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

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

StacyH1 (California)
Posts: 3
Posted:
Good evening
Our board wanted to know if we’re required to allow residents access to the garage door opener to be able to program their cars instead of using the clickers. Our system has rolling codes which doesn’t allow residents to program directly from their remote control to their vehicle. We are in California.
One resident has indicated that we are required by law since this is a main form of entry. Any input would greatly be appreciated
SheliaH (Indiana)
Posts: 6,964
Posted:
You really need to consult a private attorney for legal questions, but this homeowner sounds a little lazy. You already have clickers to open and close the garage, so the access is already there. Why can't he or she just put the thing on the visor, reach up and push the button. Once inside, take the remote inside or secure it in the glove compartment to reduce the risk of theft or loss.

I would think not allowing rolling codes is a safety precaution and a good one - what happens if a resident sells his/her car, doesn't adjust the remote control, allowing anyone to roll up in the garage? Besides, programming cars is a new wrinkle and probably more of a convenience for the individual homeowner - and not necessary for the HOA.

Tell this person to bring the actual statute requiring this and go from there (that should stop him). Better yet, ask him or her to do the research as to how much this would cost and then ask his neighbors if they'd be willing to pay the extra fee. If enough of them say yea, then you can pursue it.

If it is not right do not do it; if it is not true do not say it. Marcus Aurelius
GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808
Posted:
Many times rolling code device reprogramming will cause the other devices to also require reprogramming - have had really trying experiences with more than two-three cars.

Reliable, pre-programmed remotes are a far better solution IMO.

Required by law? Sounds a bit in the weeds.
StacyH1 (California)
Posts: 3
Posted:
They’re saying that this is a form of entry which is being denied. Not sure if anyone has dealt with this in California.

Appreciate both of your prompt responses
GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808
Posted:
Meh - they have a form of entry. The clickers.
JohnC77 (California)
Posts: 562
Posted:
Homelink can be used with rolling code technology.
GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808
Posted:
Yep - but, I have spent lots of time, and as a function of manufacturer implementation, getting it to work when adding various cars.
GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808
Posted:
And, whether one uses v,uvkernif oassuve transponders, both systems usually allow tracking, whereas a straight homelink might not?
GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808
Posted:
passive

Need more info - but, can’t imagine “law” being applied at this level.
JohnC77 (California)
Posts: 562
Posted:
I have been using it for many years with no problems
GeorgeS21 (Florida)
Posts: 3,808
Posted:
Great, please let the OP know how it can be easily implemented across their membership.
JohnC77 (California)
Posts: 562
Posted:
I program mine from the remote to homelink by following the homelink instructions. Not rocket science.

You can probably find instructional video on YouTube.
StacyH1 (California)
Posts: 3
Posted:
How can that be done? So they can override the learn button technique.?
TimB4 (Tennessee)
Posts: 21,062
Posted:
I would say it's a security issue and say no.

OR

I would specify a specific day and time this can be done.

Here is info on how to program the home link system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BseDur3LG0

🎯 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