It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have around in the
event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats have banned children from
playing in [wading] pools because they present a ‘fire risk’. "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz0vHDJWXcS

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have around in the
event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats have banned children from
playing in [wading] pools because they present a ‘fire risk’. "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ficials-ban-pa
ddling-pools--case-block-firemen-breaks-out.html#ixzz0vHDJWXcS

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

This is dumb. Even if the trucks were to go on the grassy areas, I
don't see how a thin metal walled swimming pool would be much of a
concern for a Chief's vehicle let alone a big old pumper or ladder. Just
some bureaucrats deciding kids were having too much and being too loud.

--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have
around in the event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats
have banned children from playing in [wading] pools because they
present a 'fire risk'. "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ficials-ban-pa
ddling-pools--case-block-firemen-breaks-out.html#ixzz0vHDJWXcS

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

This is dumb. Even if the trucks were to go on the grassy areas, I
don't see how a thin metal walled swimming pool would be much of a
concern for a Chief's vehicle let alone a big old pumper or ladder.
Just some bureaucrats deciding kids were having too much and being
too loud.

it's worse than dumb. We have local councils stuffed full of these idiots
who are otherwise unemployable. Under the last regime local authorities and
central government recruited numbskulls to keep the unemployment figures
down.

I've run many local charitable events for over 25 years. In the last 5 or
so, it has become almost impossible due to the scores of numpties you have
to get approval from. It came to a head this year with us threatening to
close/move the event and contacting various dignitaries and council
officers. They called a meeting at which there were millions of their staff
who actually smiled at the hoops were we asked to jump through.

Everyone of them in the room should have been sacked. They serve no useful
purpose.

Clot wrote:
Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have
around in the event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats
have banned children from playing in [wading] pools because they
present a 'fire risk'. "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ficials-ban-pa
ddling-pools--case-block-firemen-breaks-out.html#ixzz0vHDJWXcS

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

This is dumb. Even if the trucks were to go on the grassy areas, I
don't see how a thin metal walled swimming pool would be much of a
concern for a Chief's vehicle let alone a big old pumper or ladder.
Just some bureaucrats deciding kids were having too much and being
too loud.

it's worse than dumb. We have local councils stuffed full of these
idiots who are otherwise unemployable. Under the last regime local
authorities and central government recruited numbskulls to keep the
unemployment figures down.

I've run many local charitable events for over 25 years. In the last
5 or so, it has become almost impossible due to the scores of
numpties you have to get approval from. It came to a head this year
with us threatening to close/move the event and contacting various
dignitaries and council officers. They called a meeting at which
there were millions of their staff who actually smiled at the hoops
were we asked to jump through.
Everyone of them in the room should have been sacked. They serve no
useful purpose.

On the other hand...

A few years ago, a representative of a Chili Cook-Off competition complained
to the Houston City Council that the health inspector was hobbling them with
all sorts of rules.

Mayor: "Can you give us an example?"
Chili man: "Shore. They wants us to put up a TENT over the cooking area.
That's over a hundred tents!"
Mayor: "What about that, doctor?"
Health Department guy: "It's for sanitary reasons. Tents will help prevent
insects from falling into the food."
Chili man: "See! That's what they don't unnerstand. We PUT bugs in the
chili. Ain't nothing like some fire ants to add a little flavor!"
Health Department guy: "(??!!) I give up. Cook however you want. I just
don't care anymore."

HeyBub wrote:
Clot wrote:
Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have
around in the event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats
have banned children from playing in [wading] pools because they
present a 'fire risk'. "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ficials-ban-pa
ddling-pools--case-block-firemen-breaks-out.html#ixzz0vHDJWXcS

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

This is dumb. Even if the trucks were to go on the grassy areas, I
don't see how a thin metal walled swimming pool would be much of a
concern for a Chief's vehicle let alone a big old pumper or ladder.
Just some bureaucrats deciding kids were having too much and being
too loud.

it's worse than dumb. We have local councils stuffed full of these
idiots who are otherwise unemployable. Under the last regime local
authorities and central government recruited numbskulls to keep the
unemployment figures down.

I've run many local charitable events for over 25 years. In the last
5 or so, it has become almost impossible due to the scores of
numpties you have to get approval from. It came to a head this year
with us threatening to close/move the event and contacting various
dignitaries and council officers. They called a meeting at which
there were millions of their staff who actually smiled at the hoops
were we asked to jump through.
Everyone of them in the room should have been sacked. They serve no
useful purpose.

On the other hand...

