Restriction for Renting Our House

I live in Indiana. Our board is in the process of amending the covenants to state homeowners cannot rent their houses. Is this legal? They want an owner-occupied neighborhood. It takes away the homeowners rights, i.e., to travel extensively, job transfer, investment property, prevent foreclosure due to job loss, etc. Can't the board see that we cannot prevent things that happen to us as part of life itself? I believe their efforts will result in alot of empty houses without receiving the annual assessments. Can anyone provide advice?

Your board may be legitimately concerned to want to discourage purchase of properties by "investors" whose
objective is to turn them into perpetual rentals.

I have seen covenants that "control" rentals by placing a quota on the total number of units that may be rented at any time and by requiring prior permisssion to rent a property.

What you might want to do is to seek a compromise that satisies the needs of owners without attracting absentee owner-investors.

Either way, you need to study the governing documents in detail and become involved. Bad things can happen if owners leave everything to a board that thinks it "knows it all".

Good points from those responding. In my opinion, the rental agreement could be devised as a legally binding document within Indiana state guidelines. It could state that the renter will abide by the covenants, which include maintaining the property as described therein. I used to live in a community south of Wash DC of 10,00+ houses. The homeowners were allowed to rent their homes. My husband and I were renters and signed a 3-year lease. We abided by the covenants and were given a copy before we signed on the dotted line. The assessment fee was paid by the homeowner. So, I don't understand why it couldn't work elsewhere.

Also, the board members for our HOA are trying to control and ignore our rights as homeowners. Three of the five board member's spouses solely comprise the Architectural Committee. I volunteered to chair the covenants committee but wasn't "selected" to be on the committee. The board chose homeowners who would side with them and do as they asked. This really concerns me. I built my house in this neighborhood before any of these board members did. And I built based on the covenants at the time. Now, my privilege to rent is being taken away as well as being unfairly controlled.

I can see and understand both sides of this issue. I certainly don't want to have alot of rentals in our neighborhood either. However, not being able to rent my home does take away my priviledge as a homeowner of having the option of renting my home under unexpected dire conditions such as job loss, travel, etc. or to buy a house for an investment puposes and future live-in. For the investment, I would like to buy my home now when interest rates are low while I travel or help out with elder family members in various States. I don't have the option to pay the entire cost of a house at closing. I would have to have a mortgage. The covenants did not restrict renting when I purchased my present home.

Thanks to all who responded. I agree with most points. Whether people read the HOA covenants before buying is a mute point. They are still legally bound to follow them even if they didn't know they existed or failed to read them. Also, I never thought by allowing our single homeowners the priviledge of renting their homes as "irresponsible". I thought the covenant modification could include the points that the association agreed to put there regarding renting, i.e., keeping their house, fences, and yard in good order, etc. I would think that homeowners in my neighborhood would run background and credit checks on potential renters to know of their habits. We are people with average incomes - middle class. I might add - one past president of our HOA moved in increments during late night hours due to foreclosure. No one knew his house was in foreclosure and this person caused alot of trouble with other board members immediately before his departure. This person was in collusion with a vice president and he also moved out of the neighborhood (house is for sell) after getting the other 'noble' board members voted off the board by hostile homeowners at a HOA meeting. I am only making reference to this to point out that probably no matter what the covenants say - people will not care, be self-serving, and sadly some people will just be downright dishonest. Guess its time for me to move to a non-HOA neighborhood. P.S. I lived in a neighborhood HOA with over 10,000 homes. Rentals weren't a problem and did not bring down house values. Why can't a small neighborhood of 145 homes do the same? I just don't get it.