Homeowner Must Pay $102,000 For Flying the American Flag

American Homeowners Resource Center (AHRC) ^ | January 25, 2003 | Shu Bartholomew

[chuknospam]

Homeowner Must Pay $102,000 For Flying the American Flag May have to pay an additional $42,000

January 25, 2003

By Shu Bartholomew (View author info)

Richmond, VA - Breaking News...

Contact Richard and Ava Oulton FAX (804)270-5757

Richard and Ava Oullton were informed by Judge Harris of the Henrico County Circuit Court to be prepared to pay the consequences if Old Glory is still flying on their property on March 1st.

Having exhausted every avenue of appeal, the Oultons ultimately lost the battle to keep their flagpole on their property.

The Virginia Supreme Court's opinion, that people who live in homeowners' associations have very limited freedoms and property rights, was echoed by the United States Supreme Court.

On remand to the Henrico County Circuit Court, the Oulton's were ordered to comply with the wishes of the association or be prepared to go to jail.

They have been ordered to pay in excess of $102,000 to cover the association's costs, with another $42,000 to be decided by Judge Harris at a later date. Included in that award is several thousand dollars to hire a bulldozer, dump truck and several Henrico County Police to remove the 25 foot flagpole and the flag -- by force.

[smiley]

Well.....I guess it's time for a new roof.....say....red, white and blue....with stripes.....and stars.....maybe a new paint job on the house.....

[ShadowDancer]

Included in that award is several thousand dollars to hire a bulldozer, dump truck and several Henrico County Police to remove the 25 foot flagpole and the flag.

Why in God's name did they need a bulldozer and a dump truck to remove a pole from a ground sleeve?

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Why in God's name did they need a bulldozer and a dump truck to remove a pole from a ground sleeve?

In order to ensure that they were able to incur the maximum dollar figure of expenses imaginable that would then be assessed to the defendants when the plaintiffs eventually won their case. That's why.

In other words....for spite.

[JoJo Gunn]

It's time to go to war with the Left.

[zip]

This is America?????????

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

It's time to go to war with the Left.

Agreed.

Lock and load.

[LibKill]

THIS AIN'T RIGHT!

Can we raise money to bail these poor folks out? I will give.

[dennisw]

commie rat bastards! lazy fat ass supping at the public trough beaurocRATs

[Wonder Warthog]

"Well.....I guess it's time for a new roof.....say....red, white and blue....with stripes.....and stars.....maybe a new paint job on the house....."

You can bet that any such paint job(s) will also be "against the homeowners association's rules". Instead of "neighborhood associations" they should call'em what they really are "nanny Nazi associations".

[dennisw]

But of course! To jack up the bill_to_be_paid.

[kcvl]

Why would anyone want to live in that neighborhood anyway? I would just move!

[Destructor]

"The Virginia Supreme Court's opinion, that people who live in homeowners' associations have very limited freedoms and property rights, was echoed by the United States Supreme Court."

I didn't realize that "homeowners associations" had such a commune mentality. I'll be damned if I'd ever live in one of those neighborhoods!

[RightOnline]

Words fail.........

[John123]

I think the word taste rather than patriotism is the key word here. Having a huge flagpole in front of a home is sort of overkill. I don't question the patriotism of the homeowners association. The main purpose of the association is to preserve the image of the neighborhood. Otherwise you could have tacky pink flamingoes on the lawn next door or year round displays of Christmast ornaments.

If you want to be a individualistic, super patriot, be very sure to purchase a home that is NOT in a neighborhood association.

[freedumb2003]

>>Instead of "neighborhood associations" they should call'em what they really are "nanny Nazi associations". <<

This very well may be true -- I live in a condo and they're pretty restrictive (although we passed a rule allow US flags to fly after 9/11).

But these people moved in KNOWING the Association existed and would have been provided a copy of the CC&Rs. A little bit of research into common-interest living would have clued them in. I remember a "3rd Rock" episode where Sally was on a condo board and kicked herself out of the complex for rules violations. I mean, if even sitcoms know, how could these people not.

The decision to join this community was freely made -- they can't exercise such a decision and then later try to change the deal THEY accepted at the time. The best way to survive common interest fascism is to join the board and influence the rules.

These crybabies got what they deserved.

[ErnBatavia]

Even Kalifornia allows residents of "compounds" to have flagpoles; there was a lawsuit that started right here in La Quinta resulting in the new state law that became effective this past January 1.

[freedumb2003]

>>Why would anyone want to live in that neighborhood anyway? I would just move!<<

Common interset communities provide shared amenities (a pool, clubhouse, playground, security, etc.) that the individual homeowners would normally not be able to afford. Also, having a consistent and pleasant look to the community enhances property values.

Imagine if your next door neighbor decided to stop mowing the lawn, painted their place electic purple with black trim, etc. etc. You might say "hey, cool with me," but you would probably quickly change your mind when you try to sell your house and have no takers (or have reduce the price by say, tens of thousands of dollars). That would be $$ taken out of YOUR pocket and you would have zero recourse.

I know I sound like a common living aplogist, but as I said in another post, this is a CHOICE one makes. The trade off is there for rational adults to make.

[peteram]

Having a huge flagpole in front of a home is sort of overkill. I don't question the patriotism of the homeowners association. The main purpose of the association is to preserve the image of the neighborhood.

Agreed. I've lived in two communities now that have had associations and I've found their rules to be very common sense oriented (although, I can't drill for oil on my property, darn it!).

OTOH - my dad lives in a regular community - no association - and his next door neighbor has erected a 50 foot radio tower with a Moonraker antenna on top. This is in between their houses and causes interference not only to his TV, but telephone and radio as well.

Yep - I'll take the association, thank you. Keeps my property values up.

[JimVT]

Whaddaya wanna bet this one wouldna' raised a stir!