Get 2 months of free community web site hosting from Community123.com!
Monday, September 23, 2019
Get 2 months of free community web site hosting from Community123.com!
Only members have access to all features.
Click here to join HOATalk for Free! Members click here to login and access all features.
Subject: visitors vs. occupants in single family home
Prev Next
Please login to post a reply (click Member Login on the menu).
Author Messages
BonnieE
(Illinois)

Posts:338


06/09/2009 5:35 AM  
Hi!

Here is a twist on a previous discussion regarding Associations for which the homes are specified as single-family use only in the gov docs (whether a single family home or condo). The gov docs do not further address this nor place limitations on number of people or number of families or number of unrelated people which may which may occupy a home in the Association. Village requirements would apply.

Here is the question that may not be addressed by the Association nor Village: is there a minimum time that must pass before the number of people living in the home or condo is considered to be unlawful? This same question could be asked of a HOA with rules specifying a limit on the number of individuals and/or families which may occupy a home or condo.

In other words, can an owner allow another family to stay at their home for a weekend as visitors, but longer than XX days this would not be allowed? What is that number of days? As I said this is not specified. So at what point does a 2nd family staying in a home become occupants living there vs. visitors?

Thanks,
Bonnie

MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/09/2009 6:20 AM  
You would be overreaching to tell the owner how long his guests (another family or otherwise) could "visit."

If you suspect that two families are living in a space that exceeds the zoning requirements for your local jurisdiction, then simply report the address to the zoning office (wherever that authority is for your metropolitan area), and they will handle it.

It is not in the venue of an HOA unless your documents specifically address it, and apparently yours do not.

Nor do any of the ones I've ever read or heard about. Though that odd one may be out there somewhere.

EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/09/2009 6:56 AM  
In other words, can an owner allow another family to stay at their home for a weekend as visitors, but longer than XX days this would not be allowed? What is that number of days? As I said this is not specified. So at what point does a 2nd family staying in a home become occupants living there vs. visitors? Bonnie
__

Bonnie,

Are you concerned about ‘guests’ staying in a vacant unit or about ‘guests’ staying in the unit while the owner is present?
If the former, it may present problems. Our covenants do not define ’guest’ at all. Some condos are quite restrictive and do not allow an ‘overnight guest’ in a vacant unit at all. Period. That would be hard to enforce in a small community, I would think. What are your lease/rental restrictions?
MaryA1


Posts:0


06/09/2009 7:13 AM  
Bonnie,

I totally agree with Michelle. What I can't understand is why so many people are concerned with this! I don't even know how many people are visiting in my neighbors' homes from time to time. Frankly, I don't think it's any of my business. And, I dare the HOA or anyone else to tell me I can't have my brother or a close friend stay at my home longer than x number of days. My home is my home; and unless any of this is addressed in the gov docs (which I agreed to when I purchased) the HOA should just stay out of my life.

I think we just recently discussed the whole issue of "single family residence" -- it's not about how many people are living in the home!!
BonnieE
(Illinois)

Posts:338


06/09/2009 7:38 AM  
Thanks, everyone! I appreciate your thoughts on this.

Mary said: “I think we just recently discussed the whole issue of "single family residence" -- it's not about how many people are living in the home!!”

Yes, it was discussed, but my question re duration did not enter into the discussion.

Can the number living in a household exceed what is allowed by local laws if it is for a short duration?

Scenario: townhome style condo, 2 bedroom, 1 ½ bath, 1100 sq. ft. home (no basement), 1 car garage, only short term visitor parking, one owner occupant. 4 person family (2 adults, 2 children, 2 cars) move in.

If they are visiting for short term, is this OK?

If they are staying 1 – 2 months, is this OK?

What is they are paying “rent” for the longer stay?

What I am getting at is that locals laws (or HOA rules) may restrict the number of occupants per some criteria such as square footage or number of bedrooms. In this scenario, the criteria has been exceeded.

But, what if homeowner says they are just visiting? How long before just visiting becomes living there – when does the local law kick in?

