Ok, fair enough. I guess I’ve never lived in an “uppercrust” enough area. We do have plenty of “town house” condominiums around here that fit that description and they of course would have HOA’s Your explanation said it best rather than the “go read the 200 plus posts and figure it out yourself” type of response. Much appreciated.
Exactly. I grew up in a place that was completely built up before HOAs became a thing. I learned about them on the internet. But when I bought a house, it didn’t occur to me to ask. I bought a house in an area without an HOA, but it wasn’t something on my radar for a single-family dwelling, and if there HAD been an HOA, that would have been an unpleasant surprise.
I never want to get a house that has an HOA (I don’t want a condo, but if I ever end up getting one I understand the logic behind an association for those).
What cheeses me off is that the HOA membership is permanent to the house. I’d have less of an issue if you had a choice to join or not when you buy a house. Yeah, I know that having a patchwork of HOA/non-HOA homes would be a pain, but if it’s such a great benefit/asset, you wouldn’t need to strongarm people into joining by putting it on the property seed for all eternity; people would just want to join anyway.
What you say may be technically legally true–I don’t know. But I don’t know how an HOA rule can tell me what I can or can’t do on a public street. That just doesn’t sound enforceable. (If that happened I would find a pal with an RV in another neighborhood and just park at each other’s houses.)
Interesting question.
I never heard of a no-fee HOA and I would think there would always be some legal cost involved with applying and enforcing covenants - initial fees for the setup of the corporation, at least. I would think there would also be some cost to enforcement, especially if someone calls your bluff.
But what I don’t know, and Google is no help - is whether a fee is required for the covenants to be binding on the homeowner. I would think that they would need some sort of written acceptance of the covenants ( possibly part of the closing documents ), I don’t think you can bind someone to a contract unilaterally - but I’m not sure if money needs to change hands.
They can probably have you towed in California, at least after a warning. But it is slightly debatable, see here.
If it’s a private road they can absolutely tow you and fine you. Again, in CA.
How does one legally leave a HOA?
Move. Or, perhaps, there is a provision in the by laws that allow it to be disbanded if x number of members so vote.
So, it is legally impossible to remove a house from an HOA?
It’s a contract. If you disagree with the terms of the contract going to court over it is the legal solution. But some contracts are written that disagreements can only be settled by an arbitrator unless there is some overriding civil rights issue.
Has anyone every successfully removed their house from an HOA this way?
I would assume so. That’s the whole point. If one person could opt out, they’d get the “benefits” without the obligations.
The homeowner could challenger terms of the contract if they were unenforceable for some reason (like race restrictions).
I don’t think that’s possible. If there was a way, I’m sure we’d hear about it since lots of people would do it. There’s not much benefit to having your own house in the HOA, as it restricts what you can do. The benefit is having everyone in the neighborhood following the covenants.
Really interesting and thoughtful discussion. A few general comments about HOAs from the cheap seats:
Homogeneity of houses (significantly limited diversity in appearance) exacerbates the need for painful ‘sameness.’ It’s a vicious cycle that makes a ‘long lawn’ or an unapproved paint color or an open garage door or curtains (vs. blinds) or a b’ball hoop over your garage FAR more conspicuous than in neighborhoods with more architectural diversity. That definitely benefits the original builder (everything is picture perfect while they’re trying to lure buyers), but how many homeowners actually seek out neighborhoods with such uniformity and sterility ?
Standardization definitely creates cost savings to the builder, but is there any evidence that those cost savings are passed along to buyers ?
There really isn’t any compelling evidence that HOAs increase property values.
HOAs tend to create a perverse incentive where the HOA side (property managers, attorneys, investors who wait to buy a dirt-cheap house in foreclosure that the HOA has put a Lien against) tends to benefit from the misery of the homeowner. The goals of the two sides aren’t aligned.
HOAs can easily create cliques and pit neighbor against neighbor, often devolving into a “Lord of the Flies” situation. The horror stories are seemingly endless.
Look into the Business Judgment Rule. Homeowners rarely beat the HOA in court. I think the majority of states still have a Business Judgment Rule that applies to HOAs. This should be done away with immediately.
Your neighbors all have to pay to defend the HOA against your lawsuit. This rarely makes the plaintiff popular, no matter how valid your case or how wronged you have been.
Arbitrary and selective rule enforcement is at least as big a problem as ridiculous rules, clearly spelled out and uniformly enforced.
The Board may change, your neighbors may change, the rules may change. Very little you can do about any of that.
