you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 219 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (62 children)

Flock cameras aside, I would never buy a home that's part of an HOA. There have been too many stories over the last 10 years of these terrible people abusing their power, up-to and including stealing people's home out from under them. That neighborhood is unlivable.

  • source
  • hideshow 62 child comments
  • [–] 85 points 2 months ago (39 children)

    Something like 35% of all homes in the US are governed by HOAs and roughly 2/3 of all new developments are adopting HOAs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 39 child comments
  • [–] 106 points 2 months ago (33 children)

    Reason number 4629 why I'll never be immigrating to the US. "Land of the free" my ass.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 33 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 2 months ago (14 children)

    I've recently just understood what a HOA is. As a Canadian I thought they were "Unincorporated Municipalities" or there's also "Rate Payers Associations" which is like a proto-town where there's a group providing town-like services amongst themselves. Which to me is some sick ass anarchist shit. But an HOA is just letting your neigbours tell you what to do? That's lame.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 75 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    HOAs were created because racists didn't want black people in their neighborhood. I fucking hate HOAs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Judging by another guys post, HOA's are way of offloading a whole new tax structure on individual neighborhoods. The whole being racist thing is how they convinced everyone to pay it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    I don't have an HOA but my property operates under deed restrictions that limit property owners in meaningful ways, establishing usage of the wells, easements, number of structures and so forth.

    One of my neighbors repeatedly referred to herself as "the head of the HOA" and I told her she needed to stop saying that because we don't have one. I didn't say as much but I would hire an attorney to send a C&D if she were to keep that up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    My neighborhood is deed restricted but most of the rules are just how to be a good neighbor. Trash cans can only be out from this time to this time. Your grass can't be over grown. Personally, I like the structure and I like living on a street where everyone agrees we want our immediate environment to look and feel nice. I've never heard of anything ever having to be enforced because everyone just does it, and when someone doesn't, it usually just means they need to be checked on.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    The grass thing would frustrate me as someone anti lawn and want to engage in more sustainable alternative methods of maintaining a yard. I also dislike rules on how you can paint your house.

    You also have to keep in mind that whoever enforces this stuff can easily go from "neighbors checking in" to "neighborhood nutjob brings a ruler on walks to issue fines" with some changes in neighbors

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    HOAs vary a lot. In my city, every new development has one as a condition of getting permits from the city. That's mainly because cars and their infrastructure are stupidly expensive, the city just can't afford to maintain it all without raising property taxes. I have friends who live in an HOA neighborhood, and basically they just pay an extra monthly bill to cover snow removal, maintenance of common areas, and such. For them, it's nothing like the horror stories of HOAs that can take your house if your mailbox is the wrong color. It is just a group providing services that the city can't afford anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    They require residents to be involved though. Anybody who lives in an HOA or similar and doesn’t participate (go to meetings, read their bylaws etc.) contributes to the organization being abused.

    That's actually wrong. Homeowners associations require homeowners to be involved, not residents. There is actually a very strong difference between the meanings of "homeowner" and "resident".

    In France a form of "HOA" exists for what some countries call condominium: co-owned lot of houses (FR: "lotissement"), or co-owned multi-appartments complexes. Only co-owners can participate to the full general assembly or be elected as a representative member in the "Conseil syndical" (aka. "CS", the council of co-owners representatives) ? Whether these owners reside in the complex does not matter, and such owners can be "moral entities" (ex: companies). On the other hand, residing rentees are not invited to participate, even remotely, to any of these general or CS-restricted assemblies. Usually these HOA and their provider named "syndic de copropriété" manage the complex as a whole, as they managed any part of the complex that is not a part of a unit. (aka. "common parts") The rentees are usually not even supposed to interact directly with the HOA.

    Personal anecdote: residing as a rentee in an appartement inside a co-owned complex can lead to some interesting conflicts. For example, when the HOA doesn't maintain common water pipes, and these pipes flood the rented appartment, whose owner is neither available nor reactive. I've experienced the rentee side in this situation. Not fun. And it wasn't the clean water input. (And if you claim the owner wasn't fit to be a decent landlord, I'll actually agree. They weren't a malevolent, bad-faith greddy scum of a landlord, but they were indeed an incompetent one.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Pedantic but technically correct, which is the best kind of correct, they say. My point still stands though. HOAs are just a smaller form of private government which requires involvement, voting and understanding of the homeowners involved.