Thanks for your thoughts!
Bonnie
MaryA1


Posts:0


06/09/2009 7:45 AM  
Bonnie,

Why do you care how long someone visits or even if that visitor turns into a permanent residency? Unless your in a 55+ community, age and occupancy shouldn't matter.
MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/09/2009 7:50 AM  
Bonnie, whatever the homeowner "claims" is between that homeowner and the zoning enforcement office and not the business of the HOA.

Duration of the "visit" is moot if your documents don't address it, and they most likely don't.

I'm not sure, as Mary said, what the extreme interest in this is.

It's already been determined that "single-family residence" addresses the dwelling type and occupancy therein is dictated by local statutes. (Unless for some reason the HOA has them in its docs which is extremely unlikely.)

For example, the homes in our HOA are designated (and zoned) for single-family residences.

But for about 6 months about 4 years ago, my daughter's family "visited" with us as she was awaiting her home to be finished.

It was tight, but that's what family's for. If she had needed to stay for year, then she would have stayed for a year (I'm not promising that her significant other would not have been bound and gagged for a major portion of that year, but. . . )

At any rate, two families, one house, but still within the allowances for local zoning.

So it was nobody's business.

We, as leadership in HOAs, continually get black eyes for power grabs and over-reaching.

This, to me, is one of those cases where the HOA needs to keep its nose firmly in place on its own face.

If it bothers someone that much, drop the dime with the zoning enforcement officials. Then back away and let them address it.
MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/09/2009 7:52 AM  
By the way, my daughter's family: 2 adults 3 (male) children.
EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/09/2009 7:53 AM  
Mary,
this is what is happening in our association and others as well. Please keep in mind that we do deal with seasonal rentals during the winter monts.

Scenario 1: our lease restrictions - were/are - 90 days minimum. But many investors do not comply with it and rent their unit for 20 days or 14 days stating that the occupants are their 'guests'. This can present a problem, since the Florida law would qualify us as lodging facility and it could also present a liability problems ( pool. etc.) Our covenants say that the Association must keep records of all leases. We are small, everyone knows each other and when people here have no idea who lives here they are quite uncomfortable. This is why the question 'when a guest becomes a tenant'?

Scenario II. We sign a lease with a corporation and only one person is on the lease as a tenant. OK, but it turns out that the corporation is actually using the unit to accommodate their transient employees. When our secretary calls them they simply say, these people are our 'guest'.

What would you do in the situations like these? Let it go?

When guests stay in the unit when an owner is present .. that of course is not a problem at all.
EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/09/2009 7:55 AM  
Bonnie,

you still did not say if the owner is present when these 'guests' are there. Or, if these 'guests' are occupying an empty unit, meaning the owners is not present and lives somewhere else.
MaryA1


Posts:0


06/09/2009 7:58 AM  
Eva,

If there's a valid reason such as violation of a rental agreement, that's a whole different story. I didn't get that impression from Barbara's message. And regarding your Scenario II, if the entity with the lease says the occupants are guests, why wouldn't you believe them. And what matter does it make anyhow? Aren't tenants allowed to have guests? If not, why not??? This appears to be a lot of "busy work" on the part of the board.
MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/09/2009 7:58 AM  
Eva, I think you have absolutely no standing on the corporate owners lodging employees in transition there.

Let it go. They are not renting to them so it's not your business who they let stay there and for how long.

It's not the right battle.

Again, over-reaching.

If the people "visiting" are violating the covenants, then enforce against the owners just as you would any other covenant violation.

Trying to control something that is not in your venue to control will only cause frustration.


Regarding the scenario one, saying that people there one doesn't know makes everyone uncomfortable is silly and besides the point.

If they are violating the 90-day requirement, regardless of what they claim, if they are in fact renting for weekly or daily periods of time, then enforce against them.



MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/09/2009 7:59 AM  
Posted By EvaM1 on 06/09/2009 7:55 AM
Bonnie,

you still did not say if the owner is present when these 'guests' are there. Or, if these 'guests' are occupying an empty unit, meaning the owners is not present and lives somewhere else.