A few years ago, a representative of a Chili Cook-Off competition
complained to the Houston City Council that the health inspector was
hobbling them with all sorts of rules.

Mayor: "Can you give us an example?"
Chili man: "Shore. They wants us to put up a TENT over the cooking
area. That's over a hundred tents!"
Mayor: "What about that, doctor?"
Health Department guy: "It's for sanitary reasons. Tents will help
prevent insects from falling into the food."
Chili man: "See! That's what they don't unnerstand. We PUT bugs in the
chili. Ain't nothing like some fire ants to add a little flavor!"
Health Department guy: "(??!!) I give up. Cook however you want. I
just don't care anymore."

I'm not sure that I fully understand though. I guess this is an Across
The Pond issue.

Health Dept guy still there and rightly so?

"Clot" wrote
On the other hand...

A few years ago, a representative of a Chili Cook-Off competition
complained to the Houston City Council that the health inspector was
hobbling them with all sorts of rules.

Mayor: "Can you give us an example?"
Chili man: "Shore. They wants us to put up a TENT over the cooking
area. That's over a hundred tents!"
Mayor: "What about that, doctor?"
Health Department guy: "It's for sanitary reasons. Tents will help
prevent insects from falling into the food."
Chili man: "See! That's what they don't unnerstand. We PUT bugs in the
chili. Ain't nothing like some fire ants to add a little flavor!"
Health Department guy: "(??!!) I give up. Cook however you want. I
just don't care anymore."

I'm not sure that I fully understand though. I guess this is an Across
The Pond issue.

Health Dept guy still there and rightly so?


Chili contests have been held for decades around the country. All the
cooking is done outside. Bugs just don't fall from the sky so a tent is not
going to help. May even be a fire hazard if a grill flares up. Millions of
Americans grill outside under the open sky. .

On Jul 31, 11:55*pm, "Clot" wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
Clot wrote:
Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have
around in the event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats
have banned children from playing in [wading] pools because they
present a 'fire risk'. "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...safety-officia....
ddling-pools--case-block-firemen-breaks-out.html#ixzz0vHDJWXcS

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

* This is dumb. Even if the trucks were to go on the grassy areas, I
don't see how a thin metal walled swimming pool would be much of a
concern for a Chief's vehicle let alone a big old pumper or ladder.
Just some bureaucrats deciding kids were having too much and being
too loud.

it's worse than dumb. We have local councils stuffed full of these
idiots who are otherwise unemployable. Under the last regime local
authorities and central government recruited numbskulls to keep the
unemployment figures down.

I've run many local charitable events for over 25 years. In the last
5 or so, it has become almost impossible due to the scores of
numpties you have to get approval from. It came to a head this year
with us threatening to close/move the event and contacting various
dignitaries and council officers. They called a meeting at which
there were millions of their staff who actually smiled at the hoops
were we asked to jump through.
Everyone of them in the room should have been sacked. They serve no
useful purpose.

On the other hand...

A few years ago, a representative of a Chili Cook-Off competition
complained to the Houston City Council that the health inspector was
hobbling them with all sorts of rules.

Mayor: "Can you give us an example?"
Chili man: "Shore. They wants us to put up a TENT over the cooking
area. That's over a hundred tents!"
Mayor: "What about that, doctor?"
Health Department guy: "It's for sanitary reasons. Tents will help
prevent insects from falling into the food."
Chili man: "See! That's what they don't unnerstand. We PUT bugs in the
chili. Ain't nothing like some fire ants to add a little flavor!"
Health Department guy: "(??!!) I give up. Cook however you want. I
just don't care anymore."

I'm not sure that I fully understand though. I guess this is an Across
The Pond issue.

Health Dept guy still there and rightly so?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

When we had the New Labour gov. (Tony Bliar), they were bringing in
two or three new restrictive laws every week. The new con gov. is
supposed to be making a bonfire of them.
http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/repeal...necessary-laws

On Jul 31, 5:55*pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,

*"HeyBub" wrote:
It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have around in the
event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats have banned children from
playing in [wading] pools because they present a ‘fire risk’. "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...safety-officia...
ddling-pools--case-block-firemen-breaks-out.html#ixzz0vHDJWXcS

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

* *This is dumb. Even if the trucks were to go on the grassy areas, I
don't see how a thin metal walled swimming pool would be much of a
concern for a Chief's vehicle let alone a big old pumper or ladder. Just
some bureaucrats deciding kids were having too much and being too loud.

--
* I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

You're right, we have too many interfering busybodies here in the UK.

