The Definition of "In Use".

-- I would not call "in use" vague.

-- I would not call this a covenant that gives the board discretion.

-- I do not feel "abandonment" of the covenant comes into play, because these hoop assemblies are portable. It's no big deal for an owner to comply with the covenant.

-- If a board majority really wants to try to enforce this, then I think interpreting "in use" as you do (visibly playing ball = "in use") is appropriate.

Just a general question about these types of basketball rules....

How does someone store a basketball hoop out of sight when not in use? This simply is not practical. It's an 8'-10' height that can't easily fit inside a garage, plus they are generally filled with 100lbs of sand or water to keep them from blowing over.

Thanks for the replies. Maybe I should clarify. My belief is "in use" means your not playing it goes away. Our President believe that as long as they use it now and again its ok. Our 3rd board member is new and wants to compromise by saying if you use it once a week it's ok.

I don't see how you can administer a rule where its vague like if you use it once a week its ok. How do you know? You would have to monitor it 24/7 for a week!!!! Unfortunately we don't get snow here or that would help.

So I'm looking for some good ideas on how to convince the new member that in use means you have to be actively using it.

I read AdamL1's post.

I read Mark's further posts.

It is a conundrum.

I am not sure I would vote to enforce this covenant.

I agree with you Adam. I just can't convince 2 others to do it.

As far as amending the CCR, we need 75% of ALL members to change them. Impossible.

then its an abandoned covenant, make an announcement about it not being enforced, and move on. Trying to enforce a wishy washy definition of 'in use' is asking for trouble. some homeowner will end up suing you if you try to fine him, for having a hoop out for 2 weeks while his neighbor had one out for 2 years.

enforce it or don't enforce it or amend the ccr's.

Seriously are you going to go out EVERY SINGLE DAY to make sure the basketball goals are put up? Are you going to move them if they are not? No one is going to jump to do the job either. Simply make it restricted by the season or ban it altogether. Not worth enforcing. Plus no kid being called to dinner is going to take the time to put the goal away no matter how much you wish it.

I agree with Augustin.

IMO, this is one of those stupid rules that is included over and over again in covenants and has no place in any governing documents except for hoity toity neighborhoods, 55+ communities, or perhaps condo/townhome communities that just don't have space for numerous individual basketball hoops. Anywhere else, there will be kids growing up, and basket ball hoops should be expected.

In regard to the sanity check that the OP has requested . . . I disagree totally with your approach. Personally I would ignore the 2nd sentence of this "rule" altogether. If you want to enforce any part of it, enforce the 1st sentence. And if any basketball hoops become dilapidated, then enforce another rule that you probably have about maintaining exterior components in good condition or something similar.

As others have pointed out, while these "portable" basketball hoops are moveable, it's not an easy task since the bases weigh hundreds of pounds when filled with water/sand (to prevent tipping, property damage, and injury/death). If a kid wants to shoot hoops for a few minutes, it's not as simple as rolling the hoop out and then putting it back afterward.

Do these basketball hoops pose such an issue that you want enforcement of this rule to be your legacy? If you're the only one with an issue, or if only 1-2 neighbors has even mentioned a concern, then I say let it go. There are more important rules that should be the focus of your attention and enforcement. Let kids be kids and enjoy one of the only things that might get them away from the screens and outside playing with their friends.

I know I am in the minority but I would enforce this and interpret "in use" to mean exactly what it means. When you are done, move it. As has been mentioned before, Board members don't get to ignore what they don't like and only enforce what they agree with. Should the rule be changed? I don't know. Arguing about what "in use" means reminds me of Clinton saying "it depends on what the word 'is', is".

On a side note, although it's awkward and a pain in the butt, many of these portable basketball courts have wheels on the base where the sand goes and they aren't filled with 50 pounds of sand. The one I had for my kids had 10 pounds of sand. When you are done you tilted the pole towards you and rolled it where you were storing it.

"WHY...?"

because we're not talking about hockey season and ice rinks.

we're talking about a specific CCR about BBall hoops and how to enforce a specific reading of that CCR.

If you want to bring in hockey rinks in alabama into this, please cite your CCR that discusses it so that we can better discuss it.

The rule is clear and not subject to intrepretation. Either you are using the basketball hoop or it is put away. The rule requires that basketball hoops are portable in nature. One filled with 100 pounds of sand is not portable and thus not permitted. I don't see any questions on how to interpret the rule.

Whether your board wants to enforce the rule or not is another story. It sounds that some members of the Board do not want to enforce the rule while others do.

I don't see this as an rule interpretation issue, it's a rule enforcement issue.

