Category Archives: firearms

StoneGate Gets Its HOA Butt Spanked

      29 Comments on StoneGate Gets Its HOA Butt Spanked
guest blog by Dave Russell

For those of you who know me, messing with sick or disabled children is my biggest pet peeve. So when I heard the story about the StoneGate Homeowners Association, in Raymore MO and their board president Stacy Bayers, I did a little research. Now according to the Missouri Secretary of State’s Office, the StoneGate HOA was actually ‘dissolved’ back in 2009. I’ll get back to this later. For now, let’s take the story from the top.

Ella Schultz is only 6 years old and she’s battling cancer. The Make-A-Wish Foundation heard that little Ella wanted her very own playhouse. They contacted construction giant J.E. Dunn and that company agreed to build one in Ella’s backyard in Raymore, Missouri. They even used shingles to match those used on other homes in the neighborhood. .

What a touching story — a sick child and some awesome people who wanted to help out. That is until the HOA board officers reared their ugly little heads and threw a wrench into Ella’s playhouse. “I’m not at liberty to discuss that,” Bayers said Tuesday night when asked why it’s difficult to make an exception for Ella. “The proposed plan they’ve given us is a violation of our covenants.

KCTV 5 News (CBS) in Kansas City, has reported, “The StoneGate Homeowners Association is not in good standing with the Missouri Secretary of State’s office and hasn’t been properly registered for four years.” If you pull up the information on the Secretary of State’s website, it clearly shows that this HOA’s status is “Admin Dissolved –nonprofit.” Oh, say it isn’t so! I wonder how the reporters found out about this. No doubt one of those crazy anti-HOA people called them up.

So did the StoneGate HOA really have the legal right to deny the playhouse in the first place? You know, considering the HOA appears to have been ‘dissolved.’ Can this HOA legally enforce any of their governing documents? Has this HOA been illegally operating as a not-for-profit corporation? Are they illegally collecting assessments, fines and placing liens on properties within their Association? As one would imagine, it’s probably going to take a lawyer and judge to figure this one out. This also makes one wonder if the HOA dues they took in over the past four years should be considered taxable income.

I guess you could call this a bad case of HOA KARMA. Now StoneGate HOA president, Stacy Bayers, is doing a little backpedaling. She issued this unbelievable statement last night. Really, it’s unbelievable.

”The board has met for the better half of the day and at this time we would like to release the following statement:”

“Our hearts are with Ella Schultz and her family as they battle this terrible illness. Our homeowners’ association board is committed to working with Make-A-Wish Foundation and J.E. Dunn to see if we can figure out a way to make Ella’s wish come true. The initial request from Make-A-Wish to place a barn-style shed was not accepted because the board did not have enough information to grant an exception to the subdivision’s covenants. In hopes of getting enough information, we are requesting an immediate meeting with Make-A-Wish and J.E. Dunn Construction to work out a solution in the most expeditious manner possible.”

Oh, how nice of you Stacy Bayers, president of the StoneGate HOA, working so hard to make this little girl’s wish come true. I’m personally not buying a word of it! Neither is the rest of the world.

 

America’s worst neighbor owns a luxury condo in St. Petersburg FL

      No Comments on America’s worst neighbor owns a luxury condo in St. Petersburg FL
guest blog by Deborah Goonan

It seems that even if you own a condo worth nearly a half-million dollars or more, you can still end up next to the Neighbor from Hell. Bad neighbors can even afford to live at Signature Place, with its panoramic views of Tampa Bay in the heart of downtown St. Petersburg.

As of last July, the Tampa Bay Times reported that local police had responded to 48 calls regarding Brian J. Daly over a period of three years. Neighbors have filed complaints of domestic disturbances with Daly’s cocaine-addicted female companion, noxious odors, Daly pacing in the hallways buck naked, making lewd remarks and threats to other residents, and generally obnoxious and disruptive behavior while under the influence of alcohol and drugs. This has been going on since 2010.

