bought in because they wanted to live under those
restrictions. Their right to have the lifestyle they paid for should
not be dismissed.


Has the child caused problems? Many old people have nothing
better to do than complain about nothing at all.

If you let one household break the rule, you *must* allow every
household to break the rule. You cannot legally play favorites. At
that point, the rule ceases to exist, and the community is no longer a
seniors-only community.

Nosy old people used to sit at the front door of my building in nice weather
and inquire about the groceries I was carrying in or the trash I was
carrying out. This may be what the couple in Florida is up against, and if
so, the judge will hopefully spank the appropriate parties.

The judge has spanked the appropriate party, that being the
grandparents, for flouting the HOA rule. It's their fault the child
suffers. Then again, they raised an irresponsible druggie daughter, so
it doesn't sound like they're parents-of-the-year material by any
stretch of the imagination. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


It sounds like they DID understand that when they bought the home, and
the child ended up with them afterward. But none of that matters.

It most certainly does matter. This couple *knowingly* violated their HOA
rules, and not for a short time, either - for the better part of six
years. I'm sure during that time the HOA tried many times to get them to
cooperate before bringing the law into it.

For that matter, the housing market was red-hot five to six years ago.
They had ample opportunity to sell their home and move somewhere that
would have no problem with a child in their home. Instead, they decided
they were entitled to enjoy the benefits of living in a childfree
community, while at the same time being entitled to be the sole exception
to the no-children rule. That makes them assholes.

I would've
liked to know the real reason the association wants them out. It's more
than just rules.

The rules are legally enforceable - as long as they are applied
consistently and without favoritism or discrimination. If the rules are
not upheld, or inconsistently upheld, the HOA loses the legal right to
enforce the rule. If they don't pursue the case against this couple, then
everyone can have children living with them. Which cheats those people who
bought into the community precisely _because_ of the no-children rule.

You don't like it? Don't live there. But don't knock the people who
willingly bought in because they wanted to live under those restrictions.
Their right to have the lifestyle they paid for should not be dismissed.


Has the child caused problems? Many old people have nothing
better to do than complain about nothing at all.

If you let one household break the rule, you *must* allow every household
to break the rule. You cannot legally play favorites. At that point, the
rule ceases to exist, and the community is no longer a seniors-only
community.

Nosy old people used to sit at the front door of my building in nice
weather and inquire about the groceries I was carrying in or the trash I
was carrying out. This may be what the couple in Florida is up against,
and if so, the judge will hopefully spank the appropriate parties.

The judge has spanked the appropriate party, that being the grandparents,
for flouting the HOA rule. It's their fault the child suffers. Then again,
they raised an irresponsible druggie daughter, so it doesn't sound like
they're parents-of-the-year material by any stretch of the imagination.
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.


hahahahahaha

Must be some fabulous grandparents living in that retirement community if
they can't stand the sight of a 6 year old child. What assholes.

On 12/30/09 09:56 am, HeyBub wrote:

"[FLORIDA] Kimberly, a 6-year-old in the custody of her grandparents, is
facing eviction by local law enforcement because her grandparents live in a
retirement community. The child has lived in the house her whole life, as
her mother is unable to care for her due to unspecified drug problems. Now
authorities plan to remove the girl from the only home she's ever known and
place her in foster care with strangers due to a homeowners association
policy."

I agree. 'God's Waiting Room' (Florida) is no place for a child!

http://www.inquisitr.com/43825/flori...ct-6-year-old/

I had read of a somewhat similar case (except that the child in question
was a high-school senior whose sole surviving parent had died. The
grandparents were the only family members with whom she could live
without having to change schools part-way through her senior year). A
while later, at a "Senior Expo," I asked the manager of a senior-housing
complex what would have happened in his complex in such circumstances.
He said that since they get special tax (property tax?) breaks for
senior-only housing, he would have had to evict the girl also.

I am no fan of HOAs and live in a community without one, but can we be
sure that in the case in question there are not some other relevant factors?

Perce

Wow, 15 minutes. Wish that TSA worked as efficiently. They
should hire some nosy retirees. We could cut down on
underwear bombers.

I got a "unregistered vehicle" letter from the trailer park
one time, the license plate was laying on the dash board,
not screwed to the front. Oh, well.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..


"JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote in message ...


I lived in an apartment complex for a couple of years, and
one of the rules
stated that cars without license plates would be considered
abandoned or
evil or some such thing. I sold my car, and on the day the
buyer was picking
it up, I removed the plates. Within 15 minutes, the police
were at my door.
I explained the situation. He said the police got 15-20
calls a week from
aimless, nosy old people in the complex. He said "Have a
good day" and left.
I called the rental office. The nice lady said she had
nothing to do with
the call.

Nosy old people used to sit at the front door of my building
in nice weather
and inquire about the groceries I was carrying in or the
trash I was
carrying out. This may be what the couple in Florida is up
against, and if
so, the judge will hopefully spank the appropriate parties.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
HeyBub wrote:
"[FLORIDA] Kimberly, a 6-year-old in the custody of her grandparents, is
facing eviction by local law enforcement because her grandparents live
in a retirement community. The child has lived in the house her whole
life, as her mother is unable to care for her due to unspecified drug
problems. Now authorities plan to remove the girl from the only home
she's ever known and place her in foster care with strangers due to a
homeowners association policy."

I agree. 'God's Waiting Room' (Florida) is no place for a child!

http://www.inquisitr.com/43825/flori...ct-6-year-old/

Florida chose to develop itself via planned communities and HOAs, in
order to shift most of the costs of infrastructure development initially
onto the developer who builds the community, then assumed by the
homeowners who take on the debt not only for the home they buy, but for
the development's costs, too. That's the primary purpose of the HOA - to
collect funds for the debt payments and to keep their community
maintained. Making up additional rules is what they get to do to make
their community more appealing for those who believe rules are for
everyone else. If the citizens of that state keep bitching about their
big bad HOAs, they should vote to implement an income tax on themselves,
so the state will be able to fund infrastructure, instead of forcing
developers and homeowners to assume the debt via homeowner's
associations.

