Homeowner association takes Guardsmans home

[Callie Del Noire]

http://www.military.com/news/article/soldier-loses-home-while-deployed.html

Well I dislike homeowner associations anyway but this is rediculous. You mean to tell me no one in the association called or visited the wife?

[Revolverman]

977.55 in back fees = loss of a 300k plus house?


That's theft, plain and simple.

[Brandon]

There are plenty of laws in place to ensure soldiers dont get screwed over, this is the same. According to the article, the HOA already sold the house and they now say its out of their hands but that isnt true either. The house needs to go back to Captain Clauer and the money that the HOA got from Mr. Disanti, needs to be returned in full. If that happened and the HOA admitted they screwed up, no harm would be done and everyone could walk away happy. If it doesnt happen that way the Clauer's still have the law on their side

[Callie Del Noire]

I've seen vets and active duty service members take it In the shorts from HOAs before. One vet here nearly lost his home over the flagpole he had in his yard before the association was formed in his development. A new association officer slid in a rule to get rid of it and nearly took the guys home in the process. The rest of the associations officers were in the dark till it came up on the news.

Cut and dried, HOAs have too much power. A lot of their fines could be enforced in small claims or moves to garnish wages. 

[HockeyGod]

I belong to a homeowner association - and am on the Board. The biggest comment is that we do nothing. Board members are volunteers and are just like every other neighbor. The only problem is we have to deal with the crap from which other homeowners just turn their cheek. I live in a quite affluent community, but the economic times have hurt us just as I'm sure it has hit every HOA.

We have over $80,000 in unpaid dues. We have a lenient policy whereby a homeowner can contact us and make a scheduling plan if they have lost their job or just can't afford to pay the $234 / month. The issue is - we have a budget that is based on revenues. The most expensive costs we have no control over - insurance, utilities, etc.

I would just caution people not to use blanket statements about HOAs. Remember they are your neighbors and most are just trying to create a welcoming community, but are faced with realities that you may not see. I also don't mean to comment on this instance, but to specifically comment on the power of HOAs. Are there unscrupulous people serving on HOA boards? Probably - there are unscrupulous people everywhere. For the most part HOAs are trying to conduct business to keep homes in the black.

[Callie Del Noire]

I only know of the 'bad' ones that make the news and the ones my family deal with. My older brother and my parents deal with the same one and they have tried a few end runs around the homeowners as the development company that build the development sold off the lots (and their controlling interest in the HOA) but my brother is pretty sharp and he and his wife do a good job of short stopping blind ambition.

My little brother had one guy on his HOA in Phoenix that tried to get his Satellite TV dish taken out but he managed to shut it down.

This use of debtor's liens on homes for fees is ridiculous, if you want the money.. go to small claims court and garnish wages and assets. This taking of homes is WAY out of perspective and while not legally shady, is definitely hinky.

[GeekFury]

Way to treat the people protecting your country, seriously that homeowner association should be shot for fucking treason! Make sme sick to the stomach to think that could happen over a debut thats not even $1000.

[Brandon]

Treason is a high claim, and frankly Im seeing that word used a lot in the political boards and even then often wrongly. Let me define it for people


trea·son
   /ˈtrizən/ Show Spelled[tree-zuhn] Show IPA
–noun
1.the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2.a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3.the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

—Synonyms
1.  T reason , sedition  mean disloyalty or treachery to one's country or its government. T reason  is any attempt to overthrow the government or impair the well-being of a state to which one owes allegiance; the crime of giving aid or comfort to the enemies of one's government. S edition  is any act, writing, speech, etc., directed unlawfully against state authority, the government, or constitution, or calculated to bring it into contempt or to incite others to hostility, ill will or disaffection; it does not amount to treason and therefore is not a capital offense. 2. See disloyalty.

[RubySlippers]

Who said they had to join such a community there are many unrestricted neighborhoods around that leave the homeowner freer than this. But I do think its heavy handed under the circumstances.

[Vekseid]

The law is firmly against the HOA in this case, rightly so, and likely, they will pay for it. It wasn't "heavy handed", it was illegal. If there isn't a lot of case law surrounding these situations, it would be legally questionable even without military involvement.

[Trieste]

I don't really understand the benefits of HOAs. The only things I hear about are the downsides. It's never, "Well, I complained to the Homeowner's Association and got them to stop hanging their underwear and Speedos on their front railing, thank goodness. There were brassieres all over my lawn!"

No, it's always, "The Homeowner's Association told me that my house is the wrong color and I have to repaint it" when the house is butter-yellow and not remotely visible from the road. (This happened to my parents.) Things like that.

