Interesting Discovery re: C&R (Huntsville, Madison: leasing, HOA, attorneys)

[ionlife]

A lot of the C&R have a section that says the homeowners can lease their homes but they must provide the C&R to the renters.

Isn't that kind of hard to do if they aren't hard copy bound or constantly changing via new developers' total veto powers and control over the boards?

Thoughts?

[Diffy Q]

Let me get this right. A builder/developer is not required to provide a prospective buyer with a copy of the covenants and restrictions for their subdivision. Covenants and restrictions that the builder/developer wrote with the help of a local attorney. However, written in these same covenants and restrictions is a requirement that states that should a homeowner (a former prospective buyer) want to lease their home, they have to provide a copy of these documents to prospective tenants. WOW! So they are more concerned that a tenant is made aware of the rules than the person who actually bought the house from them? Hmmm... Do you think it is because if a prospective buyer is given a chance to read them pre-contract that they might not buy into that subdivision? Is there also a requirement that you have to give a copy to a subsequent buyer? Maybe Alabama has tenant/landlord laws that force the issue. ??

[Elizabeth_G]

The reasoning behind this is so prospective tenants will abide by the restrictions, such as: lawn upkeep, where trash receptacles are to be placed, automobiles on streets, current tags and in operating condition, outbuildings, etc.

Of course, if changes are made then the owner needs to keep their tenant informed. I see no difference between living in the home versus leasing the home, where it comes to having a current copy.

Honestly, I don't know why a developer would change that part of the C&R. I don't see a benefit for them doing so. Why would junk cars, overgrown lawns and such benefit them in the long run?

[ionlife]

Originally Posted by Elizabeth_G

The reasoning behind this is so prospective tenants will abide by the restrictions, such as: lawn upkeep, where trash receptacles are to be placed, automobiles on streets, current tags and in operating condition, outbuildings, etc.

Of course, if changes are made then the owner needs to keep their tenant informed. I see no difference between living in the home versus leasing the home, where it comes to having a current copy.

Honestly, I don't know why a developer would change that part of the C&R. I don't see a benefit for them doing so. Why would junk cars, overgrown lawns and such benefit them in the long run?

I think the point wasn't that the rule was wrong, Elizabeth. I totally agree the rule is necessary.

My point is it's very hard for homeowners in new developments to get the C&R for themselves, especially current ones cause the developers can change them at will. YET, as a homeowner, I'm expected to do for my tenant what the developer isn't expected to do for me, the buyer.

And that is ironic.

And that is so hard to provide the info if I, the buyer, do not have access to the most current information. Or, if I rent, with the info I have, and the developer changes it without informing me of the changes, but expects me to hunt it down in some courthouse record, then how do I get this info to the tenant as a landlord who may not have any idea due to time/distance that a change has occurred?

Just wondering about how that would all work.

Perhaps a change in the disclosure laws would help everyone in this process.

[Diffy Q]

The point I was trying to make, and many others have done so on this forum in other threads, is that builders/developers are not required to give a copy of the covenants and restrictions to prospective buyers. I find a disconnect between the fact that prospective buyers don't automatically get them yet they have to provide them to their tenants. Yes, with some research, you can find them on your own, but you shouldn't have to. This matter is being looked into by The Alabama Concerned Homeowners Alliance. I am sure we would all want our tenants to know what is expected of them whether it is on the inside of the house or the outside of the house. That is not the issue in this case.

[DvlsAdvc8]

Originally Posted by dramamama

A lot of the C&R have a section that says the homeowners can lease their homes but they must provide the C&R to the renters.

Isn't that kind of hard to do if they aren't hard copy bound or constantly changing via new developers' total veto powers and control over the boards?

Thoughts?

Doesn't make sense on the surface, but think about it for just a second:

In the event of a violation - who is it that gets the fine? -the home OWNER. The home OWNER has incentive to obtain and know the restrictions.

The instruction to landlords that they must provide the C&R to renters is just the C&R's way of eliminating the loophole of "well, it wasn't me, it was the tennant" - but the tennant, not being a member of the HOA, never agreed to the C&R.

The owner agreed to abide by the C&R in purchasing the home, and thus it is their responsiblity to ensure that the tennant abides by it.

The only legit grip is any difficulty an prospective owner has in obtaining the C&R from the developer, but as I've said before, if you don't buy from developers who make this difficult that problem takes care of itself.

I guess its hard for me to understand why one would by from a developer who is not upfront in providing the necessary materials. I mean, if they actually said: "Go find the latest copy at the courthouse" why on earth would you buy?