With regards to this particular case: the couple moved into a
seniors-only community and understood that when they purchased their
home. The community doesn't have to change because their life did. Since
they've had no luck selling it, they should see if the HOA rules permit
homes to be rented. If they can, just rent it out and move into an
apartment with the kid.


It sounds like they DID understand that when they bought the home, and the
child ended up with them afterward. But none of that matters. I would've
liked to know the real reason the association wants them out. It's more
than just rules. Has the child caused problems? Many old people have
nothing better to do than complain about nothing at all.

I lived in an apartment complex for a couple of years, and one of the
rules stated that cars without license plates would be considered
abandoned or evil or some such thing. I sold my car, and on the day the
buyer was picking it up, I removed the plates. Within 15 minutes, the
police were at my door. I explained the situation. He said the police got
15-20 calls a week from aimless, nosy old people in the complex. He said
"Have a good day" and left. I called the rental office. The nice lady said
she had nothing to do with the call.

Nosy old people used to sit at the front door of my building in nice
weather and inquire about the groceries I was carrying in or the trash I
was carrying out. This may be what the couple in Florida is up against,
and if so, the judge will hopefully spank the appropriate parties.


Seniors move into these communities because most can't take the noise of
children running around. Don't condemn them because one day you'll be old
and you won't want to be disturbed or annoyed. Regardless of when the child
came into the development, HOA rules, especially in Florida do not allow
anyone under the age of 21. Adult communities can lose their status if there
are underage people living there.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


It sounds like they DID understand that when they bought the home, and
the child ended up with them afterward. But none of that matters.

It most certainly does matter. This couple *knowingly* violated their HOA
rules, and not for a short time, either - for the better part of six
years. I'm sure during that time the HOA tried many times to get them to
cooperate before bringing the law into it.

For that matter, the housing market was red-hot five to six years ago.
They had ample opportunity to sell their home and move somewhere that
would have no problem with a child in their home. Instead, they decided
they were entitled to enjoy the benefits of living in a childfree
community, while at the same time being entitled to be the sole exception
to the no-children rule. That makes them assholes.

I would've
liked to know the real reason the association wants them out. It's more
than just rules.

The rules are legally enforceable - as long as they are applied
consistently and without favoritism or discrimination. If the rules are
not upheld, or inconsistently upheld, the HOA loses the legal right to
enforce the rule. If they don't pursue the case against this couple, then
everyone can have children living with them. Which cheats those people
who bought into the community precisely _because_ of the no-children
rule.

You don't like it? Don't live there. But don't knock the people who
willingly bought in because they wanted to live under those restrictions.
Their right to have the lifestyle they paid for should not be dismissed.


Has the child caused problems? Many old people have nothing
better to do than complain about nothing at all.

If you let one household break the rule, you *must* allow every household
to break the rule. You cannot legally play favorites. At that point, the
rule ceases to exist, and the community is no longer a seniors-only
community.

Nosy old people used to sit at the front door of my building in nice
weather and inquire about the groceries I was carrying in or the trash I
was carrying out. This may be what the couple in Florida is up against,
and if so, the judge will hopefully spank the appropriate parties.

The judge has spanked the appropriate party, that being the grandparents,
for flouting the HOA rule. It's their fault the child suffers. Then
again, they raised an irresponsible druggie daughter, so it doesn't sound
like they're parents-of-the-year material by any stretch of the
imagination. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.


hahahahahaha

Must be some fabulous grandparents living in that retirement community if
they can't stand the sight of a 6 year old child. What assholes.


No, it's assholes like you that flaunt rules and regs. People spent good
money to live in an adult community. Everyone who bought there knew the
rules and agreed to follow them. It's not for assholes like you to determine
if a grandparent can put up with the noise of children. I have many
grandchildren. I love visiting with them but when the noise and activity
gets too much for us, we go home and relax in peace.
One day you're going to be old and crotchety. I wanna be around and **** on
your tin roof all night.

Must be some fabulous grandparents living in that retirement community if
they can't stand the sight of a 6 year old child. What assholes.

We live our lives, grow up, grow old, raise our children, kick them out of
the nests if we are good parents, and they fly off on their own. For some,
they get stuck raising their grandkids, by whatever reasons.

Assholes who reach grandparenthood want to take their money and live in a
place where someone else mows the grass, paints the houses, fixes the roof,
and does all that stuff. They can sleep until 10AM because there aren't a
bunch of screaming kids running around outside their doors. Digging holes,
leaving "stuff" all over, and getting into their "stuff". They pay good
money for that quiet. Kids aren't allowed. And then these kids turn into
teenagers, and all that brings with it, even if they are well behaved
teenagers.

Do you also insist that it takes an asshole who won't let you take your 8
year old son into a drinking establishment?

It's an unfortunate situation, but not one where all these residents should
be forced to alter their lifestyles because one family's situation has
soured. They signed legal papers saying so, even the grandparents of the
child. It's time for them to relocate the child, or move out.

I would never buy into a HOA. I shouldn't say never, because one never
knows. But if I did, I sure as hell wouldn't want screaming kids and rude
teen agers to deal with again. BTDT, did my time, raised my kids, they're
through college now, and on to careers. But if something did happen to any
of my children, and I had to help raise the grandkids, hell yes, I'd do it.
But I wouldn't put it on the backs of a bunch of other people and make it
THEIR problem. I'd move out to a house where they could live more
comfortably.

Does that make me an asshole?

Steve

Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
On 12/30/09 09:56 am, HeyBub wrote:

"[FLORIDA] Kimberly, a 6-year-old in the custody of her grandparents, is
facing eviction by local law enforcement because her grandparents live
in a
retirement community. The child has lived in the house her whole life, as
her mother is unable to care for her due to unspecified drug problems.
Now
authorities plan to remove the girl from the only home she's ever
known and
place her in foster care with strangers due to a homeowners association
policy."

