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 10-27-2009, 03:16 PM
 
29,782 posts, read 34,880,403 times
Reputation: 11705

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevxu View Post
This seems a bit like saying if someone gives me a free trip to Mexico I don't have to obey the laws there. If I don't "buy into" Mexican laws, I'd better not go; and I would think the same applies here.
They should have realized with a wayward daughter that what did happen was a real possibility and sold after the inheritance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-29-2009, 06:59 PM
 
8,204 posts, read 11,921,160 times
Reputation: 18020
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
Another question if the older (over 55 dies) does the younger under 55 have to move out even if the property was jointly owned.
No.

In fact, if you look at the legislative history of the Act, that was the whole point of the 80/20 split. Congress wanted to ensure that a young widow wouldn't have to leave the community if her older husband died.

What I don't think has been made entirely clear here, is that the law is not that 80% of the residents have to be 55+; it is that 80% of the homes have to be occupied by one person who is 55+. In other words, 20% of the houses could be owned entirely by couples in their 20s, 30s, or 40s, and the community wouldn't lose its age-restricted basis. However, the HOA usually puts its own restriction in the covenants that prohibit resellers from selling their houses to people under 55. But when a community is new and the builder is still selling new homes, it is quite easy for a younger couple to buy into a 55+ community.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2009, 08:40 PM
 
Location: Edina, MN, USA
6,954 posts, read 7,396,297 times
Reputation: 16288
These are not normal times. What ever happened to a little compassion? Anyone on this forum could find themselves in some kind of situation - maybe not the same - but something where they'd need a little understanding and leeway. They are trying to sell - no doubt they can't wait to get away from such hateful people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2009, 12:58 AM
 
13,322 posts, read 25,574,131 times
Reputation: 20505
Perhaps the previous poster missed the part where they child has been with these older folks for some 5+ years, and they tried to sell at a high price years ago and didn't do so.
I certainly would not want children around me if I bought into a 55+ community, plus, often the houses/mobiles are close together. I would have bought into an age-restricted place, with its pluses and minuses, as a life decision, and for specific reasons. Others have done the same. A "little compassion and leeway" would turn the place into a regular housing place, with the disadvantages of age restriction without the advantages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2009, 09:42 AM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 35,212,077 times
Reputation: 4899
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadManofBethesda View Post
No.

In fact, if you look at the legislative history of the Act, that was the whole point of the 80/20 split. Congress wanted to ensure that a young widow wouldn't have to leave the community if her older husband died.

What I don't think has been made entirely clear here, is that the law is not that 80% of the residents have to be 55+; it is that 80% of the homes have to be occupied by one person who is 55+. In other words, 20% of the houses could be owned entirely by couples in their 20s, 30s, or 40s, and the community wouldn't lose its age-restricted basis. However, the HOA usually puts its own restriction in the covenants that prohibit resellers from selling their houses to people under 55. But when a community is new and the builder is still selling new homes, it is quite easy for a younger couple to buy into a 55+ community.
Let's be REALLY clear: One need not be 55 years old to OWN A HOME in an Age qualified community. The deed restrictions do not, and CANNOT limit OWNERSHIP.

Those restrictions can limit OCCUPANCY - and they do.

Ownership DOES NOT necessarily equal OCCUPANCY.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2009, 10:27 AM
 
8,204 posts, read 11,921,160 times
Reputation: 18020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
Let's be REALLY clear: One need not be 55 years old to OWN A HOME in an Age qualified community. The deed restrictions do not, and CANNOT limit OWNERSHIP.

Those restrictions can limit OCCUPANCY - and they do.

Ownership DOES NOT necessarily equal OCCUPANCY.
Absloutely true. I was referring to prospective buyers under 55 who intended to occupy the house and I should have said so. They can buy it, but they can't live there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2009, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Two Rivers, Wisconsin
11,723 posts, read 11,553,483 times
Reputation: 12484
Having lived in a controlled mobile home park for 30 yrs., there are many variances and interpretations of the 80/20 rule when you think about it, who enforces or challenges it? I lived in the park before I was 55, as others did. Now they sell to 55+ but as the previous poster stated, they sold a mobile to a gal in 40's because she wanted to be near her folks (but not in their mobile). Because of their very strict rules, they are always above the 80% to qualify for an adult community.

Our park started out with all ages and gradually, the owners changed it over to an adult community. It wasn't difficult for them to do because they were always very selective about who lived there. The no pets rule eliminated people right away. No one is allowed what they consider excessive day care or baby sitting, no kids play things put up in the yards. They have around 200 mobiles, the office is in charge, no one challenges them or questions the rules.

I was always amazed when people were shocked if they got a letter in the mail about a broken rule. You signed a lease agreement with a half dozen rule pages attached, initialing each one as you read it, did you not think they would enforce them? When I wanted to move two years ago, I was lucky to find someone that wanted my mobile they already knew, selling my mobile was not a problem, getting park approval, major!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2009, 04:24 PM
 
29,782 posts, read 34,880,403 times
Reputation: 11705
It is interesting how life in a 55+ is starting play out. I guess it is called life after the marketing hype is over. Some good, some bad and a lot to be determined it seems like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-30-2009, 04:25 PM
 
29,782 posts, read 34,880,403 times
Reputation: 11705
What happens with a builder bankruptcy filing if less than 50% of the possible units have been sold and the builder still had control of the HOA?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-31-2009, 04:11 AM
 
Location: Lakewood OH
21,697 posts, read 23,676,966 times
Reputation: 35449
I commend the HOA and the residents for not whining to the press about their side of the story. I remember and I will give the link if I can find it, that when these people first put their story in the media a few years ago neighbors were interviewed regarding the situation.

They stated that the daughter who was living there at the time had loud parties, friends coming and going at all hours and was generally a nuisance. Apparently, her parents were no prize either thinking nothing of breaking rules they agreed to abide by when the grandmother inherited the house. There is always more to a story than we are told. Just because a child is involved does not give her caretakers license to flaunt the rules or disrupt the lives of others.

I had a job as a building manager a while back. Like Susancruz, I was amazed at the tenants who signed their lease which I always insisted they read and then proceeded to break the rules as they saw fit. I was even more surprised at their astonishment when they were told they could be evicted for breaking those rules.
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