On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 10:15:50 -0700 (PDT), harry
wrote:

You're right, we have too many interfering busybodies here in the UK.

What's you point?! Word is, pop cycle sticks and tooth picks will
be banned next in the UK.

You might poke your eye out.

On 07/31/10 12:06 pm, HeyBub wrote:

It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have around in the
event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats have banned children from
playing in [wading] pools because they present a ‘fire risk’. "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz0vHDJWXcS

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

"... firefighters have branded the edict ridiculous and endorse the
common sense view that the pools would come in handy if a fire ever did
break out."

See the words "common sense"? That is not a phrase I am in the habit of
using in the same sentence as the term "HOA" -- unless the sentence also
includes a negative.

Perce

In article ,
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote:


See the words "common sense"? That is not a phrase I am in the habit of
using in the same sentence as the term "HOA" -- unless the sentence also
includes a negative.

Perce

But this wasn't an HOA. It was the local government bureaucracy. You
take the idiocy of an HOA and concentrate it one hundred fold and you
are still not nearing the idiocy of a bureaucrat.

--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote:


See the words "common sense"? That is not a phrase I am in the habit
of using in the same sentence as the term "HOA" -- unless the
sentence also includes a negative.

Perce

But this wasn't an HOA. It was the local government bureaucracy. You
take the idiocy of an HOA and concentrate it one hundred fold and you
are still not nearing the idiocy of a bureaucrat.

You've got the idea!

On Jul 31, 1:18*pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
* But this wasn't an HOA. It was the local government bureaucracy. You
take the idiocy of an HOA and concentrate it one hundred fold and you
are still not nearing the idiocy of a bureaucrat.

If HOA members are anything like condo board members, I'm not so sure.
Most condo board members are people who want to be bureaucrats so bad
they will do it for free in their spare time...

Larry Fishel wrote:
On Jul 31, 1:18 pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
But this wasn't an HOA. It was the local government bureaucracy. You
take the idiocy of an HOA and concentrate it one hundred fold and you
are still not nearing the idiocy of a bureaucrat.

If HOA members are anything like condo board members, I'm not so sure.
Most condo board members are people who want to be bureaucrats so bad
they will do it for free in their spare time...

Newspapers in Florida this week were full of news of $850k legal fees
over a several-year battle about parking a truck in the driveway. The
homeowner (so far) prevailed. Must be a plush HOA to spend that kind of
money )

On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 14:52:36 -0400, "
wrote:

Larry Fishel wrote:
On Jul 31, 1:18 pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
But this wasn't an HOA. It was the local government bureaucracy. You
take the idiocy of an HOA and concentrate it one hundred fold and you
are still not nearing the idiocy of a bureaucrat.

If HOA members are anything like condo board members, I'm not so sure.
Most condo board members are people who want to be bureaucrats so bad
they will do it for free in their spare time...

Newspapers in Florida this week were full of news of $850k legal fees
over a several-year battle about parking a truck in the driveway. The
homeowner (so far) prevailed. Must be a plush HOA to spend that kind of
money )

...and the board is still in place!

" wrote:

Must be a plush HOA to spend that kind of money

Most property covenants state that the homeowner is responsible for all fines
and collection costs. Presumably if the HOA prevails the homeowner will be
required to reimburse the HOA. Doesn't work in reverse though...

On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 14:52:36 -0400, "
wrote:

Newspapers in Florida this week were full of news of $850k legal fees
over a several-year battle about parking a truck in the driveway. The
homeowner (so far) prevailed. Must be a plush HOA to spend that kind of
money )

Other associations in FL, have spent plenty of dollars. They lost so
far and the homeowner can fly his American flag. (maybe a couple of
cases).

In ,
Larry Fishel wrote:

On Jul 31, 1:18*pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
* But this wasn't an HOA. It was the local government bureaucracy. You
take the idiocy of an HOA and concentrate it one hundred fold and you
are still not nearing the idiocy of a bureaucrat.

If HOA members are anything like condo board members, I'm not so sure.
Most condo board members are people who want to be bureaucrats so bad
they will do it for free in their spare time...

The way I hear it, a condo board is a board of an HOA. As in, condo
unit owners are homeowners governed by an HOA. Condo owners have as
much right to vote in and run for office in their HOA elections as
Mc-mansion owners that bought into their respective HOAs have.