    I’m not particularly fond of HOAs and I’d prefer to see a return to community development like it used to be. The city itself being involved, designating common spaces for a neighborhood or community like parks, community centers, sports fields/facilities etc. instead of that falling under a private entity.

    I’ll share my own personal anecdote: we bought our home ~6ish years ago and we had an HOA which was largely pointless. I organized the homeowners and engaged with the HOA processes and, today, we have an HOA in name only.

    It’s too expensive and difficult to dissolve the HOA so instead we all agreed to stop paying dues, return what had already been paid and abandon the HOA.

    Fortunately for us, the homeowners not only owned the homes but also the property each home sits on and there was no community property or services to deal with.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Fortunately for us, the homeowners not only owned the homes but also the property each home sits on and there was no community property or services to deal with.

    Dose "homeowner" in the USA refer to someone that eihtre don't own the home or the land on which it sits ?

    I don't know if it is legal in France cause I have no skill in property right, but I never heard of this case. The closer I heard of if a shop "owner" (franchisee) that builds and open a franchise shop, but the franchise owning big company actually owns the land and the building. Never heard anything like it for homes, despite knowing the existence of systems like "viager".

    My point still stands though. HOAs are just a smaller form of private government which requires involvement, voting and understanding of the homeowners involved.

    True, with limitations. As said by others, there can be conflicts between multiple duties for a homeowner. (e.g. HOA meeting VS work obligation.) So the HOA should also have some systems to adapt to external constraints, like a procuration system for votes.

    Also if some members of the HOA commit abuses, the responsibility of thei abuses will mostly sit on them. The non commited homeowner share a part of responsibility because of their negligence, bu the biggest part of responsibility is always owned by the perpetrators themselves, never by the victims. This part should never be omitted when communicating about abuses, as its omission carry a strong risk of shifting the responsability to the victims of said abuses. (That's probably why there are so strong reactions to your point.)

    I'll fininsh with a fun fact about French HOA :

    • The HOA themselves are mostly infamous in very big complexes with many units, because of the difficulty to make so many interests align (that formulation is meant to include absentee/negligent owners.)
    • The really infamous ones are the "syndic de copropriété", commonly perceived as being greedy bad faith companies, abusing power despite merely being service providers for the HOA. (But from what I understand having one is mandatory, which plays a part in their disproportionate power.)
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Dose "homeowner" in the USA refer to someone that eihtre don't own the home or the land on which it sits ?

    It can. It’s most common in townhomes where you own the house but everything outside of it including the exterior of the residence is “common property” or mobile home lots where you own the house itself but pay “rent” for the lot, utilities and common property maintenance.

    As said by others, there can be conflicts between multiple duties for a homeowner.

    I’ve never heard of an HOA that holds meetings where decisions are made or a vote is needed during working hours outside of retirement communities. Generally an HOA needs a quorum, typically 2/3 I believe, to enact bylaw changes, take certain actions etc. HOA disclosure is also required, at least where I am, at time of sale. Nobody should be “surprised” by an HOA.

    Also if some members of the HOA commit abuses, the responsibility of thei abuses will mostly sit on them.

    Yes and no. If a homeowner has participated I believe that’s true. If a homeowner buys a home with an HOA and doesn’t read the bylaws beforehand, doesn’t read meeting notes, attend elections, share their complaints/concerns then they’ve, at least tacitly, endorsed the HOAs operations.

    That's probably why there are so strong reactions to your point.

    I think there are strong reactions for one of two reasons. For one, too many Americans are happy to not get involved and participate and then play victim. Second, I think many people don’t actually understand how HOAs truly work, or their sum total of experience is stories they’ve read or heard from others.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    HOA are not in Canada.

    Closest we have is strata when an apartment or condo is owned by all the owners having a share.

    You have yearly vote for who sits on council, and bylaws can be changed by voting. The Strata does not have to approve your purchase into the unit like HOAs do to restrict the type of person who can own.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Both stratas and HOAs can have bylaws that allow them to approve buyers. The most significant difference between an HOA and a Strata Corp. is that in Strata’s the owners have a financial interest in the common property.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (2 children)

    Looks like only financial approval (to ensure you can afford strata fees), and occupant count approval (like not a 10 person family in a 1 bedroom apartment) but Canada doesnt allow discriminatory buyer approval like HOAs in the states...strata just can't say no because no.

    And rental bylaw got squashed with COVID

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    HOAs in the US are governed by the Fair Housing Act and can’t just say “no because no”.