It makes no difference.

EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/09/2009 9:11 AM  
If there's a valid reason such as violation of a rental agreement, that's a whole different story. I didn't get that impression from Barbara's message. And regarding your Scenario II, if the entity with the lease says the occupants are guests, why wouldn't you believe them. And what matter does it make anyhow? Aren't tenants allowed to have guests? If not, why not??? This appears to be a lot of "busy work" on the part of the board. Mary
___

Mary,

vacant units: the question is when 'a guest' becomes a tenant? Never?

There have been a bunch of legal opinions on this issue published. Some condos which restrict rentals to two times per year had problems with owners who rented their units to 'guests'. How does one confront an absentee owner, living in New York and tell him his people are not his 'guests' but tenants?
Not easy. This is why some condos simply do not allow overnight 'guests' in vacant units.

I do not want to go there because I think it is too restrictive but somehow we ought to be able to say: 'if a vacant unit is occupied for more than xx (?) days the guest becomes a tenant and must sign a lease application.' (Whether he pays $ to the owner or not is not relevant. But at least the Board will have a record who lives here as they are required to do. Do you disagree?

Scenario II: The entity signed a one year lease to have one tenant on the premises. The entity is now putting in a different person(s) every week. The entity is using the unit as a lodging facility for their employees. One could argue the unit is being used for business purposes. Right or wrong?

It is not that the Board wants to be a busy body. It is that most members are quite upset about it and want to resolve these issues, i.e. liability, security and compliance with our covenants.



TracieS
(Colorado)

Posts:460


06/09/2009 9:27 AM  
Posted By EvaM1 on 06/09/2009 9:11 AM
vacant units.

But at least the Board will have a record who lives here as they are required to do. Do you disagree?





Really? Association boards are supposed to have a record of who lives in the unit? Or is this just in your state? Is there a valid, legal reason to know this?
EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/09/2009 10:08 AM  
Tracie,
yes. it is in our covenants. When the unit is leased, the owner of that unit transfers his rights to the lessee and the lessee has all the responsibilities of the owner, sometimes even including payments of all regular assessments. (again it depends on the lease). This is one reason why it is so important for us to know if the person is a tenant or a ‘guest’.

I do not know if it is the Florida thing
BonnieE
(Illinois)

Posts:338


06/09/2009 11:02 AM  

Again, thank you for your thoughts on my questions.

I have tried to keep my questions/posts objective without injecting my personal feelings into the discussion.

I posed my question on HOATalk because, recalling the previous discussion on the matter, the time factor was not brought up. And, the reason why I asked the question was because someone asked me. I did suggest she check our Rules/Regs, and/or check with the PM, and/or check with the Village.

I agree that it is not anybody’s business how many people occupy the condo. If Rules are broken by the visitors, then the procedures in our Rules apply. And, if there is a Village ordinance possibly in conflict, I agree it is the Village’s responsibility to address.

Thanks,
Bonnie

P.S. To answer the question – yes, the homeowner would also be living there.

Also, we have Rules regarding leasing/renting units – notification, length of lease, etc.
MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/09/2009 12:15 PM  
Posted By EvaM1 on 06/09/2009 9:11 AM


Scenario II: The entity signed a one year lease to have one tenant on the premises. The entity is now putting in a different person(s) every week. The entity is using the unit as a lodging facility for their employees. One could argue the unit is being used for business purposes. Right or wrong?

It is not that the Board wants to be a busy body. It is that most members are quite upset about it and want to resolve these issues, i.e. liability, security and compliance with our covenants.







One would be wrong if one argued that they are operating a business, which is decidedly different from used for business "purposes." (extremely vague)

I use my home for "business purposes,"(I'm doing it right now) but do not "operate a business" out of it.

Even then, I would also argue very strongly that it's not being used for "business" purposes. The company is providing an outstanding personal benefit to its employees. It's the employee who is residing there, as a guest of the owner, regardless of whether it's a corporate or individual owner.

Again, plain and simple over-reaching.

