💬 Join us to post & get advice from 50,000 HOA & Condo leaders.

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

RaymondC1 (Illinois)
Posts: 2
Posted:
You may think that you're well informed about HOA matters, I certainly thought I was. None of this was new to me, the past HOAs I'd been involved with were great. Despite, like many people, having a very busy work and personal schedule, I enjoyed attending HOA meetings, volunteering during cleanup days, and contributing to social events at past HOAs. I used to presume that the people who had issues in HOA communities were poorly informed, hadn't read their CC&Rs, and were probably deserving of what ever dispute they encountered with their HOA. For me, that belief recently changed.

I had a home built in a rural subdivision that is a mix of older and newer homes. Before I settled on the lot, the first thing I did was go over to the county office which has all of the rules on file for the subdivision. I studied them carefully before signing all the papers, completing the home construction, and proceeding with the purchase and completed construction of the home.

One thing I was sure of, I wanted a small garage or large shed to put my lawn equipment in. Looking around, seeing property with various outbuildings, this didn't seem like an issue. After all, some had large detached garages, others had storage sheds that were large, none of them really matched the houses, but I didn't mind. After all, I could see that this was a somewhat laid back HOA when it came to what I saw and what was in the rules. I checked my CC&R document, and confirmed what the rules were:

"Utility or Storage buildings will be permitted as long as they are complementary with the dwelling and the construction and placement are approved by the Architectural Control Committee."

The CC&R's are very short, a couple pages, and that's the only one that deals with the construction of outbuldings. There were no published ARC rules available, but I did have the HOA board presidents number. So I call, find out what sort of documentation they require, and submit that. He made a strange comment that for my property he thought a small building would look nice, to which I comment that I'm fortunate enough to have a larger lot. The ARC board sets up an appointment to visit my property, presumably to discuss placement and perhaps provide some specifics that weren't in the information I provided. That's when things started getting strange. A somewhat truncated recollection of the conversation went as follows:

He says, "I see you submitted a proposal for 16 x 20, perhaps you weren't aware of the rules, but that is too big."

"Really?" I ask, "There are 3 outbuildings and garages larger than that size within sight of my property, and numerous ones a couple blocks that are in the subdivision. Some people even have two! At least mine matches the style and materials of my house, I wish they all did, but it doesn't really bother me that much that they don't."

He says, "Well, it's 10 x 10, that's all you can build. Those are the rules."

I said, "What rules? Neither the CC&R's nor the many, many, many existing structures are consistent with that requirement, I'll be appealing this to the board, hopefully we can avoid the time and expense of attorneys in resolving this."

It goes back and forth and eventually I conclude that there is no purpose in continuing the discussion. So, I prepared the appeal documentation for the board. I included pictures, approximate dimensions using tools available via google earth, aerial views which showed the sizes of the buildings and that some of these buildings were more recent, some were not, but had many examples showing that a large percentage of this small subdivision that had sheds and outbuildings that were out of compliance with even the rules in the CC&R's. The size, siding, roofing, architecture were remarkably dissimilar to the house in nearly all instances where there were sheds. I requested to be added to the agenda, and emailed the board this documentation so that they were prepared for my visit to the next months board meeting. I requested either approval from the board, or removal of the buildings that were not in compliance. I stressed that my strong preference was approval, because I really didn't have a problem with these buildings, other than selective application of the rules.

The only email I got back was from the welcoming director, and keep in mind that I had had no interaction with this person, other than to receive the booklet they give new residents, prior to receiving this email. This was not a response to some angry communication from me, but rather a boring PDF full of documentation and pictures of large and unmatched outbuildings:

------

Get out if you don't want to follow the rules. You knew that there were covenants that went with the property you purchased. You had time to review them before you purchased and if you did not like them you should not have made the purchase. Your b******* and complaining and making personal attacks against your neighbors, it just plain bull.

So, if you do not want to cooperate with the rules - GET OUT!!

May you be blessed and may you find peace - somewhere else!

------

I didn't really know what to think of that, felt somewhat threatened, but went ahead to the board meeting hoping that there was just one unreasonable board member. At least the meeting was civil, but it wasn't productive. The response to approval of the building, and removal of any neighbor buildings was simply, no. Several immediate neighbors voiced their support, but the board was as uninterested in their thoughts as they were mine.

So I decided that I needed the help of an attorney. He began his attempt to get them to see reason. His letter stressed several points: 1) The CC&R's do not allow for the regulation of the size of outbuildings 2) Both the initial application and subsequent application to the board had exceeded the 30 day requirement under the bylaws requiring written rejection rendering them automatically approved 3) despite these failings I would be willing to negotiate in good faith, because my goal was a mutually acceptable resolution.

