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.
My favorite is that we were all charged a special assessment fee from all of the lawsuits by homeowners fighting the HOA. They usually run around $80K of our funds per year for lawsuits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady
Apparently there are, to the point of lawsuits, and the homeowners are being charged by the HOA Board for the privilege of suing them. Conflict of interest, anyone?
Anyone can sue anyone for any reason. Homeowners suing themselves. How silly is this.
Homeowners elect the board in most HOAs. State laws require an annual election in most states. I cannot compute an HOA board creating willy-nilly rules that a majority of homeowners do not want.
My favorite is that we were all charged a special assessment fee from all of the lawsuits by homeowners fighting the HOA. They usually run around $80K of our funds per year for lawsuits.
Anyone can sue anyone for any reason. Homeowners suing themselves. How silly is this.
Homeowners elect the board in most HOAs. State laws require an annual election in most states. I cannot compute an HOA board creating willy-nilly rules that a majority of homeowners do not want.
I'm wondering if the lawsuit in question is more along the lines of a derivative action, which is brought when the management of a company (its Board of Directors) refuses to act in a manner which is consistent with the good of the company and its stockholders. The lawsuit is brought on behalf of the company, thus, it is not the company suing itself. I could easily see a lawsuit by the homeowners against the HOA being something like that and not silly in the slightest.
It is definitely a conflict of interest, however, for the HOA Board, if it is the defendant in such a lawsuit, to ask the homeowners to pay for their legal defense.
I'm wondering if the lawsuit in question is more along the lines of a derivative action, which is brought when the management of a company (its Board of Directors) refuses to act in a manner which is consistent with the good of the company and its stockholders. The lawsuit is brought on behalf of the company, thus, it is not the company suing itself. I could easily see a lawsuit by the homeowners against the HOA being something like that and not silly in the slightest.
It is definitely a conflict of interest, however, for the HOA Board, if it is the defendant in such a lawsuit, to ask the homeowners to pay for their legal defense.
Yes, this is basically it. The lawsuit is against the BOD because of not acting in the interest of the homeowner(s) due to the "interpretation" of the various rules. It wasn't always this bad but we got a set in there that moved to this area, are retired, and have nothing better to do, I guess. The homeowners that have lived here for years are not reacting well to these new rules.
One example. Used to be you could put a swingset or some such thing in your own backyard and it didn't require HOA approval as long as it couldn't be seen from the front of the house. Now, it requires approval, a $500 deposit, and $300 non-refundable fee. Due to the vague convenants, it's technically within the scope of the BOD to do so but pretty unreasonable. Another one - if you want to change any of your landscaping at all (even a few bushes), you must have a plan created by a certified landscape architect. Add the deposit and fees as well.
This is an upper middle class area but not extremely wealthy by any stretch. The neighborhood has always been well groomed and it's simply unnecessary to have this level of heavy handedness. I tend to be be a bit whatever about it all because I only have a few years before my daughter is out of school and then off to the country for me! Although it did chafe a bit to pay that special assessment for the lawsuits...not like it was my actions that resulted in the lawsuit but of course, the lawyers made sure they were on legal standing to make us pay. Believe the ability to do that was meant if someone outside the neighborhood sued the HOA, not the residents themselves!
Yes, this is basically it. The lawsuit is against the BOD because of not acting in the interest of the homeowner(s) due to the "interpretation" of the various rules. It wasn't always this bad but we got a set in there that moved to this area, are retired, and have nothing better to do, I guess. The homeowners that have lived here for years are not reacting well to these new rules.
One example. Used to be you could put a swingset or some such thing in your own backyard and it didn't require HOA approval as long as it couldn't be seen from the front of the house. Now, it requires approval, a $500 deposit, and $300 non-refundable fee. Due to the vague convenants, it's technically within the scope of the BOD to do so but pretty unreasonable. Another one - if you want to change any of your landscaping at all (even a few bushes), you must have a plan created by a certified landscape architect. Add the deposit and fees as well.
This is an upper middle class area but not extremely wealthy by any stretch. The neighborhood has always been well groomed and it's simply unnecessary to have this level of heavy handedness. I tend to be be a bit whatever about it all because I only have a few years before my daughter is out of school and then off to the country for me! Although it did chafe a bit to pay that special assessment for the lawsuits...not like it was my actions that resulted in the lawsuit but of course, the lawyers made sure they were on legal standing to make us pay. Believe the ability to do that was meant if someone outside the neighborhood sued the HOA, not the residents themselves!
My last HOA is about 10 years old and has been built out for the past 4 years. Several years back there started to be issues with the BOD interpretation of the covenants (actually via the Architectural Review Committee). Neighbors started discussing issues. A group got together and decided to have a few new people run for the BOD. The first year we got several new homeowners elected (myself included) to the BOD, but we did not have control of the BOD. We kept all homeowners informed what was happening. We even had neighbor informative meetings outside BOD control and good Email communication. The next year we swept the BOD elections.
