[NJ Brazen_3133]

If you purchase property w/HOA is it wise to ask who the other board members are? Or who controls whole thing? Lets say all units are actually owned by developer, and just rents out. But developer sells a handful of units, but in practice controls the HOA still.

Is there a potential for abuse of new minority owners? I take it there is an HOA board, and the owners sit on that board and they make all the decisions like raising fees, and what not.

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133

If you purchase property w/HOA is it wise to ask who the other board members are? Or who controls whole thing? Lets say all units are actually owned by developer, and just rents out. But developer sells a handful of units, but in practice controls the HOA still.

Is there a potential for abuse of new minority owners? I take it there is an HOA board, and the owners sit on that board and they make all the decisions like raising fees, and what not.

If you buy a place in an HOA there is a large set of documents the seller must get for you due to Nevada statutes. It gives a pretty good breakdown of how the HOA is structured and its condition.

It is quite rare for a developer to maintain control of an HOA once it is mostly complete. I do not know of an exception. The owners elect the board of directors once the development is mostly complete.

[clutchcargo777]

Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133

If you purchase property w/HOA is it wise to ask who the other board members are? Or who controls whole thing? Lets say all units are actually owned by developer, and just rents out. But developer sells a handful of units, but in practice controls the HOA still.

Is there a potential for abuse of new minority owners? I take it there is an HOA board, and the owners sit on that board and they make all the decisions like raising fees, and what not.

There is potential for abuse anytime humans get involved.


On the subject of renters, in both HOA controlled properties I've lived in, they are treated as 2nd class citizens. An unpleasant reality that barely gets tolerated. They are truly the last concern anyone seems to have. No notices are sent to them as the out of state owners are supposed to notify them (what could go wrong there?). They aren't allowed in meetings. They aren't allowed to vote, they are frequently the target of overzealous rule enforcement and if one even hints at his protection under Nevada renter laws, the hate only grows.

[NJ Brazen_3133]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

If you buy a place in an HOA there is a large set of documents the seller must get for you due to Nevada statutes. It gives a pretty good breakdown of how the HOA is structured and its condition.

It is quite rare for a developer to maintain control of an HOA once it is mostly complete. I do not know of an exception. The owners elect the board of directors once the development is mostly complete.

Will they hand over during due diligence period?

[equid0x]

Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133

In Manhattan, the condo board I guess is the equivalent of HOA for large condo developments. They in turn hire out a property management company to handle maintenance work. But many times the property management company is incompetent, and the condo board does most of the management. The condo I live in has had to do this many times. The property management firm will collect common fees.

When I grow up in NJ suburbs, single family homes almost never get grouped into an HOA. Or at least, I never hear of it. All property management is done by individual owners.

But is common in LV for HOA to handle all repairs inside and outside? Are HOAs property managers essentially? If I look for renters, do I need HOA approval?

Or is it all different from HOA to HOA?

On the east coast, most homeowners take at least a little pride in their investment and do basic maintenance and landscaping themselves.

Out here in the west are a lot of irresponsible narcissists who never grew up who need a nanny org to harass them into maintaining their property or they simply won't do it.

On the east coast ppl generally had a sense of personal responsibility to their neighborhood. Here you'll probably just get the middle finger from your "neighbors" who could care less about you or how what they're doing effects anyone else.

For example, I blow out the leaf drops on my property 2-3x a year as needed. The dude next door has done it once the entire 6 years I've lived here, which he blew directly into my yard.

[equid0x]

Originally Posted by clutchcargo777

There is potential for abuse anytime humans get involved.


On the subject of renters, in both HOA controlled properties I've lived in, they are treated as 2nd class citizens. An unpleasant reality that barely gets tolerated. They are truly the last concern anyone seems to have. No notices are sent to them as the out of state owners are supposed to notify them (what could go wrong there?). They aren't allowed in meetings. They aren't allowed to vote, they are frequently the target of overzealous rule enforcement and if one even hints at his protection under Nevada renter laws, the hate only grows.

