Posted on 06/01/2010 9:07:42 PM PDT by Dr. Marten
And that's all we're saying. You have a choice when buying a home. But once you sign those CC&R's...you must abide by them or prove that the rule is illegal..and sometimes it may be. But most times it's not.
I live in attached condos so it's a bit different. Just tonight I wrote to a woman, who hates me because she's just mad her unit isn't worth what she paid for it, and that's just the truth. We do not allow barbecues on patios. I wish we did..I'd love a barbecue on my patio (We have seven beautiful barbecues on the property for all to use). Anyway, she rents her unit out and even with repeated notices and letters and phone calls, she has not taken it down. This is a city law as well as a rule in our CC&R's. This weekend her renter used the barbecue and it literally smoked out the unit next to hers...I'm giving her 48 hours to get it out or have it removed and be fined $500..I even offered to help her as she does not live here. I guarantee you she will not respond and she'll read the letter and curse me out. There are just people like that, but I've done nothing wrong. My first responsibility is to the homeowners as a group...anything that jeopardizes them must be addressed. If that makes me the bad guy, so be it. This is my home because I CHOSE to live here. And it's a beautiful place because of it.
I thank mah chickens done laid eggs in my camaro. Anyone wanna an omelet?
There is due process (following Constitution principles) built into the foreclosure process. This doesn't happen overnight; it takes several notices,and several opportunities, before the final notice of foreclosure sale. In Texas we even go a step further, by giving people (in most cases) a chance to get their property back up to several months AFTER the foreclosure happened.
Most folks who serve on HOA boards DO NOT want to foreclose. I personally know of an HOA board member who finally, after several years of a person not paying (while availing themselves to the "perks" of the community) voted yes to initiate foreclosure - and then went to the bathroom to throw up.
Folks should know what they are buying before they buy. If you don't want the perks, don't accept the obligation of paying for them.
If you are like me, you probably pay your bills on time (come heck or high water). If you are hacked off by folks walking away from their mortage, or getting their overpriced mortgages reduced because now they don't want to pay it (while we, through our taxes, make up the difference), then you can hopefully understand why the HOAs get tired of folks not paying their fair share, too.
“You are serving on the Board of an HOA.”
Wouldn’t happen.
“The insurance, and run the risk of being held personally liable for any legal fees and damages? “
Take them to court, being held “personally” liable works both ways.
The problem is that you’re giving a false dichotomy. I don’t have to subscribe to HOA’s, and I don’t have to defend them. With all due respect (because I think you’re not trying to maliciously employ this tactic), but having me defend a position I don’t hold isn’t merely a way to get me to see though someone else’s eyes, it’s a way to try and get me to subscribe to a belief. (Two degrees in the field).
I will not and will not even entertain defending a position I don’t hold. I’ve already outlined my belief in these types of tyrannical enforcements. As OneWingedShark ingeniously has posted the 6th and 7th ammendments, and since I am a constitutionalist at heart, I would direct you to his post.
Being the SUPREME law of the land, and as this is concerning a civil matter of greater than $20.00, my answer will be the same regarding whatever scenario you give me: If you can;t get someone to pay like a gentle[wo]man, sue them like one. IN COURT.
What kind of attitude does it take to live in one? Just curious about what it takes to survive there. ;)
Easily lead and lazy it seems with a hint of color commie
ha ha...I don’t know about lazy. They seem to know a lot more detail about their neighbors than I’ll ever care to know.
Judicial foreclosure is costly to the community. Either all the residents are then forced to pay for the malfeasance of one, or the association attempts to recoup the increased costs at foreclosure.
If a person wants to exercise their right to redeem their home, they will have to shell out several thousand more to do so. It's a lot easier for a struggling homeowner to come up with $3,500, then $8,500.
Either way, the end result will be the same - the only thing that changes is the price tag to the homeowner in the end.
With all due respect, I agree with upholding contracts.
I don’t think we disagree in principle on most of what we are saying, I’m just probably not take time enough for due diligence in explaining myself.
I read virtually every contract, (which greatly annoys anyone on the other side of the contract, apparently) that I sign. I realize that it is every person’s obligation to engage in personal contracts with an understanding of what they are agreeing to.
However, you’re talking about apples and oranges. You’re talking about community benefits that are quantifiable in costs, which are ammenities that someone has access to. IF they don’t pay for them, limit their access. I don’t care if it’s hard, or seems impossible, not my problem. Charge them with trespassing on community areas, whatever you like, not my beef. That’s not property they are paying for, so they don’t have a right to it.
Painting one’s home day-glo green. I don’t care. It’s not my home, and I don’t care how it affects property values. I don’t care what selfrighteous crusade people go on in the name of property value. There was a woman in Salt Lake a few years back who had grass too high IN A PARK STRIP (easment) of all places (We’re talking I think an inch) and someone turned her in. A crew came and cut it and she was fined and billed. This is tyrannical. I have more stories.