I agree. 'God's Waiting Room' (Florida) is no place for a child!

http://www.inquisitr.com/43825/flori...ct-6-year-old/


I had read of a somewhat similar case (except that the child in question
was a high-school senior whose sole surviving parent had died. The
grandparents were the only family members with whom she could live
without having to change schools part-way through her senior year). A
while later, at a "Senior Expo," I asked the manager of a senior-housing
complex what would have happened in his complex in such circumstances.
He said that since they get special tax (property tax?) breaks for
senior-only housing, he would have had to evict the girl also.

I am no fan of HOAs and live in a community without one, but can we be
sure that in the case in question there are not some other relevant
factors?

Perce

I'm not fond of HOAs and condos, either. Equal dislike of spoiled,
trashy, rude and undisciplined kids. We have one teen brat who often
tosses her fast food trash in the parking lot or atrium. Other adult
children who have been drunks and druggies, having loud arguments,
letting pets run loose, trashing former residence, etc. There are very
good reasons for people to live in seniors-only homes - one is that
people who have never had kids don't want them around. Understandable
and a good choice for some people. The hoodlum element also prey on
elderly, which is an issue I have only recently begun to contemplate.

"Steve B" wrote in message
...

Must be some fabulous grandparents living in that retirement community
if
they can't stand the sight of a 6 year old child. What assholes.

We live our lives, grow up, grow old, raise our children, kick them out of
the nests if we are good parents, and they fly off on their own. For
some, they get stuck raising their grandkids, by whatever reasons.

Assholes who reach grandparenthood want to take their money and live in a
place where someone else mows the grass, paints the houses, fixes the
roof, and does all that stuff. They can sleep until 10AM because there
aren't a bunch of screaming kids running around outside their doors.
Digging holes, leaving "stuff" all over, and getting into their "stuff".
They pay good money for that quiet. Kids aren't allowed. And then these
kids turn into teenagers, and all that brings with it, even if they are
well behaved teenagers.

Do you also insist that it takes an asshole who won't let you take your 8
year old son into a drinking establishment?

It's an unfortunate situation, but not one where all these residents
should be forced to alter their lifestyles because one family's situation
has soured. They signed legal papers saying so, even the grandparents of
the child. It's time for them to relocate the child, or move out.

I would never buy into a HOA. I shouldn't say never, because one never
knows. But if I did, I sure as hell wouldn't want screaming kids and rude
teen agers to deal with again. BTDT, did my time, raised my kids, they're
through college now, and on to careers. But if something did happen to
any of my children, and I had to help raise the grandkids, hell yes, I'd
do it. But I wouldn't put it on the backs of a bunch of other people and
make it THEIR problem. I'd move out to a house where they could live more
comfortably.

Does that make me an asshole?

Steve



This still leaves an important question: What is the REAL problem (if any)
with the kid? Is it some aimless old person who peeks through his or her
curtains all day long LOOKING for problems which don't exist? Surely, you're
aware of such people. And I know your name's not Shirley.

"Steve B" wrote in message
...

Must be some fabulous grandparents living in that retirement community
if
they can't stand the sight of a 6 year old child. What assholes.

We live our lives, grow up, grow old, raise our children, kick them out of
the nests if we are good parents, and they fly off on their own. For
some, they get stuck raising their grandkids, by whatever reasons.

Assholes who reach grandparenthood want to take their money and live in a
place where someone else mows the grass, paints the houses, fixes the
roof, and does all that stuff. They can sleep until 10AM because there
aren't a bunch of screaming kids running around outside their doors.
Digging holes, leaving "stuff" all over, and getting into their "stuff".
They pay good money for that quiet. Kids aren't allowed. And then these
kids turn into teenagers, and all that brings with it, even if they are
well behaved teenagers.

Do you also insist that it takes an asshole who won't let you take your 8
year old son into a drinking establishment?

It's an unfortunate situation, but not one where all these residents
should be forced to alter their lifestyles because one family's situation
has soured. They signed legal papers saying so, even the grandparents of
the child. It's time for them to relocate the child, or move out.

I would never buy into a HOA. I shouldn't say never, because one never
knows. But if I did, I sure as hell wouldn't want screaming kids and rude
teen agers to deal with again. BTDT, did my time, raised my kids, they're
through college now, and on to careers. But if something did happen to
any of my children, and I had to help raise the grandkids, hell yes, I'd
do it. But I wouldn't put it on the backs of a bunch of other people and
make it THEIR problem. I'd move out to a house where they could live more
comfortably.

Does that make me an asshole?

Steve

Far from being an asshole. You did your duty and you want to relax now.
It's your privilege to do so. And I too, if by some unfortunate happenstance
that I had to take in one or more of my grandchildren to raise, I'd do it in
a heartbeat. And like you, I wouldn't inconvenience anyone else because of
my responsibilities. I would just love to live long enough to see some of
the idiots that posted otherwise here grow old enough to resent some kids
screaming and yelling in front of their houses and annoying them. It would
make life so worthwhile to hang around for that.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

I guess you're right. It would be the best thing for society at large
if the little girl was dumped into Florida's "system".
Too bad her grandparents put their comfort first, isn't it? They made a
choice, reinforced over years, to put their granddaughter's future at
risk. She pays the penalty for having lousy parents and grandparents.

Knowing several foster parents, there's a good chance she could end up
being raised by more responsible adults. You know - the kind who put the
child's interests ahead of their own. Unlike granny and gramps in this
story.

Put yourself in the exact same position as the grandparents. Now,
beginning on the day when their daughter lost custody of the little girl,
what would YOU have done differently?
It should be obvious. As soon as I agreed to take custody of the child, I
would've put my home on the market, and at a price that would've assured a
quick sale. Back in 2004-mid-2006, homes were selling almost as fast as
they were listed. I would've also met with the HOA people to let them know
my changed circumstances, including my intention to sell out. Why? Because
that would show them I was a good guy and honoring their rules. In return,
that would motivate them to help me find a buyer so I could clear out
fast. Heck, there probably were people in the community back then who
would've been glad to buy it as an investment.