[ionlife]

I believe it is the developers' responsibility to make it EASY for homebuyers to obtain this information. In fact, my developer DID post C&R online so I BELIEVED I had all the information via MY RESEARCH. However, that was not the case. AFTER I signed the dotted line, a new set of BYLAWS were posted that gave the developer the right to veto etc., basically the right to make changes without asking or telling.

NOW, how the heck was I supposed to find that online? And when we are LEAD TO BELIEVE that we have been given ALL the information prior to closing, why wouldn't we buy the place? And when we find out about the whole COURTHOUSE thing AFTER we have read C&R on line--well it's not like he TOLD us to look at the courthouse. Heck no. We have to discern that ourselves.

Heck, that's why full disclosure should be there regarding the HOA C&R. It's simply not cut and dry... at least not in the majority of cases in AL. AL is BUYER BEWARE state in so many ways that even when a buyer BELIEVES they have fully researched and informed themselves of the situation, something insidious can crop up to bite the buyer in the bottom.

I believe that is wrong. I believe we need to make it EASY, HONEST, and VERY ACCESSIBLE. As it is, how can we TRUST anyone down here in the realty industry to be 100% forthcoming when there are those who are baiting and switching on a regular basis? This impacts the honest developers as well.

I believe that is the crux of the matter. But we already know where Dvlsadc8 stand on this matter and so it's really important to hear from other interested parties about this problem.

What say you the rest of AL/Madison/Madison County?

[djmaxwell]

Originally Posted by DvlsAdvc8

I guess its hard for me to understand why one would by from a developer who is not upfront in providing the necessary materials. I mean, if they actually said: "Go find the latest copy at the courthouse" why on earth would you buy?

Because all we would have to discuss then is BBQ, 4-way stops, and Huntsville becoming Atlanta. Instead, people have been filled with great missions in life to bubble wrap our society.

[ionlife]

Asking builders to be accountable 100% is not asking to bubble wrap society. This is about not letting the good old boy network take advantage of many unsuspecting folks moving here from out of state who are being baited and switched on a regular basis.

BRAC folks are watching this issue very closely. And I believe that there are many, who upon discovering this as a problem, will be very reticent in purchasing new homes in new developments. Particularly when they realize via OUR DISCLOSURE about this issue in the media and forums such as this that they aren't getting the dream life/home they thought they'd get when they committed to uprooting their families to come here.

Dvlsadvc8 hasn't understood the duplicity that has gone on--we were sure we had been given all the information by the developer.

We were wrong because they played a bait and switch. Plain and simple.

So even researching and spending time reading through what was available didn't help us. They are taking advantage of the fact that they KNOW we are coming from a state where regulations are in place and so when we see similar C&R and other rules, we believe they will operate the same way they did in our former state.

I was an HOA Pres. in NoVA so I do speak from a point of expertise in this area. I had no reason to question the C&R as they were presented to us on the developer's website. And I spoke to attorneys in NoVa who read the C&R of many of the developments here and the "income stream" is buried between other articles/and sections that trick the buyer into believing the builder/developer will readily turn over HOA ownership to the duly elected board members at a certain point/in WRITING. This is clearly stated in our C&R, but the developer (one of many) refuses to turn over power because the income stream from our dues is necessary for the developer to roll through poor financial management.

Had we built/bought 4 years ago, I think this might have been LESS of a problem bc the developers were counting on the BRAC to bring them the money.

And that wave is not coming anytime soon. In fact, the level of disappointment I hear in my fellow future relocating BRAC friends is palpable.

This is NOT what they signed on for. And they won't take it on the chin.

In a a way, I am fighting for change so that EVERYONE will benefit and the ball can get rolling in the RIGHT direction to EVERYONE'S benefit. As I've said a thousand times: it's about creating a win-win for all the parties concerned; particularly the HONEST parties who deserve to sell their houses in their new subs.

Right now that might not happen.

[DvlsAdvc8]

Originally Posted by dramamama

NOW, how the heck was I supposed to find that online? I believe we need to make it EASY, HONEST, and VERY ACCESSIBLE.

Drama, that's not my point. I don't think you're slow for having difficulty finding the C&R. It very well may not have been easy. I too believe it should be easy.

My point is that if you want a seller to offer up something without hassle, one must demand it as a condition of buying. If my developer had made it difficult to obtain any of kind of information important to me in my decision making process - I wouldn't have bought from him. How quickly do you think he'd change his mind about providing the information?

You wouldn't buy a used car unless the owner let you test drive it right? For some reason, we don't need a law requiring sellers to provide test drives.

All you need is to require separate accounting of developer and hoa money and disclosure of hoa accounting records to hoa members. You keep going back to C&Rs unecessarily.