    The 1968 act expanded on previous acts and prohibited discrimination concerning the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, religion, national origin, and since 1974, sex. Since 1988, the act protects people with disabilitiesand families with children. Pregnant women are also protected from illegal discrimination because they have been given familial status with their unborn child being the other family member.

    You might be confusing deed covenants with HOAs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    I have heard many municipalities only allow new construction as planned communities because they don't want to do the trash and local roads and simplifies connections water/sewer wise and they require water run off management and such.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    The municipalities know the suburbs are a Ponzi scheme and don't want to be left holding the bag. Single-family homes on large lots simply don't generate enough tax revenue to pay for the infrastructure they use.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I bought a home built in the 90s that technically had an HOA because the town required one when the subdivision was built. The HOA was defunct until 2010 or so when someone wanted to add an addition to their house. They put in for permission from the town. Town said "did the HOA approve it?" Homeowner went "HOA? Oh, I guess we should have one of those." After that, the HOA existed to rubber stamp home additions and send out email reminders to get your septic tank pumped. No fuss, no fees.

    Current home is a condo with a shared roof. HOA is much more hands on and my biggest complaint is they suck at communicating expectations. Like, I'm fine following rules. I'm autistic, it's kind of my thing. Just tell me what they are before you yell at me for breaking them. (note: I'm easy to yell at because I have a history of abuse, yelling is more a tone of voice than a volume thing.)

    On the other hand, anything outside my walls isn't my problem and it's way cheaper than renting was. And I go to the monthly meetings.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    Just tell me what they are before you yell at me for breaking them.

    This is perfectly reasonable, as well as warning requirements and remediation time before any penalties apply.

    I would never buy a house in an HOA if the state it’s in doesn’t have disclosure laws like mine. Where we live you get the CC&Rs, bylaws, articles of incorporation, rules and regulations, recent meeting minutes, the current budget and reserve study, the assessment schedule, any special assessments, pending litigation, and an estoppel certificate from the management company prior to purchase.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    But it's FOR THE GREATER GOOD.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Daily reminder that one of the most famous serial killers stopped killing after he became president of an HOA because he got just as much satisfaction from it as he did torturing people to death.

    Can't remember if it was Dahmer or the BTK killer but the point is still there

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Was he president of an HOA? I thought he was just a very annoying municipal compliance officer. I can see how people would cross those streams, given both roles are built for assholes who want to measure your grass height with a ruler and check your house paint against a swatch.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    My HOA seems to be one of the best options - $300/year and zero rules about bins being x inches from the house, paint restrictions, etc. The money goes towards the subdivision pool and that's it.

    But I'm worried that the two trustees (who are in their 70s) will kick it and someone less hands off will take over.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Oh sweet summer child.

    Nobody thinks THEIR HOA can turn to shit, but all it takes is maybe five people to take over and fuck it entirely. I moved into a one of these shitbag neighborhoods because it was the only thing available at the time that fit the budget and met the other criteria. Buying during late covid was a mess. I've spent a LOT of time pouring over the legal documents, charters, etc and pulling as many docs out of the county recorder's website as I could find. The pastiche of state and local laws that interleave into HOAs is a confusing mess at best. In the case of mine, the board members got something through that changed the voting requirements for dissolution of the HOA from 60% to 95%. No, they did not hold a vote to do it, they just did it via the procedures laid out in the founding documents. I've NEVER witness or been invited to any voting activities, yet we have a new board president somehow. It's the same group of ten white boomers that just trade back and forth. Right now, the only thing that's holding them down is that they pissed away all the money so they have little to nothing left to engage in any sort of legal battles with homeowners. However, they did just raise the fees (again, no voting that I am aware of) so that may change.

    Your HOA may be benign now, but all it takes are a handful of assholes to fuck up the whole thing and create misery in the process. A few boomer busybodies, maybe one lawyer and you're fucked.

    Also, many of these things will "sell" the management to a 3rd party that will run them like a slumlord. They will send people out to generate infractions and fines that they get to keep. Grass too long, fine. Mailbox not right, another fine. Garbage out too early/late, that's a fine. Most of the money goes to the management company, the board trustees will put the rest into the HOA funds, but there is almost zero oversight for what happens to the money.

    HOAs are bullshit I would love to burn mine down; I'm half tempted to start a legal battle with mine just because I know that they dont' have a lot of money and I might be able to bully them into something, but I'd never get rid of it. Plus it would be an expensive gamble.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)