Dr. Nathan Hameroff, who owns the unit next-door to Daly, has filed a lawsuit against him alleging at least 31 incidents, seeking injunctive relief and reimbursement for loss of rental income. Hameroff leases his unit, but two of his tenants terminated their leases early, and a third tenant has received a concession in his rent to prevent him from leaving as well. All three tenants, several other neighbors, and contractors that have interacted with Daly believe he is a danger to himself and others.

The condo Board and local police department have issued various citations and fines, but the threats and bad behavior continue.

Ironic, isn’t it? In one FL condo association a retired veteran can be threatened with foreclosure over a flag placed in a flowerpot, but in this upscale, classy condo, even a potentially dangerous owner cannot be arrested or otherwise monitored after nearly five years of wreaking havoc upon his neighbors.

Something is very wrong with this system.

By the way, in addition to a potentially dangerous neighbor, condo owners also have to contend with expensive repairs of numerous construction defects in the 6-year-old building.

I guess some people don’t mind throwing good money after bad.

July 2014 Tampa Bay Times article about Signature Place

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/at-elegant-signature-place-in-st-pete-nothing-classy-about-unit-2403/2188286

Feb 2015 Tampa Bay Times article about Signature Place

http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/realestate/suit-claims-unspeakable-behavior-by-signature-place-tenant/2219379

Finally, An Organization I Can Believe In!

      12 Comments on Finally, An Organization I Can Believe In!

I’ve never been a big fan of the ACLU. Oh, I’ve interviewed ACLU officials a number of times in my career. They’re rarely the ones who say, “No comment!” And some of their battles I’ve certainly supported. Sadly, there are too many cases which I firmly believe that the ACLU won’t touch.

It’s a completely different story where the Institute for Justice (IJ.org) is concerned. They, too, are a civil rights organization but they seem to be more focused on housing, minority rights, and seeking out the kinds of justice that would help all of us, not just small minority interests.

Guest blogger Deborah Goonan sends this link to us:

http://ij.org/wa-lawyer-free-speech-release-2-20-15

Institute for Justice has a number of other great videos at:

IJ.org

You could and should spend an entire afternoon watching their videos and studying their interests. And then, as I’m doing now, write them a check. They’re doing some excellent work.

Insurance Nightmares: Of Interest To All Homeowners

      2 Comments on Insurance Nightmares: Of Interest To All Homeowners
Feel free to send my web link to everyone you know. This story should go viral.

It’s hard to make long stories short, but I’ll try.

When my wife and I were out of state a number of years ago, a squirrel got into the house and did thousands of dollars worth of damage, chewing up the sofa, all the drapes, the carpets. I called State Farm and asked if I was covered. They said “no.” If an elk or a bear had gotten in your house you’d be covered because those are wild animals.

“Aren’t squirrels wild animals?”

“Nope, they’re rodents and there’s an exclusion in all home insurance policies for rodents.”

“What if a rabbit had gotten into the house?” I asked.

“They’re rodents and they’re excluded.” Wow, I thought I had them there because I knew that rabbits and hares aren’t rodents, they’re lagamorphs. Look it up. One way or another, I’m sure the insurance company would find a way to do its customary screw job.

I started studying the exclusions and discovered another few I didn’t know. (Yes, sometimes I’m deadly stupid). But flood damage is another tricky one. If a raindrop touches the ground before it enters your house it’s considered a flood and insurance companies have tricky ways to exclude flood damage. That also means if the corroded water line to your house breaks, the water hits the ground first, so you’re not covered. If the raindrop hits your house before coming inside, then the coverage is good.

BTW, so called Smart Meters are being installed in millions of homes across the country. They’ve exploded or melted, caused thousands of house fires in the U.S. and Canada and…you might have guessed it… Smart Meters aren’t UL listed, therefore insurance policies automatically exclude any fire damage that comes from a non-UL listed device. Smart meters have also blown out entire kitchens full of appliances. Again, no coverage.

While we’re speaking of damage and insurance companies, let me refer you to another interesting story that broke last week. I won’t try to prejudice you with my thoughts…. I’ll just send you to the link.

