I think there is a high variance in how involved different HOAs are, so it's hard to make a blanket statement that you should totally avoid considering buying a property that's in an HOA.
My current house is in an HOA that's around ~$20 / month (which pays to keep some of the common spaces of the development maintained), has never gone up in ~4 years, and we've never been notified about anything needing to look better even when our lawn was in pretty rough shape the summer we moved in. We did some research and were pretty confident going into it that we weren't going to be dealing with an overbearing HOA, and I also like that the development and community areas (including a tennis court and basketball court) stay well maintained. In our case, it feels like we're getting a good deal for the cost.
My old HOA was $20/month in SoCal and got me access to the community pool with well maintained lawn around it. The HOA was basically powerless otherwise. We tried to use it to stop an old, reclusive guy from feeding crows and releasing his pigeons(literally blanketing the surrounding backyards with bird shit), but they couldn't do anything.
HOAs vary quite a bit. The older I get, the more I want to live in a strict HOA community though. I want the stability and improved neighbor relations(the HOA is the bad guy, not me, when the neighbor stops maintaining their property).
I understand why people don't like HOAs. Yes they were born out of racism. I don't think that invalidates the concept.
I like our HOA. They do a good job maintaining all of the common property, including the pool, the shuttle system, and the copious grassy areas and parks that are part of our neighborhood.
There are rules here that are related to maintenance, but since there are so many common areas (and roofs and walls, there are a lot of town houses) one person's deferred maintenance can easily become costly for others.
I don't find the HOA oppressive our violating my rights at all. I was completely free to not buy a home in this development, and the HOA documents were shared with us early and often in the buying process. I feel more like our HOA is about buying into the community, and getting the benefits of pooled resources. If that's not your thing, keep looking.
Why are covenants allowed to run with the land? There's no other kind of ownership that can control people forever like it can. Regular contract law seems way more restrained in comparison. If there were a new blanket rule that covenants couldn't run with the land, wouldn't that completely and immediately defang every mandatory HOA (effectively turning them into the benign voluntary HOAs) with no other negative side effects?
Those things were getting so obnoxious that the US federal government had to make a law that overrode the HOAs to allowe TV antennas and satellite dishes:
I used to feel very strongly against HOAs, but for the past year or so I have been dealing with a neighbor who puts out bulk trash improperly (basically a big pile of random trash) and doesn't call it for pickup so it sits for weeks if not months. This is more than an eyesore. It often includes glass and other items that kids (including theirs) break in the road where I walk my dog. He had a splinter of wood from their garbage pile go straight through his foot, but luckily is fine.
A few houses down the bank owns a house that was a foreclosure three years ago that no one lives in and is falling apart. I guess they were not able to get any money at auction for it so now are just sitting on it until they can write it off as a total loss and sell the property for land value.
Apparently no one can do anything about either problem.
Every municipality I've lived in has laws on the books against putting out trash too early, and also about condemning property (which I am admittedly not as familiar with, but I assume priorities safety over aesthetics, which makes sense). Municipalities have code enforcement and city councils to enforce the above rules.
I've seen municipalities that do a better job at these kind of things than HOAs. I've also seen HOAs that don't do a good job of enforcing their laws, seemingly falling apart. (I wonder if they can be sued in these cases?) For example, I've seen HOA neighborhoods with cars parked everywhere - driveways, street, blocking driveways, and on lawns, because the houses were unaffordable unless four or more working people lived there, and there was no way to get anywhere except via car.
Yes and No, it could be worth it depending on the HOA board. I successfully penetrated my HOA board (24 years old with no experience) and in 2 years became the president. I then rewrote the HOA covenant to be more sensible and cut the fees by 50% with a plan to phase them out in 3-5 years. 98% of the neighborhood voted my changes in. I only put leans on houses that absolutely refused to cut their lawn for multiple months and pay their HOA dues.
Oh dang, I really like my HOA. I don’t hear much from them and it’s only $250 twice a year. However, it’s been helpful in rare cases where our neighbor had obnoxious election signs up til after February 2020. They are also helpful for managing the roads and nudging the community to install fiber.
A lot of the appeal of HOAs como from the obsession americans have of seeing their homes as investments. An illusion conveniently fueled by the marketing of banks and realtors.
