Why Do So Many On INGO Hate HOA's?

[jamil]

How does Bill have ANY RIGHTS over Joe’s land? He doesn't. The government is not involved in the decision making. Everything in my example is true freedom. The only way Bill gets what you want him to get is by government oppression.


You, wanting to take Joe’s freedom over his land is the infringement…

When Bill and Biff buy Lamont's (AKA Joe) land, Lamont doesn't own it anymore. Lamont should **** off into the sunset and not care about Biff's ghey Ford truck.

 

[Ingomike]

When Bill and Biff buy Lamont's (AKA Joe) land, Lamont doesn't own it anymore. Lamont should **** off into the sunset and not care about Biff's ghey Ford truck.

The operative word is should, that is an opinion that doesn’t fly in the real world. So now landowners that don’t want to see a pickup truck should not be allowed to assemble? More rights usurpation…

 

[firecadet613]

The operative word is should, that is an opinion that doesn’t fly in the real world…

Bingo.

 

[jamil]

Yep, it currently the right of the landowner. If it was not the courts would rule it is not.

You seem to trust courts a lot more when you think it boosts your beliefs than when it doesn't. What about Trump's conviction? Hmmm? Were they right about that?

It is probably grating to hear the truth from someone who thinks this is fun.

Well, I'll let you know when I hear some truth from you.

I am for complete freedom. I am not the one proposing to make something currently common illegal for landowners.

Not true. Or else you'd acknowledge that a Hobson's choice isn't actually choosing.

You are free to have any opinion you wish. But it is not opinion that what you want takes rights away from landowners.

It doesn't. Saying it over and over doesn't make it any more true than the last time you said it. But you're welcome to keep saying it.

Here. This may help you.

 

[jamil]

The operative word is should, that is an opinion that doesn’t fly in the real world. So now landowners that don’t want to see a pickup truck should not be allowed to assemble? More rights usurpation…

it is an opinion that it should be the way it is. Have you not learned how ought/is works yet? It IS this way now. It OUGHT not be. Because you're usurping the rights of all future owners of the property.

See how that works? You say it "should" be that way. In my opinion, you're wrong. You say it's taking away freedom. That's your opinion. It's a power landowners should not have, to impose restrictions long after the land is sold, and then it stays with the land in perpetuity. Or until the HOA fizzles out because all the Karens have been stoned by law.

 

[jamil]

I want to buy a Silverado with most of the bells and whistles, leather seats, etc. but alas, GM will not build it without it connecting to the internet and telling everything I do to GM who in turn sell that data. I don’t like it, but they cannot force me to buy it. “That leaves little choice for people who” don’t want their truck telling on them but I am not forced to buy, or have my rights taken.

Trust me. Even if it didn't have the on star crap, it's nothing special.

The way I see it, GM should be required to make the spy **** it optional. You should have to opt into having it. But, if that were the case, no one would opt in. And that's the situation with HOA's. So good you have to force it on people.

 

[Ingomike]

it is an opinion that it should be the way it is. Have you not learned how ought/is works yet? It IS this way. It OUGHT not be. Because you're usurping the rights of all future owners of the property.

Thanks for agreeing that is how it is. Now, can we agree that buyers that signed that they agree to abide by the covenants, restrictions, and HOA gave up those rights?

 

[jamil]

Thanks for agreeing that is how it is. Now, can we agree that buyers that signed that they agree to abide by the covenants, restrictions, and HOA gave up those rights?

You can read, correct? I have not disagreed with how it is. I've disagreed that it should be that way.

When I lived in an HOA I followed the HOA covenants. However, I now advocate for people to nullify oppressive covenants and tell the karens to **** off. Keep up maintenance on your home. Keep your lawn mowed. Help pay for the common expenses. Try not to be a nuisance/******* to your neighbors. Beyond that, the Karens can **** off. Park that truck on your driveway. Lobby the local governments to nullify nonsense restrictions.

 

[Ingomike]

You seem to trust courts a lot more when you think it boosts your beliefs than when it doesn't. What about Trump's conviction? Hmmm? Were they right about that?

