Gene Kearns wrote in
:


Either I didn't make myself clear or you guys need to read again for
content..... (1) I wouldn't buy a property that came with a deed
restriction and (2) my position was that NO agreement is binding
unless you sign indicating assent.

Check your mortgage paperwork and you will find that you have a copy
of some sort of protective or restrictive covenant or CC&R, designed
by the developer, that gave the HOA the power to tax you and determine
how you will use your property. You will probably, also, find a rider
on your deed that says you are aware of the covenant and will abide by
its restrictions (which include all of its penalties). You signed all
that didn't you?

I still feel that if you didn't sign the paperwork covering the deed
restriction.... you are not bound by what you didn't agree to.... (of
course that means you probably (wisely) walked away from the deal).

You couldn't be more wrong. It's not even not even open to debate. Take
it from me, I'm a real estate attorney. To borrow a line from the movie
"War of the Roses," when someone who gets paid $400/hour wants to give
you free advice, you should listen. You don't sign a deed. It is
delivered to you, signed by the seller, who is referred to in the deed as
the grantor. You are the grantee. Brokers and others may have you sign
something saying you are aware of the covenants, but that's just so you
don't sue them saying they should have told you. Regardless, if you buy
property subject to a restrictive covenant, then as long as you own that
property, you are subject to that covenant. Some covenants turn out to be
unenforcible for varous reasons, but not because you didn't sign
something. As was previously pointed out, racial covenants cannot be
enforced. There are other covenants that aren't enforcible either, but
that would take years and costs thousand of lives (another movie line;-)
to explain. Suffice it to say, you buy property subject to an HOA and
your stuck with it whether you signed anything or even knew about. You
are charged with researching the title all the way back to the time the
government first deeded the property to the first owner. Since that is
not practical for you to do, you get an opinion of an abstractor, or in
many states, title insurance, or both. Caveat Emptor!

wrote in news:1187795879.112007.239080
@x40g2000prg.googlegroups.com:

On Aug 20, 11:16 pm, (Bob) wrote:
In article

"No boats, trucks, automobiles, or other vehicles, or trailers may be
stored in the open within view of the public street within this
subdivision for more than twenty-four (24) hours, nor may they be
repaired except in an emergency within said twenty-four (24) hour
period on any of the streets within this subdivision."

To me, this technically sounds like you could work on your boat in the
DRIVEWAY as long as it was an "emergency" AND you did it within the 24
hour period. But I get the feeling that they mean "within view" like
they mention in the first part talking about storage.

To me, this means you can do whatever you want on the boat in a
private driveway or yard, emergency or no, as long as it is not in
view of the public street for more than 24 hours.

The "emergency" clause refers to working on it in a "street", as might
happen if the vehicle got a flat tire and moving it from the street to
a private driveway was not practical without first effecting the
repair.

Could it be argued that "any of the streets within this subdivision"
includes private "driveways"? Possibly. It could also be argued that
if the framers meant it to include driveways, they would have written
"any of the streets or driveways within this subdivision."

I note there is no prohibition from storing or effecting non-emergency
repair on a vehicle in a private yard. The framers could have easily
foreseen such occurring and written a prohibition in the form of "nor
may they be stored or repaired except in an emergency within said
twenty-four (24) hour period on any of the streets, driveways or yards
within this subdivision."

"Said twenty-four (24) hour period" sounds very official and scary but
it merely refers again to the period that a vehicle may be "within
view of the public street." It does not a priori mean that non-
emergency repair cannot be performed on a private drive or yard.

On the whole, it seems to me that the framers most likely just wanted
to keep the work out of the public streets (read: thoroughfares), and
to keep it reasonably brief.

A private driveway is not typically considered to be as much a part of
the "common space" as a public street. So there is ample reason to
have a distinction between streets and driveways. Repairing a vehicle
in the public street could be a problem if lots of people did it even
for short periods. People don't tend to care as much what happens in a
neighbor's driveway if it's temporary.