Americans usually have this idea that a home is a valuing asset, because they mistake price inflation, fueled mostly by a constrained supply in some growing markets, with true asset valuation.
It is not like something magic happened in the bay area and trillions of dollars have magically been added as true value for the existing house, it was just price inflation most of the time.
When Detroit was an american economic power-house people probably thought that their properties would value indefinitelly.
But the thing is, even if a local supply constraint is sustainable over time, either because of real space limits (like in Manhattan where the only way to build new space is by first demolishing something) or because of zoning restrictions, nothing guarantees that the demand will stay strong forever. And even if local demand stay strong, we can expect it to decrease globally some moment in the future, as we enter a demographic transition where population starts to actually shrink instead of grow.
Take out the my-home-as-a-valuing-asset notion, and a lot of the drawbacks of this style of community (lack of privacy due to the absence of front yard fences/block walls, increasing fees, annoying restrictions) become more salient.
I grew up with an HOA and we'd always get letters about the halloween decorations (I've always done it big, ever since I was a kid) that alone made me anti HOA my whole life. Obviously not to mention how the goal of many HOAs just below the surface is to keep their neighborhood as white as possible.
I know that these same mechanisms were used to keep out minorities in the past. But I'd say now that they are more about forcing conformity to stereotypical average white middle class appearances than against minorities per say. Variety is not tolerated. It is ok to be a minority, as long as you don't ever act like one.
I personally think that's oppressive, even scary, and not good for the culture over the long term. But some people are into that.
One of the best lawns in my neighborhood is owned by an African American family. Impeccable.
The worst lawns are owned by white folks.
Doesn’t this comment assume that “only white people mow their grass?”
We’ve had issues with our HOA, and I wish they weren’t necessary, but some people won’t take care of their lawns unless they’re threatened with fines. Otherwise, they’ll let the jungle grow in their yards, and leave a couch by the sidewalk.
On the topic of race, homeownership, I’ve heard, is usually one main way in which a family can build wealth; if we’re concerned (as we should be) about racial inequality (financial inequality being a sub portion of it), any self-governance that encourages homes to be well-maintained, lawns to be kept, trees and bushes trimmed, and junk vehicles not parked in the yard is a benefit to any family’s net worth, since a main concern of an HOA is preservation of property values.
Real Estate is a supply/demand game. The nicer your home and neighborhood look, the higher the market value, which is of upmost concern if homeowner is trying to increase wealth.
It always amuses me when people talk about "buying" a property under HOA control. You're not buying anything. You're agreeing to an indefinite lease with a majority share of profit upon transfer of the lease. If someone else can decide what color your house is, you don't own it.
I've lived in both. HOAs have their place, and really I think it depends on the person. Going into a home purchase, you have to sign the HOA agreement, so you know the rules they set forth. They keep the neighborhood looking a certain way, which is something some people want.
I've met plenty of people that don't like HOAs and purposely avoid them, which is fine also. But be prepared for a much wider variation of look and style of a neighborhood. It makes it much easier for a house to get run-down as well.
One thing not mentioned in this post is that HOAs can be dissolved. A friend had voted to dissolve his HOA (which was successful), due to too many problems. Common-land that the HOA owned becomes a problem, but it can all be worked out.
Rules do change all the time. My Coop (in NYC) decided to impose a 2% transaction fee, which works out about 10k on a 500k apt. They also can raise then fees anytime.
That’s why HOAs can be a problem if they have too much power. The fact is that most HOA board members/directors tend to be older folks that have more time on their hands than you do. And they set the agenda. Good luck with that.
Unfortunately, in competitive markets like the Bay Area, HOA neighborhoods are the only option available to you in your price range for most people starting out. Your other options are to rent, or to move to a location far from where you work. (Or to live with your family if that is available to you, and all parties agree on it).
Now, of course, if you can and prefer to permanently work remotely, then moving to a further location from where you work may be a good option for you. But then you will have to consider the risk of you being able to continue to have a job that allows permanent remote work.
What competitive Bay Area markets are you referring to? We've bought here a couple times, and although we looked at a few properties that were part of a 3-5 unit "HOA", most of the homes we saw (and both of the ones we bought) were not anywhere near HOAs. In fact, we currently live on a street that is not a public road, but which is apparently maintained by neighbors without resorting to an official HOA.