I would rather have a landlord than an HOA. At least my experience so
far is that landlords are lazier, and they hire and pay for only enough
staff to do what needs to be done, sometimes even less. Their hired help
have a tendency to prefer enjoying their evenings and weekends of whatever
time-off over making enemies with the tenants. (Though I have known a few
to be "Bah-Humbug, bug-off!" - but those in my experience usually don't
spy on tenants beyond checking for unreported in-unit plumbing leaks,
unreported vermin infestations, unreported sparking-sputtering light
switches and electrical fixtures, and similarly serious ilk.)

--
- Don Klipstein )

Don Klipstein wrote:
In ,
Larry Fishel wrote:

On Jul 31, 1:18 pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
But this wasn't an HOA. It was the local government bureaucracy. You
take the idiocy of an HOA and concentrate it one hundred fold and you
are still not nearing the idiocy of a bureaucrat.
If HOA members are anything like condo board members, I'm not so sure.
Most condo board members are people who want to be bureaucrats so bad
they will do it for free in their spare time...

The way I hear it, a condo board is a board of an HOA. As in, condo
unit owners are homeowners governed by an HOA. Condo owners have as
much right to vote in and run for office in their HOA elections as
Mc-mansion owners that bought into their respective HOAs have.

In Florida, HOAs and condos are entirely different animals with their
own sets of statutes.

I would rather have a landlord than an HOA. At least my experience so
far is that landlords are lazier, and they hire and pay for only enough
staff to do what needs to be done, sometimes even less. Their hired help
have a tendency to prefer enjoying their evenings and weekends of whatever
time-off over making enemies with the tenants. (Though I have known a few
to be "Bah-Humbug, bug-off!" - but those in my experience usually don't
spy on tenants beyond checking for unreported in-unit plumbing leaks,
unreported vermin infestations, unreported sparking-sputtering light
switches and electrical fixtures, and similarly serious ilk.)

Our condo has attics above the second floor units, some of which were
infested with rats years ago. When a renter called city code
enforcement folks about animal noises in attic, the inspector determined
only that there was a dust-ball in the AC duct. He didn't check the
attic.

We had sewer backups three times...our unit is closest to the street, so
our commodes backed up first. One time, bad enough that sewage
saturated about half the carpet in master bedroom. I called the city,
they ran a camera up the sewer line, determined it was "in bad shape"
and installed a cleanout at the edge of our property. Condo assn. also
did a video; no repair yet. The official name for our code enforcement
folks is "Community Response Team"....yep, they respond but they don't
do anything.

On 07/31/10 01:18 pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:

See the words "common sense"? That is not a phrase I am in the habit of
using in the same sentence as the term "HOA" -- unless the sentence also
includes a negative.

But this wasn't an HOA. It was the local government bureaucracy. You
take the idiocy of an HOA and concentrate it one hundred fold and you
are still not nearing the idiocy of a bureaucrat.

I Googled the name and found that "Homes in Havering" is some kind of
management organization (private, AFAICT) that manages the complex on
behalf of the local government body.

Perce

In , Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote:

See the words "common sense"? That is not a phrase I am in the habit of
using in the same sentence as the term "HOA" -- unless the sentence also
includes a negative.

But this wasn't an HOA. It was the local government bureaucracy. You
take the idiocy of an HOA and concentrate it one hundred fold and you
are still not nearing the idiocy of a bureaucrat.

What I hear from family members and friends is that HOAS tend to be
worse because their busybodies are not lazy. While municipal governments
have more of a tendency to be lazy.

I have yet to hear of municipal governments forbidding people from
parking trucks on their driveways, regulating house paint colors and color
schemes to such extent as sometimes effectively specifying a particular
brand, forbidding people from working on their own cars on their own
driveways, forbidding above-ground pools where in-ground pools are
allowed, forbidding outdoor solar/wind drying of laundry, or forbidding
someone from romantically kissing a date in front of the home before going
in for the night.

That gets me thinking that in comparison, NYC is more reasonable despite
banning specific breeds of dogs and a cat hybrid, and CA is more
reasonable by banning sale of paraboloidal microphones and .50-BMG rifles.
That gets harder to enforce, since cops don't tour homes the way I hear
HOA busybodies often get to do one way or another. A cop needs a
warrant to look for my .50-BMG rifle or my paraboloidal microphone. Heck,
my experience is that landlords are not busybodies the way HOA board
members are said to be.

One laziness of some municipal governments: Make HOAs responsible for
maintenance of the sewer utility (if any) and
neighborhood-level/street-level water distribution, local roads, things like
that... Make the developer build those and write deeds ordaining
existence of an HOA whose duties include in part maintaining these...
The municipal government then gets to brag about its taxes being lower...
The HOA busybodies get to hire their buddies to do the maintenance on
the roads and the under-street water lines and any sewer lines there...

