Why Do So Many On INGO Hate HOA's?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    phylodog

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    59   0   0
    Mar 7, 2008
    19,621
    113
    Arcadia
    Since you posted without comment, what do you think is right here? The owners clearly indicated they agreed to not park trucks in the neighborhood at certain hours. Because you do not like those agreements do you support those owners even though they are going back on what they agreed to do?

    Why doesn't the neighborhood just amend the agreement if there is consensus to do so? Why is the default stance of the news crew to take the side of those breaking their agreement and present them sympathetically instead of those that kept their word and followed what was agreed to?
    I think it's ****ing ridiculous for people to think they should be able to live free from looking at pickup trucks. That's about the extent of what I think about it. I don't give two shits if it's legal, it's still ****ing ridiculous.

    You can type for months if you'd like but you won't change my mind. It's ****ing ridiculous.
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    31,433
    113
    North Central
    I think it's ****ing ridiculous for people to think they should be able to live free from looking at pickup trucks. That's about the extent of what I think about it. I don't give two shits if it's legal, it's still ****ing ridiculous.

    You can type for months if you'd like but you won't change my mind. It's ****ing ridiculous.
    I think it is ridiculous myself, but to each their own, their neighborhood, their covenants. The question I asked is still unanswered; what do you think is right here? The owners clearly indicated they agreed to not park trucks in the neighborhood at certain hours. Because you do not like those agreements do you support those owners even though they are going back on what they agreed to do?
     

    actaeon277

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Nov 20, 2011
    95,241
    113
    Merrillville
    They said the law didn’t apply to their type of covenants. The law was probably written by lawyers who will profit from the the confusion and ambiguity…

    I had a boss tell me a safety rule didn't apply
    Funny thing, when safety showed up, they took him into another room and had a "discussion" about listening.
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    31,433
    113
    North Central
    I also think it's ridiculous the HOA is ignoring the law.
    Right.
    So, just because someone SAYS the rules don't apply, doesn't mean that is the fact.
    Right. Just because someone says the HOA is ignoring the law doesn’t mean they are. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in court. I knew nothing of the new Florida law other than the news cast.
     

    phylodog

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    59   0   0
    Mar 7, 2008
    19,621
    113
    Arcadia
    The question I asked is still unanswered; what do you think is right here?
    I think it is right for the law to protect the property rights of the people who own property. I think someone who is trying to live the American dream of home ownership ought to have the right to park their pickup truck in their driveway. I think that the government should step in and shut down HOAs that resort to this sort of ******** and limit HOAs to collecting dues for and maintaining common areas and/or shared amenities.

    Before you circle back around to it yet again. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if someone wants to control what happens on a piece of property they need to own it. It is my opinion that any and all rights of ownership of a primary residence should belong to the person who actually owns it. The "rights" of someone to something they used to own are nonexistent regardless of what the lawyers have written.

    That's my opinion, it isn't going to change and I don't believe I can state it any clearer than that. I won't be responding to any one of your already worn out arguments. I'm glad to live in a free country, I just wish it hadn't made "adjustments" to the definition of the term.
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    31,433
    113
    North Central
    I think it is right for the law to protect the property rights of the people who own property. I think someone who is trying to live the American dream of home ownership ought to have the right to park their pickup truck in their driveway. I think that the government should step in and shut down HOAs that resort to this sort of ******** and limit HOAs to collecting dues for and maintaining common areas and/or shared amenities.

    Before you circle back around to it yet again. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if someone wants to control what happens on a piece of property they need to own it. It is my opinion that any and all rights of ownership of a primary residence should belong to the person who actually owns it. The "rights" of someone to something they used to own are nonexistent regardless of what the lawyers have written.

    That's my opinion, it isn't going to change and I don't believe I can state it any clearer than that. I won't be responding to any one of your already worn out arguments. I'm glad to live in a free country, I just wish it hadn't made "adjustments" to the definition of the term.
    So the ends justify going back on their word?
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,299
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Since you posted without comment, what do you think is right here? The owners clearly indicated they agreed to not park trucks in the neighborhood at certain hours. Because you do not like those agreements do you support those owners even though they are going back on what they agreed to do?

    Why doesn't the neighborhood just amend the agreement if there is consensus to do so? Why is the default stance of the news crew to take the side of those breaking their agreement and present them sympathetically instead of those that kept their word and followed what was agreed to?
    WTF are you talking about? Sounds to me like they did honer what they signed. Dude even paid for a parking place for his truck to accommodate the rules.

    Are you butthurt because the rule was preempted by state law? Sounds like the Karens are powerful mad.
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    31,433
    113
    North Central
    WTF are you talking about? Sounds to me like they did honer what they signed. Dude even paid for a parking place for his truck to accommodate the rules.

    Are you butthurt because the rule was preempted by state law? Sounds like the Karens are powerful mad.

    Well, the law made that part of the contract void. Why shouldn’t he be able to do what is legal?

    If you watched the news report, I’m paraphrasing, an attorney said that the law had loopholes and did not apply to all HOA’s and the HOA claims it does not apply to them. I do not like laws that take freedom away from legal agreements. That is what the law does, supersedes previously legal agreements.

    Just as anti-gunners want laws that supersede the constitution. Both the covenant/restrictions and the constitution have formal procedures for changing them but using the heavy hand of government is not the way to get what you want.
     

    foszoe

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Jun 2, 2011
    17,652
    113
    If you watched the news report, I’m paraphrasing, an attorney said that the law had loopholes and did not apply to all HOA’s and the HOA claims it does not apply to them. I do not like laws that take freedom away from legal agreements, with certain exceptions. That is what the law does, supersedes previously legal agreements.
    FIFY

    I forgot my pledge to help us to 94 today!
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,299
    113
    Gtown-ish
    If you watched the news report, I’m paraphrasing, an attorney said that the law had loopholes and did not apply to all HOA’s and the HOA claims it does not apply to them. I do not like laws that take freedom away from legal agreements. That is what the law does, supersedes previously legal agreements.

    Just as anti-gunners want laws that supersede the constitution. Both the covenant/restrictions and the constitution have formal procedures for changing them but using the heavy hand of government is not the way to get what you want.
    Of course an attorney said that. I’m sure there’s another attorney on the other side getting paid to say the opposite.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Top Bottom