RonaldW
(South Carolina)
Posts:901
 |
| 10/17/2007 12:18 PM |
|
John, you never answered my post.
This thread has, like so many others, degenerated into name calling, but it's clear that there are basically two groups of people posting on this forum; The intended audience of board members and volunteers trying to perform their association duties, and disgruntled homeowners whose intent is to disrupt the forum or at least argue every point.
It doesn't take much effort to figure out which is which. |
|
Ron
SC |
|
|
RonaldW
(South Carolina)
Posts:901
|
| 10/17/2007 12:26 PM |
|
Posted By SusanJ3 on 10/16/2007 10:44 AM
Still on that one eh? Did you get your patio yet?
The CC&Rs are the "Constitution" of your association. The president cannot take any action that is not authorized by those documents. He (or she) cannot prevent young people from parking but allow old people to park. The president can enforce the CC&Rs and if they seem to you to discriminate against a particular age group, too bad.
If the president (or board for that matter) had the power to make and change CC&Rs at will, there would be no continuity in the community. A family could have a dog one year and be forced to get rid of it the next. This is why the CC&Rs are typically difficult to change and require a fairly large majority of the owners consent to do so.
|
|
Ron
SC |
|
|
DJ1
(Ontario)
Posts:781
|
| 10/17/2007 3:00 PM |
|
Ron,
Isn't it important to be able to debate the pros and cons of any position. Better to do so here where you can listen to those who may not hold the same view as you BEFORE you present it in your particular HOA. Maybe like a testing ground? I would think it would be helpful to board members/volunteers and perhaps less embarassing if they had some lame ass idea in the first place.
Just because someone doesn't agree doesn't mean they are a disgrunted homeowner or their intent is to disrupt. If someone presents an opposing view to yours does that mean their goal is to argue? Maybe it is ensuring accountability.
Posted By RonaldW on 10/17/2007 12:18 PM
John, you never answered my post.
This thread has, like so many others, degenerated into name calling, but it's clear that there are basically two groups of people posting on this forum; The intended audience of board members and volunteers trying to perform their association duties, and disgruntled homeowners whose intent is to disrupt the forum or at least argue every point.
It doesn't take much effort to figure out which is which.
|
|
|
|
|
KathyS
(California)
Posts:142
|
| 10/17/2007 5:09 PM |
|
My husband is on the Board of Directors and I head the landscape committee so we must be the intended audience? We have both been called the Devil's Advocate for questioning long and hard some decisions of the Board or the MC. We've both been asked why we argue with the Board about so many things. Perhaps because the Board is not always taking in to account how their actions effect all members of this association. It is not always about what they want or the CC&R's say. Governing documents don't put a face on the members that will be affected adversely by a decision of the Board. Although our arguments weren't always successful, they did open room for discussion and to see the other side of things. In the end, those who needed to be convinced were.
Some of us don't live in picture perfect HOA's with Stepford wives and husbands. We live in a pretty laid back community with families, old folks and single people. We've found, through conversation, we can usually come to a meeting of the minds for all involved. If arguing a point or asking a question makes us disgruntled, so be it.
I can wear both hats proudly.
|
|
|
|
|
MicheleD
(Kentucky)
Posts:4491
|
| 10/17/2007 5:18 PM |
|
DJ said: " Just because someone doesn't agree doesn't mean they are a disgrunted homeowner or their intent is to disrupt. "
Yes, and characterizing ideas that are dissimilar from yours as "lame ass" or "communism" or "a crock" or equating people who support keeping kids out of the street with racism -- "All kids to the back of the bus, hahahahaha "
Sure. That's all "out of the box" thinking and "constructive criticism" or just playing "devil's advocate."
There are many people on this board who disagree or who have differing perspectives and opinions. Most all of them seem to be able to express those disagreements without resorting to "lame" call-outs and repeated disparaging comments (communism?! give me a break).
When those who want to play nasty get called out, they then go off and play the "poor me" sad song about how the "others" here have some sort of 'group think' and cannot tolerate different opinions.
I've stated it before, I don't have a problem with someone else's perspective if they are HONEST about it up front and don't pretend to be something they are not or that they have NO agenda, when it becomes sorely apparent they do. I also don't have a problem if they offer their criticism in the spirit of respect and tolerance of other people.
However, when the poster breaks down and continues to hammer away with sarcasm and hyperbole, I have no problem returning the favor.
And you are correct, JUST because someone doesn't agree, doesn't mean they are a disgruntled homeowner, BUT when their rhetoric is nothing but taunts or such, then it's a pretty good guess that definition is not far off. Or even if it is, and they are just a burnt-out or unhappy board member, it's a pretty good guess their only goal IS disruption when they offer the type of comments stated.