But this couple did not make selling out and moving their priority. These
characters dicked around. They either made no attempt at all until
recently to sell.......


I must've missed that in the news story. Where in the story did it indicate
WHEN IN THE SIX YEAR PERIOD they began trying to sell the house?

According to the article at the link below, the grandparents took in
their granddaughter in 2004. They made no attempt to sell their home
until sometime in 2006. They didn't make a serious attempt, either,
offering only a 5% discount off the appraised value. Not only is a 5%
discount a joke (10% is the absolute minimum if a quick sale is
desired), they hadn't paid for the home in the first place. They'd
inherited it, so they could've afforded an even more substantial
discount - but, like I said, they were greedy.

The HOA tried to work with them for three years, and they stubbornly
refused to cooperate. In another article, the grandmother admits that
in April 2005, she reached an agreement with the HOA that she would
abide by the association's rules by October 1st, 2006. In other
words, the HOA bent over backwards giving this family time to settle
their affairs and move out. The grandparents then broke the agreement.
The HOA sued them in 2007.

So yes, the grandparent's asshattery has been ongoing for years.

http://www.aarp.org/family/articles/eviction.html

HeyBub wrote the following:
"[FLORIDA] Kimberly, a 6-year-old in the custody of her grandparents, is
facing eviction by local law enforcement because her grandparents live in a
retirement community. The child has lived in the house her whole life, as
her mother is unable to care for her due to unspecified drug problems. Now
authorities plan to remove the girl from the only home she's ever known and
place her in foster care with strangers due to a homeowners association
policy."

I agree. 'God's Waiting Room' (Florida) is no place for a child!


Florida is a human's Elephant graveyard
http://www.inquisitr.com/43825/flori...ct-6-year-old/





--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

I guess you're right. It would be the best thing for society at large
if the little girl was dumped into Florida's "system".
Too bad her grandparents put their comfort first, isn't it? They made
a choice, reinforced over years, to put their granddaughter's future
at risk. She pays the penalty for having lousy parents and
grandparents.

Knowing several foster parents, there's a good chance she could end up
being raised by more responsible adults. You know - the kind who put
the child's interests ahead of their own. Unlike granny and gramps in
this story.

Put yourself in the exact same position as the grandparents. Now,
beginning on the day when their daughter lost custody of the little
girl, what would YOU have done differently?
It should be obvious. As soon as I agreed to take custody of the child,
I would've put my home on the market, and at a price that would've
assured a quick sale. Back in 2004-mid-2006, homes were selling almost
as fast as they were listed. I would've also met with the HOA people to
let them know my changed circumstances, including my intention to sell
out. Why? Because that would show them I was a good guy and honoring
their rules. In return, that would motivate them to help me find a buyer
so I could clear out fast. Heck, there probably were people in the
community back then who would've been glad to buy it as an investment.

But this couple did not make selling out and moving their priority.
These characters dicked around. They either made no attempt at all until
recently to sell.......


I must've missed that in the news story. Where in the story did it
indicate WHEN IN THE SIX YEAR PERIOD they began trying to sell the house?

According to the article at the link below, the grandparents took in their
granddaughter in 2004. They made no attempt to sell their home until
sometime in 2006. They didn't make a serious attempt, either, offering
only a 5% discount off the appraised value. Not only is a 5% discount a
joke (10% is the absolute minimum if a quick sale is desired), they hadn't
paid for the home in the first place. They'd inherited it, so they
could've afforded an even more substantial discount - but, like I said,
they were greedy.

The HOA tried to work with them for three years, and they stubbornly
refused to cooperate. In another article, the grandmother admits that in
April 2005, she reached an agreement with the HOA that she would abide by
the association's rules by October 1st, 2006. In other words, the HOA
bent over backwards giving this family time to settle their affairs and
move out. The grandparents then broke the agreement. The HOA sued them in
2007.

So yes, the grandparent's asshattery has been ongoing for years.

http://www.aarp.org/family/articles/eviction.html


I stand corrected.

Even so, the judge would be a fool to order them to put the child in foster
care.

wrote in message
m...
clipped

What don't you understand about the rules and regs of an adult community?
It forbids children, period. If you don't like it, don't move

Not necessarily the case in Florida ... don't recall whether it is HOAs or
MHPs, but in order to be "senior citizen" housing, it must have a minimum
percentage of OWNERS over 55. Even so, they may or may not allow younger
residents. Bylaws govern after state statutes.

Adults have to be 55 and over and no children under 21.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Sanity" wrote in message
...


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Sanity" wrote in message
...


"Steve B" wrote in message
...

Must be some fabulous grandparents living in that retirement
community if
they can't stand the sight of a 6 year old child. What assholes.

We live our lives, grow up, grow old, raise our children, kick them
out of the nests if we are good parents, and they fly off on their
own. For some, they get stuck raising their grandkids, by whatever
reasons.

Assholes who reach grandparenthood want to take their money and live
in a place where someone else mows the grass, paints the houses, fixes
the roof, and does all that stuff. They can sleep until 10AM because
there aren't a bunch of screaming kids running around outside their
doors. Digging holes, leaving "stuff" all over, and getting into their
"stuff". They pay good money for that quiet. Kids aren't allowed.
And then these kids turn into teenagers, and all that brings with it,
even if they are well behaved teenagers.

Do you also insist that it takes an asshole who won't let you take
your 8 year old son into a drinking establishment?

It's an unfortunate situation, but not one where all these residents
should be forced to alter their lifestyles because one family's
situation has soured. They signed legal papers saying so, even the
grandparents of the child. It's time for them to relocate the child,
or move out.

I would never buy into a HOA. I shouldn't say never, because one
never knows. But if I did, I sure as hell wouldn't want screaming
kids and rude teen agers to deal with again. BTDT, did my time,
raised my kids, they're through college now, and on to careers. But
if something did happen to any of my children, and I had to help raise
the grandkids, hell yes, I'd do it. But I wouldn't put it on the backs
of a bunch of other people and make it THEIR problem. I'd move out to
a house where they could live more comfortably.

