Tag Archives: HOA Hell
On this rainy day in Kansas hearing such a happy and excited voice just made my day! I asked if the legal fees were covered. Enock said Liberty Council provided their defense at no charge. That information added to the excitement of the phone call.
Spiders Run The Trost Family Off
guest blog by Nila Ridings
This time it’s not the HOA that ran a family out of the neighborhood. It’s 6000 brown recluse spiders.
Brian and Susan Trost purchased their $450,000 dream home in a Saint Louis, Missouri suburb and soon found it had little creepy crawling dangerous poisonous spiders running everywhere. They sued the previous owners, David and Tina Gault and got a settlement of $472,000 but haven’t collected a dime.
They contacted Jamel Sandidge, an expert from the University of Kansas. He determined the spiders did not arrive after the Trost’s purchased the property. They have State Farm Insurance, but no settlement has been given. Based on my experience with State Farm Insurance all I can say is, Good Luck!
Overall, if they end up not buying another HOA house, I think they will live happily ever after. Next time it could be the HOA that bites them. That could be worse than any spider out there.
(link to aol.com article spider invasion)
WHO IS BARBARA HOLLAND?
A Response To Her Recent Attack On Jonathan Friedrich
guest blog by Jonathan Friedrich
Ms Holland presumes she is the ”Queen Bee” of all community managers in the Las Vegas area.
First a few facts about Ms. Holland:
The column that she posts each week in the Review Journal SHE PAYS FOR. She is not a columnist working for the newspaper. If you observe near the very top of the page under the “Real Estate” banner the words “promotional section” are printed. This is another way of saying this is an advertisement!
Ms. Holland has built a successful business through the use of this advertisement tool.Ms. Holland, who is a licensed community manager number CAM.0001049-SUPR, has had numerous complaints filed against her with the Nevada Real Estate Division in the past. Ms. Holland makes a very nice living off the backs of people living in Homeowner Associations.
Ms. Holland’s unprovoked rabid attack on me in her paid column on September 27, 2014 for expressing my “global” view on the Nevada State Supreme Court’s decision only shows her myopic view of HOA life and her own financial well being.
What Ms. Holland fails to realize is the big picture that banks will be very cautious about lending in Nevada. This can translate into higher interest rates or refusal to lend at all!
As a Commissioner on the Common Interest-Community Commission I had a sworn duty to protect ALL of the people of this State and not just the special interest groups. This is what I did and continue to do.
Ms Holland, on the other hand, only has to look after her own special business interests. She is part of an ever growing and controlling industry that is threatening the very fabric of American life and liberty of its citizens.
To quote Ms. Holland “its about time we caught a break.” But it’s the homeowners who really need a break!
Homeowner associations have almost unlimited powers. When you purchase a home or Condo in an association you consent to be “ruled” by a group of individuals known as a “board.” This board decides what your monthly assessment is, how much will be spent on your behalf and on what, what color you can paint the exterior of your home, when you can open your garage door and for how long it can stay open, what plants and flowers you can plant. In short an HOA can and does control your life.
HOAs were created back in the 1960s to keep Blacks, Jews and Asians out of “private” communities. Is this the American way of life? I do not think so.
Oh, Ms. Holland I almost forgot to mention all of the corruption, embezzlements of funds by board members and or the managers and kickbacks to managers all costing owners millions of dollars a year. Let us not forget the abuse and attacks against owners who speak up and speak out against board members.
As a Commissioner I witnessed many of these acts first hand.
So Ms. Holland we the homeowners do need a “break”.
Ms. Holland, with her tunnel vision view of the world, owes me an apology. But I don’t expect one from her.
Due process? Fugeddaboudit!
guest blog by Robert E. Frank, USAF (Ret.)
founder, HomeOwnersCoalition.Org & veterans advocate
John Tarlton likes the idea of due process, but seems to think something like 3.4 would be too costly for small organizations. It says: “4. The parties may present witnesses and all witnesses shall be subject to cross-examination by the opposing party and may not, without the consent of all the parties, be present when other witnesses are testifying except for the alleged violator who may be present for the entire hearing and may testify if he or she so chooses.”