In short, it's called "trolling." |
|
|
|
|
DJ1
(Ontario)
Posts:781
|
| 10/18/2007 4:08 AM |
|
MicheleD, I guess you have some history with the poster that allowed you to make your claims about not even being a board member and the comment was made simply as a rebuttal to annoy him?
I know many of us can get passionate when we state our opinions...just ask Ron about kids stealing flowers hehehe (no offense Ron, I am referring to my opinion on it more than yours)
I don't agree with the communism comment but I also didn't take it seriously either in the context of the overall discussion.
(disclosure: we have a basketball hoop at the end of our driveway ..not on the road...but then we are a home within the boundaries of what was supposed to be a HOA ...except the developer 'forgot'(?) to register the CcR's on 34 of our homes) |
|
|
|
|
RodneyJ1
(Indiana)
Posts:2
|
| 10/24/2007 5:14 PM |
|
| Its my understanding that you need to turn the fines into damages its easier to collect damages than fines damages can be the cost of having a lawyer write up the violation notice having it printed and postage and late fees on the damages. Get delivery conformation when you seen out any violation letters. Thats my understanding for my state A good HOA lawyer wuold be a big help. |
|
|
|
|
EjayP
(Colorado)
Posts:1
|
| 10/30/2007 8:17 PM |
|
| that is true,imagine this i have a military community nobody cares about my hoop in the street cause we always put it back up in my driveway,my neighbor sent a complaint about my hoop in the county ,i guess she doesnt got anything else to do.she never walk in front of my sidewalk but there she is everyday acting like an inspector taking pictures of my hoop,my trash and anything that she likes todo is there anything i can do so i can stop her to harrass me im in the army ,im bout to get deploy next month i dont have a time for this housewife to harrass me everyday |
|
|
|
|
RogerB
(Colorado)
Posts:4686
|
| 10/31/2007 6:12 AM |
|
| Ejay, thank you for your service to our country!! Do you know why she is taking pictures? If you are in violations of restrictions then it is not harrassment. It is because you are failing to comply with the agreement signed when the property was purchased. If that is the case simply comply with restrictions and the picture taking will stop. |
|
|
|
|
JudithC1
(Louisiana)
Posts:1
|
| 04/27/2010 10:52 PM |
|
Seriously, a bunch of adults agonizing over kids playing basketball, with (gasp!) visible hoops that you can actually SEE when they're not playing(gasp!)...and disturbing 'the peace' of those without children (gasp! what?) and playing in the street of a community (gasp!).
Actually, it sounds charming and healthy and vibrant...Like an ideal place to live actually...Almost worthy of the barrel of 'ideal community' manure the realtor oozes as you buy into the whole deed- restricted 'community' fallacy. Before anyone observant and with self-awareness slowly allows himself to realize that he's been swindled.
It seems they now can't allow even a shred of a real 'community' to exist, just the fake mouthing of such, as manufactured by twisting the CCR's to suit their tortured little souls. Heavens, we can't have children acting like they live in America and feeling free to have good clean fun - something must be done to stop the outrage. (And the next 'outrage' and the one after that - ad nauseum).
I'm sure the agonized homeowner or bored member (who might actually have to drive slow and watch out for kids - uh, which he should be doing anyway, shouldn't he?) never had the poor taste to actually play like a child when he was one either...By all means ban the kids playing basketball - America really needs more morbidly obese kids sitting in front of the tv and the computer.
Give me a break. Its usually the big 'angst' of 1 or 2 obsessive-compulsive types, trying to attribute their dysfunction to the whole group, that do all the complaining - while everyone else goes along so as not to offend. But it IS offensive. And intrusive. And unnecessary. And unwelcome. Etc. Kind of like HOA's in general. Especially the unnecessary part. Go, take your crummy commons with you, please. Oh, but what commons? The kids don't have a place to play so I guess all the homeowners are just paying to be 'managed'.
Paying - so the parents can fight to allow their kids to play (darned soccer moms! jeesh), and the better-than-thou childless couples can criticize them for ruining the peace while they slug back their martinis to heighten their stupor... and the Bored members can congratulate each other on how no one is happy or calm so they must be doing something right. What a deal.
|
|
|
|
|
RobertR1
(South Carolina)
Posts:5164
|
| 04/27/2010 11:03 PM |
|
Judith
This original post was from 2007.
Maybe sometimes it is a help to look at archives, but it is just too much material to sort out and time changes everything.
