Why Do So Many On INGO Hate HOA's?

[firecadet613]

You don't think it matters when things like the roads from the entrance to the last home on that road are in need of maintenance?
Maintenance on drainage, community property with things like retention ponds need to be cleaned and maintained, grass needs to be mowed..
Unlike many small lot communities that the roads were turned over to the city or county and they maintain them? More so when the only community property is the flowers and beds where the entrance sign is.

Good point, I'm thinking of the smaller lot developments that have HOAs and city/counties have control of the roads.

My 15ac property has no HOA, the county maintains the roads and takes care of drainage - see the property tax thread for that discussion.

Wait a minute, isn't this the HATE HOA thread?!

That’s another rider too, it has to be your primary residence for the first year. Ugh I still can’t believe I get lucky enough to have the hotel house right next to mine.

I believe that's a requirement of most mortgages, unless you specifically get one for a second home.

I bet mike is the homeowner that goes door to door reminding the owners of the rules they are breaking.

From what I gather, Mike has routinely referred to the law, HOA agreements, etc. IMO, he is right. Don't sign on the dotted line if you don't agree with it. Don't like it, change the law. It's a pain, but it can be done.

Because the laws allows it is not justification.

But isn't the law, the law?

 

[jamil]

IMO where the HOA matters is the typical developer built vinyl village on the postage size lot.

HOAs on 3-40ac parcels don't make sense, again, IMO.

@Dean C.'s scenario is when a HOA helps and it helps not having a bunch of Karen's on the board. I have my doubts if Dean's HOA can kick that guy out so quickly and easily, but I'm glad to be watching from a distance...

The home in the neighborhood where I was on the board was a starter neighborhood. .15 acre lots. Vinyl sided homes with brick vernier. I just looked at my old home and neighborhood on google earth street view. 35 years later it's a ********. But there are a few homes in there that are well kept.

 

[firecadet613]

The home in the neighborhood where I was on the board was a starter neighborhood. .15 acre lots. Vinyl sided homes with brick vernier. I just looked at my old home and neighborhood on google earth street view. 35 years later it's a ********. But there are a few homes in there that are well kept.

But are they breaking any rules??

 

[jamil]

But are they breaking any rules??

I wish street view would go in some back yards. Wanting to see how the vinyl fences held up.

 

[Dean C.]

Other than having a variety of different vehicles coming and going, how has it effected you?

There is absolutely no process for vetting tenants in place, it could be the local pedophile hotel for all we know currently. Also this thing called property value, a big part of the reason we spent the extra cash to build in a nice neighborhood in a nice area and whatnot

 

[Timjoebillybob]

There is absolutely no process for vetting tenants in place, it could be the local pedophile hotel for all we know currently. Also this thing called property value, a big part of the reason we spent the extra cash to build in a nice neighborhood in a nice area and whatnot

So no it hasn't. You have anyway of vetting your other neighbors guests? You planning on selling anytime soon? My guess is no considering iirc every house is less than a year old I believe you said.

 

[phylodog]

But isn't the law, the law?

Sure is, what's your point?

Maybe this might help some people

 

[firecadet613]

Sure is, what's your point?

Maybe this might help some people

Oh I get it, I've just never heard a cop / retired cop say it...

 

[phylodog]

Oh I get it, I've just never heard a cop / retired cop say it...

Say what? That the law isn't always right? I'm positive I've never met a cop that believes it is. If someone is using what is legal to determine their own personal ethics I feel badly for them. That's a kind of lost which is hard to come back from.

Spend some time where the rubber meets the road as far as law is concerned and you'll see pretty quickly that it can be every bit as much a hinderance to doing what is right as it can be helpful.

 

[firecadet613]

Say what?

Say this... Because the laws allows it is not justification.

That the law isn't always right?

That's not what you said.

If we're going to say F this one law because it isn't ethical, why stop at that one? F this one to and this other one while we're at it!

That's the point I was getting at, that I've never heard a cop say...

 

[jkaetz]

The developers set the rules and restrictions that are then agreed upon by the buyers of the developers land. After the developer is gone the agreement continues between the individual landowners and those that wanted an HOA have every right for it to continue as they all agreed when they bought in.

Spin it/justify it however you want, it's still a large corporation dictating how people live. Yes, as you continue to point out, a lot of people accept this. That doesn't make it right, justified, liked, etc... It is simply what we have at the moment.

Honestly, if HOAs only covered those things I'd be a supporter of them.