Politics and business are different in my book. But nice try.

Well, I'll let you know when I hear some truth from you.

Not true. Or else you'd acknowledge that a Hobson's choice isn't actually choosing.

Are you saying there are no other options? If one wants a property free of covenants, restrictions, and HOA options exist. But you want to narrow it down to just certain homes.

It doesn't. Saying it over and over doesn't make it any more true than the last time you said it. But you're welcome to keep saying it.

So if you had your way would an owner still be able to out covenants, restrictions, and HOA on property before selling? Do they now not have that right?

 

[Ingomike]

Trust me. Even if it didn't have the on star crap, it's nothing special.

The way I see it, GM should be required to make the spy **** it optional. You should have to opt into having it. But, if that were the case, no one would opt in. And that's the situation with HOA's. So good you have to force it on people.

Rather than complaining I don’t buy trucks that do that. Or I disconnect the antenna. But I did not agree I would not do that.

 

[Ingomike]

it is an opinion that it should be the way it is. Have you not learned how ought/is works yet? It IS this way now. It OUGHT not be. Because you're usurping the rights of all future owners of the property.

See how that works? You say it "should" be that way. In my opinion, you're wrong. You say it's taking away freedom. That's your opinion. It's a power landowners should not have, to impose restrictions long after the land is sold, and then it stays with the land in perpetuity. Or until the HOA fizzles out because all the Karens have been stoned by law.

So you are saying landowners have that right, they should not have that right, but not allowing them to do that is not taking anything away…

 

[jamil]

Politics and business are different in my book. But nice try.

It was criminal court. You think civil courts have all the fair judges? lol

Well I haven't heard any yet, so...

Are you saying there are no other options? If one wants a property free of covenants, restrictions, and HOA options exist. But you want to narrow it down to just certain homes.

Do the math. If 80% of the homes are HOA, and less than 80% want an HOA, the outcome is much like musical chairs.

So if you had your way would an owner still be able to out covenants, restrictions, and HOA on property before selling? Do they now not have that right?

If I had my way, the only way to bring in an HOA would be for the neighborhood to vote one in. It's not usurping anyone's rights if we're talking about what rights should be. A property owner should not have any rights to a property after they no longer own the property. That's how it should be. You think it shouldn't be that way, so that would be your opinion. But you want me to say your opinion. But I have my own.

 

[jamil]

Rather than complaining I don’t buy trucks that do that. Or I disconnect the antenna. But I did not agree I would not do that.

Disconnecting the antenna doesn't work.

I think Automakers should have to make stuff like that opt-in. The only reason they don't, is that if you let them have the choice, no one would opt in. And that's how it is with HOA's required in the deed. You don't want it to be a choice because HOA's would die a wonderful death. And then the Karens couldn't harass homeowners.

 

[smokingman]

I sold quite a few homes over the years,around 300 or so. The ones with a HOA were always the harder sell.
I made sure people read the HOA,every time. New construction HOA's are the worst. With some controlled by 3rd parties for 3-8 years(until the development is finished no one gets to vote or can be elected...cough...beazer cough) or now defuct CP Morgan who would hold onto that last buildable lot to keep control just a little while longer.

I can see the point of them in highly populated housing with 1/4 acre lots. Once you move into half acre lots the need falls of quite a bit. By the time you are at 1 acre or more per lot they are really not needed, and doing away with them means your taxes not additional fees pay to clean your roads and maintain them. Neighborhood parks also become city or county parks, removing the liability from the HOA(home owners). Those parks are great for the kids,but so is the price tag for an HOA if they lose a lawsuit.

I will not own a home personally if it has an HOA. I want to choose the type of exterior material and color of my home, and decide what kind of fence, or out buildings are desirable. Then again I do not have a neighbor within 150 yards of my property and the ones I do have I meet before signing on the house. A HOA might be what some people desire, but from my experince they are far from the majority.

 

[jamil]

 

[Ingomike]

I sold quite a few homes over the years,around 300 or so. The ones with a HOA were always the harder sell.

