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.
Note you said you were "allowed" - not that you had any "right". How nice that you were "allowed" to vote or run for office. Pray tell what else did your masters "allow" you to do? ... and what happens with the next regime change when "rules" are changed to make them far more restrictive?
There was no right to run for office nor any right to vote for directors. Depriving homeowners from voting was a common tactic for those "serving the community" to spend decades in office - and for the management companies to be assured of continuing contract with those board members they helped maintain regimes for. Legislation was filed and passed in 2011 to prohibit HOA boards from being able to deny other owners from voting or running for office. Kind of hard to deny the existence of the new law. Also can't deny that HOA boards were denying other owners the ability to vote or run for office. Even today the declarant-controlled HOAs were specifically excluded from the "right to vote" legislation.
It's too bad you promoted perpetual liens rather than getting rid of the HOA altogether. However, despite your example there are plenty of declarant-controlled subdivisions where homeowners have no right to vote at all. Nothing false about any of the statements I made.
IC_deLight you are constantly harping and going on endlessly about how evil HOA's are. It is obvious that you hate them or have some professional interest in opposing them. What is your problem about? Why do you hate them so much? I can't imagine that you ever belonged to one, so why do you have such an overwhelming interest in constantly complaining about them and harping on how evil they are? I swear the way you rant and rave you must have some kind of phobia about them yourself. In fact it is just about the only thing you ever talk about on these forums. If HOA's are so evil why is it we hardly ever hear from anyone else complaining in these forums about their HOA? As I said previously, after years in these forums I can only think of a few complaints, and those were from people who had failed to pay their dues and were hoping for some magic loophole that would get them out of their obligations.
People love to complain, so why is it we don't hear more complaints?
Note you said you were "allowed" - not that you had any "right". How nice that you were "allowed" to vote or run for office. Pray tell what else did your masters "allow" you to do? ... and what happens with the next regime change when "rules" are changed to make them far more restrictive?
Blah, blah, blah ...
I bet they draw straws at the management company over who gets to deal with you when you call.
If HOA's are so evil why is it we hardly ever hear from anyone else complaining in these forums about their HOA? As I said previously, after years in these forums I can only think of a few complaints, and those were from people who had failed to pay their dues and were hoping for some magic loophole that would get them out of their obligations.
People love to complain, so why is it we don't hear more complaints?
FWIW, I have a friend who lives in an HOA and *hates* it. He pays his dues on time and keeps his yard up but they still find very nitpicky things to try to send him notices over. He complains to friends, but he also toys with the HOA as much as he can since they've annoyed him so much. We also know someone else who's having a hard time with their HOA - there's a dead spot in their grass due to a complete lack of sunlight in that spot, but the HOA won't let them have anything but grass in that spot, so they're pretty much stuck trying to re-sod over and over again. Just because you don't hear people complaining on this forum doesn't mean they don't complain to people they know.
HOAs are fine in theory, but in practice, at least in Texas, many of them have ties to management companies that make money off of trying to find as much wrong as possible. That's the problem I have with them. My parents actually live in a very small HOA - a very small number of houses, no management company, and they have no problems! Everybody knows each other and they can easily vote for variances as needed (for instance, a new house was being built that was slightly smaller than the minimum size, but the neighbors felt like it fit the character of the neighborhood so they approved it). But that's a very different situation than hundreds or thousands of houses and a professional management company looking to make money.
FWIW, I have a friend who lives in an HOA and *hates* it. He pays his dues on time and keeps his yard up but they still find very nitpicky things to try to send him notices over. He complains to friends, but he also toys with the HOA as much as he can since they've annoyed him so much. We also know someone else who's having a hard time with their HOA - there's a dead spot in their grass due to a complete lack of sunlight in that spot, but the HOA won't let them have anything but grass in that spot, so they're pretty much stuck trying to re-sod over and over again. Just because you don't hear people complaining on this forum doesn't mean they don't complain to people they know.
HOAs are fine in theory, but in practice, at least in Texas, many of them have ties to management companies that make money off of trying to find as much wrong as possible. That's the problem I have with them. My parents actually live in a very small HOA - a very small number of houses, no management company, and they have no problems! Everybody knows each other and they can easily vote for variances as needed (for instance, a new house was being built that was slightly smaller than the minimum size, but the neighbors felt like it fit the character of the neighborhood so they approved it). But that's a very different situation than hundreds or thousands of houses and a professional management company looking to make money.
All hear-say, apparently you have no actual experience to share with us? "He complains to friends, but he also toys with the HOA", how immature! Why doesn't he go talk to them if he thinks the complaints are unreasonable? Probably because he knows they were justified.
No one enjoys getting a notice they are not maintaining their yard sufficiently, but on the few occasions when I got one, they were right. My lawn had a fungus disease and it took their prompting for me to do something about it. It was a friendly reminder, I was never fined as I corrected the problem.