Does that make me an asshole?

Steve

Far from being an asshole. You did your duty and you want to relax
now. It's your privilege to do so. And I too, if by some unfortunate
happenstance that I had to take in one or more of my grandchildren to
raise, I'd do it in a heartbeat. And like you, I wouldn't inconvenience
anyone else because of my responsibilities. I would just love to live
long enough to see some of the idiots that posted otherwise here grow
old enough to resent some kids screaming and yelling in front of their
houses and annoying them. It would make life so worthwhile to hang
around for that.


I live in a pretty nice neighborhood. The worst annoyances a

1) People who use leaf blowers for hours on end, trying to get one leaf
out from under a shrub.

2) Old folks who don't clean up after their dogs because they claim
they're unable to bend over low enough to do it. They should not own
dogs. Or, they are lying.

There are lots of kids here. They cause no problems, although one
neighbor's little kid developed a brief fascination with his dad's push
broom, and insisted on sweeping my driveway to show me what a fabulous
broom he had. The kids make no undue noise of any kind.

So by your above statement you admit that you're in the youngish stage of
life.

Bad guess, or unclear definition. I'm 56.


How do you know how you'll feel when your older and possible sicker? Will
you be able to tolerate any noises or disturbances?

There were no indications of problems in the article, so let's refrain
from guessing, OK?


Adult communities are nice to live in for seniors, not juniors. Let's go
one step further. If an older person were in an old age home and a
grandchild needed a home and care, would it be proper to move the
grandchild in with all the old folks in a nursing home?


I guess you're right. It would be the best thing for society at large if
the little girl was dumped into Florida's "system". Weren't there some
scandals involving the "system" not long ago?


..Who said she should be dumped? The grandparents should move out of an HOA
and raise this kid elsewhere. If the grandparents are old enough to go into
a nursing home, would it be all right to bring the 6 year old with them?
And you're 56 years old? You sure haven't learned anything in those 56
years.
Again, if the rules say no kids, what don't you understand? And who are you
to tell people how to or where to live? Did you pay for their houses? Did
you pay their maint. fees? When you're a true senior, if you like kids so
much move into a day care center.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


I stand corrected.

Even so, the judge would be a fool to order them to put the child in foster
care.

He doesn't have to. He can order the lot of them evicted for being in
violation of the guidelines. At that point the grandparents have their
own decision to make: leave with their granddaughter and find another
place where they all can live - or stay, and place their granddaughter
in foster care.

Judging from their self-centered history in this dispute, I'm betting
they'll give up their granddaughter before they'll give up their
house. They seem to be that kind of people.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

I guess you're right. It would be the best thing for society at large if
the little girl was dumped into Florida's "system".

Too bad her grandparents put their comfort first, isn't it? They made a
choice, reinforced over years, to put their granddaughter's future at
risk. She pays the penalty for having lousy parents and grandparents.

Knowing several foster parents, there's a good chance she could end up
being raised by more responsible adults. You know - the kind who put the
child's interests ahead of their own. Unlike granny and gramps in this
story.


Put yourself in the exact same position as the grandparents. Now,
beginning on the day when their daughter lost custody of the little girl,
what would YOU have done differently?


Knowing the rules of the HOA I would have put my house up for sale and moved
to a community that accepted youths. I would not have spit in the face of
the HOA and all the other homeowners who paid a fee not to have children
thrust in their face. Six years. Six years she violated the rules. The
HOA could have had her thrown out years ago. How much tolerance should they
have? The grandparents said to the HOA and the homeowners "F- - K You, I'll
do what I want".

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


Without that information, this discussion is based purely on conjecture.
I
realize conjecture is the fuel on which newsgroups run, but still, it's
best
to avoid it whenever possible.

No conjecture about it. They were in a no-child area, took the child,
and knew they were in the wrong from then on. The rest may be
conjecture, but is also beside the point. No kids=no kids.


No. It's important. When in the six year period did they begin trying to
sell the home?


It should have been at most 30 days after the child moved in. Actually, if
they knew they were keeping the child they should have started selling
immediately (especially 6 years ago the houses were bringing big money). The
intentionally violated the rules and I have no pity on them. I'm sorry for
the 6 year old that her mother is a junkie but that doesn't excuse the fact
the grandparents were 1000 percent wrong.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote the following:
"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


It sounds like they DID understand that when they bought the home, and
the child ended up with them afterward. But none of that matters.

It most certainly does matter. This couple *knowingly* violated their HOA
rules, and not for a short time, either - for the better part of six
years. I'm sure during that time the HOA tried many times to get them to
cooperate before bringing the law into it.

For that matter, the housing market was red-hot five to six years ago.
They had ample opportunity to sell their home and move somewhere that
would have no problem with a child in their home. Instead, they decided
they were entitled to enjoy the benefits of living in a childfree
community, while at the same time being entitled to be the sole exception
to the no-children rule. That makes them assholes.

I would've

liked to know the real reason the association wants them out. It's more
than just rules.

The rules are legally enforceable - as long as they are applied
consistently and without favoritism or discrimination. If the rules are
not upheld, or inconsistently upheld, the HOA loses the legal right to
enforce the rule. If they don't pursue the case against this couple, then
everyone can have children living with them. Which cheats those people who
bought into the community precisely _because_ of the no-children rule.

You don't like it? Don't live there. But don't knock the people who
willingly bought in because they wanted to live under those restrictions.
Their right to have the lifestyle they paid for should not be dismissed.


Has the child caused problems? Many old people have nothing

better to do than complain about nothing at all.

If you let one household break the rule, you *must* allow every household
to break the rule. You cannot legally play favorites. At that point, the
rule ceases to exist, and the community is no longer a seniors-only
community.


Nosy old people used to sit at the front door of my building in nice
weather and inquire about the groceries I was carrying in or the trash I
was carrying out. This may be what the couple in Florida is up against,
and if so, the judge will hopefully spank the appropriate parties.