Really?? Too costly to ensure fair challenges and cross examination to possibly false statements by someone in the hearing process (including directors, CAMs, etc.) who wish to do possible harm (minor or extreme) to a member? While false statements might be innocently made in board hearings, under no circumstances should they be allowed to stand. Our nation allows rigorous challenges against false witnesses, and justice demands nothing less.
I believe competent association managers and/or volunteer directors can figure out low-cost ways to protect the vital interests of both members and the association without violating something as basic as the “right” to challenge false witnesses and expose “possible criminal violations” by false hearing statements. Regardless, if the rule is worth enforcing, and the member violation is worth charging, the board’s cost of defending the accuracy and appropriateness of the charge is an unavoidable cost.
I say possible criminal violations because the outcome of most board hearings is cash coming out of the pockets of members. Any submitted/accepted false witness statements by anyone in the hearing process could be grounds for various types of common criminal statute violations including theft, extortion, etc.
Having personally seen false claims being accepted by boards against innocent members that resulted in arbitrary/unfair hard cash penalties and sometimes extreme impacts against out-of-favor members, I cannot imagine why industry professionals would tolerate policies for such to be created or allowed to exist in any developer-sponsored CC&Rs. Protection of all due process rights could/should be embedded in every CC&R.
Judgments by HOA/Condo Boards must ALWAYS be seen as done fairly, justly and above board. We professionals must demand nothing less than EQUAL justice for ALL members–not just the favored few.
And, IMO state legislatures are derelict in their duties if they allow CC&Rs to contain provisions where the basic due process protections for all owners and other occupants are not guaranteed.
Individual rights MUST prevail in this nation–EVEN in HOAs and Condos. The majority cannot be allowed to overrule such individual rights to protect property and freedom. It is embarrassing and deeply troubling when so many of the professionals in this HOA/Condo business are able to look the other way and ignore this major flaw in our governance practices.
Since the costs of operations are borne by, and benefit, all members, failing to protect all due process rights for all individuals under CC&R governance rules is indefensible–in my view.
——————————
This situation should remind us of Patrick Henry’s passionate demand for liberty or death…. Our personal property rights have been “taken” and we have no choice but to reclaim them for our survivors in the future.
HOAs & Owner Involvement: An Oxymoron? (part 1 of 3)
guest blog by Deborah Goonan
Let’s get real!
One of the most common laments of HOA industry professionals is this: “Owners are apathetic. No matter what we do, we cannot get them involved in governance of the community.”
I have previously blogged, tongue-in-cheek, about the tendency of Boards to cultivate apathy. Today I will explore the issue in more depth.
Is it realistic to expect widespread participation?
Historically, few people actively participate in city, town, or county government, so what makes anyone believe that there would be a higher participation rate in HOAs?
Consider that HOAs (and especially condo associations) are marketed as carefree, low-maintenance lifestyles, often including amenities that owners do not have to personally maintain. HOA homes are not explicitly disclosed as what they are: shares in real estate investment, almost always part of a corporate entity. And, even if we could enlighten buyers and owners about the need to protect their investments in their HOAs, how many would take active roles? After all, most people with retirement accounts tend to put their money into funds managed by financial professionals – few actively monitor their funds.
Does HOA governance structure encourage or discourage participation of residents?
Some critics of HOA governance have suggested that Boards should allow residents to actively participate at meetings, with the ability to present ideas, make motions, and vote on resolutions directly affecting them.
But I doubt we will see such change, because CAI – and most governing documents written by attorneys for developers – promotes policies that give the Board broad authority to act on behalf of the association.
Refer to page 30 of Community Association Living: (Emphasis added in bold)
“Board members and committee members are volunteer leaders who meet regularly to discuss pertinent details about running their community. A board meeting at a community association is comparable to a town council meeting of a municipality. The basic authority in a community association lies with the owners. However, the owners elect a board of directors to act on their behalf. Usually the governing documents delegate almost all of the association’s decision-making powers to a board. This leaves the owners with very few direct powers. Typically, owners have only the voting power to:
- Elect and remove directors
- Amend any of the governing documents, except board resolutions
Occasionally, owners will approve the annual budget for their association. But all other decisions are usually left to the board. As a result, if owners are unsatisfied with a board decision, they usually do not have the direct authority to “veto” or “undo” its action. Under such conditions, their only remedy is to elect a new board to represent them.”
Clearly, the status quo discourages active participation of owners, exacerbating apathy. See Part 2: Reality Check