I am not a lawyer, but I have extensive experience interpreting zoning
codes.



I think you are dead on. I am a lawyer and I used to write CC&Rs for a
living. When we wanted say driveway, we said driveway. The quoted CC&Rs
only restrict repair on the streets. I wrote several CC&Rs (at the
request of the developer) that said no repair in the driveway, only the
garage. I think as long as you can do the repair within the 24 hour
storage period, you're alright. The OP should point that out to the busy
buddy and tell him or her to pound sand. BTW, because of my dealings with
HOAs, I would never live in one. I've only been to New Hampshire once,
but I like their motto: "Live free or die."

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 19:29:24 -0400, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:02:26 -0700, penned the
following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

Your suggestion to buy somewhere that doesn't have an HOA sounds
really good, except that most people don't have the money to buy the
kind of home they would REALLY like. In other words, not everyone is
rich, or lives in an area that the housing cost are reasonable
compared to wages. For us working folks, HOAs can be a necessary evil,
if we want to buy SOME kind of home.

It must be nice to have lots of $$.
It is unfortunate that for many, it really warps their comprehension
of the reality of life for for regular working folks.

That is odd!

Here in NC, it is the high end neighborhoods where HOAs are all the
rage. Many HOAs seem to exist, in part, to enforce rules where it
gives the illusion that no one in the neighborhood must either work
for a living or do any personal manual labor (winterize the boat, for
example).
Its all about keeping you from putting that single wide in the backyard
for mama and making sure that you don't have that old Chevy up on blocks
in the front yard fro a couple of years.


Simply a straw man. Cities and towns have ordinances governing these
practices and there really is no need to create an umbrella of civil
litigation over the existing laws.... unless you are an attorney, then
it probably seems like a great idea!

Most covenants are written such that you can keep a boat on the
property if it is housed within a garage..... and many covenants
prohibit an unattached garage. So.... you can have your boat if you
can afford a house/garage big enough to house both.

Go figure.......
Its all about resale value.

I think there is more to it than that.


No, it really is all about the resale value. When you drive through my
neighborhood you see that every yard is clean and well kept, the paint
is not peeling off the trim, the garage doors all work and look good.
There are no paved over front yards, although one or two owners would do
it if they could, and houses sell rather quickly with deals that don't
fall through at the closing table.

BAR wrote:
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 19:29:24 -0400, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:02:26 -0700, penned the
following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

Your suggestion to buy somewhere that doesn't have an HOA sounds
really good, except that most people don't have the money to buy the
kind of home they would REALLY like. In other words, not everyone is
rich, or lives in an area that the housing cost are reasonable
compared to wages. For us working folks, HOAs can be a necessary evil,
if we want to buy SOME kind of home.

It must be nice to have lots of $$.
It is unfortunate that for many, it really warps their comprehension
of the reality of life for for regular working folks.

That is odd!

Here in NC, it is the high end neighborhoods where HOAs are all the
rage. Many HOAs seem to exist, in part, to enforce rules where it
gives the illusion that no one in the neighborhood must either work
for a living or do any personal manual labor (winterize the boat, for
example).
Its all about keeping you from putting that single wide in the
backyard for mama and making sure that you don't have that old Chevy
up on blocks in the front yard fro a couple of years.


Simply a straw man. Cities and towns have ordinances governing these
practices and there really is no need to create an umbrella of civil
litigation over the existing laws.... unless you are an attorney, then
it probably seems like a great idea!

Most covenants are written such that you can keep a boat on the
property if it is housed within a garage..... and many covenants
prohibit an unattached garage. So.... you can have your boat if you
can afford a house/garage big enough to house both.

Go figure.......
Its all about resale value.

I think there is more to it than that.


No, it really is all about the resale value. When you drive through my
neighborhood you see that every yard is clean and well kept, the paint
is not peeling off the trim, the garage doors all work and look good.
There are no paved over front yards, although one or two owners would do
it if they could, and houses sell rather quickly with deals that don't
fall through at the closing table.


