Owner's truck won't fit in garage

The issue: 2 car garage owner with 2 cars. CC&Rs state 2 car car garage owners must park both cars into their garage and may not use a visitor parking spot for permanent resident use. This owner came to us and claims that his truck is too long to fit into the garage. They owned the truck before their house was built. In all honesty, they didn't think that this truck would be a problem. The owner has parked his truck in visitor parking, but now that we have our spots assigned to those without a garage and the rest as visitor spaces, he was receiving fines from us. The owner came to us ( the board) and wanted to work with us because he didn't want to be in violation, but simply didn't know what to do with his truck. His wife's SUV is currently parked in the garage. They are an honest couple who have not given us any other problems and are open to working with us in making a plan. We don't have off site parking either that is close.
we had him attempt to park his truck in his garage to show us. He's right, the truck is too long and hangs out of the garage.
What do we do? How are we going to be accommodating to him and still be fair to the rest of community. I can see the other owners with the following situations coming to us: the ones with a third car, the ones who have an adult child who lives with them temporarily, or even the ones who would rather use their garage for storage.

Can anyone explain to me why this is considered such an eyesore for them to park in their driveway?

2 car garage houses do not have a driveway. So his house doesn't have a driveway.
1 car garage houses also have a driveway that is long enough for 1 car and their driveway in considered they second parking space. We do not know what to do with 3+ cars per household at this point. open to suggestions

Your 'job' is to administer / enforce the Covenant as written

or

seek the requisite votes from the membership to amend same.

Stop 'thinking' and begin administering.

The SUV goes in the garage the truck in the driveway!

But it is a problem because it's a clear violation of the CC&Rs. It's the truck owner's problem, his feeble excuses aside.

If you want to change the CC&Rs then CHANGE THEM. But until that happens everyone has to abide by them.

I REALLY appreciate everyone's advice. I also am getting the fact that this guy needs to deal with his problem because it is not the HOA's to deal with. I like the fact that you all said, "stop thinking and start administering"

here are some other issue:
suggestions on what to tell people with a third car
an adult child home from college for the summer
a mom staying to help a mom with her newborn for a month

a guest pass? a temp hanging tag?

I doubt that the garage shrunk after the homeowner was looking at the new purchase. I hate when people want an HOA to change the rules when it does not fit their situation. The HOA was here before they moved in and will be there after they are gone. I am a rules guy and love the rules as they are written. I read them before making an offer on our first HOA home. HOAs are not for everybody that is for sure. If they adopt to the worst offenders they will ruin it for the good homeowners that had their eyes wide open when they made one of the biggest purchases of a lifetime. The rest need to learn to comply or except the fines till they comply.

Becuase it's not a criminal case. It's a civil contract dispute.

I have read enough CCRs to know there is a solution without having to amend them. Times change, cars get bigger.

Covenant:

An agreement, contract, or written promise between two [or more] individuals that frequently constitutes a pledge to do or refrain from doing something.

The individual making the promise or agreement is known as the covenantor, and the individual to whom such promise is made is called the covenantee.

Covenants are really a type of contractual arrangement that, if validly reached, is enforceable by a court. They can be phrased so as to prohibit certain actions and in such cases are sometimes called negative covenants.

There are two major categories of covenants in the law governing real property transactions: covenants running with the land and covenants for title.

Covenants Running with the Land
A covenant is said to run with the land in the event that the covenant is annexed to the estate and cannot be separated from the land or the land transferred without it. Such a covenant exists if the original owner as well as each successive owner of the property is either subject to its burden or entitled to its benefit. A covenant running with the land is said to touch and concern the property. For example, an individual might own property subject to the restriction that it is only to be used for church purposes. When selling the land, the person can only do so upon an agreement by the buyer that he or she, too, will only use the land for church purposes. The land is thereby burdened or encumbered by a Restrictive Covenant, since the covenant specifically limits the use to which the land can be put. In addition, the covenant runs with the land because it remains attached to it despite subsequent changes in its ownership. This type of covenant is also called a covenant appurtenant.

Certain easements also run with the land. An easement, for example, that permits one landowner to walk across a particular portion of the property of an adjoining landowner in order to gain access to the street would run with the land. Subsequent owners of both plots would take the land subject to such easement.

A covenant in gross is unlike a covenant running with the land in that it is personal, binding only the particular owner and not the land itself. A subsequent owner is not required to keep the promise as one would with a covenant appurtenant.

Covenants for Title
When an individual obtains title to, or possession and ownership of, real property, six covenants are ordinarily afforded to him or her. They are (1) covenant for seisin; (2) covenant of the right to convey; (3) covenant against encumbrances; (4) covenant for Quiet Enjoyment; (5) covenant of general Warranty; and (6) covenant for further assurances.

A deed to real property that provides for usual covenants generally includes the first five of these covenants. When a deed provides for full covenants, it is regarded as giving such protection as is extended pursuant to all six covenants.

Covenants for seisin and of the right to convey are ordinarily regarded as being the same thing. Essentially, they make a guarantee to the grantee that the grantor is actually the owner of the estate that he or she is transferring.