[Oniya]

I don't really understand the benefits of HOAs. The only things I hear about are the downsides. It's never, "Well, I complained to the Homeowner's Association and got them to stop hanging their underwear and Speedos on their front railing, thank goodness. There were brassieres all over my lawn!"

Love the image there.

I have only seen one instance where the HOA did something that the whole community (except for the 'offender') benefited from.  Someone living near my mother's house decided to start keeping chickens.  This is in a suburban Virginia neighborhood, just outside the Beltway, fully stocked with government workers and DINKs (the only people that can afford such locations).  I'm not sure which category the 'offender' fell into.

At any rate, when keeping chickens, it is apparently necessary to keep both genders.  And we all know what roosters do to chat up the ladies.  Between the crowing at all hours, and the smell (chickens aren't really that fastidious, apparently), that the owner was somehow oblivious to, the HOA was called in.

That being said, I'm sure it's the exception rather than the rule.  They also called out someone whose door was painted the wrong color (looked different in the store, or something), and someone else who flew their flag 24-7 (which is technically against flag code if you don't light it up.)

[Brandon]

Hmmm seems to me like HOA's have the ability to impede on freedom of speech when it comes to physical expressions. Whats so bad about flying an american flag? or even one of personal or historical significance?

[Oniya]

I think Pete Seeger explains it best:

Little Boxes

The funny colored door, the stand-alone flagpole - if you let those in, then the little boxes aren't the same.

[Brandon]

Ah I see, another aspect of our society trying to force people to conform to what the society wants rather then what the individual wants. Gotcha

[Torch]

I don't really understand the benefits of HOAs. The only things I hear about are the downsides. It's never, "Well, I complained to the Homeowner's Association and got them to stop hanging their underwear and Speedos on their front railing, thank goodness. There were brassieres all over my lawn!"

*sneaks outside to hang unmentionables from the tree in the front yard*

Seriously though, I've owned homes in three different states where HOA's were in effect. Like anything else, there's an upside and a downside. As a homeowner, I like knowing that some yahoo can't move next door, paint his house pink with purple polka dots and keep goats in his backyard. When my property value is at stake, you better believe I want someone watching my back, and the HOA does that. I'd rather give up that bit of freedom than not be able to sell my house when and if I need to.

It's a trade-off I'm willing to make to preserve my investment in my home.

[Paladin]

*sneaks outside to hang unmentionables from the tree in the front yard*

Seriously though, I've owned homes in three different states where HOA's were in effect. Like anything else, there's an upside and a downside. As a homeowner, I like knowing that some yahoo can't move next door, paint his house pink with purple polka dots and keep goats in his backyard. When my property value is at stake, you better believe I want someone watching my back, and the HOA does that. I'd rather give up that bit of freedom than not be able to sell my house when and if I need to.

It's a trade-off I'm willing to make to preserve my investment in my home.

Yes but the consittution gives him the right to happyness. If he wants to paint his house like that he should be able to.

Its a Catch 22 situation.

*Moves in next to Torch and paints house Lime Green with purple awnings*

[Serephino]

I'm with Paladin on this one.  I don't currently own a house, but if I did, it would be my private property.  I don't like it when anyone tries to tell me what I can and can't do with something that is mine.  They had no right to take the house. 

[Torch]

I'm with Paladin on this one.  I don't currently own a house, but if I did, it would be my private property.  I don't like it when anyone tries to tell me what I can and can't do with something that is mine.  They had no right to take the house. 

Putting aside the above case for a moment, I'd like to focus on something. You don't own a house, but if you did, your view would most likely be different. As I said, when you invest half a million dollars into your property, you want that investment to hold it's value, right? You pay the mortgage, you pay the property taxes, you pay the insurance, you pay the upkeep and maintenance and everything else that goes along with owning a home. And it's all good until you have to sell that house, for whatever reason. But you can't sell, and you know why? Because of the next door neighbor, of the pink and purple polka dotted house with goats in the backyard, that's why. No one is going to buy YOUR house, as lovely as it might be, because of the yahoo next door.

So now, because of your yahoo neighbor, YOUR right to sell your home is being infringed upon. And you can't do a damn thing about it. So you get to suck it up, watch your property value plummet, watch your investment go down the toilet, and you DID NOTHING WRONG. Sucks, huh?

Now do you see why some folks value a homeowner's association?

[Brandon]

Sounds like the problem is not the neighbor but the buyers and the forceful process of making people conform to what is considered normal. Granted Ive always been an opponent against conformity, if I conformed to everything that people thought was normal I would be a robot, not an individual.