Yeah, nobody likes an HOA. We all want to be allowed to do whatever we want. That's why I live in a neighborhood without one.
Leave the kids toys and trash cans out for a day? A week? Forever? No problem! But I can't complain about similar things my neighbors might do. Or, I can complain, directly to them. If I care enough.
Neighbors replaced their roof a year ago. Left the old shingles on the lawn, for a year. Did I like it? No. Did I care enough to complain to them about it? Also no. That's the kind of neighborhood I want to live in though. You want a neighborhood where the houses are in perfect cookie cutter shape? You need an HOA neighborhood, and you get the pluses with the minuses.
What I think most of us really want is to be able to do whatever we want, while also being able to tell others what to do. That doesn't work. You have to choose to either rely on your neighbors being decent, or suffer through life under an HOA.
>What I think most of us really want is to be able to do whatever we want, while also being able to tell others what to do.
I think some people really do want this. But I don't. I really just want to be able to do whatever I want, and then want other people to do whatever they want, as long as it isn't doing material harm to someone. The problem can come down to defining 'harm' since some people try to define it in their own image of what they wish wasn't allowed, but I hope there are still people out there who espouse these values, because it's the world I would prefer to live in :\
The problem is that people think like this everywhere, because it's exceptionally easy to just lie to yourself and convince yourself that in your case, it's justified to tell others what to do. And you get a lot of mental gymnastics out of that.
I do understand that sometimes it might not be out of a strict desire to prevent people from doing stuff that they do not personally agree with. For example, maybe someone's primary concern is property value, or hell, just having a nice looking neighborhood. But honestly, if I see a neighborhood with a very tasteless looking front yard with shit scattered about, then at least that's a sign that the neighborhood is chill.
edit: And it shall be noted I am trying to make a case against HOAs. I think my note about “harm” was a bit ambiguous. In general I want the legal system to define what is harmful enough to be actionable. Imperfect? Yes. A sort of “nobody’s favorite, but everybody’s favorite”
-type situation, in my view.
I personally chose to live in an incorporated city but not an HOA. There are city ordinances with actual real government representation and force of law behind them for serious health and safety concerns but we can paint our houses whatever color we want and build sheds under a certain size any way we like etc. The important thing with choosing a place to live is to honestly assess what you want and how much you want your neighbors to be able to do. There are plusses and minuses under any living arrangement. Personally I would never live under a HOA but in exchange I have to put up with the stuff that is under the level of city enforcement, things like boom cars and a few unkept lawns. In exchange I can work on my truck in my driveway without some busybody stopping me.
> We all want to be allowed to do whatever we want
Ehh, not everyone's that selfish.
I for one am perfectly happy with compromising so that my neighbors are happier with what I do, but only if they return the favor. At a small scale we can have a handshake agreement, but for something more long term or with a lot more people, it's great to be able to put it on paper.
>You have to choose to either rely on your neighbors being decent, or suffer through life under an HOA.
Local Governments traditionally played this role. Problem is that some people hate governments simply because they are governments so they make private governments. I guess that makes sense to them?
In my (non HOA) neighborhood leaving shingles on your lawn comes with a $100/day fine.
The people who were cleaning out the house next door to me (they inherited it) were leaving piles of garbage outside. I saw the blight officer leave a notice in their mailbox and the garbage was gone the next day. (I assume it was a warning rather than a fine, but idk.)
It’s easier to live somewhere with a decent HOA than to rely on each of your neighbors being decent.
Otherwise, the only other way to ensure neighbors don’t bother you without an HOA is to live somewhere with lots of land around homes so that neighbors are very spaced out, and hopefully they will be far enough from you to not be bothered by their filth, and putting up high hedges and trees should be enough to block them from your sight.
Right. I've always thought that HOAs seem kind of un-American. Being how Americans are all pro-freedom and anti-socialist , having some social construct dictating what you can do in your house AND paying it yo do so seems quite far from US values.
And I am not American and I'm pretty socialist myself.
I've never lived in a neighborhood where the houses must be in "perfect cookie cutter shape", nor would I ever want to. I want my neighborhood to be diverse and interesting. HOA neighborhoods sound soul-crushing to me.
Why does this post read like an over the top and rather extreme representation of non-HOA neighborhoods to the point of being just short of a false-dichotomy altogether? It sounds like an awful situation you have but it’s not as if this is how every neighborhood is that isn’t united and governed by HOAs.