The developers put together the restrictive covenants and the HOA
because it helps them sell the homes initially. If the homeowners and
the HOA enforce the covenants it does make the neighborhood have much
better curb appeal and homes will sell much quicker. Nothing worse than
a yard with cars parked all over. with half the cars torn apart and not
working, it to destroy the resale value of all the homes close by.

Most HOA would not worry if someone was working on a boat for a day, but
if the boat was out in the street, or torn apart in the driveway or
yard, they would enforce the covenants. That being said, they will be
some HOA Nazi's, but if the homeowners don't like their enforcement
style, they will vote them out quickly.

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 07:27:57 -0400, BAR wrote:



No, it really is all about the resale value. When you drive through my
neighborhood you see that every yard is clean and well kept, the paint
is not peeling off the trim, the garage doors all work and look good.
There are no paved over front yards, although one or two owners would do
it if they could, and houses sell rather quickly with deals that don't
fall through at the closing table.

My neighborhood is no different and there is no HOA.
When homes reach a certain price range people take care of them.
The village imposes some fencing restrictions and they'll ticket you
if your grass gets too shaggy. Had a warning on my door when we got
back from vacation once because my son had let it go for more than a
week.
But I found this on the village website:
"FENCES
Fences are not permitted on any part of a front yard.
Fences are not permitted on any side yards that face an
intersecting street. Fences may be built up to a height of six
feet from ground level, and the finished side”of the fence
must face outward. A permit is required before installing
or replacing a fence.
PROPERTY & LAWN
MAINTENANCE
Each property owner is responsible for the minimum
maintenance requirements established by ordinance.
Code enforcement personnel routinely monitor compliance.
Using the Village’s Minimum Housing Standards
Ordinance that establish the minimum standards to ensure
the health, safety and welfare of the public, code
enforcement officers review exterior and interior maintenance,
drainage, sanitary facilities, rodent infestation
and other aesthetic, health and safety considerations.
Deficiencies include peeling paint, improper storage on
property, abandoned automobiles, and overgrown vegetation.
Residents are notified if their homes fall below
these standards.
No person may permit weeds, grass or plants other than
trees, bushes or other ornamental shrubs to grow to a
height exceeding six inches. All landscape debris must
be properly disposed. Please review the Yard Waste
information in the Garbage and Recycling section.
Violators of property maintenance codes are subject
to a code enforcement ticket and a fine between $75
and $750.
VEHICLE & BOAT STORAGE
Boats, commercial vehicles and other recreational
vehicles may not be parked or placed in front yard
driveways (front yard driveways are defined as the area
between the curb and the front building line). They
must be parked behind the building line on a hard
surface, screened from view or garaged. No vehicle
may be parked on unpaved surfaces in front yards.
Vehicles not garaged must be licensed and operable."

That boat part is even more restrictive than the HOA we're talking
about here.
As a matter of fact, I've never seen a boat anywhere around here.
Oh oh. Better tell my wife we have to move to Florida.
I'm thinking there's nothing wrong with HOA's per se so long as
you know what you're getting into. In fact, you better be aware
of local ordinances too. It's like that old Holiday Inn commercial
about surprises.

--Vic

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 07:27:57 -0400, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:



No, it really is all about the resale value. When you drive through my
neighborhood you see that every yard is clean and well kept, the paint
is not peeling off the trim, the garage doors all work and look good.
There are no paved over front yards, although one or two owners would do
it if they could, and houses sell rather quickly with deals that don't
fall through at the closing table.

None of the properties I own have a deed restriction. All of them
sound like your description.... except I can't conceive of a paved
yard.... we have real lawns.

One neighboring house that just sold was never even listed. It sold
within an hour, the morning it went on the market.

Apparently, there are many exceptions to your rule!

