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.
An HOA can be responsible for as much or as little as the writers of the documents that govern it want, within the rules of the state, which vary quite a bit from state to state. Yes, most HOAs for recent neighborhoods do much more, but prior to the 90s when the laws started essentially requiring them, many new developments didn't have them or they were very limited.
Well, using my former north Raleigh neighborhood as an example, the voluntary HOA had four primary purposes: (1) it maintained and published a neighborhood directory, which including things like teenagers availaable for babysitting; (2) it organized 2 or 3 social events a year - Halloween costume parade for the kids, luminaries at Christmas, etc.; (3) it arranged to have some simple landscaping maintained at the entrances to the neighborhood; and (4) it published a newsletter 3 or 4 times a year with some simple neighborhood and area news and information.
Makes sense. To return to the point about lawsuits, if one of those landscaping projects funded by the HOA changed things such that it resulted in drainage/flood damage for one of the homeowners and the homeowner didn't want to pay tens of thousands or whatever to fix their home and install a new drainage system, they could sue the pants off the HOA (if it was an established business entity, and it better hope it was to protect the personal assets of the individuals on the board).
That was my real point. A HOA by definition has some goal or purpose, and if along the lines of achieving those goals they adversely affect someone, they are a potential civil suit target. Saying "we reserve the right change the landscaping, but we are off the hook of any legal disputes that might arise from our actions" is simply not going to fly in court.
(And yes I do understand that you were referring to landscaping stuff so simple that drainage risks would probably not be an issue... I know that most HOA don't get sued. My position is just that they can be).
An HOA can be responsible for as much or as little as the writers of the documents that govern it want, within the rules of the state, which vary quite a bit from state to state.
Sure they can, but as I said power and responsibility are intertwined. A do-nothing HOA is probably in no risk of getting sued. A do-everything HOA has to dot their legal i's and cross their t's. A do-something HOA needs to know that if they do something that results in an adverse condition for one of the homeowners, they are a potential civil suit target.
I think people are making this too complicated. The poster above makes an excellent point that HOA can't just declare it has power to assess fines. Some HOAs will try to usurp this right. However, it's possible you consented to the HOA's authority when you purchased the home. I recommend the following to determine the HOA's power.
1. Did you sign a document related to the HOA?
2. If yes, read it. It's probably shorter than this thread. It should specify what fines the HOA can assess. It may refer to a rule book that can be changed or give the HOA's board discretion on fines which sucks.
3. If you didn't sign anything, ask the HOA for a copy of the document that gives then them the authority to assess fines.
Do you have documentation to support that?
It would help in my situation.
I'm not an expert - so take it for what it's worth, but I think an HOA can enforce covenants with regard to parking against a homeowner. That's not quite the same as regulating parking on the street (which I agree is solely within the authority of the local government).
Homeowners agreed to a set of rules when purchasing their property and accepting the covenants. They agreed that those covenants could be enforced against them. The HOA can't ticket or tow, but I believe they can enforce fines per the covenants.
EDIT: I took to long to complete my post - I see the prior poster covered this. One comment to that - the covenants are probably incorporated in the deed restrictions, not something separately signed.
Upon my review of various documents, and opinions, found on multiple internet sites, it appears that an HOA could have limited policing powers for public streets, IF so identified in the covenants and restrictions of the HOA. This capability applies ONLY to property owners who agreed to abide by the limitations of the CCR's upon purchase of property within the community.
HOA's have NO authority to control visitor or public parking on public streets; only the entity which owns the public street can do so.
Isn't it reasonable to assume the street within the PUD is subject to the covenants? We have a rule about boats,rvs,work vehicles over 3 days parked in the street/driveways. I can't imagine lawyers would put that stuff in if it was enforceable in some way? There is usually sever-ability clauses in the rules as well, at least in my PUD.
My HOA does not govern street parking or doesn't want to enforce it. There is a guy who has been parking a new car carrier full size like you see on the highway on the street overnight by the community pool. I called the rep for the HOA who said to take it up with the Durham police.
You will get a notice if you leave your garbage cans in the driveway too long though.
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.