The members can just be told that the unit conforms to the documents so go find something else to nit about.

EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/09/2009 12:55 PM  
The members can just be told that the unit conforms to the documents so go find something else to nit about. Michele
__

Michele,

Are you telling me 'to go and find something else to nit about'? I think may be you ought to cool it. I find your views stubborn and argumentative and not substantiated by any facts. Otherwise, we do not have ‘motel units’ here as far as I know.
MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/09/2009 1:35 PM  
Posted By EvaM1 on 06/09/2009 12:55 PM
The members can just be told that the unit conforms to the documents so go find something else to nit about. Michele
__

Michele,

Are you telling me 'to go and find something else to nit about'? I think may be you ought to cool it. I find your views stubborn and argumentative and not substantiated by any facts. Otherwise, we do not have ‘motel units’ here as far as I know.




I find you stubborn as well.

Go figure.
MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/09/2009 1:37 PM  
Posted By EvaM1 on 06/09/2009 12:55 PM
The members can just be told that the unit conforms to the documents so go find something else to nit about. Michele
__

Michele,

Are you telling me 'to go and find something else to nit about'? I think may be you ought to cool it. I find your views stubborn and argumentative and not substantiated by any facts. Otherwise, we do not have ‘motel units’ here as far as I know.




By the way, my opinions regarding the corporate scenario are just as "fact-based" as yours.

I'm sorry you don't like my opinion.

I also think that resorting to the mantra, "But the residents are complaining about it." to be childish.

It doesn't matter that they complain about it if it isn't violating the documents.

Then they are nit-picking and if you find yourself in the group that is complaining about an owner having the complete right to loan his property out to whomever he chooses then I can't help that.

If the shoe fits, and all that.
MaryA1


Posts:0


06/09/2009 4:19 PM  
Eva,

IMO, a guest would only become a tenant if rent was being paid. Otherwise, it's a guest. And a guest can stay for as long as the owner wants him to. I just don't think you can dictate when a guest becomes a tenant.
With regard to Scenario II, this sounds like a company perk to me which I don't believe would qualify for business purposes.

I don't understand the liability and security concerns. But I can understand being concerned about complying with covenants. To address that just inform the owners that they should provide a copy of the CCRs to any quests that stay on the premises when the owner is gone.

If the BOD doesn't want to be a "busy body", as you say, then they shouldn't!! If members are complaining I'm thinking it's those nosey types who don't have anything better to do and they should just be ignored.
EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/09/2009 10:18 PM  
Scenario II..I don't understand the liability and security concerns. But I can understand being concerned about complying with covenants. To address that just inform the owners that they should provide a copy of the CCRs to any quests that stay on the premises when the owner is gone. Mary
__

Mary,

Good idea, I tell the Board to have the Covenants translated to Spanish.
MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/10/2009 6:18 AM  
Posted By EvaM1 on 06/09/2009 10:18 PM
Scenario II..I don't understand the liability and security concerns. But I can understand being concerned about complying with covenants. To address that just inform the owners that they should provide a copy of the CCRs to any quests that stay on the premises when the owner is gone. Mary
__

Mary,

Good idea, I tell the Board to have the Covenants translated to Spanish.





Now I have to tell my husband he was right!
MaryA1


Posts:0


06/10/2009 6:29 AM  
Eva,

A shame you're not in CA, it would be a state requirement to have them printed in both English and Spanish, not to mention French, Italian, German, Chinese, Japanese, Swahili, Pig Latin, Ebonics, etc., etc. LOL
AnnJ2
(Colorado)

Posts:120


06/11/2009 2:29 AM  
In some of the associations we manage that have such activities as vehicle registration due to parking restrictions have had to deal with this question of when does a guest become a resident. these boards defined the time line in their rules for the sole purpose of determining when they would have the obligation or right to enforce other rules such as parking restrictions.