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 07:27:57 -0400, BAR penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

No, it really is all about the resale value. When you drive through my
neighborhood you see that every yard is clean and well kept, the paint
is not peeling off the trim, the garage doors all work and look good.
There are no paved over front yards, although one or two owners would do
it if they could, and houses sell rather quickly with deals that don't
fall through at the closing table.

None of the properties I own have a deed restriction. All of them
sound like your description.... except I can't conceive of a paved
yard.... we have real lawns.

One neighboring house that just sold was never even listed. It sold
within an hour, the morning it went on the market.

Apparently, there are many exceptions to your rule!


Gene,
Of course there are, but if you are one of the people who live next to
someone who has destroyed the value of your home, you would wish there
were restrictive covenants.

For what it is worth, most homes do have some restrictive covenants
enforced by the local or county goverements (ie zoning, sanitary etc.)

akheel wrote:
The OP should point that out to the busy
buddy and tell him or her to pound sand.

The busy buddy won't even bother listening to the OP's opinion. He's
not the property owner. The busy buddy is the girlfriend's problem.
And she's the one that'll have to put up with the busy buddy as well
as the rest of her neighbors day in and day out in the future. Not
sure why so many here are missing that point.

Rick

"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
. ..

Nothing worse than a yard with cars parked all over. with half the cars
torn apart and not working, it to destroy the resale value of all the
homes close by.


Our properties are private (heh) and not subject to HOA restrictions, but
*are* subject to town ordinances, conservation, etc. I had a go-a-round
with the town because I was clearing some ditches of old branches, leaves,
etc. so the water would flow better. Long story short, it took 2 years,
lawyer fees and a environmental scientist consultant to accomplish what I
could have done in an afternoon.

During this experience I got so ticked off that I started reviewing some of
the town ordinances. One, common to many towns, permits only one
unregistered vehicle to be on any property. We happen to own three adjacent
but irregularly shaped lots, all three of which meet at one point at the end
of our driveway. I seriously considered purchasing three old, rusty
"clunker" type cars and parking them next to each other where the lots meet,
each on a separate lot, just to **** the town administrators off. My wife
convinced me to be a little more rational.

Eisboch

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 19:24:05 -0500, John H. penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 08:35:53 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 20:55:52 -0500, lid penned the
following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

Phantman:
I don't know about your state, but in mine it's as binding as any
other deed restriction. And deed restrictions are very much binding.

Gene Kearns wrote:
Even if you don't sign it?

Yep.
A deed restriction runs with the land. It's one of the reasons you get
a Title Opinion before buying property. To uncover these sorts of
things.

Nope. You miss the point. Wisest, IMHO, course is to walk away and
look for a property that doesn't beg for civil litigation......

That is my comfort level. YMMV.

Gene, I'd defy you to do that within an hour's drive of downtown D.C. The
new stuff going up here is all in developments, all with HOA's. Almost all
of the older (less than 20 years) is the same way. Some, like mine, built
in 1987, escaped the HOA covenants, etc. But, within two blocks there are
five houses with more than ten Mexican adults in each. This is why I'm in a
semi-rush to move.

Don't blame you for that.

My experience with that area is all old... thankfully. My aunt and
uncle owned 13 acres in Lanham, which is certainly with an hours
drive.... it was secluded by a deep woods and had deer, rabbits,
squirrels, etc. on the property. They both were research scientists
at the DoA and the landscaping on the property was varied and
beautiful. I've spent many days on that property sitting against a
tree next to the spring reading good books. It was a great place to
spend time.

They sold in the early 90's.

I'm sure that property is now raped of trees and planted with cookie
cutter tract homes ruled over by an HOA and all of the intrinsic
citizen-enforcers that it inevitably creates.

The development(s) in that area are why I no longer have any interest
in going back... other than, perhaps, a short trip to the museums,
etc.

Do you have any points of interest in the Carolinas on your short
list, yet?

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------