If you have a specific current concern, certainly feel free to post a new thread. Try not to deal in generalities. All are welcome here as you are. |
|
|
|
|
RonaldW
(South Carolina)
Posts:901
|
| 04/28/2010 10:16 AM |
|
Posted By JudithC1 on 04/27/2010 10:52 PM
Seriously, a bunch of adults agonizing over kids playing basketball, with (gasp!) visible hoops that you can actually SEE when they're not playing(gasp!)...and disturbing 'the peace' of those without children (gasp! what?) and playing in the street of a community (gasp!).
Actually, it sounds charming and healthy and vibrant...Like an ideal place to live actually...Almost worthy of the barrel of 'ideal community' manure the realtor oozes as you buy into the whole deed- restricted 'community' fallacy. Before anyone observant and with self-awareness slowly allows himself to realize that he's been swindled.
It seems they now can't allow even a shred of a real 'community' to exist, just the fake mouthing of such, as manufactured by twisting the CCR's to suit their tortured little souls. Heavens, we can't have children acting like they live in America and feeling free to have good clean fun - something must be done to stop the outrage. (And the next 'outrage' and the one after that - ad nauseum).
I'm sure the agonized homeowner or bored member (who might actually have to drive slow and watch out for kids - uh, which he should be doing anyway, shouldn't he?) never had the poor taste to actually play like a child when he was one either...By all means ban the kids playing basketball - America really needs more morbidly obese kids sitting in front of the tv and the computer.
Give me a break. Its usually the big 'angst' of 1 or 2 obsessive-compulsive types, trying to attribute their dysfunction to the whole group, that do all the complaining - while everyone else goes along so as not to offend. But it IS offensive. And intrusive. And unnecessary. And unwelcome. Etc. Kind of like HOA's in general. Especially the unnecessary part. Go, take your crummy commons with you, please. Oh, but what commons? The kids don't have a place to play so I guess all the homeowners are just paying to be 'managed'.
Paying - so the parents can fight to allow their kids to play (darned soccer moms! jeesh), and the better-than-thou childless couples can criticize them for ruining the peace while they slug back their martinis to heighten their stupor... and the Bored members can congratulate each other on how no one is happy or calm so they must be doing something right. What a deal.
JudithC1,
This is a stupid post.
You clearly have absolutely no understanding of covenants, HOAs, etc. Do some research next time before you put your foot in your mouth.
I don't post here anymore because this is no longer a forum for HOA officers, it's a forum full of disgruntled owners such as yourself who failed to read the covenants before buying property and are now trying to blame someone else for their problems.
If you don't want to be bound by covenants, move to where there are none.
|
|
Ron
SC |
|
|
DonnaS
(Tennessee)
Posts:5671
|
| 04/28/2010 10:28 AM |
|
Ronald,
There is no such thing as a stupid post, only stupid situations. I agree with all of the disgruntled people getting on the site and have asked for removal of several of them. But as a Board member, we all have gotten stupid requests and complaints from members. It is part of the game. Many do not have any idea about covenants and restrictions of HOA living but if you want to be considered a professional at this, you also must listen. Listen without becoming biased on the "stupidity" of the post. In other words, if it makes you irrate to read a post, don't reply to it in an alienating manner. |
|
|
|
|
RichardP13
(California)
Posts:836
|
| 04/28/2010 1:33 PM |
|
Posted By DonnaS on 04/28/2010 10:28 AM
Ronald,
There is no such thing as a stupid post, only stupid situations. I agree with all of the disgruntled people getting on the site and have asked for removal of several of them. But as a Board member, we all have gotten stupid requests and complaints from members. It is part of the game. Many do not have any idea about covenants and restrictions of HOA living but if you want to be considered a professional at this, you also must listen. Listen without becoming biased on the "stupidity" of the post. In other words, if it makes you irrate to read a post, don't reply to it in an alienating manner.
Good Job Donna!! |
|
|
|
|
RobertR1
(South Carolina)
Posts:5164
|
| 04/28/2010 1:58 PM |
|
Donna,
Tell me what you are trying to say in your second sentence. As written, to me, it sounds as if you agree with all the disgrunted people getting on the site, and have asked for the removal of some.
Do these kinds of unreasonable demands run in cycles. Seems we go along smooth for a while then up pops a couple of impossible posts in a row?
