|
Homeowner's Associations suck!
Eisboch wrote:
"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 Eisboch, You are an impetuous individual, I am sure you wife is used to "convincing you to be a little more rational". ;) |
Homeowner's Associations suck!
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 07:44:52 GMT, akheel penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: 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! You are correct. My point was that I didn't know why anybody would willing assent to such an agreement. My point assumed that the grantee had done their homework and *knew* about the restrictive covenant(s). The paperwork I was thinking of that didn't have to be signed was the deed. As in, just walk away.... as SWS did in his instance. The scary point, as you point out, is that an unwary grantee may unwittingly find themselves subject to these screwy agreements by not doing their homework. In my state: one should NEVER buy anything without (1) a Title Search, (2) Title Insurance, AND (3) written assurances of clear title from a duly qualified and licensed real estate attorney. In my state, not even a Title Search guarantees clear title..... only an attorney can advise on the actual status of the title. Personally, I'm amazed at the freedoms some people are willing to relinquish (for whatever reason) to make sure that other people behave in a particular way. I'm glad to see that you, an attorney, don't see these covenants as personally desirable.... -- 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 ----------------- |
Homeowner's Associations suck!
Gene Kearns wrote:
Personally, I'm amazed at the freedoms some people are willing to relinquish What's worse is when they don't do it willingly. i.e. a city ordinance enacted *after* the owner has bought his property. Or a city that takes in areas, against the will of its residents, and imposes its taxes and ordinances on those property owners. They can do it without a vote by the residents of the area being taken. And not even a vote by the citizens of the city. The city administration can just do it with no agreement from anyone and no recourse for anyone .... that's what really sucks. Rick |
Homeowner's Associations suck!
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 08:33:47 -0400, Reginald P. Smithers III penned
the following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: 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.) Ok.... again..... here is my point. Local or county governments are free to pass *LAWS* (no taxation without representation and all of that stuff), but they don't do restrictive covenants. Restrictive covenants are legal obligations imposed in a deed by the seller upon the buyer of real estate to do or not do something. (And likely supplement and supercede any laws that don't violate police powers..... such as SWS's example of the FCC.) Violate a restrictive covenant and you have not violated a law..... you have (unnecessarily, IMHO) exposed yourself to civil litigation and forfeiture of your home, possessions, and property (protected by an all too eager group of people that want to shape your behavior in some manner that they find acceptable). Anybody note any contradiction there? If someone has destroyed the value of your home, they have most likely violated existing safety and/or zoning LAWS and the nice guys in blue suits are likely to take care of the problem for you (with your already collected tax money).... you don't need to pay a virtually uncontrollable band of vigilantes to guard your interests (picture Barney Fife screaming, "Citizens arrest!, Citizens arrest!"). However, if YOU decide that a HOA is the way to protect your investment and THEY decide, as part of the deal, to shape you, the conduct of your affairs, and/or how to pursue your hobbies...... well, that is between YOU, THEM, and everyone's respective attorneys. Have at it, just include me out..... -- 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 ----------------- |
Homeowner's Associations suck!
Gene Kearns wrote:
Agreed. Yabutt, now I've worked meself into a frenzy an'll be ****ed off the rest of the week. Who the hell started this #%*&! thread?!?! Rick -------aarrgghh!! ..... (back later, gone for a boat ride). |
Homeowner's Associations suck!
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:26:21 -0500, lid penned the
following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: Gene Kearns wrote: Agreed. Yabutt, now I've worked meself into a frenzy an'll be ****ed off the rest of the week. Who the hell started this #%*&! thread?!?! Rick -------aarrgghh!! ..... (back later, gone for a boat ride). Now, now..... there IS a cure....... float the boat and leave the cares ashore! -- 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 ----------------- |
Homeowner's Associations suck!
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 16:14:07 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
We have both boats on the block. If one sells, we'll most likely keep the other. I like them both, for different reasons. If both should sell this season, it presents a new dilemma .... what to look for next. Maybe a GB 49? I am just tired of worrying about two of them. As we both know there is no such thing as the perfect boat. If you are really going to cut back to one you have to think long and hard about how you want to use it, and how much maintenance you are comfortable with. The larger GBs like the 46, 49 and up are great liveaboard/cruising boats but slow and high maintenance. If we ever give up on long distance cruising I'd seriously think about going back to a mid-30s sportfish. They are big enough to be sea worthy and halfway comfortable in bad weather, big enough for weekend cruising, as well as being reasonably fast and fun for just zipping around.. |
Homeowner's Associations suck!
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 19:34:24 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote: Try something smaller and faster. If you are not going to cruise north/south, and spend a lot of time RV'ing through the waterways, why bother with anything more than 30 feet? I've already got a 27 ft Searay for running around in moderate to flat conditions. It's a good day boat for where we live, running mostly in the river and on Pine Island Sound. It's been my experience however that you really need something up in the 30s to get a consistently good ride (running on plane) in the Gulf of Mexico. I have several neighbors with light weight 34s and they do OK most of the time as long as the waves are 3 ft or less. Above that and they get beat up and have to slow down. Our old Bertram 33 would go OK in 3 to 5 ft waves but even that would get tiresome after a while, and it was a fuel guzzler because of the weight and deep V bottom. |
Homeowner's Associations suck!
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. In the Wash. DC area it is becoming a real problem. Somebody buys the house next door and rents individual rooms and to accomodate all of the cars the front yard is paved over, removing the need for lawn maintenance. One neighboring house that just sold was never even listed. It sold within an hour, the morning it went on the market. How did it go "on the market?" Usually real estate agents delay the posting of the listing trying to get the sale themselves or keeping it with the brokerage family. Apparently, there are many exceptions to your rule! All over the country. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:28 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com