|
|
|
|
| |
Re: Comment 3: How can an unbiased reporter say in one breath that he is looking for someone who is upset with their HOA, and with the next breath say that the person should be an "expert" on the new law. - Posted Jun 8 2007 1:13PM PDT - James Stilwell - Lake Kiowa, Texas Most Homeowners who are experts are "upset" with the laws and politics of homeowner associations. Many also believe that lobbyists and the politicians elected to represent them are writing laws that are chipping away at property owners rights and assets.
Some HOA boards do act in violation of law and the interests of the owners and any informed homeowner would be aware of this.
Why do you believe that an "expert" would not be upset with their HOA?
Are you the James Stilwell, the litigation lawyer from who represents developers, insurance companies and corporations in Texas?
Posted Jun 13 2007 4:36PM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
, California |
| |
|
|
| |
My HOA is charging everyone with a special assessment that they made up for repairs that we already paid for. I have $40,000 in damages from a storm and the HOA says sorry we have no money. Pay more, and we 'might' get around to your house.
not a lawyer in NC will touch the case, all say...you can win, but no money, you win nothing... judgement is worth only the paper it is written on.
97 units, and over 50 are section 8, not even the prez lives here, she just rents to section 8. The management company is personally buying units after the HOA forcloses them.
And the owner that are left have to pay more money for the antics of the board... ohh want to try an election, the board changed by-laws. no elections, prez is now for life. no vote.. just up date them on the internet.
Oh... and miss a payment, HOA says... we are too poor to send out statements, you should know your balance, you can tell it to a judge in foreclouse court.
Btw, Welcome to NC.
~Steve
Posted Jun 12 2007 4:01AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Steve Hull
, North Carolina |
| |
|
|
| |
I am in San Diego California, but I had to file bankruptcy to protect my home over a small (few hundred dollars) bill with my HOA, which I had an agreed-upon repayment plan with - if i had not filed bk - the HOA could have continued towards foreclosure is any "hiccup" occurred in the repayment process, without "going back to square one" - in other words the clock would keep ticking towards foreclosure, because they turned my unit into foreclosure over such a small bill - with an agreed upon repayment plan! HOA's being able to just assess monthly fee's without members approval is another way that peoples homes can be stolen for small amounts of money!
This has been a major problem, and is why strong homeowner-friendly bills are needed to protect the American Dream of people, owning their own home, and having the rights to enjoy it! I understand the creepy firm of Peters and Freedman up in the Carlsbad area is undergoing RICO investigations currently because of stealing peoples homes over small bills owed. If a few legal fee's or administrative fees are added to peoples bills, then a small payable bill becomes a huge unpayable bill almost overnight - I know I have had to tell my HOA that their will be no "doubling or tripling of fines from month to month" and that any board member that thinks this is ok proceedure needs to be immediately removed from office! I also commented on how I put my name in to run for the board during the last election - and it somehow - got - uh - lost - they never seemed to get it?
Dennis
Wintergreen Terrace HOA
Lakeside, San Diego County
California
Posted Jun 12 2007 2:01AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Dennis Faulkner
(View Profile)
Lakeside, California |
| |
|
|
| |
My HOA has done away with the gate code and magnetic readers and forced everyone in our community to buy clickers. We have nurses that come in to see elderly people and they were denied access because there is no universal code that they will give owners.
I asked one of the board members "What happens if my clicker breaks or the batteries die and I cannot get in the gate? His answer was to call a neighbor!! My husband is diabetic and God forbid if we forget his medication and we can't get back in those gates. Or if one of the owners that need daily care can't get it. NRS116.2111 states:
HOA cannot unreasonably restrict, prohibit or otherwise impede the lawful rights of a unit's owmer to have reasonable access to his unit. I have written to the Attorney General and the Ombudsmans office. Where else can I go? I am totally dumbfounded at what this HOA has done.