I have some associations that have written into their rules the number of people allowed to live in a residence again with a date line for when they become considered residents. the purpose in these cases is to not have a battallion of marines living in a two bedroom condo where water in included with the dues but not metered per unit and parking is at a premium not to mention that 10 20 year olds are not normally very considerate of neighbors on a saturday night. It is put in the rules as a means of notifying what the Housing authority limits are and providing a definitive trigger for when the association will begin looking into a reported problem such as this.
MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/11/2009 7:00 AM  
With all due respect, Ann, just because some boards have "written" them [privacy invasion "triggers"] into their rules, doesn't mean such would hold up if challenged.

And I, for one, would challenge an HOA's ability to dictate when MY guests overstay their welcome, if it's not something that is addressed in the governing documents.

If these boards have done this, then I stand by my position that they are over-reaching.

They certainly can control the parking issue, again, IF addressed in their governing documents.

But who can stay, and how long, sorry. Not their jurisdiction.

Turn it over to Zoning Enforcement if they think it violates state or local code. Let the appropriate authorities deal with it.

Otherwise, again, keep their noses snuggly attached to their own faces.
MaryA1


Posts:0


06/11/2009 7:18 AM  
Ann,

It would seem to me the assn could deal with the guest parking by issuing "guest" parking stickers. These vehicles would be parked in the space disignated for the unit owner (if he is not on site) or in designated "guest" spaces. That should solve the parking issue w/o the BOD trying to determine when a guest becomes a resident, which is something they have no business doing anyhow.

A batallion of Marines might be a welcome addition to any condo! LOL
EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/11/2009 6:13 PM  
IMO, a guest would only become a tenant if rent was being paid. Otherwise, it's a guest. And a guest can stay for as long as the owner wants him to. I just don't think you can dictate when a guest becomes a tenant. .. members are complaining I'm thinking it's those nosey types who don't have anything better to do and they should just be ignored. Mary
__

Mary,

this is really hard for me to explain on this forum, so let me just make one point.

In Florida, 'oral leases' are perfectly legal. Just give a guy a key and that is it. Our association is responsible for keeping a record of all tenants occupying vacant units (meaning when the owner is not here).
I do not want to go into an explanation why 'oral leases' are preferred by many investors. But let me just say it does present a problem for the Association and the question when a 'guest' becomes a 'tenant' is relevant. This is why many FL condos took a radical approach 'no overnight guests' in vacant units'. We really ought to be address it somehow. Not because of nosy neighbors who have nothing better to do – which is not the case either -but because the Association is liable.
MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/11/2009 6:15 PM  
Sorry, Eva. Still not buying it.

Still sounds like over-reaching to me.

MaryA1


Posts:0


06/12/2009 8:01 AM  
Eva,

Regardless of whether "oral leases" are legal in FL or not, if the assn requires a copy of the lease as part of their rental policy, then the h/o better provide one or they are in violation of an assn rule and can be fined accordingly. At least that's how it would be handled in AZ!

But, I don't understand what an oral lease has to do with anything. If the person is a guest, he's a guest. Plain and simple. So you have to keep a record of all "tenants" occupying vacant rentals; so keep the record and indicate the individual is a guest. I agree with Michele, it appears you are overreaching.
EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/12/2009 9:57 AM  
Mary,

May be I am looking at it the wrong way. But here are the facts. An owner has ‘oral lease’ with the tenant and tells the Association that the tenant is a ‘guest’ and the tenant tells people that he pays rent and in fact is asking the Board or others if another unit is available for rent because he pays too much or does not like that particular unit. So, now everyone in our little community - including the board -knows the person who lives in the unit is not a guest but he is in fact a tenant. Funny right?

How do you confront an investor who may also be an attorney and tell him that you found out his tenant is not a guest? Not easy. Also, the tenant could be in a rather awkward position or, deny it or leave or something. Would any Board in a small self-managed community want that hassle? I do not think so. At least I would not.

Perhaps, there is another approach. In an owner does not want to file a formal lease application – for what ever reason he may have – we should just ask him and the tenant to sign a ‘guest occupancy’ application. This way, the Association is covered.