This runs counter to the fact that the most popular communities in central Indiana Carmel, Fishers, Westfield, Whitestown, Brownsburg, Avon, Greenwood, Franklin Tnshp, and even Decatur Tnshp, have a mostly new construction or newer neighborhoods that all have HOA’s. They sure don’t seem harder to sell by the stats published.

I made sure people read the HOA,every time.

Good for you! That is the way it should be.

New construction HOA's are the worst. With some controlled by 3rd parties for 3-8 years(until the development is finished no one gets to vote or can be elected...cough...beazer cough) or now defuct CP Morgan who would hold onto that last buildable lot to keep control just a little while longer.

So I am to believe that a building corporation didn’t want to sell the last lot so they could keep the headache of an HOA? I agree they will keep control, if they can, until they are divested of property in the neighborhood.

I can see the point of them in highly populated housing with 1/4 acre lots. Once you move into half acre lots the need falls of quite a bit.

There are few half acre lots in modern neighborhoods. They are building green spaces in the neighborhood and putting homes with 3000-7000 foot footprints with garages and outdoor living areas on third acre lots. Maybe at the low end.

By the time you are at 1 acre or more per lot they are really not needed,

Agreed

and doing away with them means your taxes not additional fees pay to clean your roads and maintain them.

Very few new neighborhoods are built where the owners are responsible for roads unless the developer screwed up and failed to meet construction standards of the city and they would not take ownership of them. Them owners get screwed. Also many neighborhoods want snow removal at a level beyond what the city provides. Many cities do not plow cul-de-sak until 6 inches. Those owners want plowed sooner.

Neighborhood parks also become city or county parks, removing the liability from the HOA(home owners). Those parks are great for the kids,but so is the price tag for an HOA if they lose a lawsuit.

Good insurance is a must.

I will not own a home personally if it has an HOA. I want to choose the type of exterior material and color of my home, and decide what kind of fence, or out buildings are desirable. Then again I do not have a neighbor within 150 yards of my property and the ones I do have I meet before signing on the house. A HOA might be what some people desire, but from my experince they are far from the majority.

Yep, completely reasonable. Glad you have that option. Those neighbors you met may sell to the biggest jerk in the world, there are no guarantees…

 

[Ingomike]

Don’t choke…

 

[smokingman]

So I am to believe that a building corporation didn’t want to sell the last lot so they could keep the headache of an HOA? I agree they will keep control, if they can, until they are divested of property in the neighborhood.

Yes. That is what happens when a builder contracts to a 3rd party run by relatives of said builder to run the HOA of 20+ neighborhoods. Those small yearly saleries add up, and well you do not want to lose the fees of an entire neighborhood when your relatives would lose the income and make no mistake they were petty tyrants loving every moment of control they had. It also made sure the "right" people got the lanscaping and snow removal contracts....and then the grift really starts to add up.

Yes,it happened. Still likely is as well.

If you take power away from homeowners and give it to someone else, and they can make money off it.....they will.

Have you ever heard of an HOA putting out an open bid for snow removal or landscaping?

 

[Ingomike]

Yes. That is what happens when a builder contracts to a 3rd party run by relatives of said builder to run the HOA of 20+ neighborhoods. Those small yearly saleries add up, and well you do not want to lose the fees of an entire neighborhood when your relatives would lose the income and make no mistake they were petty tyrants loving every moment of control they had. It also made sure the "right" people got the lanscaping and snow removal contracts....and then the grift really starts to add up.

Yes,it happened. Still likely is as well.

I can see that with the local builders you said.

 

[smokingman]

I can see that with the local builders you said.

I did not say which builder used relatives as the 3rd party company and won't. They have deeper pockets than I do.

Do you know how the landscaping company your HOA uses got the gig? Snow removal?

Of course there could be a clubhouse that needs maintained, pool, street lights,walking trails... every feature a neighborhood has that is run by a HOA is another chance at more grift. That is the hard reality. Even who can pick up the trash.