Quote:
But that's a very different situation than hundreds or thousands of houses and a professional management company looking to make money.
Exactly when and where did this situation take place? Or is that just an IC_deLight inspired delusion?
All hear-say, apparently you have no actual experience to share with us? "He complains to friends, but he also toys with the HOA", how immature! Why doesn't he go talk to them if he thinks the complaints are unreasonable? Probably because he knows they were justified.
No one enjoys getting a notice they are not maintaining their yard sufficiently, but on the few occasions when I got one, they were right. My lawn had a fungus disease and it took their prompting for me to do something about it. It was a friendly reminder, I was never fined as I corrected the problem.
He tried to talk to them. The notices he gets are unreasonable and usually incorrect. Sometimes they make up rules that don't actually exist. This has been going on for years now. His lawn is much, much nicer than ours is - he is keeping the house up appropriately by any possible standard you could come up with.
It is hearsay because I don't live in an HOA community.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CptnRn
Exactly when and where did this situation take place? Or is that just an IC_deLight inspired delusion?
There have been numerous news articles over the years about the issues of having professionally managed HOAs. There's currently a class action lawsuit in AZ over illegal fees. I'm not sure exactly what "situation" you're talking about - I just don't think you need to be a conspiracy theorist to recognize that the business model of a professionally managed HOA is to maximize infractions and fees.
He tried to talk to them. The notices he gets are unreasonable and usually incorrect. Sometimes they make up rules that don't actually exist. This has been going on for years now. His lawn is much, much nicer than ours is - he is keeping the house up appropriately by any possible standard you could come up with.
It is hearsay because I don't live in an HOA community.
How do you know the notices he gets are unreasonable? Have you seen them? Have you compared them to the rules he agreed to when he bought the property? How do you know they make up rules that don't actually exist? It is hearsay because you have nothing but his word telling you this. In all likelihood he is embellishing his claims both regarding his treatment and his response. They sound like ohh poor me complaints in my opinion. If he has a leg to stand on, what has he done about it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesmer
There have been numerous news articles over the years about the issues of having professionally managed HOAs. There's currently a class action lawsuit in AZ over illegal fees. I'm not sure exactly what "situation" you're talking about - I just don't think you need to be a conspiracy theorist to recognize that the business model of a professionally managed HOA is to maximize infractions and fees.
Numerous? How many? More like a few I would say across the entire United States. What does one suit in AZ have to do with Austin? One law suite you "think" but can't actually quote anything about? What proof do you have of the claim that "the business model of a professionally managed HOA is to maximize infractions and fees"? Sounds to me like you have been reading too many of IC_Delights posts, or you actually just his shill?
Where is the actual proof to support these claims of horrible wrong doing by HOA's in Austin? In 36 years of living here I can think of only two that made the news, and those were quickly rectified.
Love it how your "arguement" shifts (I really have a hard time defining your spew as a point, let alone the side of a real debate, but whatever). "Allowed" was your word. And if I wasnt "allowed" to be part of the entity that had influence over my rights, I would simply choose not to live there.
Please, pray tell, how is that not making a choice to enter a contractual relationship?
"Allowed" was the word you used to describe being permitted to vote or run for office. As I stated before there was no enforceable right to either in Texas until 2012. There still is no such right in declarant controlled subdivisions.
You are "part of the entity" regardless of whether you are a board member or have any rights to vote or run for office. Membership is involuntary.
How do you know the notices he gets are unreasonable? Have you seen them? Have you compared them to the rules he agreed to when he bought the property? How do you know they make up rules that don't actually exist? It is hearsay because you have nothing but his word telling you this. In all likelihood he is embellishing his claims both regarding his treatment and his response. They sound like ohh poor me complaints in my opinion. If he has a leg to stand on, what has he done about it?
I think the point where you call one of my very good friends a liar is the point where I no longer wish to participate in this conversation. His character is unimpeachable and he has done what any number of people would do in the situation - try to have a sense of humor about the issue, and wait until the time is right to move.
The homeowner does have a choice. A homeowner can easily choose to not have any HOA at all, simply buy somewhere else. The fact is that most homeowners who buy property in an HOA value what the HOA has to offer over subdivisions that have no HOA.
BS detector alert. Virtually all housing built since about 1985 in this area is burdened by an involuntary membership HOA corporation. Most homeowners who buy HOA-burdened property are simply looking for housing and that's all that's available.
Quote:
Not true, the HOA has no liens on my property, and all I have to do to keep it that way is fulfill the obligations I agreed to when I bought property here. If I ever get tried of that I can always sell and move someplace else.
Well you didn't "read your CCRs" too well. The HOA had a lien on the property before you purchased it. The lien is perpetual and can never be paid off so long as the HOA corporation exists. The lien was imposed by the restrictive covenants before you ever purchased the property. I hope you don't give that kind of legal advice to clients.
