[crabtrees]

Originally Posted by skugelstadt

I'm assuming this means entering the property to correct violations, not enter the house itself. Our HOA rules have a similar statement.

It was to correct the violations forcefully, you are correct, but entering the house and/or property was all encompassing. Example: they need to enter the backyard and can only do so by entering the home etc. Another example: the HOA limited households to 2 dogs and certain breeds were restricted. If you had 3 pitbulls on the property the HOA could forcefully enter your home to take action. Like I said, I wasn't too concerned with that particular rule with regards to myself, but in principal it bothered me. Although I do see the benefit to having some soft guidelines as far as how the neighborhood appearance goes, I generally have a problem with some rule book or over entitled neighbor telling me what I can/cannot do with my house. I don't need someone knocking on my front door to tell me that I'm not allowed to park in my own driveway. I ended up purchasing a property in Green Valley that did not have an HOA much to my amazement. I didn't think that even existed.

[aswontsp]

I had a neighbor that was apparently told they were 'grandfathered in' from the previous owner. Well, they laid turf down in the back yard without the HOA's ARC approval. Something to the tune of thousands of dollars. The board used bolt cutters to open the gate and get in to the property to take pictures of the unauthorized improvements.

The homeowners called police, the police spoke with the board and the homeowner was told they had no right to keep the ARC off the property, as they in effect don't truly own the land, but the HOA does. Any truth to this sort of thing?

I once lived in a place where garages were not meant to be used for anything but storage of operable vehicles... could not hang my TV on a wall because CC&R's did not permit anything be driven into studs, etc.

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by quebon

I had a neighbor that was apparently told they were 'grandfathered in' from the previous owner. Well, they laid turf down in the back yard without the HOA's ARC approval. Something to the tune of thousands of dollars. The board used bolt cutters to open the gate and get in to the property to take pictures of the unauthorized improvements.

The homeowners called police, the police spoke with the board and the homeowner was told they had no right to keep the ARC off the property, as they in effect don't truly own the land, but the HOA does. Any truth to this sort of thing?

I once lived in a place where garages were not meant to be used for anything but storage of operable vehicles... could not hang my TV on a wall because CC&R's did not permit anything be driven into studs, etc.

There is a wide variety of CICs (Common Interest Communities) which is the formal legal name of HOAs in Nevada. This leads to many ownership possibilities from the air inside the unit, to that which is on the slab, to everything except the landscaping at the entrance.

It would be very unusual for an HOA to own property fenced off by the owner of a specific unit. Not impossible I suppose but very weird. Almost universally backyard developments are off limits unless visible from the street. There is no way turf would ever be an issue with the ARC. There are circumstances when it can be an issue with the local water company who has an easement preventing turf...but not the ARC.

I would think the story is apocryphal as the likelihood that an HOA would cut off a lock is so small as to be hard to believe. They generally use lawyers...not bolt cutters.

[SoHoVe]

While I am not at all someone who supports HOAs it's completely understandable that they would document infractions using photos or video.

Not sure the OP has any recourse other than consent to the rules governing the property or just sell it. I also think while the questions asked are valid a mountain is being made out of a mole hill in respect to this. I'm fairly confident the president was simply giving a heads up that infractions are documented and taken seriously rather then suggesting drones would be flown over your house while you're sitting on the patio or engaging in other harmless behavior.

[skugelstadt]

[quote=lvmensch;47357512]There is a wide variety of CICs (Common Interest Communities) which is the formal legal name of HOAs in Nevada. This leads to many ownership possibilities from the air inside the unit, to that which is on the slab, to everything except the landscaping at the entrance.

It would be very unusual for an HOA to own property fenced off by the owner of a specific unit. Not impossible I suppose but very weird. Almost universally backyard developments are off limits unless visible from the street. There is no way turf would ever be an issue with the ARC. There are circumstances when it can be an issue with the local water company who has an easement preventing turf...but not the ARC.

I would think the story is apocryphal as the likelihood that an HOA would cut off a lock is so small as to be hard to believe. They generally use lawyers...not bolt cutters.[/QUOTE

Our HOA can take action if a neighbor has a complaint about a non compliant back yard that is in view from their property.

[IC_deLight]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

There is a wide variety of CICs (Common Interest Communities) which is the formal legal name of HOAs in Nevada. This leads to many ownership possibilities from the air inside the unit, to that which is on the slab, to everything except the landscaping at the entrance.

It would be very unusual for an HOA to own property fenced off by the owner of a specific unit. Not impossible I suppose but very weird.

I suspect the owner was being told that he might as well not be an owner since he could not exclude the architectural committee from entering his yard - not that the HOA actually owned the yard.

Ownership = i) right of use and enjoyment; ii) right to exclude others; iii) right of alienability. These have been highly restricted or eliminated in HOA burdened property. The term "ownership" is sales speak any more.

Originally Posted by lvmensch

Almost universally backyard developments are off limits unless visible from the street. There is no way turf would ever be an issue with the ARC. There are circumstances when it can be an issue with the local water company who has an easement preventing turf...but not the ARC.

There are plenty of lawsuits involving architectural committees refusing to approve or HOAs filing suit because an owner did not get "prior approval" (i.e., grovel and pay $$). There are also plenty of suits where HOA agents entered into yards and took property or did something to the property. Case here locally where the HOA agents went into an owner's privacy-fenced backyard and cut down a tree - and then sent the owner a bill for the tree. Then the HOA started imposing "fines" unless he planted a tree because they were "aware" one had been removed. Then the HOA tried foreclosing when the owner did not pay for the fines or the charges for cutting down his tree. No it was not on anyone else's property - but even if it had been that issue should have been between the two owners, not the HOA.

Many CCRs are being implemented with provisions that purport to allow the HOA or its managing agent to enter into "your" property at any time to inspect for deed restriction violations. HOA attorneys and management companies love it. Causes great chaos in subdivisions and guaranteed to lead to lawsuits.

Originally Posted by lvmensch

I would think the story is apocryphal as the likelihood that an HOA would cut off a lock is so small as to be hard to believe. They generally use lawyers...not bolt cutters.

Well the industry in this state pushed legislation under the pretext of "allowing" religious displays that actually purported to create a "right" for the HOA and its agents to enter into your property to remove any display that wasn't confined to 25 square inches on your front door. That wasn't even appropriate for a crappy condominium much less acreage detached single family homes.

[Tek_Freek]

[quote=skugelstadt;47362024]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

There is a wide variety of CICs (Common Interest Communities) which is the formal legal name of HOAs in Nevada. This leads to many ownership possibilities from the air inside the unit, to that which is on the slab, to everything except the landscaping at the entrance.

It would be very unusual for an HOA to own property fenced off by the owner of a specific unit. Not impossible I suppose but very weird. Almost universally backyard developments are off limits unless visible from the street. There is no way turf would ever be an issue with the ARC. There are circumstances when it can be an issue with the local water company who has an easement preventing turf...but not the ARC.

I would think the story is apocryphal as the likelihood that an HOA would cut off a lock is so small as to be hard to believe. They generally use lawyers...not bolt cutters.[/QUOTE

Our HOA can take action if a neighbor has a complaint about a non compliant back yard that is in view from their property.

As can ours.