To me (and seemingly most of INGO), a house being in a HOA lowers the value more than the neighbors house being pink.
Correct. They'll never see my money.
To me (and seemingly most of INGO), a house being in a HOA lowers the value more than the neighbors house being pink.
Well said and yes, I agree for the most part.You're correct, to a point. However, with the example given, there is no real, honest way to justify another person or group of people having more freedom to pick the color of a neighbor's house than that neighbor does. IMO, freedom ends at the property line. Seeking to control a property that doesn't actually belong to you is hardly different than trespassing in my opinion. Forming a group of similar minded individuals and wrapping it in the trappings of an officialdom with an HOA doesn't lessen the trespass either. Also, while garish paint schemes, maintenance, etc. may be the reasons given for the formation of an HOA, it never ends there. There is always mission expansion as some members discover that they enjoy the control. "The issue is never the issue, the issue is always control."
To most of the country, and too lenders, it increases the value…To me (and seemingly most of INGO), a house being in a HOA lowers the value more than the neighbors house being pink.
If a group of people agree that there will be no paint colors other than what the group agree the paint colors are, do they not have the freedom to make that agreement?You're correct, to a point. However, with the example given, there is no real, honest way to justify another person or group of people having more freedom to pick the color of a neighbor's house than that neighbor does. IMO, freedom ends at the property line. Seeking to control a property that doesn't actually belong to you is hardly different than trespassing in my opinion. Forming a group of similar minded individuals and wrapping it in the trappings of an officialdom with an HOA doesn't lessen the trespass either. Also, while garish paint schemes, maintenance, etc. may be the reasons given for the formation of an HOA, it never ends there. There is always mission expansion as some members discover that they enjoy the control. "The issue is never the issue, the issue is always control."
You're saying that someone can move into a neighborhood with an HOA, they could opt not to join, and thus not be subject to the rules and associated fees? That doesn't sound right.If a group of people agree that there will be no paint colors other than what the group agree the paint colors are, do they not have the freedom to make that agreement?
An HOA is voluntary, no one is ever forced to join one, shouldn’t people have the freedom to join one? Just as most here relish the freedom not to join one?
Sure, they can make the agreement... trying to enforce that agreement on those that did not agree is the problem.If a group of people agree that there will be no paint colors other than what the group agree the paint colors are, do they not have the freedom to make that agreement?
An HOA is voluntary, no one is ever forced to join one, shouldn’t people have the freedom to join one? Just as most here relish the freedom not to join one?
Well. Also. If you can own nuclear weapons safely, why not?
He will state that you can just not sign the mortgage.You're saying that someone can move into a neighborhood with an HOA, they could opt not to join, and thus not be subject to the rules and associated fees? That doesn't sound right.
That right there say everything.BTW, my personal preference right now would be a well prepped cabin in the woods on the 200 acres I owned three miles from my nearest neighbors, and for sure no HOA.
But as long as I have to live in a subdivision I want some way to keep the outliers under control…
It does, therefore I volunteer to join in a group that has agreed to live according to the covenants and if someone violates their agreement we have recourse. Not a thing wrong with that. Freedom to choose.That right there say everything.
I am saying people are free to chose to move into a neighborhood that does not have an HOAYou're saying that someone can move into a neighborhood with an HOA, they could opt not to join, and thus not be subject to the rules and associated fees? That doesn't sound right.
If one lives in the neighborhood and signed a deed they agreed to the covenants and HOA..Sure, they can make the agreement... trying to enforce that agreement on those that did not agree is the problem.
Haha, The Freedom to control what others do on their property.It does, therefore I volunteer to join in a group that has agreed to live according to the covenants and if someone violates their agreement we have recourse. Not a thing wrong with that. Freedom to choose.
And what if the Board of that group of people vote and decide hot pink is the only acceptable color and any new construction/remodeling/repair must be in that color? Then along comes a hailstorm and damages just a couple pieces of siding, you now have the option of redoing the house hot pink or having a couple of patches of hot pink.If a group of people agree that there will be no paint colors other than what the group agree the paint colors are, do they not have the freedom to make that agreement?
An HOA is voluntary, no one is ever forced to join one, shouldn’t people have the freedom to join one? Just as most here relish the freedom not to join one?
No, it appears you like to tell your neighbors what they can/can't do.As bug said, INGO doesn’t like to be told they can’t do something. LOL. I guess I don’t either but I try to temper that with the trade offs of the agreement as to how we will live.
Perhaps lenders, I'll need a cite for most of the country.To most of the country, and too lenders, it increases the value…
The freedom to enter into agreements is also a freedom…Haha, The Freedom to control what others do on their property.
That's the definition of the American Dream.
No thanks.
That they foolishly agreed to the covenants at the time of purchase does not mean that they will also agree with covenants enacted later by the HOA. A lot of things that sound like a good idea when you have control become a lot less so when others that disagree gain control. Or when the amount of control, or the things being controlled inevitably increase. Some have to learn this the hard way.If one lives in the neighborhood and signed a deed they agreed to the covenants and HOA..
If it is in the covenants when one buys or is legally changed then that is what was agreed…And what if the Board of that group of people vote and decide hot pink is the only acceptable color and any new construction/remodeling/repair must be in that color? Then along comes a hailstorm and damages just a couple pieces of siding, you now have the option of redoing the house hot pink or having a couple of patches of hot pink.
So people are duped into buying property with an HOA? My experience has shown the opposite of what you described. Most neighborhoods HOA get more lax over the years…That they foolishly agreed to the covenants at the time of purchase does not mean that they will also agree with covenants enacted later by the HOA. A lot of things that sound like a good idea when you have control become a lot less so when others that disagree gain control. Or when the amount of control, or the things being controlled inevitably increase. Some have to learn this the hard way.