Category Archives: HOA

Disaster Relief for HOA Members? Ha!

      1 Comment on Disaster Relief for HOA Members? Ha!

I’m linking to the CAI site only for the purpose of backing up a previous blog.

If you are living in a Homeowners Association which experiences a weather or earthquake disaster, don’t count on getting federal help of any kind. An HOA member hit by a flood is not considered a homeowner, but an investor in a corporation. When 20,000 homes were damaged in the Boulder flood two years ago, many homeowners discovered they were flat out of luck. Those inside HOAs found that FEMA wouldn’t help them and they couldn’t get federal loans. They couldn’t buy federal flood insurance either because they didn’t live inside recognized flood zones. Who knew Boulder Creek could ever launch that big a flood?

We learned recently that if HOA boards in California don’t buy earthquake insurance for the whole community, then individual homeowners can’t get coverage either.

CAI reports that a couple of Democratic Congress members have made some progress in getting the feds to help Homeowners Associations badly hit by Hurricane Sandy.

CAI’s press release is about as dishonest and disingenuous as they come. What they should really be talking about is not about federal exemptions, but about the fact that the very membership of an HOA in CAI is a red flag to the feds. You HOA members are investors, NOT HOMEOWNERS!!!

(link to CAI press release)

 

Promises, Promises

      No Comments on Promises, Promises
guest blog by Deborah Goonan

Today’s blog features the story of a major developer, Centex, allegedly not delivering on amenities as promised to early buyers in the master planned community,

Sullivan Ranch in Mount Dora, Florida, was supposed to include a private equestrian center, according to Sara MacKenzie, a homeowner since 2007. She says she still has the brochures that describe the plans for owners to ride their horses on lush, rolling hills, and the developer did install a fence suitable for the purpose of keeping horses. But the two-story equestrian center, as described, has never been built. MacKenzie claims recent buyers received an addendum disclosing approval for multifamily apartments in place of the promised amenity. So MacKenzie has filed suit against the developer, with a hearing scheduled for April 21, 2015.

In typical HOA style, as soon as MacKenzie began to talk to her neighbors, she was hit with a “non-solicitation” violation. Free speech in an HOA? Only if you are willing to sue to protect your rights.

Do these owners have a solid legal case? Maybe not.

A quick Google search of Centex and Sullivan Ranch is revealing. The current promotional video fails to mention a single word about horses or an equestrian center. Clicking on the site plan thumbnail opens a web page without a site plan, but with this fine print disclaimer:

“The site plan shown is conceptual in nature and for illustrative purposes only to show general features and the layout of the community, and should not be relied upon in making a decision to purchase a homesite. Any improvements shown may not have been constructed and Centex makes no representation or warranty that the improvements will be constructed. The past, present, future or proposed roads, easements, land uses, plat maps, lot sizes or layouts, zoning, utilities, drainage, land conditions, or development of any type whatsoever, whether reflected on the site plan or map, or whether outside the boundaries of the site plan or map, may not be shown or may be incomplete or inaccurate.

“See the recorded plat, utility plans and construction plans on file in the sales office for lot dimensions, restrictions, easements and other important information regarding these lots and this community. Any landscaping that may be shown is for illustrative purposes only and does not represent the current landscaping within the community or plans for future landscaping. Seller reserves the right to change and modify development plans without notice. This site plan is not drawn to scale.”

In fact, I hate to break it to these homeowners, but these boilerplate disclaimers appear on virtually every developer website and brochure these days. This isn’t the first time Centex has not delivered on all of its promised community features and amenities, and plenty of other developers, large and small, have also broken their promises to finish golf courses, club houses, pools, boat slips, bike trails — you name it. If the economy changes, the builder can alter plans for the community to better maximize profit. Homeowners can sue, but there’s no guarantee the developer will ever finish what was started, or that owners will be compensated for broken promises.