The details of our particular situation are not importatnt. What is important is that HOA BOD's are elected (usually very year) by home owners. If the BOD gets overbearing (as in upsets many homeowners), it is easy enough to replace them.
If unable to replace them, then one must ask themselves if all others are happy then are they the malcontent?
Many are not meant to live in HOA's. If you think you are one, then do not buy there. Move on down the road.
My last HOA is about 10 years old and has been built out for the past 4 years. Several years back there started to be issues with the BOD interpretation of the covenants (actually via the Architectural Review Committee). Neighbors started discussing issues. A group got together and decided to have a few new people run for the BOD. The first year we got several new homeowners elected (myself included) to the BOD, but we did not have control of the BOD. We kept all homeowners informed what was happening. We even had neighbor informative meetings outside BOD control and good Email communication. The next year we swept the BOD elections.
The details of our particular situation are not importatnt. What is important is that HOA BOD's are elected (usually very year) by home owners. If the BOD gets overbearing (as in upsets many homeowners), it is easy enough to replace them.
If unable to replace them, then one must ask themselves if all others are happy then are they the malcontent?
Many are not meant to live in HOA's. If you think you are one, then do not buy there. Move on down the road.
I think that HOAs just tend to lead to this type of abuse too easily. But, I live where I live because it was good for my daughter due to the schools. You live where I live, you know what I'm talking about. I deal with it, don't love it. After she gets out of school, I'm moving out to the country where it doesn't matter about the schools.
I do feel bad for those that have no real choice to live outside an HOA. Even in our town, you're hard pressed to find a place to live without an HOA. Just one small portion of town and of course, the prices there are outrageous. HOAs are just like everything else. It's a phase and right now, it's a big trend. That will eventually wane as more homeowners press for different options.
I think that HOAs just tend to lead to this type of abuse too easily. But, I live where I live because it was good for my daughter due to the schools. You live where I live, you know what I'm talking about. I deal with it, don't love it. After she gets out of school, I'm moving out to the country where it doesn't matter about the schools.
I do feel bad for those that have no real choice to live outside an HOA. Even in our town, you're hard pressed to find a place to live without an HOA. Just one small portion of town and of course, the prices there are outrageous. HOAs are just like everything else. It's a phase and right now, it's a big trend. That will eventually wane as more homeowners press for different options.
I keep hearing things like this, and it makes me wonder why people still think that HOA's "preserve property values". I think that particular pendulum has turned and is heading in the other direction.
It is definitely a conflict of interest, however, for the HOA Board, if it is the defendant in such a lawsuit, to ask the homeowners to pay for their legal defense.
Most HOAs carry D&O insurance. It's the law in some states. Not all D&O insurance is equal. Most D&O endorcements typically exclude suits for non- monentary damages, for example the enforcement of a rule or lack thereof. HOA boards are volunteers, usually elected by homeowners. State laws often protect volunteers except in the case of theft/fraud.
Again, I keep coming back to how it is possible for a rule, any rule, to be effective if the majority of homeowners don't want the rule.
A few years ago a board majority on my HOA decided to budget for the replacement of X. That X was no where near its useful life expectancy did not matter. That we had the money to do so was the rationalization used by the board majority. In one winter weekend, 20% of homeowners signed a petition to "Preserve the Reserves". Problem solved.
Last edited by middle-aged mom; 10-08-2011 at 03:13 PM..
MOM, if you've truly worked with volunteers, you really can't help but have noticed that the majority of ANY group is basically apathetic. It's the old "80-20" rule in action, and it crosses all fields of human endeavor, near as I can tell.
So, just because someone doesn't stand up and march, or run for the Board, or file a lawsuit, doesn't mean that you can assume that they like what you're doing, as a Board.
There's the old business rule, too, that stated that you should absolutely value above rubies the customer who told you WHY he was never going to darken your door again, because for every one who did that, at least 9 more would simply leave without giving you a chance to fix the way you do business so as not to drive away customers.
More HOA Boards should have to study that rule, I think, rather than the "Well, everybody must like what I'm doing because I like it and I haven't been taken to the guillotine yet" theory of governance.
My last HOA is about 10 years old and has been built out for the past 4 years. Several years back there started to be issues with the BOD interpretation of the covenants (actually via the Architectural Review Committee). Neighbors started discussing issues. A group got together and decided to have a few new people run for the BOD. The first year we got several new homeowners elected (myself included) to the BOD, but we did not have control of the BOD. We kept all homeowners informed what was happening. We even had neighbor informative meetings outside BOD control and good Email communication. The next year we swept the BOD elections.