But maybe you are just saying everyone is welcome to post and we welcome all entries, however we also could end up disagreeing with those that do not follow the decorum of the site. I know you well enough to understand you would not want to be seen as unreasonable.
|
|
|
|
|
DonnaS
(Tennessee)
Posts:5671
|
| 04/28/2010 2:06 PM |
|
Robert,
Thanks Robert
I meant to say that, "I agree that there are all kinds of disgruntled people getting on to the site" I am having a difficult day. Kinda fell and broke my nose and have a slight concussion so the fingers and brain waves are slightly disconnected today. Stupid curbing! (notice stupid? It should have been stupid Donna, watch where you are stepping) |
|
|
|
|
MicheleD
(Kentucky)
Posts:4491
|
| 04/28/2010 2:06 PM |
|
I dunno, I kind of agree with Ronald.
Judith had nothing constructive to say, other than to simply trash HOAs and an HOA mindset with a particularly vitriolic rant.
With luck such a person won't keep posting. I'm not sure what she would hope to contribute, other than to post yet another rant directed at us "tortured little souls" and "obsessive-compulsive dysfunctional types."
My first reaction to her was something that started with an "F" and ended with a "you."
But telling her not to move into a deed-restricted community if she doesn't like them was probably much more polite.
|
|
|
|
|
DonnaS
(Tennessee)
Posts:5671
|
| 04/28/2010 2:16 PM |
|
Hey Michelle,
I too kind of agree with Ronald. It's just his "THIS IS A STUPID POST" comment that was being pointed out as unnescessary. God only knows how right he is in what he wrote to Judith----and this was her 1st post. Not a very nice welcome, ya think? |
|
|
|
|
MicheleD
(Kentucky)
Posts:4491
|
| 04/28/2010 2:26 PM |
|
| Gotchya! |
|
|
|
|
RobertR1
(South Carolina)
Posts:5164
|
| 04/28/2010 4:03 PM |
|
Donna,
So sorry to hear about your fall. That is another thing they didn't tell us about when we were younger. I fell on a concrete deck after tripping and banged my self up pretty good not long ago. It can shock the hell of of you. It will take a while to get over this, one day you are going along and "Blam" next thing you know you are rolling around wondering if you had killed yourself. This falling business is very underrated. There are a lot more stupid things out there than there used to be. Take care and don't hesitate to stop at the MD's for a look see.......serious. |
|
|
|
|
DonnaS
(Tennessee)
Posts:5671
|
| 04/28/2010 4:07 PM |
|
Robert,
Been there, done that! (E.R.) After the C.T scan, it was decided that there WAS a brain but I failed to use it when walking between curb and truck with my hands full. |
|
|
|
|
RobertR1
(South Carolina)
Posts:5164
|
| 04/28/2010 4:34 PM |
|
Donna,
So you are saying you usually use all your facilities, but occasionally slip up. I can agree to that, that's what happens when you disagree with me.
You did the right thing incidentally so all you out there listen up. Get checked out. |
|
|
|
|
DaveW3
(Missouri)
Posts:9
|
| 04/29/2010 8:59 AM |
|
You can alwasy take the homeowner to court and get an injunction preventing them from continuing to violate the restrictions. That is our enforcement process since we don't fine. Failure to act on the letters from the Board and then our attorney gets you sued and then you have court cost and attorney fees to pay.
It's always best to follow the rules you agreed to when you purchased your home. |
|
|
|
|
RobertR1
(South Carolina)
Posts:5164
|
| 04/29/2010 9:35 AM |
|
DaveW3, Would you care to elaborate a little Dave?
If it works in your state, and it works for you....more power to you.
What do you do if the violation threatens property or creates a hazzard?
Has this process ever been contested in court. If this would work across the Board here in the states, the housing picture would be different.
I do agree with your last sentence. If it were just that easy, the more we read here, the more complicated it seems for the rules to be enforced. |
|
|
|
|
DaveW3
(Missouri)
Posts:9
|
| 04/30/2010 7:00 AM |
|
Our enforcement policy is to send two letters from the Board (through our management company) in an attempt to get the homeowner to correct the violation. If they do not comply, out attorney sends a letter demanding they comply. If they don't correct the issue within 10 days, he sends another letter with a copy of the lawsuit to be filed. If they fail to comply with that demand within 10 days, the lawsuit is filed. We have not had a case go that far.
If a violation was present that was deemed hazardous, we have language in our restrictions that allows us to go on the property and make corrections at the owners expense if they fail to resolve it themselves. We've never used that either and I'd rather sue than go on a homeowner's property. |
|
|
|
|
DwightT
(Idaho)
Posts:653
|
| 04/30/2010 8:35 AM |
|
| Even if it's a hazardous situation it probably wouldn't be a good idea for the HOA to enter the property without a court order. If it truly is hazardous, it's probably something that the police would be interested in anyway and they would be better equipped to deal with it. |
|
|
|
|