The judge has spanked the appropriate party, that being the grandparents,
for flouting the HOA rule. It's their fault the child suffers. Then again,
they raised an irresponsible druggie daughter, so it doesn't sound like
they're parents-of-the-year material by any stretch of the imagination.
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.



hahahahahaha

Must be some fabulous grandparents living in that retirement community if
they can't stand the sight of a 6 year old child. What assholes.

They probably don't have grandkids themselves. Maybe it would be better
if the complainers moved to their better reward ASAP.
Why would anyone not want yo see a 6 year old kid in their community.
The rule, like most HOA rules, are unconstitutional. What if they
prohibited black people from living there ( maybe they do!!! ), the
American Civil Liberties Union would be all over their asses. Maybe give
them a call?

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

Senior development are design as stated for senior
if they permit one family then they most permit other
I am sure you are familiar with word discrimination.
you may fill that you have been discriminated but apparently
it is just apposite.
This people both property specifically to live in peace for remain part
of they lives and now you want them to loose that freedom for your benefits,
You don't think that you are just little selfish.
In my opinion you are more then that, so please don't complain
You are not making you self look good.
As for me I live in north NJ in most expensive area in country,
if parents of this child want to bring it up let them move up here,
I am sure state of NJ would love that.



"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
"[FLORIDA] Kimberly, a 6-year-old in the custody of her grandparents, is
facing eviction by local law enforcement because her grandparents live in
a retirement community. The child has lived in the house her whole life,
as her mother is unable to care for her due to unspecified drug problems.
Now authorities plan to remove the girl from the only home she's ever
known and place her in foster care with strangers due to a homeowners
association policy."

I agree. 'God's Waiting Room' (Florida) is no place for a child!

http://www.inquisitr.com/43825/flori...ct-6-year-old/

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Dec 30, 1:06 pm, mm wrote:
Yes, renting would be good. then they can move back when she's 18 or
whatever the age limit is.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If it's 55 like many retirement communities, they'll be waiting a long
time.

As for the situation, I'm with Hell, Sanity, and Steve. The assholes
here are the grandparents who chose to ignore the clear restriction on
occupancy for 6 years.

================


The article doesn't seem to support the theory that they ignored the
rules. They *have* tried to sell the place. Sounds like they're stuck. One
day, the kid didn't need a home. The next day, she did. On that day, the
grandparents had two choices:

A) Give the kid a home and break the rules. Try to sell.
B) Send her off to foster care

If any of you say that YOU would've chosen "B" in the same situation, I'd
be very surprised.


So according to you it doesn't make a difference that the HOA bent over
backwards to help them? They could have had them put out after 30 days but 6
years later the idiot grandparents are still flaunting the rules.
Where is your logic? No one said to put the child in foster care. But the
grandparents had no right staying where they were and if the grandparents
don't have the brains to understand this, then maybe the child would be
better off in a foster home.

Ken wrote the following:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Steve wrote in message
...

Must be some fabulous grandparents living in that retirement
community
if
they can't stand the sight of a 6 year old child. What assholes.

We live our lives, grow up, grow old, raise our children, kick them
out of
the nests if we are good parents, and they fly off on their own. For
some, they get stuck raising their grandkids, by whatever reasons.

Assholes who reach grandparenthood want to take their money and live
in a
place where someone else mows the grass, paints the houses, fixes the
roof, and does all that stuff. They can sleep until 10AM because there
aren't a bunch of screaming kids running around outside their doors.
Digging holes, leaving "stuff" all over, and getting into their
"stuff".
They pay good money for that quiet. Kids aren't allowed. And then
these
kids turn into teenagers, and all that brings with it, even if they are
well behaved teenagers.

Do you also insist that it takes an asshole who won't let you take
your 8
year old son into a drinking establishment?

It's an unfortunate situation, but not one where all these residents
should be forced to alter their lifestyles because one family's
situation
has soured. They signed legal papers saying so, even the
grandparents of
the child. It's time for them to relocate the child, or move out.

I would never buy into a HOA. I shouldn't say never, because one never
knows. But if I did, I sure as hell wouldn't want screaming kids
and rude
teen agers to deal with again. BTDT, did my time, raised my kids,
they're
through college now, and on to careers. But if something did happen to
any of my children, and I had to help raise the grandkids, hell yes,
I'd
do it. But I wouldn't put it on the backs of a bunch of other people
and
make it THEIR problem. I'd move out to a house where they could
live more
comfortably.

Does that make me an asshole?

Steve



This still leaves an important question: What is the REAL problem
(if any)
with the kid? Is it some aimless old person who peeks through his or her
curtains all day long LOOKING for problems which don't exist? Surely,
you're
aware of such people. And I know your name's not Shirley.



It really doesn't matter if there is anything wrong with the kid
or not. I live in a community that has a Bill of Assurance and a HOA.
There are rules such as "No trailers can be parked on the homeowners
property or street." If someone buys a travel trailer for summer
travel, they need to rent a space off the community in which to store
it. There are other rules as well, and violations are not weighed
based upon whether the trailer looks "Neat," and so on. If a person
visits for a couple of night via a trailer, no one will complain. If
it becomes a permanent fixture however, it must be removed.

Does your HOA rules say that a certain type of person cannot live in the
community?
We are not talking about vehicles, or how your property is kept, we are
talking about HUMAN BEINGS.
Maybe your HOA does not like your kind and wants to evict you? Then what
will be your rssponse?


--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

Sanity wrote the following:


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Sanity" wrote in message
...


"Steve B" wrote in message
...

Must be some fabulous grandparents living in that retirement
community if
they can't stand the sight of a 6 year old child. What assholes.

We live our lives, grow up, grow old, raise our children, kick them
out of the nests if we are good parents, and they fly off on their
own. For some, they get stuck raising their grandkids, by whatever
reasons.

