I haven't taken the time to read through all of that, but here's what most folks are missing when they come to his defense:

I don't think it's legally possible to force anyone to join a HOA unless there was some provision made and attached to the property deed. In the case of our own HOA, there was none when I bought my home, yet there were ceretain restrictive covenants listed by the developer and attached to the deed that outlined a basic set of rules. Those rules are and should be inviolate, since they are attached to the deed and purchase of the home results in acceptance of the terms and conditions set forth on the restrictive covenants. In addition, there was a clause that required agreement to accept membership in a HOA, since after the developer sold all of the lots, there would otherwise be no controlling authority to enforce the covenants. Here's that clause:



As for what happens if a person doesn't want to live by the above agreement, here's the stick:



There are many other "rules" set forth in the document, including the right for the eventually established HOA BOD to determine additional rules, regulations and fines for non-compliance. It can be interesting when liens are placed on a homeowner's residence when he/she wants to "try" the system. Such is unusual, but it happens - usually only to those who are one step away from bankruptcy proceedings and are not paying dues and/or creditors and/or those who think they should get what they want without regard for the agreement they signed when they bought their property.

The point I'm trying to make is that without something similar to the above language attached to a deed at time of purchase, there is no way for neighbors to form a HOA and force compliance.... and any attempt to do so would be found flawed by a court of law. It seems reasonable to me that this fellow didn't read what he signed - and if he did, tried to skate by blaming something/somebody else other than himself. HOAs can be too picky - many may be.... but many folks buy in areas of small lots and nice homes that want to keep it looking good - and they don't want their value diminished by those who don't feel the same way...... so, the answer is "RULES". The lesson is if you can't live by rules (whether they've yet been established or not), don't buy a property that has the potential for eventual compliance with the wishes of others...... and..... READ WHAT YOU SIGN. Of course, the option also exists to sell and move away if the rules become too difficult.



When I provided that service for our community, I headed an Architectural Control Committee (ACC or ARC) that published pre-approved fence plans. Those fence styles/designs were available for all to see and included in the original documents that were given to purchasers of lots and to builders. The main requirement was that fences must have masonry columns at required intervals and any panels must be of a certain height and made from certain materials of approved type. If someone wanted to build a style of fence that had not been pre-approved, they could submit a design drawing and it would be approved if the ACC felt it was architecturally compatible. The idea was/is to have architectural harmony (not cookie-cutter) through the elimination of unsightly fences - the number one problem for most subdivisions.... and certainly one of the biggest areas of concern for ours. One fence in a subdivision isn't so bad - even if it's ugly (to some).... and originally there aren't many fences - since everyone doesn't want one. But, as houses turn over, the odds of a fence being built increases - and ultimately a subdivision has a good chance of having a fence around every property. Fences can be architecturally attractive..... or horrible - particularly when viewed from the street. So, it is in the interests of any HOA to address the issue early in the life of the development if they want to maintain property values long term.



Sure - that's the County or City ordinances that we also have to work within.... because those ordinances take precedent over any HOA. The HOA rules must first satisfy - and are in addition to - any municipality regulations.

The downside to the property value argument is if the HOA becomes so demanding that nobody wants to own a home there, property values will drop - something that should be addressed long before reaching that point. There is a line of reasonableness that should be closely watched by members and the BOD alike.

Frank