This guy's understanding of what constitutes "horror" is really high strung.
Like yeah, this stuff might be irritating. Maybe you wanted pinker shutters. But who really cares? Imagine getting bent out of shape about the color of your shutters or having to put up curtains.
Ive had my car towed multiple times when I was parked in my designated spot with my parking tag in my window. They didn't care, they just towed it and claimed they coudln't see the tag. Every time it cost me > $300.
I've had the HOA manager show up when I had friends over because it was technically over the allotted "2 guest maximum" for the area. I was just having a game night, it wasn't even an outdoor party.
I've had them literally show up with a measuring tape to check the distance from the curb one of my guests was parked and then come knock on the door to inform me that they were illegally parked and would be towed in the next hour if they didn't move.
yeah, all of that? That's a horror story. Basically every HOA I've ever interacted with or lived under has been nothing but a thinly veiled legally-backed racket to kick back money to towing and lawn care companies.
You're entirely missing the point. Yes, having to re-paint your shutters is an annoyance in the scheme of things, but why should you _have_ to? It's your house; why should you _have_ to do what a committee demands?
And yes, you can say that he has to because he's signed the papers, but you'd still be missing the point.
> Imagine getting bent out of shape about the color of your shutters
If you think that that is trivial, imagine how much more trivial and petty it is to get bent out of shape about the color of someone elses shutters.
He's not complaining about not being allowed pink shutters, he's complaining that his neighbours are far too petty because they're getting bent out of shape about the color of someone elses shutters.
I sure would. Where I live, you do you, I do me, they do them.
It is great!
Sometimes we have a chat. Berry vines out of control, or maybe someone needs something. Whatever. That gets done and people are pretty happy.
Want to pick the shutter and trim colors? Several people here would be happy to entertain that so long as the ones wanting to pick are paying.
Me? Nope. And the bonus is nobody will hear from me about the colors, unless it is complementary. Who doesn't like that sort of thing?
Crazy cat lady down the street has a whole garden growing in the easement in front of her house. Passersby will pick and eat some of it. Pretty sure that makes her happy.
I could go on, but the place is very human, at times vibrant and has soul.
Yeah, bent right out of shape. There is just not enough time and energy to deal with all the meta associated with the more strongly regulated neighborhoods.
I basically have every other possible thing to do before worrying about what the other people are doing and so forth. Mutual respect and consideration are lean, easy, human, and definitely the way I want to play it.
All that said, yeah! Some people seem to need all that meta mess. Great! We have places for them to get it, thankfully.
Imagine caring that your neighbors have pinker shutters or don't have curtains? Imagine caring enough to fine them until they either comply or have to move out?
Isn’t that exactly what HOAs do? Get bent out of shape and demand home owners paint their shutters the proper shade of beige or they will literally lose their house.
Yeah imagine that. Oh wait that is exactly what the HOA is getting bent out of shape over, and forcing their arbitrary rules on others with escalating fines.
Seeing lots of posts in this thread about "Americans" and "freedom", but these posters I think are forgetting that the only thing Americans love more than "freedom" (quotes intentional) are controlling other people, which HOAs allow.
This kind of reminds me of those for and against CoC (Code of Conducts). Some people find them unnecessary and insulting, others can't imagine working/contributing without them. Different strokes for different folks I suppose.
I pay around 15 bucks a month for my HOA. They take care of common land and also the 3 kids playgrounds in the neighborhood. They also have to approve any changes to the exterior of a house which can be annoying.
One interesting thing they do is that for things like new decks or replaced ones, you need to submit an application for approval which should include a building permit by the county. It gives prospective home buyers assurance that certain things were done correctly. Before a house is sold, the seller needs to provide an HOA disclosure which triggers an inspection for which a seller needs to ensure all changes were made with the approval of the HOA. Our seller (an investment property management company) had to fix several things in our house to being them up to code to get those approvals, which helped me as a home buyer.
Besides that, the HOA has been very responsive, we did replace our windows without their approval but it was relatively easy to fix given that they were similar windows.
What I find interesting about where I currently live is rules you'd expect at the HOA level are actually at the township level: how tall your grass can be before it must be cut, how many cars you can park outside and where, maintaining exterior structures like fences, etc. All are laws in the town I live in. I've never seen that before.
