Posted on 06/27/2011 10:20:34 AM PDT by Immerito
A 77-year-old Army veteran is being threatened with legal action for flying the American flag in his front yard.
Fred Quigley, of Macedonia, Ohio, a retired Army chaplain and minister who served active duty during the Vietnam War, has been told his flag violates his homeowners association's rules on flagpoles.
As an alternative, the association offered to place the flag at the entrance of the development, but Mr Quigley refused.
*****
Mr Quigley's lawyer Gerald Patronite said the association has no right to stop his client.
He cites a 2003 state statute that addresses the homeowner's rights in such a dispute.
'Essentially, no deed restriction or association can abridge this right to display the flag,' he told AOL Real Estate.
Mr Patronite said that the HOA's rules state that a flag can only be displayed if affixed to the home.
But doing so would mean Mr Quigley would have to put up a much smaller flag.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
A good agent:
It depends on the development. Many HOA docs are straight forward and reliably followed. Reviewing these with the client buyer is absolutely something we will do. Some communities have a large body of rule interpretations that make reading and blindly following the HOA docs a bit risky. In those cases we review the docs but caution the buyer to contact HOA management with questions before and after the sale.
I have found that it works best if I review them first and make notes of things that stand out to me. Then, I pass them on to you, have you read them, find out what questions you have and tell you what I’ve found to be noteworthy. Then, I figure out how to get answers to your questions.
I do help all of my buyers after qualifying if they understand HOA’s in general. Those who feel adverse to HOA control are asked to commit or kick out the deal. After that, those who still want to move forward will discuss
any outstanding financial issues the HOA has. Like a pending blanket assessment, or hole in the bottom of their pool.
http://www.trulia.com/voices/Home_Buying/Buyers_agents_do_you_read_the_HOA_docs_along_w-238648
Yeah, they sound like communes... one more throw back to the ‘60’s and ‘70’s...
It seems that the vet’s lawyer is correct, then. The HOA is in violation of the law.
Why thank you very much, I typically look for advice from people who have demonstrated a willful ignorance.
Please show me my willful ignorance so I will no longer be ignorant. I want to learn from the best.
Yup. The HOA despots better pray that their covenants and restrictions were well written with a clause that states that if one section is found to be null and void it does not invalidate ALL of them because that can serve as a means to break the contract, which is all that it is: a contract binding the parties to abide by the rules in the agreement. If they take it to court and it set aside as unenforceable, it maybe held breakabe... And all covenants and restriction unenforceable! I doubt that will happen, but if that severability clause isn't in there it's possible that might be the outcome.
Swordmaker,
In my experience the HOA rules are mostly intended to protect the builder while they build out the development. They control the HOA and make the rules. The developer can also change the rules anytime they want up until they voluntarily turn the development over to the homeowners.
Our HOA bans all flags, which does not comply with state law. They’ve tried changing it several times but cannot get enough people. They also are trying to change the rules so they can fine people for not maintaining their yards. That hasn’t passed either.
So the one major reason an HOA exists for, to force maintenance of exteriors, is unenforceable because the covenants are written so poorly.
I read the story and he is still an arrogant SOB who’s real intent to get attention.
HOA rules are there for a reason.
If Vets from Norway show up and buy a home in the HOA then they should be allowed to fly their colors as well.
After that then they can start allowing commercial vehicles in all the driveways, Lawn ornaments, fountains, etc.
The neighborhood will start looking my My Big Fat Greek Wedding.
Dude should take his win and help dedicate the Flag to his nation and neighborhood.
The HOA is being reasonable and he is well....
LOL
Agreed.
I live in an HOA and there have some things tried. Personally, I didn’t care about them but when thought out and what the future looks like for exceptions it makes sense.
The first HOA’s had what the builders believed was a good purpose.
After building certain developments and years passed and some prior completed development had “the appearance of dump”, with lawns unkempt, fences and walls of every variety and showing every haphazard manner of construction with some literally falling down, alterations that “looked totally out of place” with the rest of the development, etc., etc., etc.; and yet people did not forget that “oh yea, that was a ‘Ryder Homes’ development”. Developers THOUGHT - originally - that an HOA was a way to try to “preserve the quality of the brand, of their name”.
