Well, for now, that would be me..... and for several years, I was the guy who made folks remove flagpoles, approved house plans, additions, colors, fences and all other such stuff - but I wouldn't say I'm stingy.... just determined that rules are there for a reason.

But - I do agree that I deserve what I get. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> I work for it. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/kewl.gif" alt="" />

Frank

Clearly, you couldn't be bothered to actually read the thread. He lived there before the HOA as a renter, then they sold it to him and told him the HOA came with it. He didn't choose to live under HOA rules as much as he chose to not live in his car. It took him several months just to find a rental, then they sold it to him, or he could have gone out to look for another rental (there weren't any), or buy another house (twice the dough).

Bottom line as far as I could tell; he got snookered and managed to find something he could fight for to help improve his situation in some small way.

If you would have "bothered" to read my response, you'd see that I spent several hours reading the thread and hundreds of post. Excuse me if I missed a few details in all that reading. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> Assuming I got anything wrong.

Last time I checked, buying a house is a free choice. He bought knowing there was an HOA. That's called making a choice. The other stuff is all BS to me. If he didn't want an HOA, he would have found a way to live elsewhere. I know what hot markets look like. I lived in one before the housing crash. Anyone could find a place if they needed, or they could make up garbage excuses to do what they really want to do. He didn't have a problem with HOA's until this situation cropped up, anyway.

Sorry Brian. I was... grumpy. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cheers.gif" alt="" />

The way I read his story, he seemed like he was in a pretty good mess and really didn't have a way out. I can totally see that happening other places. Like Eugene. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/barf.gif" alt="" />

Anyway, he didn't seem to have any other issues with the HOA aside from the parking thing. At least not that he posted. I sure would like to know how this all plays out. I have a real problem with private "authorities" that get out of control. OTOH, I also have a problem right now with any authority that decides to be "the Gestapo" <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/lol.gif" alt="" />

Frank, from my reading the HOA wasn't even established when this guy bought his home. All this crap was dumped into his lap afterwards. Being a self proclaimed "enforcer", what do you get out of telling people that they cant put up a privacy fence or addition to their house? Where I come from we have zoning rules against certain property modifications. If someone wishes to do a property modification thats against the zoning rules then they get a public hearing to ok or nix the modification.

No worries, me too. Long week. I totally agree. Reading that thread made me so mad, I was ready to email or even call that company myself, until I read the posts that said, don't do it. I would love nothing more than to see this guy win and that company get shut down or at least shut out of that neighborhood.

The whole thing is actually a pretty interesting concept. How can someone disable your property without recourse and demand money (extortion). Then when you take your property and move it, along with the disabling device and call the owner of the device to tell them they can come pick it up, how in the hell could that be construde as theft? I think the guy is dead right and I can't believe anyone would charge him with theft or in this case even submit it to the city attorney.

The whole thing just makes me angry. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/angry.gif" alt="" />

Unfortunately, did you see how the main thread was killed by their moderator? No more. All done. I wonder if we'll ever find out the conclusion? I guess too much liability and probably taxed their servers as well.

Too bad.

Me too Brian. Unfortunately the rest of the real world isnt as good natured or tolerant as us sensible 4x4 guys! <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/cheers.gif" alt="" /> I vote no more posts about 2x2 loosers! Heavily modified Audis dont belong on this forum in the first place (although it is technically Off Topic Chat) <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/mrt.gif" alt="" /> TFS!

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

OK, maybe the property owner's at fault for not seeing the forthcoming rules. I myself would not be that stupid to subject myself to said rules or close neighors to begin with! I dont see how you guys send in pics of your rigs with other peoples houses within 25 feet of your property and live there happily. JFC,if they fart. you'll smell it! <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/barf.gif" alt="" />

People in good neighborhoods don't do that...... and if they accidentally do, it doesn't stink. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Frank