Posted Jun 10 2007 6:48AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Joanne Douglass
las vegas, Nevada |
| |
|
|
| |
With respect to comment #6:
I don't know where you live in Florida, nor where you came from in your 'other' community, since also you chose to remain 'anonymous' but here are the actual facts, not what you tend to believe or have been manipuated by the industry to believe:
1. HOAs do not protect nor were they ever intended to 'protect' your investment. They were intended initially to 'prevent' blight conditions (severe disrepair), and to provide for the costs associated with the 'common elements' only initially, which is really the entire reason 'the Association' as corporate entity was contractually provided...for 'common expense' maintenance costs only, as non-profits.
2. Due to legislation in most states expanding these to actual government dictatorships far and above what they were intended either through the CAI created 'contracts' or bombarding the legislatures for their 'industry' promoted propaganda, and the fact that a good many CC&Rs actually 'limit' property enhancing improvements....the property 'value' and 'investment' argument is all wet, and not the least bit back up by any clear evidence.
My former home in Phoenix that I grew up in was and always has been 'deed restricted free', and yet the value of that home and land rose at a much greater rate than any of the homes in Phoenix in which I had an ownership interests - why? Because of its 'location' in central Phoenix where there is no longer any more land in order to build. It is worth quite a bit more than newer homes in HOA deed restricted communities even with their purported 'property value' lie due to its very location.
3. Unless you lived in a rural area, by city ordinance raising goats and chickens are prohibited in any 'incorporated' residential area, without a 'commercial' farming license. So that argument is all wet also.....insofar as someone painting their home other than beige....to me this is more a 'jealousy' and 'control' issue - you don't want anyone else's home to show yours up in their taste or decor, as statistically throughout the country the supposed 'colors' most fear - the 'shocking pink' or 'turquiose' home rarely happens, and if so, in Victorian areas such as San Francisco, would be a plus. This is a 'control' issue, and the paint color of your neighbor would not affect your home's value at all. What is inside will, but on an appraisal they do not deduct for paint color, weeds or any of those petty annoyances or 'fears' of those that which to impose their dictatorial standards on others, who are usually the ones that 'run' for these positions - and further the lies they have been manipulated to believe, but upon which there is clear and convincing evidence has no 'weight.' Some people, it is clear desire Stepford and 'communal' living - communism - so why not go out in the desert and start your own 'commune.' These developments were not created at the 'demand' or 'request' of the masses, but at the state/developers initiation for land use control and revenue period.
4. And you really do need to get a clue, because as there has become more and more objection to these communities, disclosures were and have been withheld, and documents misrepresented across the nation by the chief manipulators - the Boards, and primarily first and foremost, their 'advisors' and the real estate industry as a whole. They can't sell them very easily - and it is only fools that would buy into one giving their neighbor, a total stranger, a lien right and interest to their most valuable asset and emotional investment - their home.
I can only surmise your naievete is only compounded by your ignorance in what, throughout the past decade at least, has been a bottom line constitutional violation of private property ownership rights, and not upon the 'demand' of the populace by any means. And as a demonstration of your naievete, it is point of fact that there is little 'choice' (as your 'option' for 'change') for new or newer properties, or town homes, condos and such - they are 'mandated' now for all redevelopment, and even sooner, there will be no 'option' for even detached homes.
Insofar as 'getting on the Board', the 'Board' is fed propaganda by their 'advisors' painted as 'truth,' so any real change in 'directorship' in these communities changes nothing, except the 'mouthpiece.'
And bottom line, it really doesn't matter what you 'personally' feel either. You also have and had just as much 'right' to initiate the votes necessary to amend your documents to 'give' additional powers to your Board if you so desired.....but for these 'industries' or 'dictatorial' members of these communities to utilize the state legislatures to 'change' those documents through it......is actually unconstitutional and these 'contracts' in most communities have 'changed' not through their consent, and have a perfect right to be outraged at this property violation and Constitutional breach.
It is quite clear throughout the country, if an 'honest' assessment were taken and presented a choice for the layout and design of the home they purchased, in the neighborhood they selected, at the same price, with the same amenities in this 'honest' way -- would you purchase an HOA deed restricted propety subjecting your property to an 'lien foreclosure' continuing interest dependent upon 'maintenance' or undetermined tax increases, or a property one with none at all, with your taxes only raised through 'assessed valuation' initiatives or votes, which choice do you think the majority of homeowners (not minority, obviously, as yourself) would pick?