Very quickly they went too far and the “home OWNER” (in an HOA) became more like a “resident with a mortgage”.
On the other hand:
I knew we had an HOA with a home we bought years ago in Spring, Texas. I did not read the rules before or at the closing. Having no prior experience with an HOA, I just thought: “Oh, how nice, a ‘neighborhood association’ “.
I managed to incur two infractions before the HOA board caught up with us. First, I painted the house without the approval of the Architechtual Review Committee, who was supposed to approve the colors. Then I moved two Palm trees from locations about two and half feet from the front wall of the house, to new locations I made for them on my land in the space between my driveway and my next door neighbors lot. Again, I had failed to consult the Architectual Review Committee, the Landscaping Committee and the Safety Committee. But, after letting us know that we had violated the rules in both instances, they let my changes stand.
When we decided to put fencing on the two sides of the back yard that were not yet fenced - across the line at the back of the lot and between our lot and one neighbor - we knew we better “ask if it was O.K.”.
It was O.K. with a big difference. Only one exact kind/style of fence was allowed, just one - a six foot high wood “stack” fence, with any gates constructed of the same material, and with no fencing or gate extending into the front of the lot beyond the front of the house. (”and they’re all made of ticky tacky and they all look just the same”).
Our problem was that one of the attractions of the house to us was that it was located with a permanent Audubon Society owned preserve behind our lot. It meant we would always have the open spaces there - a large number of tree covered acres.
We were willing to put the wood stake fence between our lot and our neighbors, but we wanted a “chain-link” fence along the back of the lot, so that the view of the nature preserve would be less obstructed.
We noted to the HOA committees that the location of that portion of our fencing meant it would not be noticed from the street and barely noticed by our neighbors. Nope. It didn’t matter. ALL fences MUST be the same, no exceptions.
So, we complied, grumbling all the way.
And next time? There never was or will be a next time.
And, knowing that it was my mistake to sign the contract without seeing what I was getting into, I hold anyone in an HOA today responsible for any problem they have with it. Don’t do it and if you do then don’t come to me with your sob stories.
Also, I question the Constitutionality of some of the sought-after ways that States want to restrict HOAs from putting in the HOA-deed-restrictions. What about all the rights of the residents in the HOA who agreed to and DO NOT mind the restrictions; who believe the restrictions DO help define the environment THEY want THEIR property to be part of? Whose Liberty is actually at stake, when all the legal objects in question are objects of a contract no one is required to make?
The HOA is in violation of state law, in this case. This is not a simple case of homeowner doesn’t want to follow an HOA’s rules.
This is a case of an HOA which has a rule in violation of state law.
I think your motivation is ambitiously noble but the fact of the matter is HE CAN FLY A FLAG ATTACHED TO HIS HOME and THEY WILL FLY ONE AT THE ENTRANCE OF COMMUNITY.
I live in an HOA and I can tell you having everyone do whatever they want is not why I moved here.
If he can erect a 30 foot flag pole then anyone whose origins are from other countries can also erect a flag pole and fly their colors.
Then next thing you know the community looks like United Nations Plaza and I sure in the hell don’t want that.
Then the next schmo who wants to put a fountain in his front yard will do it and the next guy who wants to up decorations to celebrate Dia De Los Muertos will be able to as well.
Pretty soon there neighborhood doesn’t look like it did when you moved in and becomes undesirable.
At that point the HOA no longer serves a purpose since cannot enforce community standards.
They guy has a choice and the HOA even took a step further but he want his absolute and perfect way.
No one is stopping him from flying a flag. He just can’t do it on a 30 foot pole.
Actually, the state law says he can fly a flag on a pole.
The HOA is in violation of state law in this case, which makes it different from most resident vs HOA cases.
Actually, the state law says he can fly a flag on a pole.
The HOA is in violation of state law in this case, which makes it different from many resident vs HOA cases.
Really? I don’t like it but if that’s the then the HOA must know this and they should STFU.
There are real bullies on HOA boards and you have to push back at every chance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.