What ensued was about a year of my attorney and their attorney wasting all our money writing letters and making their arguments to one another. It took a long time because the HOA attorney was very slow in responding. My attorney encouraged me to take the matter to court, he belived given the facts it was extremely likely that I'd be successful, but it would also be expensive. Given his particular background, I strongly believe that if he thinks I would have been successful, I would have. I had initially planned, and could afford to do that, at some point I decided that it was time to agree to end this battle, and find peace somewhere else as the welcoming director suggested, even though I prefer newer housing, and that is nearly impossible to find outside of an HOA governed area (thanks to local land use planning which largely mandates associations for plots smaller than 5 acres). I'm saddened to leave a house I had built, that otherwise fits my needs very well, and neighbors I will truly miss, but it's time to move on. I realize that it's not a requirement that I move, but at some point, it's just worth it for improved quality of life. While I didn't include all of the ugly interactions I've had with the BOD while living here, or witnessed being directed against my neighbors, the above example from the welcoming director is a sample of the kinds of communications people regularly receive. I will say that no unkempt yard, or children's toys in the yard, or car parked on the street or boat is as ugly as what I've witnessed from the BOD in this subdivision.

I wrote this out simply because it may be helpful to those considering living in an HOA area, or considering if they need to cut their losses and move on. Everyone has a difference of opinion, you may see their actions as legitimate. You may see some things that I could have, or should have handled differently and these suggestions would be helpful to others. I have no interest in politics, but if you do and if you're considering getting involved with your HOA, it may be a good idea to do so, in order to prevent behaviors and actions that you consider to be unreasonable.
MarkM31 (Washington)
Posts: 556
Posted:
Sometimes you need to cut to the chase. It seems like it was apparent early that you were going to be at logger heads and either forced to sell, give in or go to court.

You should have just hauled them to court on day three
RaymondC1 (Illinois)
Posts: 2
Posted:
Agreed. Wasting over a year attempting to negotiate a resolution was a bad idea. I should have either proceeded with selling the property, accepting the outbuilding rules as they saw them, or proceeded with taking them to court within days of meeting with the board.
MarkM31 (Washington)
Posts: 556
Posted:
If war is inevitable, go to war.
BobD4 (up north)
Posts: 1,002
Posted:
RaymondC1 :

Your comments could help many buyers.

( And in your locale, what you went though at least may warn local buyers to steer clear or insist on incorporating lots of space totally within new building envelopes, or hopefully to insist on ready availability of ARC criteria ).

If you misjudged, it may have NOT have been the year of interactions between lawyers instead of almost immediately litigating. “What If you had won ?” could have been “What if you had lost ?” From an ADR standpoint, formal litigation tends to sort out only degrees of loss between adversaries. The retaliation after your win, could have been nasty too.

Backing up, you wrote and regret that “there were no published ARC rules available” so looked at the as-builts and completed the purchase without pressing for whatever current the ARC criteria to accept or reject. Only after closing did it emerge that your wish list was 3 times larger 320 ft2 than the ARC’s limit 100 ft 2. Their limit may not be magic.

Without directly reviewing the entire CCRs it is impossible to agree or disagree whether the ARC (and HOA) had adequate authority in the first place to try to limit this under the POA’s twin approval criteria in the CCR. “Construction and placement” sound broad scope for the HOA, but your lawyer advised you had a good overall legal position.

Buyers should be careful not to rely largely on what they think is the “already built” non-compliances/ violations of current day criteria. The ‘already builts’ could have been “grandfathered exemptions” given by earlier ARCs or by the developer still in control or by outright past illegal favouritism. It is not a slamdunk to get rules turfed because some now look to have beaten them. The mere ‘already built’ list could ongoing get a lot of different or whacky conclusions drawn.

A recurrent legal analogy has been to the solitary traffic cop ticketing a speeder while others fly by just as fast & unticketed. It is not easy to beat that ticket merely by arguing favoritism or acquiescence or past lack of resources or whatsoever. Else which no tickets might ever be enforceable again. Maybe try looking for an entire jurisdiction hostile to HOAs. Good luck.
JohnC46 (South Carolina)
Posts: 14,265
Posted:
Raymond.

Sorry for your aggravation but at least let others learn from it.

The maybe errors on your part I see is are:

1. You placed to much emphasis on existing structures as thinking similar would be allowed:

2. You relied to much on verbal statements like, no problem.

3. They tried to placate you with a smaller structure which you refused to accept.

Best of luck in your new place
CyrstalB (Maryland)
Posts: 457
Posted:
Quote:
Posted By JohnC46 on 05/05/2015 3:43 PM
Raymond.

Sorry for your aggravation but at least let others learn from it.

The maybe errors on your part I see is are:

1. You placed to much emphasis on existing structures as thinking similar would be allowed:

2. You relied to much on verbal statements like, no problem.

3. They tried to placate you with a smaller structure which you refused to accept.

Best of luck in your new place

and please don't forget the legal bills the attorneys were happy ring up as it went on and on.

🎯 You've read this entire discussion

Join the conversation with 50,000 HOA & Condo Leaders:

  • ✓ Ask follow-up questions
  • ✓ Share your experience
  • ✓ Get expert advice
  • ✓ Access 350,000 discussions
Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in here