HOA’s are not evil in nature, but I would argue that people are and certainly become when put into positions of power. HOA’s by and large they have grown in nature to become monstrosities that are a perversion of property rights. I respect everyone’s right to sign into one, but I’m not for suspending constitutional rights either. I’m not for binding arbitration either if that helps.
I think one should be able to get one’s (HOA) money, but that one should be able to buy into a HOA neighborhood and opt out of the HOA. The HOA’s (correct me if I’m wrong), don’t actually own the property, the HOA merely has a hand in all of the transactions. Once someone has bought property, it is theirs, and no one elses. Matters of safety are to be decided by the law of the land, via Federal or State constitution, down to local. But even that has infringed upon property rights too far. That’s my opinion, and It’s never going to change.
What I would do is this: write into the contracts that as condition of the sale $X must be paid into a fund every year for say 15 years. X would be what would be required to pay all that you listed PLUS what would make the fund self-sustaining in 10 years.
Then, not only do you have ALL the fundings taken care of you might even be able to make the fund into a sort of insurance-as-well thing for emergencies. {Of course this requires both foresight and patience.}
Sorry HOA = busybodies and thieves.
Anyone who would presume to think they really OWN property that is in jurisdiction of an HOA is delusional. It’s problematic enough to have city and state taxes and jurisdiction over your property, but at least you have the power of your vote.
Sorry, I was responding to a different post...
“The nonjudicial foreclosure process is the least expensive one for everyone involved.”
A non starter for me. I’m for the legal process as intended, regardless of cost.
As an afterthought, if the legal/judicial system wasn’t being deliberately bogged down, it would be much less costly. It’s only become that way because the judicial system has been corrupted. We want to fix Congress and fix the Presidency and fix the Supreme Court, but we’re not fixing the system. That’s where it must start.
All of which is illegal if the Captain signed the HOA agreement, which he did.
No legal actions can be taken against him while he is overseas. That is a federal law also known as the Soldiers and Sailors relief act of 1940.
Agreed, which is the heart of this issue, and why (we know there was Fraud involved) this entire debacle is suspect.
Most HOA boards don't keep that kind of information on people; it has to be offered.
One phone call could have stopped all of this months ago. Again, not the HOA's fault.
I was thinking about an initial deposit being a portion of the contract, as an answer to his/her question, but I don’t know how well that would work in any event, nor do I think it would be any better for the homeowner. But it would, at least in theory and temporarily (until the funds run out), solve the posed problem I was asked.
If my sister’s chickens had ever laid an egg on my camaro I would have cooked the chicken for dinner just for her. :-)
And it was a 1968RS w/ a 327 w/matching numbers and a posi trac rear end. I sold it w/ regrets to finish my house.
Sorry, but if it’s illegal, it is the HOA man’s fault, phone call or not.
See, thias is what law is about. It doesn’t matter whether he knew or not, before taking action he should have known. So, the rememdy to this is for the HOA to pay and give the man/woman back their house. They are entitled to their property under a higher law. If it was a mistake, or even an error, it doesn’t matter that they didn’t know.
If you take something that isn’t yours, you restore it. That is a fundamental tenet of our society. Not it’s time to sue the pants off them and get his house, or it’s appraisal value if he prefers, (minus $800 in fees+plus his cost for housing until restored) back. And that’s that.
No it doesn’t, all one has to do is be serving in the military and deploy-able.
It also protect the Captain in this case from a default judgment
STATUTES OF LIMITATION (SEC. 206)
(a). TOLLING OF STATUTES OF LIMITATION DURING MILITARY SERVICE: The period of a servicemember’s military service may not be included in computing any period limited by law, regulation, or order for the bringing of any action or proceeding in a court, or in any board, bureau, commission, department, or other agency of a State (or political subdivision of a State) or the United States by or against the servicemember or the servicemember’s heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns.
(b). REDEMPTION OF REAL PROPERTY: A period of military service may not be included in computing any period provided by law for the redemption of real property sold or forfeited to enforce an obligation, tax, or assessment.
(c). INAPPLICABILITY TO INTERNAL REVENUE LAWS: This section does not apply to any period of limitation prescribed by or under the internal revenue laws of the United States.
We have over 1/4 acre of beautiful lawn, almost that much garden, a boat, two snow machines, two ATV's, a pick-up truck ,two suv's, and a Pontiac sedan.
For the snobs in the crowd, I looked all over and did not see any washers or dryers, other than the ones in the house.
Oh ,and another thing, we have a 26 foot motorhome.
We pride ourselves on doing our own thing, not bothering our neighbors and they don't bother us. Good people. We Alaskans just want to be left alone.
BTW, I did not buy this place as an investment, I bought it to live in. I would not live under a HOA for all the tea in China...
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.