And insofar likening 'assessment' payments to your home purchase mortgage or car payment - they aren't near the same. They are 'fixed' sums and commercial transactions overseen through bank regulation and control affording a minimal of protection, and there are 'truth in lending' statements attached to each. No such 'protections' or 'disclosures' with most HOA properties, or that these 'terms' over the course of ownership will fluctuate in most instances, annually, without 'pre-approval or consent.' And HOA assessments are collected 'in advance of need' not as with your mortgage payment or car loan.....and for very small sums given 'lien and seizure' rights far in excess of just the amounts owed. So that position also is truly laughable.
I can now see why this was posted as anonymous, unless it too was a CAI propaganda post.
Posted Jun 10 2007 4:13AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Linda Gehring
Phoenix, Arizona |
| |
|
|
| |
Re; Comment: . Please stop the bellyaching.... I am a three-time president of our HOA, here in Florida.
Please.............. Sarcastic attitude noted
HOA's do not raise dues to cover legal fees, those fees end up being paid by the people they rip off. THE HOMEOWNER!
In our case my brother didnt pay the fees for 3 months and they came in and foreclosed and sold the property and
GET THIS
THEY CHARGED ME ALMOST $40,000 in costs.
All that for not paying $183 a month
Homeowner Association Takes Home of Menally Ill Person For $549 in Maintenence Dues - June 06, 2007 - By Jay Goldstein - Los Angeles, California
Posted Jun 10 2007 1:15AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Jay Goldstein
Los Angeles, California |
| |
|
|
| |
This is my second attempt at trying to post this comment - will it get in?
Sorry, but I SUPPORT this effort... and here is why...
Okay, I too have heard the many horror stories from homeowners about their HOA's. I am a three-time president of our HOA, here in Florida. My first house in Florida was NOT in a deed-restricted community. My neighbors painted their homes odd colors, started to raise chickens, and even goats. Many never mowed what little lawns they had. My value plummeted. I moved out and into a deed restricted community back in 1997. I LOVE it here!
We are not the enemy. I work with many of our members when they have problems. Some, not able to pay their dues enter into a monthly payment agreement and make good their word. I have always believed that if an owner wishes to work WITH the board, then the board should work with the owner.
Unfortunately not all owners want to do things this way. I am often stumped but this attitude. Sorry, but I am also a realist. I knew full well that my home was on a deed-restricted community. Every owner, by law, is aware of this and the rules when they bought their home. Why were the rules not looked over BEFORE they bought, to be sure they could live within the confines of the association.
Want to know WHY fees increase to HOA members each year? One reason is that the HOA board (who by the way are also residents) have to spend more and more money on legal fees in order to get a homeowner who does NOT want to comply to comply.
ALL homeowners HAVE recourse if they do not like their HOA restrictions. They can do one of three things. They can comply. They can move out. They can obtain the needed number of votes to ammend the deed to their favor. Show some initiative folks! Besides complaining - do something. I did!
I know of instance where owners, who do not pay their dues, do not follow the rules, and will not work with the board of directors, end up being the first in line to complain the board when their neighbor is running a repair shop in his driveway at 3am, or another decides to tear up their front lawn only to never replace it again.
MoOst HOA's do not have enough money in reserve to fight unwilling owners who ignroe rules. By imposing fines to those who ignore rules (and do nothing to contact the board and make other arrangements) it prevents thos of us who WANT the rules from having to fork over our money!
Why is it that everyone can understand that when you do not pay a mortgage or a car payment when scheduled, you have only a certain amount of time to make good. Otherwise the bank takes the home or car away. This does not seem to get the same media attention as the "bad" side o HOA's. There are good sides and good HOA's too. I am in one (although I am confident not everyone here agrees.)
What about MY rights? I bought in a HOA, because I WANTED to. I reviewed the laws - in advance of buying - and not only saw that I could live within them, but preferred to live within them, so I would not experience the other side of a declining market due to a neglectful owner. I bought here because it provided SOME protection form an ever-increasing insane world.