Your typical car is 17' long so yes it can be stored in a garage. These portable hoops have casters to make moving it easier hence the name "portable" It can be stored on it's side. As your 100# stated notion
If people can place them in the street, then they can easily put them away when not "in use" There are a few people in our neighborhood that have them and we do send a warning letter first then a fine.
Even though our covenants state no "storage" on the side of houses, we let people put portable hoops on the side for ease of use. And yes these things do blow over. We had one damage someones car

abandoned generally refers to a rule that the HOA has failed to enforce across the community for a long period of time. Easy to google.

For example: No basketball hoops allowed, but there's been no enforcement in 20 years and now 30% of the homes have basketball hoops. The genie is out of the bottle. Yes, technically the "no BBall hoop rule" is still there and everyone is in violation, but pretty much impossible to start enforcing and most likely the HOA would lose if they ever tried fining and taking it to court.

I would say "in use" means actually playing but would also include a short break from playing. The problem is that, absent a definition in your covenants or a legal definition, you are bound to have multiple opinions. That is the definition of ambiguous. So the real question is, how does your state handle ambiguous CC&Rs?

Thank you for making my point. The fact that you discount other opinions does not make the definition clear as day. On the contrary, the fact that reasonable people have a different opinion of the definition is evidence that the term is ambiguous.

No, the fact that people disagreed doesn't mean that the term is ambiguous. It means that those who disagreed with me are wrong.

The term "in use" is widely used in our society. It is used on the word use, which is defined in the dictionary:

"the action of using something or the state of being used for a purpose."

If I drive past a basketball hoop and there is no action of it being used nor is it in the state of being used for a purpose then it is not "in use".

Another example is a bathroom. Is the bathroom in use if no one is in the bathroom? No, it's not in use and therefore available for other people in the house to use. You wouldn't say that it's "in use" if no one is actually using it at the time the question is asked.

Another example is the telephone. If I ask, "is the telephone in use" and no one is using it, what will you say? Probably, "no, it's not in use."

Thus, a basketball hoop that no one is using at the time of observation is not in use.

From a practical HOA enforcement standpoint, I think that a basketball hoop that is well maintain (clean net, no signs of algae / moss growth, good overall condition, no signs of damage or repairs) would be fine in most neighborhoods. HOAs are not going to score points by trying to take basketball away from youth. Signs that a basketball hoop has fallen into disrepair, such as a net that is rotten, mildly; repairs needed to basketball goal, mildew or algae growth elsewhere, or sun faded would indicate that the kids may have moved on to other activities.

From an enforcement standpoint, it's going to be really difficult to enforce putting the hoop away all of the time for the person who keeps their hoop in nicely maintained condition. The one whose appearance is in decay will likely be much more responsive to a request to remove it or store it.

From a practical standpoint, I would focus my energy on the low hanging fruit. I would not attempt to have everyone in the neighborhood put all hoops away but rather focus on those whose appearance indicates that the families may have forgotten about them.

Yes, I am saying that as HOA president of my own association, we do not send out letters for every basketball hoop that is left out when not in use. We do not believe that our community would support that. Rather, letters get sent when the basketball hoop falls into disrepair.

If a homeowner has an issue with this, they are welcome to resolve their disagreement through the courts. I believe that our decision is reasonable and that our attorneys would be willing to defend us in our decision making if this came to a court case. It won't come to that because we only sent out letters to the obvious hoops that need to be retired, and people do not complain about those letters.

Even if the covenant on portable basketball hoops is not enforced for a long period of time, I have doubts the abandonment defense would work. This is because people can fairly easily comply with the covenant.

I think the abandonment defense gets raised when complying with the long un-enforced covenant is a great burden on an owner.

I am not buying your arguments here. But it's all probably pretty academic.

so I lived in Mark's neighborhood, read the covenant, looked around and saw dozens of hoops, and made the assumption that the HOA is not enforcing this CCR, effectively abandoning it, and then decided to install a bball anchored to my driveway w/ a posthole...that seems like a long un-enforced covenant that would cause great burden to me to remedy if the HOA decided to start enforcing it....

... and I'll toss in that the judge really appreciates that you (AdamL1) read the covenant.

Judge: So you knew that all hoops must be portable?

Adam: Yes.

Judge: But you installed one anyway?

Adam: Yes.

Judge: I rule for the HOA. Next case.

Mark quoted the covenant verbatim above. To repeat:



It's selective enforcement only when the Board enforces against owner X who is doing Y (in violation of the covenants) but not owner Z who is also doing Y (in violation of the covenants).