Next time you look at a developer’s website or glossy brochure, be sure to read the fine print. For a true representation of what the developer is obligated to build, check the plats on file with your local county clerk, or ask your real estate attorney to check it out for you before you finalize a sale agreement. Visit other communities that were constructed in previous decades, and check out what was completed, and its current condition in relation to age of the community. Then decide for yourself if it’s worth paying extra for amenities that may or may not be completed someday in the future.”

More Money Down The Drain

      No Comments on More Money Down The Drain
guest blog by Deborah Goonan

Yet another case of shoddy construction, this time a failing storm drain and a sinking retention pond in Michigan. Over several years, homeowners of Windridge Estates HOA have experienced cracked foundations and basement windows, shifting soil in their back yards, and movement of retention walls, as the shoreline of the nearby pond crumbles into the water.

The HOA lacks the means to make the needed repairs, so the City of New Baltimore has agreed to “help” by setting up a special assessment district, in order to collect $1.45 million from homeowners over the next 10 years. Each lot will ultimately be taxed roughly $6500.

That’s in addition to any regular HOA assessments and property taxes they have paid all these years the problem has gone unaddressed.

The HOA Attorney argues that the City should pay at least 18.5% of the cost, since City roads drain into the pond when it rains. In this particular HOA, the City maintains the roads and easements, but not storm drainage. This illogical arrangement is amazingly common in HOAs.

Several questions come to mind.

First, how did this storm water system get approved by the City Inspector? Second, why isn’t the developer on the hook to pay for these repairs? Third, how much will this end up costing City taxpayers who do NOT live in Windridge Estates?

Local governments have been abdicating responsibility for maintenance of major infrastructure for decades. But retention ponds and underground stormwater pipes are notoriously difficult and expensive to maintain and repair, even when they are constructed properly. Repairs almost always involve precise engineering design, heavy equipment, and moving around large amounts of soil. How do local governments justify dumping this responsibility on a volunteer Board and the disproportionate expense on unsuspecting homeowners?

In the meantime, one unfortunate recent buyer just got a fine welcome to the community. The seller hadn’t disclosed problems with the pond, and now the buyer is on the hook for his share of the cost. Just goes to show how affordability of your home in an HOA can be wildly unpredictable.

Oh, and as I’ve mentioned before, but it bears repeating: a lot adjacent to a retention pond is NOT a “lake view” or “water view” for which a buyer should pay a premium.

(read the story, check out the photos, here)

 

HOAs often pit Investors vs. Homeowners, and homeowners usually lose

      3 Comments on HOAs often pit Investors vs. Homeowners, and homeowners usually lose
guest blog by Deborah Goonan
Even in the nation’s Heartland, homeowners’ and condo associations are subject to considerable consumer risk. The Des Moines Register story highlights just one example of what happens when investors take over an Association, a common occurrence across the country.

Here’s the blatant truth. The corporate structure of HOAs — allocating voting rights to the Property instead of allocating those rights to People based upon residency — leads to the inevitable consequence of pitting investors against homestead property owners.

Because an HOA property owner gains voting rights for EACH property owned, it creates the incentive for investors or developers to buy up – or retain – as many “shares” of the HOA corporation as possible. And everyone knows that a majority shareholder controls a corporation.

But not everyone realizes that nearly all HOAs are corporations. Share this story with everyone you know, especially if they are considering buying a home.

We need to decide in this country: are homes a place to live and gradually accumulate stable personal wealth over time, or are they merely investment commodities subject to the whims of a volatile real estate market – where a few people profit at the expense of everyone else?

(link to warning in Des Moines Register)

 

Disbanding an HOA

      21 Comments on Disbanding an HOA

I think I’ve written about this before, so forgive me if this is repetitive. But a friend of mine lives in a tiny HOA of about a dozen houses. Last year he bought a dozen copies of my book and lobbied every member of the association to read it. The neighbors voted unanimously to disband their corporation.

Now, my friend says, there are sounds of kids laughing and playing. Several basketball hoops have gone up. Neighbors are now talking over the back fence and inviting each other over for dinner. He says the difference in the neighborhood is incredible.

Plus, insurance liability costs have gone down.

Life is amazing, isn’t it?