Assholes who reach grandparenthood want to take their money and
live in a place where someone else mows the grass, paints the
houses, fixes the roof, and does all that stuff. They can sleep
until 10AM because there aren't a bunch of screaming kids running
around outside their doors. Digging holes, leaving "stuff" all
over, and getting into their "stuff". They pay good money for that
quiet. Kids aren't allowed. And then these kids turn into
teenagers, and all that brings with it, even if they are well
behaved teenagers.

Do you also insist that it takes an asshole who won't let you take
your 8 year old son into a drinking establishment?

It's an unfortunate situation, but not one where all these
residents should be forced to alter their lifestyles because one
family's situation has soured. They signed legal papers saying so,
even the grandparents of the child. It's time for them to relocate
the child, or move out.

I would never buy into a HOA. I shouldn't say never, because one
never knows. But if I did, I sure as hell wouldn't want screaming
kids and rude teen agers to deal with again. BTDT, did my time,
raised my kids, they're through college now, and on to careers.
But if something did happen to any of my children, and I had to
help raise the grandkids, hell yes, I'd do it. But I wouldn't put
it on the backs of a bunch of other people and make it THEIR
problem. I'd move out to a house where they could live more
comfortably.

Does that make me an asshole?

Steve

Far from being an asshole. You did your duty and you want to relax
now. It's your privilege to do so. And I too, if by some unfortunate
happenstance that I had to take in one or more of my grandchildren
to raise, I'd do it in a heartbeat. And like you, I wouldn't
inconvenience anyone else because of my responsibilities. I would
just love to live long enough to see some of the idiots that posted
otherwise here grow old enough to resent some kids screaming and
yelling in front of their houses and annoying them. It would make
life so worthwhile to hang around for that.


I live in a pretty nice neighborhood. The worst annoyances a

1) People who use leaf blowers for hours on end, trying to get one
leaf out from under a shrub.

2) Old folks who don't clean up after their dogs because they claim
they're unable to bend over low enough to do it. They should not own
dogs. Or, they are lying.

There are lots of kids here. They cause no problems, although one
neighbor's little kid developed a brief fascination with his dad's
push broom, and insisted on sweeping my driveway to show me what a
fabulous broom he had. The kids make no undue noise of any kind.

So by your above statement you admit that you're in the youngish stage
of life. How do you know how you'll feel when your older and possible
sicker? Will you be able to tolerate any noises or disturbances?
Adult communities are nice to live in for seniors, not juniors. Let's
go one step further. If an older person were in an old age home and a
grandchild needed a home and care, would it be proper to move the
grandchild in with all the old folks in a nursing home?

I hope that I never get old enough to not enjoy the laughter of
children. I hope that you never have to listen to them, including your
own children and grandchuldren.
I think that I would rather have the children as neighbors than you. You
seem like the one that would turn me in for any distraction to your
miserable life.

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Steve B" wrote in message
...

Must be some fabulous grandparents living in that retirement community
if
they can't stand the sight of a 6 year old child. What assholes.

We live our lives, grow up, grow old, raise our children, kick them out
of the nests if we are good parents, and they fly off on their own. For
some, they get stuck raising their grandkids, by whatever reasons.

Assholes who reach grandparenthood want to take their money and live in a
place where someone else mows the grass, paints the houses, fixes the
roof, and does all that stuff. They can sleep until 10AM because there
aren't a bunch of screaming kids running around outside their doors.
Digging holes, leaving "stuff" all over, and getting into their "stuff".
They pay good money for that quiet. Kids aren't allowed. And then these
kids turn into teenagers, and all that brings with it, even if they are
well behaved teenagers.

Do you also insist that it takes an asshole who won't let you take your 8
year old son into a drinking establishment?

It's an unfortunate situation, but not one where all these residents
should be forced to alter their lifestyles because one family's situation
has soured. They signed legal papers saying so, even the grandparents of
the child. It's time for them to relocate the child, or move out.

I would never buy into a HOA. I shouldn't say never, because one never
knows. But if I did, I sure as hell wouldn't want screaming kids and
rude teen agers to deal with again. BTDT, did my time, raised my kids,
they're through college now, and on to careers. But if something did
happen to any of my children, and I had to help raise the grandkids, hell
yes, I'd do it. But I wouldn't put it on the backs of a bunch of other
people and make it THEIR problem. I'd move out to a house where they
could live more comfortably.

Does that make me an asshole?

Steve



This still leaves an important question: What is the REAL problem (if
any) with the kid? Is it some aimless old person who peeks through his or
her curtains all day long LOOKING for problems which don't exist? Surely,
you're aware of such people. And I know your name's not Shirley.

We do reserve studies for HOAs in the State of Nevada. We have done over
700 now. Our largest was 1200 acres.

Believe me, we've seen it all.

There may not, and there may never ever be a problem with this six year old.
She may become the darling of a bunch of people lonely for their own
grandchildren. She could possibly "adopt" a lot of new grandparents, and
have a happy full loving life there.

There are two problems. One is there is a precedent set, where the next
ones say, "Well, you let that one in, why not mine?" And the second or
third or umpteenth, or every other one may be the grandkids from Hell.
Second is the people bought and signed legal documents that said there would
be no kids. Just like when you agree and sign that there will be NO on
street parking. That's just the way it is. And if someone wants to enforce
that, they are not being a busybody.

YES, YES, YES, there are HOA Nazis. I have seen disputes over shades of
paint, color of rock fill, window shading, even colors of flowers. And for
someone planting flowers without getting it cleared with the board first.
Yes, there are some cranky old farts who do nothing but go around all day
and spy on neighbors. There was even one lady in North Las Vegas who
brought it to the attention of the City that there was an ordinance for
having weeds over X inches high in one's front yard, and the city had to put
a whole crew on that to get it enforced. Some people are just basically
unhappy, and they're always the ones who make the board because no one else
wants to make enemies with every neighbor they have. To these people, it
makes no difference because they already don't have any friends. NO ONE
ELSE WANTS THE JOB.

It's all up to the board and members, and the board interprets and enforces
the rules at the meetings. If enough people don't mind, then she may be
able to stay.

All in all, it's just a sad situation.