Quote:
Also the HOA corporation provides me with substantial services in exchange, including maintaining the landscaped public areas, parks, children's playscapes, swimming pool, hike and bike trails, all amenities which I enjoy and are rarely found in close proximity to non-HOA subdivisions. Yes I know there are a few properties next door to a City park, but damned few, they are not easy to find. And most of those parks, especially the pools are often over crowded.
If they are public areas why are you singled out for paying for them?
Quote:
Again not true, the assessments go to pay for and maintain all of the amenities I described above, in addition to the insurance that provides protection for the homeowners in the event the association is liable for someone who gets is hurt or injured using those amenities or in case of fire or damage to the properties. Loss of the public amenities is a loss to the homeowners, and they are covered by the insurance against that loss. In the HOA that I belong to our total annual budget is around $200,000 but we spent less than $6,000 for insurance last year, less than 3% of the budget. The biggest expenses were $39,000 for water and electricity, $34,000 landscaping services and repair, $24,000 for pool maintenance and $16,000 common area maintenance,. The total budget for HOA management fees is only $15,000, less than 7.5% of the budget. All of this financial information is readily available to any HOA member who wants it and is provided as part of the handouts at the annual meetings.
Loss of the amenities is NOT a loss to the homeowners. The amenities are owned by the HOA corporation and not the homeowners. All the homeowners get is the liability for paying for them under threat of foreclosure on their own homes. The homeowners do not even have assurances of using them since the HOA corporation decides who and when.
If the amenities were valued as highly as you claim, then the HOA should be able to operate like a club with membership being voluntary and voluntary members having access to club facilities. If the HOA and its amenities are such a great thing, you should have no problem being able to continue operations of your club with members that value the HOA and its amenities.
Your budget is meaningless with respect to the insurance you refer to. The only thing relevant to the insurance premium is what the value is of the risk/asset to be covered and what coverage the insurance actually provides.
Depending upon which management company you are using, your HOA corp might not even own an insurance policy. Instead you might be paying a full premium for the same coverage shared by a bunch of other clients of the management company or its parent company with a policy that is owned by the management company or its parent. The management companies that engage in this practice conceal the "shared" nature as well as ownership by misrepresenting ownership and by delivering certificates of insurance that show only your HOA as a covered entity.
The management companies traditionally make a large amount of their monies directly off the backs of the homeowners and off-the-books of the HOA. They call it "charge back" or "direct charge". The total cost to the homeowners is more than just the assessments they are forced to pay under threat of foreclosure on their homes.
Quote:
Again I do not agree with those assertions, the HOA is not always demanding money. The increases in our HOA fees have been very modest, averaging around 2.5% per year, some years having no increase at all. Our HOA board members are made up totally of citizens who live in the community and who try to be very frugal with their expenditures. The total HOA income from fines was only $250 last year and there is only one member who has not paid. And yes I think the board should file a lien on his property, there is no reason he shouldn't pay his fair share like the rest of us.
So the HOA provides money to homeowners? Not based on your statements.
Based upon your own statements, it would appear that the HOA is always demanding money and it is coupled with an implicit or explicit threat.
You believe you have authority to impose "fines" on other homeowners? Are you a court of law? No, you are a representative of an HOA corporation, not a governmental entity and not a court of law. When did you decide that you had "fining" power, to engage in the practice of law, to sit in judgment, and to assess "fines" on other homeowners?
Quote:
Most people who live in HOA communities have no problems with the HOA's. The board members are their neighbors, who contribute an enormous amount of personal time to helping run the organization and take care of the communities interests. Notice how rare it is to hear complaints about HOA's on this forum. With the exception of IC_deLight and the current OP of this thread, the rare complaint we do hear is typically like the one posted by this OP, who failed to pay the fees he agreed to and now is looking for some way to weasel out of his obligations.
Well you have little evidence of the first and I maintain that the statement is simply false. The reality is that nothing but HOA subdivisions have been built for the last several decades. There has not been any meaningful choice in some time and there are plenty of problems with them. The second statement might be true for some subdivisions but it is certainly untrue for others including declarant-controlled subdivisions.
This forum primarily relates to Relocation, Moving, General, and Local City Discussions for Austin, Texas. As such it is oriented towards real estate sales and heavily frequented and moderated by real estate agents - who have every incentive in the world to push the HOA issues out of sight as they look to drum up business on city-data. Sales of HOA property relies heavily on lack of disclosure and concealment - particularly with respect to the legal entanglement that the HOA represents. If your "financials" were such a selling point, why do you need to conceal them from anyone except existing involuntary members for whom it is "too late"? Do you have some tribal mentality in your subdivision?
Of course you have no problem with "your" HOA because you are a board member. Who has ever heard about a board member that didn't think they did a great job? As a current board member you also need not worry about being accused of being "in violation" or threatened with fines or liens. Being a board member offers immunity from the board and its managing agent. Taking care of the "community's interest"? Who decides what that is? Which members of the "community's interests" are you serving?
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.
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.