I guess one thing I dont understand is how a property becomes less valuable because of a property next to it. When you buy land, or something on that land, youre buying the land, not the place next to it, not the house next to it, not the neighbors next to it.

[Oniya]

I guess one thing I dont understand is how a property becomes less valuable because of a property next to it. When you buy land, or something on that land, youre buying the land, not the place next to it, not the house next to it, not the neighbors next to it.

Okay - here's a simple way to look at it.  You're looking to buy a house, and you come across a neighborhood where there are two identical houses in your price range.  Same floor-plan, same lot size, same school district, etc.  The one difference is that one of them backs onto the city landfill, and the other backs onto parkland.  From the first one, if you look out your back window, or go out in your back yard, you're treated to the sight and smell of rotting garbage, and from the other, you see tranquil forest.

Which one are you going to buy?

[Ket]

Say you are in a group of people, and your performance is graded based upon the entire group's performance. Let's say this is a troupe of actors. You can act, most of the other people can act, but one person cannot act worth a dime. They can never remember their lines, have a monotone voice, and just stand like a statue on stage, poorly delivering what few lines they can remember.

That one person has ruined your entire performance.

Now - put that in the sense of a neighborhood. The entire neighborhood has houses and lawns that are kept up and beautiful. Except for one. The lawn is rarely mowed, the fence is falling down, the paint is faded or the siding falling off. There are trashy cars in the driveway, half of which don't even run.

That one house has blemished that entire neighborhood.

HOA's are good for the fact that they do help neighborhoods keep property values. However, I do feel they have gone too far into forcing everything to be cookie cutter and exactly the same. If I want a purple door, by gosh I'm going to have a purple door. But being the person that I am, I will make sure that the door is not too gaudy of a purple and that it flows with the rest of my house. However, there are people out there who aren't like that, and could care less. Which is where the homeowner's association steps in.

I do feel they should have taken the service member and his wife to small claim's court instead of foreclosing on their house. To me, that is being just a bit too catty and trivial. I understand why the fees are in place, but I also understand her situation (as I've seen it happen to many military wives while their husbands are deployed) and feel that as human beings, the HOA should have tried to do more than just send her letters. She probably could have used the knock on her door and a face asking her if everything was okay during that time. Who knows, had someone from the HOA gone over there and tried to see what was wrong and figured out why the dues weren't being paid, this situation may have never occurred.

So while I agree that HOA's do have a good purpose, I believe in many cases they have been taken entirely too far and have rules just for the sake of having rules. Where I live currently doesn't have an HOA, but since we are a historical neighborhood, we have to deal with the city when it comes to making improvements to our house. In all honestly, I feel the city is easier to deal with.

[Torch]

Sounds like the problem is not the neighbor but the buyers and the forceful process of making people conform to what is considered normal.

I'm sorry, was someone forced at gunpoint to buy a home in a neighborhood with a HOA?

I guess one thing I dont understand is how a property becomes less valuable because of a property next to it. When you buy land, or something on that land, youre buying the land, not the place next to it, not the house next to it, not the neighbors next to it.

You don't understand? Really? You aren't being obtuse on purpose?

Because none of us live in a vacuum or a plastic bubble, that's why. What you do on your property, next door to me, affects me to some extent. That's why we have noise ordinances, trash ordinances, building ordinances, zoning ordinances, etc.

Your rights as a property owner are not absolute. In the same way that you can't yell "Fire" in a crowded theater, you can't buy a half-acre of land in a residential zoned neighborhood, and then put a couple of cows on it because you've changed your mind about being a homeowner and decided you'd rather be Old MacDonald instead.

[Brandon]

I suppose it comes down to my way of thinking then. I do not feel I have the right to force someone change anything about their private property, just as I feel like they dont have the right to change something about my private property. As I said Im very anti-conformist because I feel conformity is one of the evil aspects of law, creating crushed spirit and despair when authority no longer cares about whats good for all people rather then whats good for the few. Rules for the sake of rules is not good policy IMO

Housing markets as they are can prevent people from living in an HOA free community. For example I have a personal policy that I will not live more then 5 miles from where I work. The reason for this is I prefer to run/walk to work which saves me money and helps me keep a healthy body. If I have to change jobs or job locations and there are only a few free homes/apartments near them then yes because of my personal policy I could be forced to live in an HOA influenced area

As a free people Americans should reject conformity and as several people have pointed out HOA's seem to do little but enforce conformity

[Torch]

As a free people Americans should reject conformity and as several people have pointed out HOA's seem to do little but enforce conformity

That's what's great about living in America.

You can choose to be as anti-conformist as you please.

I can choose to live in a goat-free neighborhood.

We can both be happy.