If the board did not have that power in the first place then you wouldn't have to waste so much time dealing with them. Apparently your position is that it is okay for an HOA to have that power so long as the "right" people are in charge. There's the fallacy. The "right" people will never be in charge. The "wrong" is the existence of the HOA corporation with that purported authority to begin with. Tolerating another year of abuse with the risk of it continuing further or starting up again is not a solution.
Quote:
The details of our particular situation are not importatnt. What is important is that HOA BOD's are elected (usually very year) by home owners. If the BOD gets overbearing (as in upsets many homeowners), it is easy enough to replace them.
The better solution would be to ensure that the HOA corporation does not have such authority to begin with because it will surely be abused. Exactly what is your solution in the interim - telling the victims to wait until the results of next year's election? That's not a solution.
Quote:
If unable to replace them, then one must ask themselves if all others are happy then are they the malcontent?
"Majority rule" is not an excuse for the actions of these boards. Perhaps if you want to discuss pool hours on the HOA's amenities, but not homeowners' own properties. If a "majority" simply decides that your property should be theirs, is that justification for making it so? I think not.
To be real clear, the HOA industry has worked for years to make it difficult to get rid of corrupt boards. Provoking disputes is the business these self-proclaimed "professionals" are in. They've worked to eliminate homeowner's ability to vote, to run for office, to attend meetings, or to inspect records. Does state law provide you with unfettered access to records, right to vote, right to run in an election, etc? If these are supposed to be examples of local democracy, then why are they controlled by a different set of laws than what applies to legitimate political subdivisions? Even if these barriers did not exist, an HOA corporation should not be given powers that will inevitably be abused by the board members or the vendors (management company and HOA attorney).
Quote:
Many are not meant to live in HOA's. If you think you are one, then do not buy there. Move on down the road.
That tends to be the attitude of Johnny-come-lately board members who decide it's their job to decide who is "meant" to live in the subdivision under the pretext of aesthetics or "good for the community" nonsense. Good fences make good neighbors. Stay on your side of the fence.
If the board did not have that power in the first place then you wouldn't have to waste so much time dealing with them. Apparently your position is that it is okay for an HOA to have that power so long as the "right" people are in charge. There's the fallacy. The "right" people will never be in charge. The "wrong" is the existence of the HOA corporation with that purported authority to begin with. Tolerating another year of abuse with the risk of it continuing further or starting up again is not a solution.
The better solution would be to ensure that the HOA corporation does not have such authority to begin with because it will surely be abused. Exactly what is your solution in the interim - telling the victims to wait until the results of next year's election? That's not a solution.
"Majority rule" is not an excuse for the actions of these boards. Perhaps if you want to discuss pool hours on the HOA's amenities, but not homeowners' own properties. If a "majority" simply decides that your property should be theirs, is that justification for making it so? I think not.
To be real clear, the HOA industry has worked for years to make it difficult to get rid of corrupt boards. Provoking disputes is the business these self-proclaimed "professionals" are in. They've worked to eliminate homeowner's ability to vote, to run for office, to attend meetings, or to inspect records. Does state law provide you with unfettered access to records, right to vote, right to run in an election, etc? If these are supposed to be examples of local democracy, then why are they controlled by a different set of laws than what applies to legitimate political subdivisions? Even if these barriers did not exist, an HOA corporation should not be given powers that will inevitably be abused by the board members or the vendors (management company and HOA attorney).
That tends to be the attitude of Johnny-come-lately board members who decide it's their job to decide who is "meant" to live in the subdivision under the pretext of aesthetics or "good for the community" nonsense. Good fences make good neighbors. Stay on your side of the fence.
Simply put, I do like HOA's holding/keeping the neighborhood to the standard I liked/was looking for when I purchased there. My experience is the majority of non-controlled or weakly controlled neighborhoods have a tendency to slip into being a bit shop worn and some become down right seedy.
HOA's cannot and do not control who lives in a neighborhood. Anybody is free to live there as long as they maintain the acceptable/mandated standards they will rarely have issues.
Also an HOA is the only/most economical way many can live in a neighborhood having amenities such as tennis, pools, playgrounds, bike paths, etc. Yes they might well have to give up some individual rights to share in the greater good......sounds Karl Marxish......LOL
I have lived under HOA's twice in IL, twice in MA, twice in SC and I presently live under one. I have served on several HOA appointed committees and have been elected to two HOA BOD's. Believe me I know the pros (many) and cons (some). I may have not seen it all, but I have seen quite a bit.......LOL
I am the first to know and admit, that it is not a life style for all.
Last edited by accufitgolf; 10-09-2011 at 06:17 PM..
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.