Now, the question is ‘what info the guest application should have’? Should there be a statement signed by a guest ‘I am a guest and do not pay owner any money?’ and I will reside here for 6 months, or three weeks, etc? Err

Or, should we state in our covenants that any person occupying a vacant unit for 30 days or longer must sign a lease applcation regardless whether the rent is $3,000/month or $3 per months. I was told the latter was recommend by an attorney when he was consulted on this issue about two years ago.

Which approach sounds more reasonable to you?
MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/12/2009 11:32 AM  
Stay out of these people's personal and private transactions.

Your "approach" to make them tell you how long they intend to stay. . . well, it's really none of your business.

Your "facts scenario" is rife with hearsay and, again, not anyone's business, and I still fail to see where the Association needs to be "covered."

Follow your documents. That's really all that needs to be done.


MaryA1


Posts:0


06/12/2009 11:41 AM  
Eva,

Frankly, I think Michele's approach is the best approach to take. Even if the guest tennant is making remarks about paying rent, it's still hearsay. The owner of the unit has informed the board this person is a guest. The monkey is on his back if, for some strange reason, something happens to this "guest" and he isn't covered by the assn's liab. ins. because he's a guest (which I think would be doubtful, but. . .).

As I see it, you're just creating problems by trying to prove that the owner is lying to the BOD. If he is it will all come out at some point in time w/o the board having to get involved with trying to solve the mystery. Golly, don't you guys have more important things to worry about other than if a guest is really a tenant?
EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/12/2009 12:23 PM  
Mary,

Personally, I would not give a hoot about 'guests'. And I am not getting into anyone’s personal business. As I said a number of times, many condos and HOAs have severe restrictions when it comes to 'guests'.
Tell them to go and have something else to nit about or that they are overreaching or have nothing better to do. Have you ever considered the possibility that they may have a reason? I was asked to look into the attorney’s recommendation and it is my obligation to the membership to do so, regardless what I may think about it.

The reason, I even brought it up is because I do not feel comfortable with imposing any more restrictions on ANYONE. I do not understand why you are insisting that I want to do something. I do not. I am looking for options and reasonable opinions. And I was hoping to find someone here who has similar ‘guest’ problems and if so, how they handle it and how they are processing leases. Some do background checks, interviews, etc. We do not do any of those things. And, we had a serious and I mean serious crime here and the old folks are simply afraid. The idea of the lease, as proposed by an attorney, may give the association an opportunity to verify if the person has a criminal record and to notify the owner. OK, enough, I will think about it or ask an attorney, and again, my obligation to the membership is to address this issue. And I will not tell them to go and nit pick on something else. Hope you understand.
MaryA1


Posts:0


06/12/2009 1:01 PM  
Eva,

Sorry, there have been so many responses to this thread, I must have missed the one where you said you are researching this because of your attorney's opinion on the subject.
EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/12/2009 1:20 PM  
Mary,

I know you mean well and I also know you are very helpful to everybody, it is overwheleming, I know. I just don't get the point accrosss because I do not want to go into any details. I am researching everything. LOL
You should hear the response to the covenant amendment I tried to slip in.. you know your version on enforcing the rules by members over riding the Board? I do have to take a few punches sometimes. So funny. More about it later.
BonnieE
(Illinois)

Posts:338


06/12/2009 3:28 PM  
Hi Eva,

We are townhouse-style condos. Our Declaration has lease restrictions – can not lease for less than 30 days, lease must be in writing. Our Rules/Regs require that a copy of the written lease be provided to the HOA’s MC, they also require a rider to lease form shall be added to the lease – both are due to the MC a max of 10 days after execution of the lease and prior to occupancy. The owner must provide a copy of the gov docs and rules/regs to the tenant; tenant required to comply (although owner is responsible for actions of their tenants); there is a procedure for adding to an existing lease and for renewal of a lease.

And, the IL Condo Act states that the HOA may prohibit a tenant from occupying a unit until owner/lessor complies with Act, gov docs, rules/regs.

Hope this helps,

Bonnie
MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/12/2009 3:58 PM  
It's a shame you took offense to my "nit picking" comment.

