U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-25-2009, 06:23 PM
 
8,204 posts, read 11,921,160 times
Reputation: 18020

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady View Post
You obviously missed Greatday's addition (repeated here so you'll be sure to see it):

"At least 80% of the occupied units must be occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or older and no one under the age of 18 years of age shall permanently occupy the unit.

Federal Fair Housing Act - HOPA"

Note that last part.

Oh, I didn't miss it.

I ignored it because HOPA says no such thing.

In fact, you can read the text of the law yourself here:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...publ76.104.pdf

Feel free to post again when you find the age 18 restriction in there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-25-2009, 06:44 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 35,212,077 times
Reputation: 4899
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadManofBethesda View Post
Oh, I didn't miss it.

I ignored it because HOPA says no such thing.
HOPA is part of the Federal Fair Housing Act. The Age qualifications, as they were amended (the creation of HOPA), provide that the 18year old standard (and adult under law) can be restricted to - and that allowing children to PERMANENTLY reside in an Age Qualified community will void the Age qualification requirement. There have been numerous ALJ cases on this. Some Federal District court cases on this.

You will need to read the entire Fair Housing Act (as amended), along with the various litigations - when you do, you will find the 18 y.o. notations / requirements

Also, while you posted a link to the HOPA statute, you did not link to the implementing administrative rules of the USHUD
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2009, 12:20 AM
 
Location: California
30,702 posts, read 33,490,466 times
Reputation: 26130
It's a shame these folks decided to take their bad choices public to gain sympathy. They won't win in the end.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2009, 06:43 AM
 
13,773 posts, read 33,920,246 times
Reputation: 10561
I remember this story when it first happened 6 years ago when I lived in Tampa. I felt sorry for the GPs at the time since my grand daughter is being cared for by her grandparents so it hit home. To be honest they felt that the rules should not apply to them since they had custody because their daughter was a druggie. They said back then that they were going to sell their house. I am guessing a lawyer got to them and told them they could fight it and win. They should have sold as now the housing market where they live in in the tank.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2009, 06:52 AM
 
8,204 posts, read 11,921,160 times
Reputation: 18020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
HOPA is part of the Federal Fair Housing Act. The Age qualifications, as they were amended (the creation of HOPA), provide that the 18year old standard (and adult under law) can be restricted to - and that allowing children to PERMANENTLY reside in an Age Qualified community will void the Age qualification requirement. There have been numerous ALJ cases on this. Some Federal District court cases on this.

You will need to read the entire Fair Housing Act (as amended), along with the various litigations - when you do, you will find the 18 y.o. notations / requirements

Also, while you posted a link to the HOPA statute, you did not link to the implementing administrative rules of the USHUD
Feel free to link to link to the entire Act. And while you're at it, I draw your attention to 24 U.S.C. 100.306(d):

"A housing facility or community may allow occupancy by families with children as long as it meets the requirements of sections 100.305 and 100.306(a).

I'll try this again. There is nothing in statute that would require the HOA to evict the family. It is their choice whether to allow occupancy. The court cases on this issue have occured where families have sued to stay and the HOA has objected. They have that right.

And while we're at, administrative regulations as codified in the C.F.R. can not and do not supercede the underlying statutory basis (U.S.C.) for the regulations
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2009, 07:06 AM
 
Location: Tennessee/Michigan
28,215 posts, read 47,628,039 times
Reputation: 19724
I can relate to this subject because I tried to get in a 55 and over community in Nashville, TN and was turned down because I'm not over 55 years old. I'm just 49 years old. I'm not mad because they said I'm still way to young.

John
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2009, 03:00 PM
 
13,773 posts, read 33,920,246 times
Reputation: 10561
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMan Bethesda View Post
Feel free to link to link to the entire Act. And while you're at it, I draw your attention to 24 U.S.C. 100.306(d):

"A housing facility or community may allow occupancy by families with children as long as it meets the requirements of sections 100.305 and 100.306(a).

I'll try this again. There is nothing in statute that would require the HOA to evict the family. It is their choice whether to allow occupancy. The court cases on this issue have occurred families where they have sued to stay and the HOA has objected. They have that right.

And while we're at, administrative regulations as codified in the C.F.R. can not and do not supercede the underlying statutory basis (U.S.C.) for the regulations
It is the HOA.. it is a matter of setting precedent if they let them stay then they would have to let children into the community. Not that I am an expert but that is what they said back when it first started.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2009, 03:59 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
16,133 posts, read 20,831,348 times
Reputation: 8293
So would you call HOAs Socialist or Fascist?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2009, 04:03 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 35,212,077 times
Reputation: 4899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa View Post
So would you call HOAs Socialist or Fascist?
Neither.

I call them freedom. You have the FREEDOM to buy into a subdivision with, or without an HOA.

It is called Freedom of Contract in law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2009, 04:15 PM
 
Location: Sunshine N'Blue Skies
13,320 posts, read 20,147,455 times
Reputation: 11645
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadManofBethesda View Post
Feel free to link to link to the entire Act. And while you're at it, I draw your attention to 24 U.S.C. 100.306(d):

"A housing facility or community may allow occupancy by families with children as long as it meets the requirements of sections 100.305 and 100.306(a).

I'll try this again. There is nothing in statute that would require the HOA to evict the family. It is their choice whether to allow occupancy. The court cases on this issue have occured where families have sued to stay and the HOA has objected. They have that right.

And while we're at, administrative regulations as codified in the C.F.R. can not and do not supercede the underlying statutory basis (U.S.C.) for the regulations
So then its up to their HEARTS and SOULS to give these people some time to sell........Everyone should understand.......Life doesn't go as planned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top