I haven't had any issues with my HOA. There are bad HOAs, but I feel like for the average person they're fine. Beats having a neighbor that decides to put junk in the front yard, including a toilet. That happened to my parents, who don't live in an HOA neighborhood.
[+] [-] stakecounter|4 years ago|reply
My current house is in an HOA that's around ~$20 / month (which pays to keep some of the common spaces of the development maintained), has never gone up in ~4 years, and we've never been notified about anything needing to look better even when our lawn was in pretty rough shape the summer we moved in. We did some research and were pretty confident going into it that we weren't going to be dealing with an overbearing HOA, and I also like that the development and community areas (including a tennis court and basketball court) stay well maintained. In our case, it feels like we're getting a good deal for the cost.
[+] [-] 01100011|4 years ago|reply
HOAs vary quite a bit. The older I get, the more I want to live in a strict HOA community though. I want the stability and improved neighbor relations(the HOA is the bad guy, not me, when the neighbor stops maintaining their property).
I understand why people don't like HOAs. Yes they were born out of racism. I don't think that invalidates the concept.
[+] [-] rickspencer3|4 years ago|reply
There are rules here that are related to maintenance, but since there are so many common areas (and roofs and walls, there are a lot of town houses) one person's deferred maintenance can easily become costly for others.
I don't find the HOA oppressive our violating my rights at all. I was completely free to not buy a home in this development, and the HOA documents were shared with us early and often in the buying process. I feel more like our HOA is about buying into the community, and getting the benefits of pooled resources. If that's not your thing, keep looking.
[+] [-] josephcsible|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] upofadown|4 years ago|reply
* https://www.fcc.gov/media/over-air-reception-devices-rule
[+] [-] walterbell|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] etempleton|4 years ago|reply
A few houses down the bank owns a house that was a foreclosure three years ago that no one lives in and is falling apart. I guess they were not able to get any money at auction for it so now are just sitting on it until they can write it off as a total loss and sell the property for land value.
Apparently no one can do anything about either problem.
[+] [-] mikem170|4 years ago|reply
I've seen municipalities that do a better job at these kind of things than HOAs. I've also seen HOAs that don't do a good job of enforcing their laws, seemingly falling apart. (I wonder if they can be sued in these cases?) For example, I've seen HOA neighborhoods with cars parked everywhere - driveways, street, blocking driveways, and on lawns, because the houses were unaffordable unless four or more working people lived there, and there was no way to get anywhere except via car.
[+] [-] technick|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] walterbell|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] del_operator|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] elzbardico|4 years ago|reply
Americans usually have this idea that a home is a valuing asset, because they mistake price inflation, fueled mostly by a constrained supply in some growing markets, with true asset valuation.
It is not like something magic happened in the bay area and trillions of dollars have magically been added as true value for the existing house, it was just price inflation most of the time.
When Detroit was an american economic power-house people probably thought that their properties would value indefinitelly.
But the thing is, even if a local supply constraint is sustainable over time, either because of real space limits (like in Manhattan where the only way to build new space is by first demolishing something) or because of zoning restrictions, nothing guarantees that the demand will stay strong forever. And even if local demand stay strong, we can expect it to decrease globally some moment in the future, as we enter a demographic transition where population starts to actually shrink instead of grow.
Take out the my-home-as-a-valuing-asset notion, and a lot of the drawbacks of this style of community (lack of privacy due to the absence of front yard fences/block walls, increasing fees, annoying restrictions) become more salient.
[+] [-] ryanmcbride|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikem170|4 years ago|reply
I know that these same mechanisms were used to keep out minorities in the past. But I'd say now that they are more about forcing conformity to stereotypical average white middle class appearances than against minorities per say. Variety is not tolerated. It is ok to be a minority, as long as you don't ever act like one.
I personally think that's oppressive, even scary, and not good for the culture over the long term. But some people are into that.
[+] [-] yona|4 years ago|reply
One of the best lawns in my neighborhood is owned by an African American family. Impeccable.
The worst lawns are owned by white folks.
Doesn’t this comment assume that “only white people mow their grass?”
We’ve had issues with our HOA, and I wish they weren’t necessary, but some people won’t take care of their lawns unless they’re threatened with fines. Otherwise, they’ll let the jungle grow in their yards, and leave a couch by the sidewalk.