Double dipping. Has any City EVER lowered your property taxes because you’re now paying your HOA for services that Cities have long traditionally provided ? This is a windfall for cities.
With governments, there /can/ be public awareness of their actions, allowing criticism or consequences for wrongdoing. HOAs really do function as ‘shadow governments’ and have very limited accountability. Some HOA governed neighborhoods are really small (very few houses), creating a ridiculously limited pool from which Board Members can be appointed. Hard to turn over the Board in these situations when there isn’t anybody else willing to serve.
Investors having multiple properties within a HOA neighborhood can wind up with a disproportionate voting interest. Yet another case where interests can be out of alignment.
Opting out – particularly if real estate prices have dropped dramatically – can be impossible for homeowners. Litigating creates a David and Goliath situation, apart from the issues I raised above. Whoever has the most money tends to win in Civil Court. How many homeowners have such deep pockets ? In addition, the money is in representing well-heeled Defendants where insurance companies are footing the bill, not in representing the truly-wronged lowly homeowner. Good luck getting top-notch legal counsel to represent you if you’re the aggrieved homeowner.
Cheers !
As a Canadian it’s interesting that these never really quite took off, up here, but seemed to prove very popular is a country obsessed with personal freedoms, in all things.
My house in now in a historic district but wasn’t when we bought it. It’s not quite the same, as they don’t do any maintenance or have fees. But they do have some say if you want to redevelop a property, or alter the front facade of your house.
Our house is designated a ‘D’, for architectural importance, which means it has little to none. That’s because it had already been altered before the historic district designation for the neighbourhood. So they don’t care about us. (Besides that, they don’t really do house colours unless you choose something neon, etc.)
They did give my neighbour grief over the porch rebuild, delayed things while they approved the design. But they’re mostly interested it doesn’t look hideously out of place. There is redevelopment, places get renovated, without much difficulty so I don’t think it’s quite as onerous, as an HOA.
Pretty much all the “crazy HOA board” stories I’ve heard seem really about problems with the homeowner rather than the HOA board. Someone may think it’s unreasonable that they can’t put up a flagpole or paint their home in their school colors, and they may be right, but they agreed to follow the covenants when they signed the contract. If they didn’t like what was spelled out in them, they should not have agreed to them. If someone loses their house because they won’t take down their flagpole, won’t pay the fees, or comply with the covenants in a way that all their neighbors are, then I see that more as an issue with the homeowner rather than HOA.
One lovely thing about HOAs is the “special assessment”, which homeowners can be hit with if the HOA board decides an upgrade is needed to common facilities like a clubhouse or pool, or if there’s storm damage. Or maybe the board thinks a new building project is warranted to maintain property values in the community. Depending on what laws may exist in the jurisdiction to limit HOA powers, you could wind up with a big extra monthly fee on top of the $200-300 average monthly HOA dues for a typical single-family home.
‘‘In one case, an HOA Board voted to replace all roofs in the community. With no discussion with homeowners and no vote of approval, the HOA Board contracted for the services, and the work went forward. In such a case, unless your HOA Declaration/governing documents require a vote of homeowners to limit the authority of the board to make special assessments, you are stuck with what they decide.’’
Prospective homebuyers looking to purchase in an HOA development are advised to check out the condition of common areas to see if maintenance is being properly taken care of, and to check the HOA books to assure that fees are being collected and that there’s an adequate reserve fund to limit or prevent the need for special assessments.
If doing that extra work before buying a home is worth it for the “peace of mind” an HOA provides, then no problem.
I wouldn’t want the hassle and worry.
Ive never cared for the cookie cutter feel of gated communities. My neighborhood has character. Every house is different. Even houses that originally built with the same floor plan have been customized over the years. Granted that if part of that character was a broken washing machine and derelict pick up truck on the front lawn i might change my tune.
My car however is a pristine cookie cutter version. I dont understand people who put bumper stickers and do other stuff to their cars.
To each their own.
I find it interesting that Libertarians (especially the more anarcho-capitalist types) often use HOAs as an example of the kind of government they want. They’re generally known for micromanaging other people’s property, but get used as an example of ultimate freedom by the people who base ‘liberty’ on ‘property rights’.
I have a chill neighborhood. It has a mix of folks. Some folks are very anal about their yards and some folks are pretty indifferent. I’m in the middle. I try to mow every two weeks, but sometimes I let it go a little longer than that. I always keep my front and side yards in compliance with the city ordinance. But sometimes I let my backyard get shaggy.
I chose this neighborhood because I don’t want to have to keep my yard groomed to golf course specifications. So no, I don’t want to live under an HOA.