|
|
|
|
| |
Texas Senate hearings:
http://www.senate.state.tx.us/avarchive/ram.php?ram=00001213
Posted Apr 5 2006 6:13AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
, California |
| |
|
|
| |
Does this constitute a rule change? If so were you given notic as under.
Per the Davis-Sterling Act, Article four, 1357.130 : "The board of directors shall provide written notice of a proposed rule change to the members at least 30 days before making the rule change. The notice shall include the text of the proposed rule change and a description of the purpose and effect of the proposed rule change".
Any change in the fine schedule is a rule change and if you were not duly noticed, the rule is invalid
Posted Apr 4 2006 1:20AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
San Diego, California |
| |
|
|
| |
Re: Comment 14 statement: If they do not get a 75% vote, the assocaition lawyer (Gary Wasserman can ask the court to lower the percentage of votes required to pass the amendment.
Letting association lawyers to go into court to change the member vote requirement from 75% to 51% for CCRs amemndments can be dangerous for Encinitas Ranch owners home equity
CCRs are private contracts between property owners and their non-profit mutual benefit 501(c) not-for-profit corporation? Where does the judge get the authority, at the request of any homeowner association lawyer, to change the percentage of votes required to amend CCRs?
I have seen reports from homeowners about aggressive CAI lawyers going into courts and getting permissions to change CCRs with just 51% votes. This is too much power trusted to board members , lawyers and managers who already have too much power with no checks and balances or government oversight.
There has been an aggressince trend by certain CAI lawyers to change CCRs to give board members more powers over the homes in homeowner associations and only require 51% vote to make major contracual changes for vendor and allied board members' benefit.
Trusting the board of directors to play politics with five hundred $1.5 million dollar homes at Encinitas Ranch puts all all the owners home equity at risk.
Posted Mar 29 2006 7:28AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
, California |
| |
|
|
| |
To AHRC Staff:
Well, what did you expect Christina to say? Well, she is a Jaeschke family member, as that's her last name.
Yes, we did receive notice in October, but does that make this legitimate? Besides, what did you expect her to say? That this was illegal?
Sorry, but I'm just playing devil's advocate here ... lol!
An Encinitas Ranch Homeowner
Posted Mar 29 2006 6:23AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
, California |
| |
|
|
| |
Thank you to AHRC for publicizing these "connections". This information that you provide is invaluable.
The Daily Journal article in July of 2004 about the $140,000 parking ticket would have been lost forever if not AHRC-ived.
The connection with Texas' Senator John Carona, his Associa Management and this Jaeschke company would have never been made public.
The connection with the $140,000 parking ticket article and the HOA lawyers and now the same lawyers' efforts to rewrite the rules in this Encinitas HOA (were they hoping to drum up another $140,000 parking ticket story?) would have flown under the radar!
Knowledge is power and in this case maybe the court of public opinion also had a great deal of influence and these boards of directors came to their senses?
If this were my HOA I would hope the board would fire those people straight away!
Thanks again AHRC for all you have done. Yours is truly an amazing grass roots effort fueled by hard work and a passion dedicated to Saving Homes and preserving the American Dream.
Posted Mar 29 2006 5:08AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
, ot |
| |
|
|
| |
The following is an update Encinitas Ranch Homeoewner Association parking policy
The Encinitas Ranch Homeowner Association board was surprised by the reaction they received after they initiated a fine of $250. per violation and enforcement of the parking regulations contained in their CCRs.
About 60 residents attended the March 13, 2006 association meeting to express their concern about the parking regulation in the CCRs (the developers lawyers wrote these), the $250. parking fine per incident, and the unlimited attorney fees homeowners could incur. Normally only about 10 homeowners attend the monthly homeowner association meetings.
The board has decided not enforce this parking rules. It has now set up an adhoc committee to receive suggestions to amend the parking rules contained in the Encinitas Ranch Homeowners Assocaition CCRs and will survey the residents on the change. They need a 75% vote to amend the CCRs,.
If they do not get a 75% vote, the assocaition lawyer (Gary Wasserman) can ask the court to lower the percentage of votes required to pass the amendment.
NOTES: AHRC received this information from Christina Jaeschke of N.N. Jaeschke, Manager, Encinitas Ranch Homeowners Association.
Posted Mar 29 2006 3:04AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
AHRC Staff
(View Profile)
, California |
| |
|
|
| |
What the @#$*&! Verrrrryyyyy interesting.
Posted Mar 28 2006 5:15AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
, ot |
| |
|
|
| |
Comment 1. John J. Carona - Texas Senator - purchases N.N. Jaeschke, a San Diego County management company
Posted Mar 28 2006 3:42AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
, California |
| |
|
|
| |
Regarding comment #6 again:
HOA rules change. They change again. And then they change some more.
HOA rules (CCR's, bylaws, rules and regulations) are a constant ever morphing chasm of unexpected change.
They can change with or without your knowledge.
They can change with or without your vote or your permission.
They can change even before you have had a chance to move in.
They are enforced arbitrarily.
The rules are sometimes NOT enforced at all.
They are enforced with heavy handed impunity.
The rules are broken - and they are broken by the board of directors.
Change is the only thing that is constant when it comes to HOA laden housing. Year after year after year after year after year.....................
Oh yeah, one more thing - the HOA board and attorney will tell you to run for the board if you want to do things your way.
Just remember, that board changes too. Year after year after year after year................you can't sit there in perpetuity.
Posted Mar 27 2006 11:39PM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
, ot |
| |
|
|
| |
Read the following rule to see if all the requirements have been met in you case.
However, with the 'anti-homeowner' attorney of records you folks have I would suggest that all of you pay your fines and do not fight this issue in this manner. This law firm has foreclosed on many properties and for less, they are known for this, so don't wait to get a letter from them and have attorney fee's start mounting up. After making payment which you should send your document by registered mail and make all the necessary notations on your check to document what the payment is for. You then take this issue to small claims along with all the others that have gotten the same violation, and ask for you money back, if the amount is unreasonable or if you didn't get a warning etc. (The schedule of fines have to be reasonable also and it sounds like that $250.00 is way out of line with parking fines in your area. especially for the first ticket).
It also sounds like you need to read and understand your CC&R's because they do vary association to association. You are also entitled to a written document relecting all the rules in your association along with the fines clearly noted. You were also entitled to a warning. If you are not able to fully understand these documents, it is worth the investement to seek the help of a professional. This website has referals to attorney's that are homeowner friendly and it would well worth the time and investment to fully understand your limitations in the associations you bought into.
On the other side of the coin, the street is no doubt common area along with your driveway.....keep that in mind if there any driveway damage in your future because the association will have to repair and pay for it. Common area's are governed by the Board of Directors in all CC&R's. This is on of many pitfalls, of HOA's.
Davis-Sterling Act:
Civil Code 1357.110 Validity and Enforceability of Operating Rules
An operating rule is valid and enforceable only if all of the following requirements are satisfied:
(a) The rule is in writing.
(b) The rule is within the authority of the board of directors of the association conferred by law or by the declaration, articles of incorporation or association, or bylaws of the association.
(c) The rule is not inconsistent with governing law and the declaration, articles of incorporation or association, and bylaws of the association.
(d) The rule is adopted, amended, or repealed in good faith and in substantial compliance with the requirements of this article.
(e) The rule is reasonable.
Good luck.
Posted Mar 27 2006 8:19PM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
Colorado Springs, Colorado |
| |
|
|