But I still believe that is the case.

If there is crime or zoning issues, then your local appropriate authorities need to address that, not the HOA.

And, Bonnie, with all due respect, your documents started out that way, I'm guessing?

Eva appears to want to either go around her documents, over-reach from what the documents cover, or create new rules because some residents don't like the flavor of the "guests."

If they do go for a covenant change, then she is of course doing the right thing by getting an attorney involved.

But all of her excuses so far lean to more not liking who an owner selects as a guest rather than anything else.

I say that because either their own documents or local zoning and/or crime officers can and should be doing the job they HOA is trying to usurp.

And Mary you are correct, she did not include the idea of researching this as part of a response to an attorney's opinion until she was trying to defend against over-reaching.

In any case, I doubt the attorney came to them with this. More like they went to an attorney and that was his suggestion, go for a covenant change.

Just keep in mind that the owners who are renting/leasing/"loaning" out their units will get to vote on it, too. And many times, covenant changes that affect things like (restricting an owner's ability to make money off his investment) that will sometimes require a higher percentage of positive votes than another kind of covenant change. AND, in many cases like that, the owners who are currently renting out/leasing/loaning out their units will be allowed to be grandfathered in.

I know this because we went through the exact same thing a few years ago with residents being "concerned" about the growing number of "rentals" in our neighborhood. We did all the research, because the owners "asked" us. They had "safety" concerns; they had "population density" concerns; they had "covenant violation" concerns (by renters).

What they really had was, how should I say this, "diversity" concerns.

In the end, even though we can change our docs with 51% majority, to change them to affect an owner's ability to make money off of his investment requires a much higher (100%). Even then, if we could have changed it, then we would have still had to allow for those units that were currently "rented" during the change to continue to be "rented," unless they were to stand vacant for 12 months (consecutively).

What did we do?

We assured that we vigorously enforced against the owners with the renters were violating the restrictions, and we contacted (and still contact) local police and/or zoning when the issues are within those venues.

So, I still say it's over-reaching and I still say they (the "residents") need to concentrate on the areas on which the HOA does have jurisdiction and make sure they are not masking a more nefarious "issue."
BonnieE
(Illinois)

Posts:338


06/12/2009 4:06 PM  
Hi Michelle,

In response to: "And, Bonnie, with all due respect, your documents started out that way, I'm guessing?"

You are correct. And, our Rules/Regs were developed off those that had been developed for other IL condo associations. Our attorney also reviewed them and they were provided to our HOs for a 30 day comment period.

Bonnie

BonnieE
(Illinois)

Posts:338


06/12/2009 4:07 PM  
Oops, sorry I meant Michele.

(I knew I would get your name wrong)
EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/12/2009 5:58 PM  
Bonnie,

yes, thank you.
AnnJ2
(Colorado)

Posts:120


06/17/2009 3:13 AM  
Michele I will respectfully disagree with you on this topic. The associatio ndoes need to know for various different reasons whether individual(s) are guests or tenants or owners for that matter. Placing a trigger date for investigation makes the most sense so as to avoid some of the "nit picking" that does go on with some residents who have "diversity" issues. (liked that phrasing). In my scenerio I was speaking of particular situtions with no guest parking or limited guest parking and limited resident parking, It has been done where a tenant or owner has 2 assigned parking spaces and association ahs say 5 guest parking spots, and the same tenant has 4 "guests" living with them for oh 6 months for the sole benefit of overreaching the number of parking spaces assigned to any one unit and therby denying the use of the guest spaces to other residents. by defining the addtonal residents as guests they are doing and end run around the association and thereby denying access to the amenity by other residents. this is a situation that the board is obligated to control and correct. It is a simple matter for someone to lie. Housing also defines how many people can live in any one unit and an argument we have gotten in the past that due to lifestyle or work there are never more than oh 5 in the home at any one time is not legal if they all call the house home and have mail delivered there etc. No association needs a "flop house" for a group of where 10 or more go into together on rent for a three bedroom unit. It does happen. Beleive me. While I hate to use the addage that "rules are made to be broken" rules can be placed for those situations outside the norm and never ever have to be used or imposed. but if the rule is not in place when the situation does occur there is the catch-22 of how do you grandfather in a rule especially when dealing with an owners ability to use the unit as an investment? so every topic and item on these types of board has an answer and they all have mulitple and infinite answers based on the docuements involved, the state involved, the community involved and the specifcs to each situation. If no rule is in place to trigger "when" a board will act to investigate the situation you do have a situation which could be perceived as "sticking their nose in" on a particulr unit which smacks of discrmination.
MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/17/2009 6:16 AM  
AnnJ, you are still proving my point, actually. And I appreciate your keeping this as a disagreement in ideas and not taking it personal.