Do enough homeowners that have HOAs go to their HOA meetings to hold
to the fire the feet of "that level of government"? So that, for example,
road maintenance is performed at a reasonable frequency and to a
reasonable extent by the winner of a reasonable competitive bidding
process? (Of course, I wish people also held municipal gubmint feet to
their respective fires.)

Do enough homeowners who are not "busybodies" run for election to their
HOA boards? It's hard enough to get good-honest people to run for
municipal, county and state government offices for that matter!

And as much as Americans like to bash lawyers, why do Americans vote for
so many of them for state government legislative offices and for both
houses of US Congress?

--
- Don Klipstein )

In article ,
(Don Klipstein) wrote:

In , Kurt Ullman wrote:


What I hear from family members and friends is that HOAS tend to be
worse because their busybodies are not lazy. While municipal governments
have more of a tendency to be lazy.
Sorta depends. I have known bureaucrats to get a bug up their ass
about things and, with the police powers available to the government,
have made life miserable.


I have yet to hear of municipal governments forbidding people from
parking trucks on their driveways, regulating house paint colors and color
schemes to such extent as sometimes effectively specifying a particular
brand, forbidding people from working on their own cars on their own
driveways, forbidding above-ground pools where in-ground pools are
allowed, forbidding outdoor solar/wind drying of laundry, or forbidding
someone from romantically kissing a date in front of the home before going
in for the night.
There are a couple that come close. Things like driveways,
regulation of colors and in-ground pools have been included in the
zoning variances for subdivisions around here. Height is another biggy.
And then there are the restrictions on historic houses, but that is more
self-inflicted since you have to apply for them or know the status when
you buy them.


That gets harder to enforce, since cops don't tour homes the way I hear
HOA busybodies often get to do one way or another.

That is largely self-inflicted, again. You should know the
neighborhood busy-bodies and just don't invite them into your house.


And as much as Americans like to bash lawyers, why do Americans vote for
so many of them for state government legislative offices and for both
houses of US Congress?
Lawyers are the only ones who can take the time off from actually
doing work to run.

--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
(Don Klipstein) wrote:

In , Kurt Ullman wrote:


What I hear from family members and friends is that HOAS tend to be
worse because their busybodies are not lazy. While municipal governments
have more of a tendency to be lazy.
Sorta depends. I have known bureaucrats to get a bug up their ass
about things and, with the police powers available to the government,
have made life miserable.

I have yet to hear of municipal governments forbidding people from
parking trucks on their driveways, regulating house paint colors and color
schemes to such extent as sometimes effectively specifying a particular
brand, forbidding people from working on their own cars on their own
driveways, forbidding above-ground pools where in-ground pools are
allowed, forbidding outdoor solar/wind drying of laundry, or forbidding
someone from romantically kissing a date in front of the home before going
in for the night.
There are a couple that come close. Things like driveways,
regulation of colors and in-ground pools have been included in the
zoning variances for subdivisions around here. Height is another biggy.
And then there are the restrictions on historic houses, but that is more
self-inflicted since you have to apply for them or know the status when
you buy them.

That gets harder to enforce, since cops don't tour homes the way I hear
HOA busybodies often get to do one way or another.

That is largely self-inflicted, again. You should know the
neighborhood busy-bodies and just don't invite them into your house.

And as much as Americans like to bash lawyers, why do Americans vote for
so many of them for state government legislative offices and for both
houses of US Congress?
Lawyers are the only ones who can take the time off from actually
doing work to run.


Florida passed a new condo law in, I believe, 2009, that bans board
members from serving on boards if they are in arrears with their
maintenance assessment. That would have saved a lot of grief for my
condo a few years back. Imagine condo owners wanting and needing
repairs, like new roof, and a deadbeat on the board voting it down. It
gets really, really nasty. There aren't any professional standards or
ethics in my area....

On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 04:57:11 +0000 (UTC), (Don Klipstein)
wrote:

In , Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote:

See the words "common sense"? That is not a phrase I am in the habit of
using in the same sentence as the term "HOA" -- unless the sentence also
includes a negative.

But this wasn't an HOA. It was the local government bureaucracy. You
take the idiocy of an HOA and concentrate it one hundred fold and you
are still not nearing the idiocy of a bureaucrat.

What I hear from family members and friends is that HOAS tend to be
worse because their busybodies are not lazy. While municipal governments
have more of a tendency to be lazy.