On the topic of race, homeownership, I’ve heard, is usually one main way in which a family can build wealth; if we’re concerned (as we should be) about racial inequality (financial inequality being a sub portion of it), any self-governance that encourages homes to be well-maintained, lawns to be kept, trees and bushes trimmed, and junk vehicles not parked in the yard is a benefit to any family’s net worth, since a main concern of an HOA is preservation of property values.
Real Estate is a supply/demand game. The nicer your home and neighborhood look, the higher the market value, which is of upmost concern if homeowner is trying to increase wealth.
[+] [-] caymanjim|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kyrra|4 years ago|reply
I've met plenty of people that don't like HOAs and purposely avoid them, which is fine also. But be prepared for a much wider variation of look and style of a neighborhood. It makes it much easier for a house to get run-down as well.
One thing not mentioned in this post is that HOAs can be dissolved. A friend had voted to dissolve his HOA (which was successful), due to too many problems. Common-land that the HOA owned becomes a problem, but it can all be worked out.
[+] [-] ardit33|4 years ago|reply
That’s why HOAs can be a problem if they have too much power. The fact is that most HOA board members/directors tend to be older folks that have more time on their hands than you do. And they set the agenda. Good luck with that.
[+] [-] lokar|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] entire-name|4 years ago|reply
Now, of course, if you can and prefer to permanently work remotely, then moving to a further location from where you work may be a good option for you. But then you will have to consider the risk of you being able to continue to have a job that allows permanent remote work.
[+] [-] gnicholas|4 years ago|reply
Where are the HOAs around here?
[+] [-] WarOnPrivacy|4 years ago|reply
Man jailed over brown sod: https://jonathanturley.org/2008/10/12/putting-the-prude-back...
EMTs finish heart attack victim's sod job so he'll go to the ER: http://www.ccfj.net/HOAFLFirefFinLawnw.html
[+] [-] jimmyswimmy|4 years ago|reply
Leave the kids toys and trash cans out for a day? A week? Forever? No problem! But I can't complain about similar things my neighbors might do. Or, I can complain, directly to them. If I care enough.
Neighbors replaced their roof a year ago. Left the old shingles on the lawn, for a year. Did I like it? No. Did I care enough to complain to them about it? Also no. That's the kind of neighborhood I want to live in though. You want a neighborhood where the houses are in perfect cookie cutter shape? You need an HOA neighborhood, and you get the pluses with the minuses.
What I think most of us really want is to be able to do whatever we want, while also being able to tell others what to do. That doesn't work. You have to choose to either rely on your neighbors being decent, or suffer through life under an HOA.
[+] [-] jchw|4 years ago|reply
I think some people really do want this. But I don't. I really just want to be able to do whatever I want, and then want other people to do whatever they want, as long as it isn't doing material harm to someone. The problem can come down to defining 'harm' since some people try to define it in their own image of what they wish wasn't allowed, but I hope there are still people out there who espouse these values, because it's the world I would prefer to live in :\
The problem is that people think like this everywhere, because it's exceptionally easy to just lie to yourself and convince yourself that in your case, it's justified to tell others what to do. And you get a lot of mental gymnastics out of that.
I do understand that sometimes it might not be out of a strict desire to prevent people from doing stuff that they do not personally agree with. For example, maybe someone's primary concern is property value, or hell, just having a nice looking neighborhood. But honestly, if I see a neighborhood with a very tasteless looking front yard with shit scattered about, then at least that's a sign that the neighborhood is chill.
edit: And it shall be noted I am trying to make a case against HOAs. I think my note about “harm” was a bit ambiguous. In general I want the legal system to define what is harmful enough to be actionable. Imperfect? Yes. A sort of “nobody’s favorite, but everybody’s favorite” -type situation, in my view.
[+] [-] blabitty|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] klohto|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shados|4 years ago|reply
Ehh, not everyone's that selfish.
I for one am perfectly happy with compromising so that my neighbors are happier with what I do, but only if they return the favor. At a small scale we can have a handshake agreement, but for something more long term or with a lot more people, it's great to be able to put it on paper.
[+] [-] astura|4 years ago|reply
Local Governments traditionally played this role. Problem is that some people hate governments simply because they are governments so they make private governments. I guess that makes sense to them?