The covenant against encumbrances promises to the grantee that the property being conveyed is not subject to any outstanding rights or interests by other parties, such as mortgages, liens, easements, profits, or restrictions on its use that would diminish its value. The existence of Zoning restrictions do not constitute breach of this covenant; however, the existence of a violation of some type of zoning or building restriction might be regarded as a breach thereof.

The covenants of quiet enjoyment and general warranty both have the legal effect of protecting the grantee against all unlawful claims of others, including the grantor and third parties, who might attempt to effect an actual or constructive eviction of the grantee.

The sixth covenant, which is the covenant for further assurances, is not widely used in the United States. It is an agreement by the grantor to perform any further necessary acts within his or her ability to perfect the grantee's title.

The first three covenants of title ordinarily do not run with the land, since they become personal choses in action—rights to initiate a lawsuit—if breached upon delivery of the deed. The others are covenants appurtenant or run with the land and are enforceable by all grantees of the land.

In order to recover on the basis of a breach of a covenant of title, financial loss must actually be sustained by the covenantee, since such covenants are contracts of indemnity. In most jurisdictions, the maximum amount of damages recoverable for such a breach is the purchase price of the land plus interest.

Purposes
Land use planning is often effected through the use of covenants. Covenants facilitate the creation of particular types of neighborhoods as part of a neighborhood plan. A housing developer might, for example, buy up vacant land to divide into building lots. A low price is paid for the undeveloped land, which the developer subsequently sells burdened with a number of restrictive covenants. The developer might stipulate in the contract of sale that the owner must retain the original size of a lot. Developers can also make owners agree that houses to be constructed upon the lots must be larger than a certain size and include other specifications to ensure that such property will more than likely sell for premium prices because of the desirability of the neighborhood. Courts enforce such covenants provided they benefit and burden all the property owners in a neighborhood equally.

Covenants will not, however, be enforced if they are intended to accomplish an illegal purpose. The Supreme Court ruled in Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1, 68 S. Ct. 836, 92 L. Ed. 1161 (1948), that no court or state officials have the power under law to take any action toward the enforcement of a racial covenant. In this case, a group of neighbors were bringing suit to prohibit a property owner from selling his home to blacks, based on the argument that the owner had purchased the home subject to the restrictive covenant not to sell to blacks. The covenant was found to be unenforceable based on equal housing laws. To enforce it would constitute a Civil Rights violation.

Every set of governing documents I have seen allows the board to issue a variance from the covenants, which is what I assumed the prior poster was referring to. If the only reason for following a rule is "because it's the rule" it's not a very good rule.

Barbara,
Anyone who buys into an HOA with the thought that the Rules can be changed to fit their needs is not very smart. The people that have bought before them did so for the most part because of the same Rules they want to change. When variances are handed out easily the HOA board becomes weaker. I am not saying in some cases they make sense. IMO Variances are very similar Executive Orders from a President. They may be over turned by the next board.

True, hence the medical definition of : moron.

"The word comes from the Greek mōros, meaning "foolish, stupid," and shares this etymology with words such as sophomore ("a student in the second year at college or a 4-year secondary school") and morosoph ("a learned fool")."

Barbara,
I will admit that you are correct about Most homeowners do not read the HOA documents until they are called out for not abiding by them. My only come back to that statement is that nearly all of them have driven in and around the community. They liked what they saw which was probably clear streets and open roadways. I doubt anyone will ever say cluttered streets are the reason why they moved into an HOA.

I'm not suggesting they allow street parking. The OP says the guy with the long truck has been parking in visitor spaces.

I once managed townhomes that allowed owners to rent visitor spaces if they were unable to fit all their cars in the garage or driveway. That's an option. Continuing to fine the owner is also an option. If he keeps paying the fines and parking in visitor parking and getting more fines and pays the fines...they are essentially renting him a space anyway.

I guess they can tell the owner to get rid of the truck or park offsite and... I guess Uber home? I suppose if he refuses to do that, the association could file a lawsuit.

Well said Richard.

What exactly does this case have to do with the discussion? A pickup truck was legally classified as a vehicle transporting passengers.

To go a step further, I have had boards hire someone to "enforce" the rules and, as you know, prior to applying a fine, the offender must be called to a hearing. A recently had A board member fire my company because I wouldn't fine someone to death, yet the Board never wanted to face the accused. They didn't being in due process and I was just making stuff up.

If I see an opportunity for a change, I will bring it and and help them through the process. I have found over time that many CCRs put into place for HOA's don't apply to them, they are just canned documents.

I could be a "get in, sit down and shut up" manager, BUT that's just not me.

I am leaning toward allowing owners to rent VP spots.

Can he make a deal with someone that does not have a garage and let them use his garage and he uses their outdoor spot or someone with only one car?

I am sure that CCRs were written with your BS in mind.

ps. look at the DOT sticker located on the lower right of YOUR driver door panel - look at the lower right of said sticker - try hard not to puke -

I am sure every single one of the 1.5 Million HOA members in the U.S. have done the same!

Conundrum: If they HAD looked at (and understood) the CCRs would they still have purchased ?

Even if their truck would not fit INSIDE the garage as REQUIRED by same CCRs ?