I have yet to hear of municipal governments forbidding people from
parking trucks on their driveways, regulating house paint colors and color
schemes to such extent as sometimes effectively specifying a particular
brand, forbidding people from working on their own cars on their own
driveways, forbidding above-ground pools where in-ground pools are
allowed, forbidding outdoor solar/wind drying of laundry, or forbidding
someone from romantically kissing a date in front of the home before going
in for the night.

That gets me thinking that in comparison, NYC is more reasonable despite
banning specific breeds of dogs and a cat hybrid, and CA is more
reasonable by banning sale of paraboloidal microphones and .50-BMG rifles.
That gets harder to enforce, since cops don't tour homes the way I hear
HOA busybodies often get to do one way or another. A cop needs a
warrant to look for my .50-BMG rifle or my paraboloidal microphone. Heck,
my experience is that landlords are not busybodies the way HOA board
members are said to be.

One laziness of some municipal governments: Make HOAs responsible for
maintenance of the sewer utility (if any) and
neighborhood-level/street-level water distribution, local roads, things like
that... Make the developer build those and write deeds ordaining
existence of an HOA whose duties include in part maintaining these...
The municipal government then gets to brag about its taxes being lower...
The HOA busybodies get to hire their buddies to do the maintenance on
the roads and the under-street water lines and any sewer lines there...

Do enough homeowners that have HOAs go to their HOA meetings to hold
to the fire the feet of "that level of government"? So that, for example,
road maintenance is performed at a reasonable frequency and to a
reasonable extent by the winner of a reasonable competitive bidding
process? (Of course, I wish people also held municipal gubmint feet to
their respective fires.)

Do enough homeowners who are not "busybodies" run for election to their
HOA boards? It's hard enough to get good-honest people to run for
municipal, county and state government offices for that matter!

And as much as Americans like to bash lawyers, why do Americans vote for
so many of them for state government legislative offices and for both
houses of US Congress?

Note that fewer than half of the congresscritters are lawyers.

wrote

And as much as Americans like to bash lawyers, why do Americans vote for
so many of them for state government legislative offices and for both
houses of US Congress?

Note that fewer than half of the congresscritters are lawyers.

If there are two garter snakes and a cobra in a cage, are you saying it is
safe because less than half are poisonous? Less that half of congress
still leave about 200.

On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 11:06:57 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have around in the
event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats have banned children from
playing in [wading] pools because they present a ‘fire risk’. "

I think this all started when they tried to use a pool as a source of
water and one 4-year old kid wouldn't leave when told to. Eventually
he was sucked up the hose and sprayed onto the fire. He received
first degree burns on 10% of his body and had to stay overnight in the
hospital. His parents sued and this is the result.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz0vHDJWXcS

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

In article , mm wrote:
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 11:06:57 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have around in the
event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats have banned children from
playing in [wading] pools because they present a ‘fire risk’. "

I think this all started when they tried to use a pool as a source of
water and one 4-year old kid wouldn't leave when told to. Eventually
he was sucked up the hose and sprayed onto the fire. He received
first degree burns on 10% of his body and had to stay overnight in the
hospital. His parents sued and this is the result.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz0vHDJWXcS

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

It appears to me extremely incredible for a 4-year-old to pass through a
fire hose (generally 6 inches in diameter or less, usually less) and the
nozzle at the end of the fire hose, and to both pass that far and remain
being a 4-year-old live human needing only an overnight hospital stay,
whether or not also surviving being tossed into a fire worth fighting
with a hose and a pump that can pass a 4-year-old child.

I would repeat, "extremely incredible". And I consider such to be so
"incredible" that I would like to add a phrase that comes to my mind with
such an extreme claim, whether the cited link supports it or (preferably)
does not support it: "Credibility problem".

Or does one have a cite for a 4-year-old child being sucked from a pool
by firefighting equipment, and afterwards passed by the firefighting
equipment to be tossed onto the fire (or scorched property), and needing
only an overnight hospital stay with most-notable injuries being
1st-degree burns over 10% of skin area?

--
- Don Klipstein )

(Don Klipstein) wrote:

In article , mm wrote:
-snip-
I think this all started when they tried to use a pool as a source of
water and one 4-year old kid wouldn't leave when told to. Eventually
he was sucked up the hose and sprayed onto the fire. He received
first degree burns on 10% of his body and had to stay overnight in the
hospital. His parents sued and this is the result.
-snip-

It appears to me extremely incredible for a 4-year-old to pass through a
fire hose (generally 6 inches in diameter or less, usually less) and the
nozzle at the end of the fire hose, and to both pass that far and remain
being a 4-year-old live human needing only an overnight hospital stay,
whether or not also surviving being tossed into a fire worth fighting
with a hose and a pump that can pass a 4-year-old child.