I have no issues with the association enforcing its EXISTING rules and regulations regarding parking, amenities, etc.

But, as you even mentioned in your post, if there is an illegal "load" in the house, it is the responsibility of the local ZONING OFFICERS and NOT the HOA or the board, UNLESS YOUR DOCUMENTS GIVE YOU THAT RESPONSIBILITY.

Eva's doesn't. And she wants to change it so that it does. Without an amendment.

Unless and until the governing documents make it your business, WHO and HOW MANY are living in any given unit, then it IS nit-picking, and I would lay good money that it's because of WHO is staying there and somehow tied to "diversity issues." The comment about needing to translate the documents sort of tipped the hand on that one.

If the occupants, regardless of their status are violating any restrictions, then the OWNERS can be dealt with. It's not necessary to know who the person violating is nor their status, because it is the OWNER who is responsible for maintaining CC&R compliance.

MicheleD
(Kentucky)

Posts:4491


06/17/2009 6:17 AM  
PS: the "trigger"? It should only ever be: when a restriction has been violated.

EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/17/2009 7:33 AM  
'Eva's doesn't. And she wants to change it so that it does. Without an amendment. '

MicheleD
_______

Not true. Not at all.
EvaM1
(Florida)

Posts:190


06/17/2009 10:02 PM  
It has been done where a tenant or owner has 2 assigned parking spaces and association ahs say 5 guest parking spots, and the same tenant has 4 "guests" living with them for oh 6 months for the sole benefit of overreaching the number of parking spaces assigned to any one unit and therby denying the use of the guest spaces to other residents..

_AnnJ2

Ann,

I think I know exactly what you are saying. Please let me know if you ever solve the perpetual ‘guest’ parking and occupancy problem. Ha. Would a limit of guest parking to one-two weeks work for you?
JohnR25
(California)

Posts:3


06/03/2019 12:39 PM  
Hello

This is my first time posting to this forum.

My scenario is the following:

A homeowner admittedly stated that her brother will be staying with her for an unknown period of time.

The HOA does not care about the length of stay or if he will be paying rent, etc.

What the HOA does care about is that he is parking in a guest area zoned and marked "exclusively for guests," instead of parking in her 2-car garage or out on the street. Due to limited available guest spaces (4 spaces for 31 units) all guests are limited to park in the guest area for a period not to exceed 3 times a month.

So the question is at what point is a guest considered a co-occupant of the unit? Is there a legal definition? 10 days in a month? 20 days? more?

Thanks in advance

John
GenoS
(Florida)

Posts:3177


06/04/2019 12:36 PM  
Hello JohnR25
Welcome.
Please start a new thread for your comment.
The forum software here is too dumb to lock old threads.

This one is 10 years old.
Please login to post a reply (click Member Login on the menu).
Forums > Homeowner Association > HOA Discussions > visitors vs. occupants in single family home



Get 2 months of free community web site hosting from Community123.com!



News Articles Provided by: Community Associations Network
News, articles and blogs about condos/HOA's

Only members have access to all features.
Click here to join HOATalk for Free! Members click here to login and access all features.







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.)

Copyright HOA Talk.com, A Service of Community123 LLC ( Homeowners Association Discussions )   Terms Of Use  Privacy Statement