In my (non HOA) neighborhood leaving shingles on your lawn comes with a $100/day fine.
The people who were cleaning out the house next door to me (they inherited it) were leaving piles of garbage outside. I saw the blight officer leave a notice in their mailbox and the garbage was gone the next day. (I assume it was a warning rather than a fine, but idk.)
[+] [-] xwdv|4 years ago|reply
Otherwise, the only other way to ensure neighbors don’t bother you without an HOA is to live somewhere with lots of land around homes so that neighbors are very spaced out, and hopefully they will be far enough from you to not be bothered by their filth, and putting up high hedges and trees should be enough to block them from your sight.
[+] [-] throwaway98797|4 years ago|reply
That’s why you live in an HOA area, but become the ruler.
Rules for thee, but not for me!
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] xtracto|4 years ago|reply
And I am not American and I'm pretty socialist myself.
[+] [-] howinteresting|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dvtrn|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vincent-toups|4 years ago|reply
Like yeah, this stuff might be irritating. Maybe you wanted pinker shutters. But who really cares? Imagine getting bent out of shape about the color of your shutters or having to put up curtains.
[+] [-] shakezula|4 years ago|reply
Ive had my car towed multiple times when I was parked in my designated spot with my parking tag in my window. They didn't care, they just towed it and claimed they coudln't see the tag. Every time it cost me > $300.
I've had the HOA manager show up when I had friends over because it was technically over the allotted "2 guest maximum" for the area. I was just having a game night, it wasn't even an outdoor party.
I've had them literally show up with a measuring tape to check the distance from the curb one of my guests was parked and then come knock on the door to inform me that they were illegally parked and would be towed in the next hour if they didn't move.
yeah, all of that? That's a horror story. Basically every HOA I've ever interacted with or lived under has been nothing but a thinly veiled legally-backed racket to kick back money to towing and lawn care companies.
[+] [-] glitchcrab|4 years ago|reply
And yes, you can say that he has to because he's signed the papers, but you'd still be missing the point.
[+] [-] lelanthran|4 years ago|reply
If you think that that is trivial, imagine how much more trivial and petty it is to get bent out of shape about the color of someone elses shutters.
He's not complaining about not being allowed pink shutters, he's complaining that his neighbours are far too petty because they're getting bent out of shape about the color of someone elses shutters.
[+] [-] ddingus|4 years ago|reply
I sure would. Where I live, you do you, I do me, they do them.
It is great!
Sometimes we have a chat. Berry vines out of control, or maybe someone needs something. Whatever. That gets done and people are pretty happy.
Want to pick the shutter and trim colors? Several people here would be happy to entertain that so long as the ones wanting to pick are paying.
Me? Nope. And the bonus is nobody will hear from me about the colors, unless it is complementary. Who doesn't like that sort of thing?
Crazy cat lady down the street has a whole garden growing in the easement in front of her house. Passersby will pick and eat some of it. Pretty sure that makes her happy.
I could go on, but the place is very human, at times vibrant and has soul.
Yeah, bent right out of shape. There is just not enough time and energy to deal with all the meta associated with the more strongly regulated neighborhoods.
I basically have every other possible thing to do before worrying about what the other people are doing and so forth. Mutual respect and consideration are lean, easy, human, and definitely the way I want to play it.
All that said, yeah! Some people seem to need all that meta mess. Great! We have places for them to get it, thankfully.
[+] [-] nightfly|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mint2|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smegger001|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] balfirevic|4 years ago|reply
No need to imagine, as that seems to be exactly what their HOA does.
[+] [-] _6pvr|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gedy|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] grosales|4 years ago|reply
One interesting thing they do is that for things like new decks or replaced ones, you need to submit an application for approval which should include a building permit by the county. It gives prospective home buyers assurance that certain things were done correctly. Before a house is sold, the seller needs to provide an HOA disclosure which triggers an inspection for which a seller needs to ensure all changes were made with the approval of the HOA. Our seller (an investment property management company) had to fix several things in our house to being them up to code to get those approvals, which helped me as a home buyer.
Besides that, the HOA has been very responsive, we did replace our windows without their approval but it was relatively easy to fix given that they were similar windows.
[+] [-] city41|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andrewzah|4 years ago|reply