I would repeat, "extremely incredible". And I consider such to be so
"incredible" that I would like to add a phrase that comes to my mind with
such an extreme claim, whether the cited link supports it or (preferably)
does not support it: "Credibility problem".

You are kind. The word that pops in my head is "bull****".


Or does one have a cite for a 4-year-old child being sucked from a pool
by firefighting equipment, and afterwards passed by the firefighting
equipment to be tossed onto the fire (or scorched property), and needing
only an overnight hospital stay with most-notable injuries being
1st-degree burns over 10% of skin area?

The world *is* a very big place, but I'd have to see the cite about
the part of the world with such large firehoses, such kind pumps, and
such lucky little boys.

Jim

"Jim Elbrecht" wrote

You are kind. The word that pops in my head is "bull****".


The world *is* a very big place, but I'd have to see the cite about
the part of the world with such large firehoses, such kind pumps, and
such lucky little boys.

Jim

The word that popped into my mind was wry humor.

On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 08:15:47 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski"
wrote:


"Jim Elbrecht" wrote

You are kind. The word that pops in my head is "bull****".


The world *is* a very big place, but I'd have to see the cite about
the part of the world with such large firehoses, such kind pumps, and
such lucky little boys.

Jim

The word that popped into my mind was wry humor.


Now that you mention it--- and after I consider that mm has been
posting here a while & I haven't noted any flaming net-nuttiness about
previous postings. . . . maybe that was the loud 'zoom' I heard this
morning.

Jim
[if mm is British that would explain a lot-- I never get their humor]

On Jul 31, 9:06*am, "HeyBub" wrote:
It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have around in the
event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats have banned children from
playing in [wading] pools because they present a ‘fire risk’. "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...safety-officia...

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

When I read things like this that I thank God I’m living in the USA
where real estate is relatively cheaper so that we don’t have to live
with a HOA unless we want to.

On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 13:19:41 -0700 (PDT), Molly Brown
wrote:

On Jul 31, 9:06*am, "HeyBub" wrote:
It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have around in the
event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats have banned children from
playing in [wading] pools because they present a ‘fire risk’. "

They also say the pools would inhibit access to the fire. How often
do they have fires.

And the fire engines would just drive over the pools if they were in
the way. The one in the picture is less than a foot high with an
aluminum, tin, or vinyl wall.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...safety-officia...

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

When I read things like this that I thank God I’m living in the USA
where real estate is relatively cheaper so that we don’t have to live
with a HOA unless we want to.

On 07/31/10 04:19 pm, Molly Brown wrote:

It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have around in the
event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats have banned children from
playing in [wading] pools because they present a ‘fire risk’. "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...safety-officia...

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.

When I read things like this that I thank God I’m living in the USA
where real estate is relatively cheaper so that we don’t have to live
with a HOA unless we want to.

.... as long as you don't want anything reasonably modern and reasonably
close to civilization.

Perce

On Jul 31, 1:44*pm, "Percival P. Cassidy" wrote:
On 07/31/10 04:19 pm, Molly Brown wrote:

It's in the UK, but still...

"You may think a large pool of water is a useful thing to have around in the
event of a fire. But officials at a block of flats have banned children from
playing in [wading] pools because they present a ‘fire risk’. "

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...safety-officia....

Somebody in the US is going to read this and we're doomed.
When I read things like this that I thank God I’m living in the USA
where real estate is relatively cheaper so that we don’t have to live
with a HOA unless we want to.

... as long as you don't want anything reasonably modern and reasonably
close to civilization.

Perce

I don’t know what you mean by “reasonably modern and reasonably
close to civilization” but I’m 22 miles from downtown Los Angeles.
That’s 22 minutes with very little traffic and one hour with heavy
traffic. The houses here average about $250.000 and have a large yard.
Is that reasonable enough?

On 07/31/10 08:11 pm, Molly Brown wrote:

When I read things like this that I thank God I’m living in the USA
where real estate is relatively cheaper so that we don’t have to live
with a HOA unless we want to.

... as long as you don't want anything reasonably modern and reasonably
close to civilization.

I don’t know what you mean by “reasonably modern and reasonably
close to civilization” but I’m 22 miles from downtown Los Angeles.
That’s 22 minutes with very little traffic and one hour with heavy
traffic. The houses here average about $250.000 and have a large yard.
Is that reasonable enough?