So, please stop the bellyaching. Yes, there are bad HOA's that get in the face of owners. They are not the norm, but get all the publicity. They make it harder and harder for those of us who want a local government agency that we control as we live here and want more say as to what goes on here.
I don't know about Las Vegas as a homeowner, but I do know about owning property in Florida. Many resident here are still transient. Many more neglect their property and do not look at as if it were an investment. I do, and this is why I seek the protection a GOOD HOA can offer.
Thanks for hearing me out...
Posted Jun 10 2007 12:01AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Username withheld
Valrico, Florida |
| |
|
|
| |
This bill and 'law' is just too complex to believe, and as I'm sure intended, lobbied for by 'industry', read: attorneys and written that way to insure, again, their incomes most of all.
It appears in Nevada they have very definitely given 'governmental' powers to the Board of Directors of these association far greaters than they were originally intended to ever have, and authority to levy additional sums and fees without unconstitutionally and in depriving owners of their property, i.e., monetary sums without 'due process of law,' in the form of voting rights. The most dangerous of all those provisions, and unconstitutional are the following, it appears:
Section 21 of this bill revises provisions relating to financial statements for certain associations. (NRS 116.31144)
which reads:
Sec. 21. NRS 116.31144 is hereby amended to read as
follows:
116.31144 1. Except as otherwise provided in [subsection 2,]
this section, the executive board shall:
(a) If the annual budget of the association is less than $75,000,
cause the financial statement of the association to be audited by [an
independent certified public accountant] a person deemed qualified by the association to conduct such an audit at least once every 4 fiscal years.
This was CAI initiated - would allow 'audits' by their membership management concerns - like the rooster guarding the chicken house - and only every four years. Management concerns, I would bet, are not 'regulated' or 'licensed' in Nevada, so any 'thief' or 'crook' can start a 'management concern. The ethics of the CAI as has been proved in California and other communities, is next to nill, as they also are not 'regulated' and actually with their lobbying efforts and lack of oversight of the 'true' professionals running it, the collection and foreclosure attorneys, is again another tool to gain them access to the Associations funds, without any governmental oversight or regulation.
(b) If the annual budget of the association is $75,000 or more
but less than $150,000, cause the financial statement of the
association to be:
(1) Audited by an independent certified public accountant at
least once every 4 fiscal years; and
(2) Reviewed by an independent certified public accountant
every fiscal year for which an audit is not conducted.
(c) If the annual budget of the association is $150,000 or more,
cause the financial statement of the association to be audited by an independent certified public accountant every fiscal year.
There are also many accounting firms affiliated with the CAI in some states, it would appear, and without oversight or regulation of that 'primary' provider of 'Association' services, due to their lack of oversight, regulation and actually writing of these bills, until that happens the fraud in these communities will escalate, only at a more expensive and higher level. And unless there is strict regulation of even the 'accounting' industry, some of which are their members.....well look at Arthur Anderson, one of the largest and was investigated and charged with criminal conduct in some of its 'professinal' services.
2. For any fiscal year for which an audit of the financial
statement of the association will not be conducted pursuant to
subsection 1, the executive board shall cause the financial statement for that fiscal year to be audited by [an] :
(a) A person deemed qualified by the association to conduct
such an audit if the annual budget of the association is less than
$75,000; or (b) An independent certified public accountant if the annual budget of the association is $75,000 or more,
if, within 180 days before the end of the fiscal year, 15 percent of the total number of voting members of the association submit a written request for such an audit.
With the stakes involved, yet lack of 'teeth' for abuse or criminal conduct, this 'law' does nothing really for the either the Associations or owners, but is ripe with potential abuse by the industries for their own 'for profit' bottom lines, and gains. Since the members and membership are funding the corporation, as non-profits, mandatory mailing and full disclosure is what should be required by law, on at least an annual basis.
3. The Commission shall adopt regulations prescribing the
requirements for the auditing or reviewing of the financial
statements of an association pursuant to this section. Such
regulations must include, without limitation:
(a) The qualifications necessary for a person to audit or review
financial statements of an association; [and]
(b) The standards and format to be followed in auditing or
reviewing financial statements of an association [.] ; and
(c) The requirement that an audit or review of the financial
statements of an association be completed within 180 days after
the end of the fiscal year.