(insurance issues in Hurricane Sandy)

 

Great Proposed HOA Bill In Colorado

      3 Comments on Great Proposed HOA Bill In Colorado
Guest blog by Stan Hrincevich

SB 15-177 concerns proposed construction defects litigation in Colorado. No Bill is perfect and in the world of HOA homeowners’ rights we seize the moment for any reform especially when it reins in the influence of HOA lawyers, property managers, and abusive Boards. This Bill would require HOA homeowners to approve the use of HOA funds in litigation.

Homeowners would have to be apprised of any intended litigation, informed on the substance and estimated costs, the consequences of unsuccessful litigation such as special assessments, and how the lawsuit is to be financed. A majority vote would be required to use HOA funds. HOAs can still bring legal action for construction defects and individuals can still pursue legal action using their own funds.

The Community Associations Institute (CAI) and HOA lawyers hate this Bill as it reins in their mostly open and easy access to HOA funds for litigation by requiring homeowners to first approve of such action. This can save large amounts of money for homeowners and safeguard reserve funds that can now be used for lawsuits. The CAI’s latest and weak argument on this Bill contends a Board would require a homeowner to vote for legal counsel on everyday, routine matters but no such verbiage is in the Bill and this is called desperation. See the article below for more information.

Please take a few minutes to write your legislator asking them to support SB 15-177. If the content of the Bill changes to lose our support we will let you know. Your email does help and helps home owners. Get involved!

CAI Threatened If Homeowners Are Empowered

(article from HOAforum.org)

The Community Associations Institute (CAI), long incorrectly identified as a homeowner-centric organization in the press and by State legislators, is again attacking the idea of HOA homeowners’ rights. The CAI represents the interests of property managers and HOA lawyers and not homeowners. This time they are objecting to a provision in proposed Colorado SB 15-177 (construction defects) that requires HOA homeowners to approve the use of HOA funds in litigation. Why the opposition? The CAI and HOA lawyers view the HOA as a profit center and easy money. Empowering homeowners on how their funds are used considered disruptive and meddling.

Too often HOA lawyers raid HOA bank accounts for legal fees and costly legal cases that should never have been litigated. That leaves homeowners with depleted reserve funds, special assessments to pay legal costs, and/or increases in HOA dues to replenish reserve funds. HOA Boards can currently enter into litigation without apprising homeowners of their intent, the cost and consequences of litigation or how they intend to finance legal fees. Boards can incur unlimited legal expenses and even take out debt instruments to pay legal fees. Home owners in too many cases only know of the financial consequences after the case has been litigated and they are stuck with the bill. This Bill simply reins in the authority of an HOA Board (that is highly influenced by HOA lawyers and property managers) in making decisions on litigation that can have significant if not catastrophic financial impact.

SB 15-177 would not preclude legal action but require a majority of home owners to approve litigation. This would mitigate the number of law suits and the abusive practice of an HOA Board suing on behalf of a very few (as few as two) vs. the community at large. More cases would be handled in the less expensive legal venue of arbitration thus saving HOAs significant sums of money. Home owners could still pursue individual actions using their own funds.

The CAI is fabricating a tall tale in contending that any legal fees paid to an HOA lawyer related to routine advice and counsel would take a majority vote of home owners. This Bill doesn’t get involved in regulating or interfering with the operations and daily functions of the HOA. Legal counsel on enforcing covenants, controls, restrictions, and debt collection or other issues involving common and routine HOA issues would not require a majority vote of homeowners. It’s just not in this Bill. Payment of routine legal counsel doesn’t require a lawsuit today nor would it under this Bill. This Bill is directed at legal cases filed in a court of law that are specific, unique, non-recurring and financially impacting. The CAI is embarrassing itself by claiming that any payment to an HOA lawyer would have to be voted upon. Obviously, the CAI is desperate to kill this bill.

The winner in this Bill will be homeowners in HOA community associations, not the Community Association Institute. Homeowners will now have more control over how HOA assets are used. They will still retain the right to litigate construction defects. This Bill does not impair the ability of any HOA Board to govern but contributes to open governance.