How big and how old is the house? How old is the subdivision? When we
were looking for a house around here, just about everything from 1980 or
so on had a(n) HOA. Our house was built in the early 1970s and in a
subdivision new enough to have all underground utilities but old enough
to have CC&Rs that did not establish a(n) HOA. We would have liked
something a little newer but were determined to have nothing to do with
HOAs.

Perce

On Jul 31, 5:42*pm, "Percival P. Cassidy" wrote:
On 07/31/10 08:11 pm, Molly Brown wrote:

When I read things like this that I thank God I’m living in the USA
where real estate is relatively cheaper so that we don’t have to live
with a HOA unless we want to.
... as long as you don't want anything reasonably modern and reasonably
close to civilization.
I don’t know what you mean by “reasonably modern and reasonably
close to civilization” but I’m 22 miles from downtown Los Angeles.
That’s 22 minutes with very little traffic and one hour with heavy
traffic. The houses here average about $250.000 and have a large yard.
Is that reasonable enough?

How big and how old is the house? How old is the subdivision? When we
were looking for a house around here, just about everything from 1980 or
so on had a(n) HOA. Our house was built in the early 1970s and in a
subdivision new enough to have all underground utilities but old enough
to have CC&Rs that did not establish a(n) HOA. We would have liked
something a little newer but were determined to have nothing to do with
HOAs.

Perce

Houses and Subdivisions very old but no HOA and no CC&R. All utilities
including natural gas, sewer, water underground but electric above
ground. If you’re a regular at alt.home.repair then you don’t care how
old your house is.

"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote
When I read things like this that I thank God I’m living in the USA
where real estate is relatively cheaper so that we don’t have to live
with a HOA unless we want to.

... as long as you don't want anything reasonably modern and reasonably
close to civilization.

Perce

I know Florida and CA are overrun with HOAs, but here in New England they
are a rarity. I'd never move to a place that has one.

On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:30:22 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:


"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote
When I read things like this that I thank God I’m living in the USA
where real estate is relatively cheaper so that we don’t have to live
with a HOA unless we want to.

... as long as you don't want anything reasonably modern and reasonably
close to civilization.

Perce

I know Florida and CA are overrun with HOAs, but here in New England they
are a rarity. I'd never move to a place that has one.

We had one in Vermont but its function was really only to collect money to mow
and pay the taxes on some common land. It was usually about $60/year, (about
1% of our property tax), so it wasn't a big deal. Here in Alabama we have an
HOA but again, it does nothing. There are some rules the builder put in but
no one is around to enforce any of them, and they aren't.

In , Ed Pawlowski wrote:

"Percival P. Cassidy" wrote
When I read things like this that I thank God I’m living in the USA
where real estate is relatively cheaper so that we don’t have to live
with a HOA unless we want to.

... as long as you don't want anything reasonably modern and reasonably
close to civilization.

Perce

I know Florida and CA are overrun with HOAs, but here in New England they
are a rarity. I'd never move to a place that has one.

I'd turn down a job offer that effectively requires me to move into an
an area where my home choice options are effectively limited to ones that
have HOAs. (I have heard that such areas in USA do exist.)

Unless the prospective employer can tell me where I can replace an
ignition coil or a timing belt in my car close to my home, and where
I have complete lack of problem with operating a soldering iron, let
alone high power UV lamps of any wavelength or a Class IIIb laser in my
living room or my bedroom at any moment that my scaredy-cat boyfriend is
somewhere else...

(Unless a career move includes a raise sufficient to rent or otherwise
acquire a separate business property for use of UV lamps, Class IIIb
lasers, soldering irons, heat guns, maybe a drill press, and-the-like...)

--
- Don Klipstein )

Don Klipstein wrote:

I'd turn down a job offer that effectively requires me to move into
an an area where my home choice options are effectively limited to
ones that have HOAs. (I have heard that such areas in USA do exist.)


Here in Houston we have HOAs. We also have deed restrictions. Together they
cover, oh, I'd say, 1/4 of the residential property in the city.

The rest of the town is "my property, my rules." We don't even have zoning.

We do, however, have other methods of enforcing civility.

A few years ago, Shell bought a corner lot in an uber-ritzy neighborhood
with a view toward inserting a gas station. The neighbors objected. They
tore up their Shell credit cards. They signed petitions. The neighbors
promised war, and war on a Biblical scale...

When Shell got the objections from people in the neighborhood (i.e.,
ex-Secretary of the Treasury John Connally, Secretary of Commerce Robert
Mossbacher, etc.), Shell donated the land to the city for a "pocket park."