Good. Most renters are a nightmare in a single family neighborhood. They never follow rules. Don't care about how the property looks. Always seem to have 10 people living in the house whether they are section 8 or not. Always parking dead cars and leaving junk outside.

Complain about the HOA when it's your property value on the line.

IMHO Vegas has such a problem with renters and absentee slumlords that the county ought to have a compulsory registry for rentals and a required response mechanism with penalties attached for non-compliance.

[BBMW]

One thing people may not realize. I don't know if Clark County does this, but a lot of local governments require new developments to have HOAs. They do this so that the HOA can provide services the local governments don't want to pay for.

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by BBMW

One thing people may not realize. I don't know if Clark County does this, but a lot of local governments require new developments to have HOAs. They do this so that the HOA can provide services the local governments don't want to pay for.

Not a requirement here but can be hard to avoid. If, for instance, you do not want to use the standard grid layout on your streets you end up needing an HOA. Anything with walls or gates will need one. Even a fancy landscaping display at the entry will need one.

There is however a very wide range of HOAs. Varies from $15 a month to take care of the landscaping to over a thousand for condos with full hotel like services. And the existence of a landscaping or gate HOA in no way requires any structure other than someone collecting the funds and hiring the landscaper.

It can also go the other way. A cul de sac in the NW appears to have nothing but the standard well agreement. But when you look at what is in the well agreement you find a full blown and enforcement oriented HOA. And in our cul de sac we have nothing but a well agreement. But our road is in fact private and is maintained by the owners. We simply determine the cost and pay it out of the well fund or supply the required sum to the well manager who is one of the owners.

[orca17]

Originally Posted by EA

Bored busy bodies seeking control over others.

I am a member of my HOA board. I am neither bored nor on a power trip. If we didn't exist, some homeowners (or renters, as the case may be) would leave junk cars around the neighborhood, keep overgrown or dead plants and grass, keep landscaping overgrown with weeds, paint their houses colors that clash with everything around, leave massive amounts of trash on the curb, etc. First impressions matter, and home values are affected by what a neighborhood looks like when people drive through. We have had to issue courtesy notices, and sometimes impose fines, for everything that I just mentioned.

As others have mentioned, prospective buyers are given a copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) that spell out exactly what the rules are. They exist to maintain everyone's home values, and to provide them with a neighborhood that looks nice to anyone who lives there or passes through.

In our case, the common areas to be maintained are small (we don't have any parks or pools, we don't have a clubhouse and and we aren't gated), but the builder set it up so that we are responsible for maintaining the streets and the sewer lines. About two years ago we had to have all of the streets resurfaced, and several times we have had to repaint the fire lane lines. We are currently taking bids to replace street signs (ours are at the end of their useful life), and we have had to re-plumb several streets (which also involves excavation and resurfacing) because the builder used substandard materials in running the sewer lines for about half the development. For any repairs, we have to solicit and approve bids. We are also responsible for issuing water bills, and to have someone read the meters every month. We also have to maintain insurance, to have periodic financial audits, and to retain legal counsel for issues that require a legal opinion or a court filing. They also assist us if we are sued.

Sometimes courtesy notices aren't enough, and we proceed to fines. Ours aren't exorbitant ($100), but we have exhausted all other efforts before we get there. Some people don't believe that you are serious until you hit them in the wallet. It hasn't gotten to the point that we have put a lien on anyone's house, but that is an option if all else fails. That would make the house harder to sell.

As far as dues go, we are conservative about raising them. We had to increase them about a year ago, because of the money that we had to spend re-plumbing streets, and we were in danger of falling below the state-mandated minimum percentage in our reserve fund (and an HOA definitely doesn't want to go into state receivership). We are homeowners, too, and we have to pay any increases that we agree to. We aren't unreasonable.

[mvn88]

They just make sure that landscaping is done. That’s it. ☹️