|
|
|
|
|
|
| IHG Insurance (National Insurance Provider) |
| Providing Community Association Insurance for over 25 years: D&O Liability, Crime Products, Umbrella Coverage and Property Manager's Errors & Omissions Liability. |
|
| Reserve Fund Resources (National Reserve Planning Tools) |
| If you’re a BOD Member, Planner, or PM you’ll want our offerings. Many are FREE. Plus, there’s our “Essentials” book, and software to keep your funds healthy. Learn More… |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
| Author |
Messages |
|
hoatalk
Posts:487
 |
| 02/21/2007 6:17 PM |
|
An interesting court case appealed all the way to the NC Supreme Court may impact what amendments may be made to CCRs, even if you follow all the 'rules'.
The NC Supreme Court struck down amendments made by an association that added common fees where none existed before and also added rental restrictions. The court said that any amendment must be reasonable in light of the orignal contracting parties 'intent'. The NC court said that this requirement is currently being used in Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, North Dakota, Ohio, and Wyoming.
The interesting note here is that all amendments were made following the CCRs and Bylaws, but the court still struck them down because they were not 'reasonable' considering the expectations of an original buyer reading the original declarations.
The court said, "We hold that amendments to a declaration of restrictive covenants must be reasonable. Reasonableness may be ascertained from the language of the declaration, deeds, and plats, together with other objective circumstances surrounding the parties' bargain, including the nature and character of the community. Because we determine that the amendment to the declaration sub judice, which authorizes broad assessments "for the general purposes of promoting the safety, welfare, recreation, health, common benefit, and enjoyment of the residents of Lots in The Ledges as may be more specifically authorized from time to time by the Board," is unreasonable, we conclude that the amendment is invalid and unenforceable."
Regarding rental restrictions, the court said, "Thus, it may not be reasonable to retroactively prohibit rentals in a mountain community during ski season or in a beach community during the summer. Similarly, it may not be reasonable to continually raise assessments in a retirement community where residents live primarily on a fixed income. Finally, a homeowners' association cannot unreasonably restrict property rental by implementing a garnishment or "taking" of rents (which is essentially an assessment); although it may be reasonable to restrict the frequency of rentals to prevent rented property from becoming like a motel.
⎸] Correspondingly, restrictions are generally enforceable when clearly set forth in the original declaration. Thus, rentals may be prohibited by the original declaration. In this way, the declaration may prevent a simple majority of association members from turning established non-rental property into a rental complex, and vice-versa. "
See: http://www.ccfj.net/courtdecNCamenddeedrestr.html
|
|
HOATalk.com, A free service of Community123.com
Provider of Upscale Community Websites
CLICK HERE to get a FREE trial community website
*See legal notice below (end of page) or go to www.hoatalk.com/legal |
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
General Legal Notice: The content of forum messages are from the posting member and have not been reviewed nor endorsed by HOATalk.com. Messages posted by HOATalk or other members are for informational purposes only, are not legal or professional advice and do not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. HOATalk is not a licensed attorney, CPA, tax advisor, financial advisor or any other licensed professional. HOATalk accepts ads from sponsors but does not verify sponsor qualifications nor endorse/guarantee any sponsor's product or service.
HindmanSanchez Legal Notice: (For messages posted by HindmanSanchez) This message has been prepared by HindmanSanchez for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Members of HOATalk.com should not act on this information without seeking professional counsel. Please do not send us confidential information unless you speak with one of our attorneys and get authorization to send that information to us. If you wish to initiate possible representation, please contact an attorney in our firm. Our attorneys are licensed to practice law in the state of Colorado only.
Legal Notice For Messages Posted by Sponsoring Attorneys: This message has been prepared by the sponsoring attorney for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Readers of HOATalk.com should not act on this information without seeking professional counsel. Please do not send any sponsoring attorney confidential information unless you speak with the sponsoring attorney or an attorney from the sponsoring attorney’s firm and get authorization to send that information to them. If you wish to initiate possible representation, please contact an attorney in the firm of the sponsoring attorney. Sponsoring attorneys that post messages here are licensed to practice law in a specific state or states as indicated in their message signature or sponsor’s profile page. (NOTE: A ‘sponsoring attorney’ is an attorney that is a HOATalk.com official sponsor and is identified as such in the posted message or on our sponsor page.)
|
|