Steve

"Sanity" wrote in message
...


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

I guess you're right. It would be the best thing for society at large
if the little girl was dumped into Florida's "system".

Too bad her grandparents put their comfort first, isn't it? They made a
choice, reinforced over years, to put their granddaughter's future at
risk. She pays the penalty for having lousy parents and grandparents.

Knowing several foster parents, there's a good chance she could end up
being raised by more responsible adults. You know - the kind who put the
child's interests ahead of their own. Unlike granny and gramps in this
story.


Put yourself in the exact same position as the grandparents. Now,
beginning on the day when their daughter lost custody of the little girl,
what would YOU have done differently?


Knowing the rules of the HOA I would have put my house up for sale and
moved to a community that accepted youths. I would not have spit in the
face of the HOA and all the other homeowners who paid a fee not to have
children thrust in their face. Six years. Six years she violated the
rules. The HOA could have had her thrown out years ago. How much
tolerance should they have? The grandparents said to the HOA and the
homeowners "F- - K You, I'll do what I want".


Maybe they figured that for the first year or two, the INFANT....

Never mind.

"Sanity" wrote in message
...

And who are you to tell people how to or where to live?

Why not? You're doing the exact same thing.

"willshak" wrote in message

The rule, like most HOA rules, are unconstitutional. What if they
prohibited black people from living there ( maybe they do!!! ), the
American Civil Liberties Union would be all over their asses. Maybe give
them a call?

If it's a black *granchild*, I'm sure it is prohibited.

Cheri

JoeSpareBedroom wrote the following:
"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

"Hell Toupee" wrote in message
...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


I guess you're right. It would be the best thing for society at large
if the little girl was dumped into Florida's "system".

Too bad her grandparents put their comfort first, isn't it? They made a
choice, reinforced over years, to put their granddaughter's future at
risk. She pays the penalty for having lousy parents and grandparents.

Knowing several foster parents, there's a good chance she could end up
being raised by more responsible adults. You know - the kind who put the
child's interests ahead of their own. Unlike granny and gramps in this
story.

Put yourself in the exact same position as the grandparents. Now,
beginning on the day when their daughter lost custody of the little girl,
what would YOU have done differently?

It should be obvious. As soon as I agreed to take custody of the child, I
would've put my home on the market, and at a price that would've assured a
quick sale. Back in 2004-mid-2006, homes were selling almost as fast as
they were listed. I would've also met with the HOA people to let them know
my changed circumstances, including my intention to sell out. Why? Because
that would show them I was a good guy and honoring their rules. In return,
that would motivate them to help me find a buyer so I could clear out
fast. Heck, there probably were people in the community back then who
would've been glad to buy it as an investment.

But this couple did not make selling out and moving their priority. These
characters dicked around. They either made no attempt at all until
recently to sell.......



I must've missed that in the news story. Where in the story did it indicate
WHEN IN THE SIX YEAR PERIOD they began trying to sell the house?


Probably when the ogres told them they would have to get out.

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

"Sanity" wrote in message
...

No one said to put the child in foster care.

That is one of the options mentioned in the news.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote the following:
wrote in message
...

Hell Toupee wrote:

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:


I guess you're right. It would be the best thing for society at large if
the little girl was dumped into Florida's "system".

Too bad her grandparents put their comfort first, isn't it? They made a
choice, reinforced over years, to put their granddaughter's future at
risk. She pays the penalty for having lousy parents and grandparents.

Knowing several foster parents, there's a good chance she could end up
being raised by more responsible adults. You know - the kind who put the
child's interests ahead of their own. Unlike granny and gramps in this
story.

Kinda helps explain why the mother has been a junkie for six years, in
spite of her kid being in danger of going into foster care system.



Are you saying it's the grandparents' fault that their daughter has a drug
problem?

Of course, today's society blames everyone else for their problems.

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:



No. It's important. When in the six year period did they begin trying to
sell the home?

Beside the point. They had 6 years to sell it or find alternative
arrangements for the kid they KNEW was there illegally from the getgo.

--
To find that place where the rats don't race
and the phones don't ring at all.
If once, you've slept on an island.
Scott Kirby "If once you've slept on an island"

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

Even so, the judge would be a fool to order them to put the child in foster
care.

He wouldn't. He would only be in a position to either tell the
grandparents the kid had to have alternative placement or the GP could
maintain custody of the kid elsewhere. How the gp's worked it out would
be up to them.

--
To find that place where the rats don't race
and the phones don't ring at all.
If once, you've slept on an island.
Scott Kirby "If once you've slept on an island"

Cheri wrote the following:
"willshak" wrote in message
The rule, like most HOA rules, are unconstitutional. What if they
prohibited black people from living there ( maybe they do!!! ), the
American Civil Liberties Union would be all over their asses. Maybe
give them a call?

If it's a black *granchild*, I'm sure it is prohibited.

Cheri

I like you Cheri! :-)

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

In article ,
willshak wrote:

I hope that I never get old enough to not enjoy the laughter of
children. I hope that you never have to listen to them, including your
own children and grandchuldren.
I think that I would rather have the children as neighbors than you. You
seem like the one that would turn me in for any distraction to your
miserable life.

Fine. Then you can find a home in an area that allows children. But
what you are saying is that this annoys YOU and so no one should be able
to live they way they want to.

--
To find that place where the rats don't race
and the phones don't ring at all.
If once, you've slept on an island.
Scott Kirby "If once you've slept on an island"

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 13:11:29 -0800, "Steve B"
wrote:

We do reserve studies for HOAs in the State of Nevada.

Steve,

What is a reserve study and what's the purpose? I noticed you
mentioned this before and was curious.

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

Even so, the judge would be a fool to order them to put the child in
foster
care.

He wouldn't. He would only be in a position to either tell the
grandparents the kid had to have alternative placement or the GP could
maintain custody of the kid elsewhere. How the gp's worked it out would
be up to them.



OK.

http://www.sptimes.com/2006/06/20/St...roblems_.shtml