Make sure the CCR's are actually registered on your deed

Thought I should start another thread rather than continuing on George's "Company vehicle Issue"

That is what you get when a Developer apparently doesn't know what he is doing.

Because we didn't get what we paid for (beach access at and near the clubhouse - key reason for buying here) we first asked to be exempted form the HOA we had been led to believe we were a part of, the developer stalled and passed the buck while he was still in control and there was an interim board, next several residents including ourselves contributed to a legal fund to fix the developers mess but the interim board eventually decided not to pursue the matter. That event triggered us to restart our exemption attempt but then our lawyer discovered that the developer hadn't registered the CCRs until 2002, but by then 34 homes had been sold and title changed to our/others hands (beginning in ~1999.

Developer can't register the CCR's if he doesn't own the property. (plus not all had been disclosed ie CCR's not provided to some of us). We advised the HOA/developer that we would not be a part. Things turned nasty between residents AGAIN dividing the community (first the beach issue/then CCRs). We saw firsthand what happens when you raise concerns with a HOA and decided we could not allow ourselves to be under the rule of some of these neighbours who were on the BOD. Even had to have the lawyer tell the President he would be sued for slander against us.

There is no question the developer knew of his apparent screw-up when he filed the CCR's because he had to list the lots the CCR's applied and there were 34 he knew he had sold by this point.

Ironically when we were led to believe we were part of the HOA, we were the only ones who were in compliance with the CCR's (read them after getting a copy during the process of putting in a pool request). I can list off violations on properties including the President's.

Rather than calling a meeting as I asked, to inform residents of the situation, and have everybody get the same facts, the different board members went door to door to the 33 homes excluded and gave different version from something as simple as 'sign this, it will make you part of the community' and on up. I had a meeting of the 34 in the backyard and it was the first opportunity we all had to listen to the different versions and misleading information given to people solely to convince them to join. The truth apparently didn't matter in that effort.

Some joined, some didn't. Even a year later there are some HOA members who won't speak to their non-member neighbors. It's a shame they do this but I know they didn't get all the information needed to make a fair assessment of why some of us didn't want to join.

Funniest thing our lawyer advised to say nothing about the CCR error and just ignor the HOA but we felt the developer had screwed all of us and we didn't want the HOA when turned over (our neighbours) to be stuck with the costs to fix this.

Should have taken his advice!

My advice to others, make sure the CCR's are actually registered on your deed!

How does one "Make sure the CCR's are actually registered on [the] deed"? Is it possible to "opt out" of an hoa?

~11 homes are on the water including the clubhouse. ~103 are not on the water. The subdivision is located at a lake, (hint you might call it one of the 'great' lakes )

Clubhouse is at one end of the subdivision, town park on the other. Walking between these two points was the amenity described by the developer which due to a series of error resulted in it not being provided. ie. Easement application granting access to the members of the HOA was filed and approved by the Town subject to payment of 100.00 and copies of deeds within 1 year of approval date. Developer let the application lapse during which time he sold some waterfront lots as private ownership, other waterfront lots had a clause stating there would be an easement in favour of the HOA to allow residents use.

Looks to me like the developer sold both groups a bill of goods by telling some we would have the right to use the entire waterfront, then selling (for a premium) waterfront lots but that is just imo.

Some waterfront owners (who bought as private waterfront) were upset with the developer telling other residents they could walk on the property. The latter group included the majority of residents who bought before any waterfront lots were sold. Residents turned against residents.

In the end even if the lawyers were successful restoring access to the waterfront lots that had the clause it wouldn't have helped because they could not win access for those who did not have the clause. Still couldn't walk from point a to point b.

May sound like a trivial feature but it was a key one for us. Each buyer buying at different points in time seem to have different expectations and desires as to what they were to get based on what the developer staff said.

We are in Canada, no HOA laws in the province.

We were very clear that we wanted no part of a HOA without this feature, even before our lawyer discovered the CCR's were not on title for us. The latter fact just gave us an easy way to accomplish that but had the CCR's been on title the lawyers and lawsuits would have gone on for years with no chance of success of any homeowners recovering damages from the developer (limited company with no real assets. Developers like to do so for each subdivision to avoid having any claims against against the bigger company!)

I won't name the developer or hoa as it is now a year after we consider the matter closed as far as our decision not to join the HOA. One last comment the 34 who didn't have the ccrs on title were the first to buy and none of us were on the waterfront. Picture a field between us and the lake which was later filled with homes. The 34 had been using the beach from day one until the error was discovered.