This is the truth. I even gave Mike that I could see benefits of an HOA. But we don't have a genuine HOA structure as it is. Everything is decided by the developer by the time the homeowners get any say. The biggest ticket items I see highlighted for an HOA are:

• Community Maintenance
• No renters/transients
• No junk vehicles
• Keep your place maintained

While the last two are a bit subjective and would need definition, the first two could very likely be agreed upon by a group of homeowners. Depending on the demographic of the homeowners some of the other things could likely be also agreed upon. A social experiment for sure but dare I say that communities of like minded people might arise where we can live in close proximity to people we generally like, enjoy our hobbies, and not be hassled. I wonder if we could get gun owner communities with a neighborhood range together. I could also see the potential for an entire renter community where most of the homes are rented. HOAs as they exist are very one size fits all since all the developers generally have the same desires.

But isn't the law, the law?

There's plenty of bad law on the books.

 

[Creedmoor]

Oh I get it, I've just never heard a cop / retired cop say it...

If you met him, you would instantly realize when you see his long hair he really wasn't in LE at all. In real life, He's the man on the front cover of all the Romance Novels you see at the book store.
Being a cop is just his online persona.

 

[Dean C.]

Say this... Because the laws allows it is not justification.

That's not what you said.

If we're going to say F this one law because it isn't ethical, why stop at that one? F this one to and this other one while we're at it!

That's the point I was getting at, that I've

never heard a cop say...

How do you feel about speed limits?

So no it hasn't. You have anyway of vetting your other neighbors guests? You planning on selling anytime soon? My guess is no considering iirc every house is less than a year old I believe you said.

Glad you are OK with it, once again I bought in a neighborhood explicitly banning rentals for the most part. I don’t like rentals at all and want nothing to do with them.


This thread is also a great example of how black and white morality is freaking stupid.

 

[firecadet613]

How do you feel about speed limits?

Who the F follows speed limits?! You mean they aren't just suggestions?

This thread is also a great example of how black and white morality is freaking stupid.

Yep, it is. I just find it hilarious when someone who's spent their life enforcing laws, downplays laws...

 

[KLB]

There's plenty of bad law on the books.

There should be an amendment that requires a law be stricken for every new law written.

 

[Route 45]

Yep, it is. I just find it hilarious when someone who's spent their life enforcing laws, downplays laws...

Have you ever met or talked with police officers in real life, or are you just laughing at what you've made up in your mind?

 

[Ingomike]

You stated that courts don't have to accept cases, that is incorrect. They have to accept them. Now yes there are a multitude of reasons a judge can dismiss it after, but that is not what you stated. So yep you were wrong.

Playing word play you can tell me I’m wrong. To me a judge dismissing a case pre trial is not accepting it but you define for you.

You can tell that is a CA plate in that picture? I'm pretty sure it's not. CA plates have California written across the top in red and it doesn't come as close to the edge as what appears to be a darker colored bar on that plate. So I'm pretty sure you're wrong on that as well.

But yes I could see a recent Commiefornia transplant wanting to own in an HOA. Make them feel like they never left.

Not what you stated, so yep still wrong.

He listed the various states the cars parked near, I just picked one. So there.

 

[Ingomike]

Justify someone who does not own something maintaining rights to it. The land owner is the person who owns it. Once someone sells it, someone else owns it. When you own something it belings to you and you get to decide what to do with it.

Because the laws allows it is not justification.

There is no justification necessary, they own the land and can do with it what they want. Can we agree on that?

 

[Route 45]

Fifty bucks says she's HOA president.

 

[phylodog]

If we're going to say F this one law because it isn't ethical, why stop at that one? F this one to and this other one while we're at it!

The alternative being that if politicians put it on paper it's automatically justified, ethical and not to be criticized?

Many people may not realize that cops have a lot of discretion when it comes to enforcing the law. A lot. I easily pulled 500+ cars over for every 1 ticket that I wrote. If it were even remotely possible to wade through every law that is currently on the books in this country, I'd venture to guess I could find necessity in about 40% of them.

Our society is so far removed from reality that people can not even fathom not having someone ruling over their every move. I'm not advocating for anarchy (before the hyperbole experts slobber all over my post) but to equate law with what is fundamentally right is putting way, way, way, way, way, way, way too much faith in mankind.

If this is how we are to believe, I guess anything I do which isn't specifically prohibited by law must be acceptable. That'd be a very dangerous world to live in for many.