And I wonder what these 'qualifications' are going to be, and whether they must be gained at state educational institutions, or whether the CAI is going to use these laws in order to attempt to foster themselves, again, as a 'legitimate' educational 'institute,' when there 'instructors,' are actually collection and foreclosure attorneys, and not 'educators,' with teaching degrees or certificates in accounting at all.
Sec. 22. NRS 116.3115 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 22 of this bill permits the executive board to impose certain assessments for the purpose of funding a reserve without a vote of the units' owners under certain circumstances. (NRS 116.3115)
Illegal - unconstitutional....that is all that needs to be said. A 'taking' without due process of law, or votes = dictatorship and not within the legislators powers to 'assess' taxation without 'representation' in the form of votes, or tax credits for those sums. These assessments, if not paid, I would imagine will also be used to 'up the ante' in the foreclosure industry since 'the state' has worded them as 'assessments.' Have the legislators in Nevada even read its states or the U.S. Constitution?
Section 23 of this bill establishes the criteria for evaluating the adequacy of the reserves of an association. (NRS 116.31152)
Existing law requires certain signatures before money in the reserve account of an association may be withdrawn. (NRS 116.31153) Section 23.3 of this bill also requires certain signatures before money in the operating account of an association
may be withdrawn.
Bet these 'signatures' are either strictly Board members, or their 'representatives', the for-profit unregulated and unlicensed management concerns or attorneys. Another avenue for further fraud and theft.
Section 23.7 of this bill changes existing law to provide that the sale of a unit as a result of a foreclosure of a lien is subject to an equity or right of redemption.
However, as a 'taking' doesn't provide for full market value price if sold, penalties if the foreclosure remedy is 'illegally' used by the 'offending parties' to these illegal transactions in most communities, nor even criminal penalties for blatant 'thefts' through some of these 'takings' which have occurred. Also great for the attorneys, they make money on the foreclosure many times illegally using their 'favored' judges, and then again if the owner goes back to court to get the property to exercise his 'right of redemption,' and then is socked with additional fees for the sales. What a racket!!!!
(NRS 116.31166)
Section 28 of this bill excludes the books, records and other papers of the association which are in the process of being developed and have not yet been placed on an agenda for final approval by the executive board from the material which the board must make available upon the written request of a unit's owner.
An 'accountable' 'government' funded 'by the people' requires full disclosure of any and all books and records, and a penalty or 'right' of redress for any owner so denied that right. Owners should only be responsible for the 'copying' costs for a corporation or government which they are funding and supporting.
Looks like Del Webb & Co., the CAI, and the real estate industry is doing its job in Nevada also, with their lackeys taking the 'bribes' for their legislation.
Sell and abandon those properties, Nevada, and get out while you can. When the economy is depressed by what is going on and the number of citizens who will not buy into one, and the prices go down, thus the property taxes also, other than filing the criminal charges or state/developer/industry RICO actions that would truly turn this around, at this point the writing is on the wall, and the legislators either need to be exposed as to whom they are truly 'representing' - the industry - and treasonous under the State of Nevada and U.S. Constitutions.
Posted Jun 9 2007 5:26AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Linda Gehring
Phoenix, Arizona |
| |
|
|
| |
I can't help you with things in Nevada, I live in one of these little fifedoms in New Jersey. Someone in the media or somewhere should make a campaign out of putting these HOA in their place.
It is well to have 55 and older communities, but these people destroy American values. Where I live they are forcing a fammily to seel and move out because the courts awarded them custody of two small grand children ages 3 and 4.
We are subjected to searches without cause, limited in our voting power. This is not unique to Nevada, it is all over America.
PLEASE somone help.
John C. Collier, Jr.
Posted Jun 9 2007 12:57AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
John Collier
(View Profile)
, New Jersey |
| |
|
|
| |
How can an unbiased reporter say in one breath that he is looking for someone who is upset with their HOA, and with the next breath say that the person should be an "expert" on the new law.
Posted Jun 8 2007 10:13PM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
James Stilwell
Lake Kiowa, Texas |
| |
|
|
|
