HOA want to amend CCR's to enter homes

DJ1

Oh my gosh this is not believable. I'll bet you will get many responses. Where did this "big brother" mentality start? A person's home is their castle and I would fight all the way to avoid it. Why do they want to look into others' homes for anyway?

DJ,
As we say down here in Tennessee---"WHEN PIGS FLY"!!! would I ever allow that. For what purpose do they want entry?

But I think that you should not worry about it at all because it would have to be an amendment to your CC&Rs and who ever in the world would vote for that.

DJ1,

ARE YOU SERIOUS!? I can honestly tell you, that it would be best to have a police officer accompanying them, if they decided to enter my home! I couldn’t even fathom another board member even suggesting such a thing.

If there is any reason to enter someone’s castle it should be with probable cause and a search warrant! That is NO place for the HOA!

I thought I had heard it all. YEAH, APPARENTLY NOT!

Thanks that will be fun to share with the other board members. They will appreciate a good laugh.

Beside as already stated above it would be an amendment to the governing documents and I can’t image they would receive an approval for such a ludicrous amendment.

Although, you should receive some rather interesting responses, to say the least.

Chuck W.

Could they be meaning emtering the PROPERTY (not inside the home) to maybe correct a violation? Our docs allow that, and I think others do too, altho I would never attempt it. Some here have advised against doing that too.
Absoultely crazy to want the ability to enter someone's home. Whatever for? This cannot be a "rule" but would have to be approved by the required percent of owners. Good luck selling that.

I would say that it's time to post the old trespassing sign on my property:

PRIVATE PROPERTY
TRESPASSERS WILL BE VIOLATED!

PS Michelle and Ellen I was trying to be careful not to indicate what I thought of such a CCR as I think it is assinine to say the least! One of the original versions of the CCR's (~3 existed dependent on when HO bought) regulated ONE thing that fell on the interior, the other versions did not. (Window film on inside of window). At the time I thought while the HOA can inspect the exterior of the property (with notice) at least they couldn't come inside!

Yes I agree that on its face this seems like a ridiculous amendment but DJ just out of curiosity exactly for what purpose do they want the right to enter?

Glen, who knows why!

Well did you actually read the proposed amendment or is this something you heard they wanted to do? In other words do you in fact have first hand knowledge that this proposed amendment exists? Or could it be propaganda from someone who doesn't want the new amendments passed. i.e. "You know Fred if these darned amendments pass; then the BOD can come in your house and inspect it anytime they want. I'm voting NO and you should too and let your neighbors know about what those bas*****'s are trying to do."

It isn't from someone who doesn't want the new amendments to pass, or fail since they can't vote. They have the proposed CCR's though.

Since it takes 75% to vote to change I will be surprised if they will.

PS. Ellen, I know you said "competent", but it still reminded me that the HOA touted this lawyer as essentially being from a big law firm so he must be right and I was wrong on the concerns expressed about the whole screw-up referenced earlier.

Now that I've had time to recover from the initial shock at the question and read some of the other posts, I can maybe raise a few more questions.

First, there is the issue of getting such a change to the CCRs through. It takes a large number of homeowners to pass an amendment to the CCRs (did I read 75%?). Although such an amendment could be buried amid a dozen or so innocuous amendments, I find it difficult to believe that some astute homeowner wouldn’t catch it and alert the others. Still, I suppose it might be possible to pass if homeowners are apathetic enough and one could obtain enough proxies to put it through.

Forgetting, for the moment, the issue of privacy, which so many others have already touched on, I have several practical questions that no one has even addressed. Assuming that such an amendment does get passed:

1. How will you gain entrance to the homes? Will you require each homeowner to give you a key, or will you just break in?

2. If a homeowner refuses to give you a key, how will you enforce compliance?

3. What if a homeowner gives you a key and then changes the lock so the key is no longer any good? How will you determine this has happened? Do you intend to conduct periodic, random checks to make sure the keys all still work?

4. Who will have custody of the keys?

5. Where will the keys be stored?

5. How will the keys be secured?

6. What happens if one or more of the keys in possession of the association gets lost or stolen? If a thief obtains the keys, then he or she has access to all the homes. Does the association then become liable?

7. One indication police look for in the event of a burglary is sign of forced entry. What happens if there is report of a burglary and there is no sign of forced entry? Does anyone who has access to the keys immediately become suspect? Can the association be held responsible?

8. Will your existing association liability insurance or your D&O insurance cover a claim that arises out of your having possession of the keys? If so, will the premiums increase because of the increased liability and risk?

9. If existing liability or D&O insurance will not provide coverage, will the members of the board and/or committees who have access to the keys, because they also have access to the homeowners’ valuables, need to be bonded? (Also an additional cost to the association).

10. If the answer to 9 is yes, can you even obtain a bond? Will you have to show a justifiable need to have access to the homes to obtain a bond?

Maybe someone in this forum has some answers to these questions. I sure don't.

PS - By "you", I am not referring to anyone personally, but to the HOA, or board, collectively.

Bruce has just about covered it. Then there is the question of alarm systems. Would the nut who proposed this make owners give out their codes for the system?

Keys aren't an issue, just the right to inspect with 48 hours notice and I'm assuming the HO would need to be home in order to allow the inspection...but the only CCR currently in place is the window film on the interior so I see no point either...unless there are some other CCR's being considered that would involve some change to the interior. I know one HO complained about the neighbour cigarette smoke drifting over. This might be fun to exercise the HO's proxy for him just to see if they expose the reasoning for interior inspections!

Your original post didn't say anything about a 48 hour notice and the homeowner being home, so I assumed it would be at any time, including when the homeowner was not at home. For that, you would need keys.

With 48 hour notice, what's to prevent the homeowner from always being away? What if the HO refuses to let anyone in? How do you make the HO comply?

I can see from your posts you do not see the point of this. I just see a lot of issues why this isn't even practical, let alone enforceable.

If the concern is about film on the interior of the window, as I think you indicated, that can be seen from the outside. If you can't see it, what's the point of going inside to see if someone has film that can't be seen from the outside there?

"Mr. Homeowner, we need to come in to see if you have something on your window we can't see. We're pretty sure it's there, but we can't see it, so we want to check."

It doesn't matter what their reason is..they are dead meat.

DJ since you said you hadn't actually seen the proposed change but were going by what your friend told you that they wanted to include the interiors have you considered that he might be "yanking your chain" about this?

DJ,

So you have really posted misleading information! You led us to believe the board wants to amend the CCRs to allow them to enter the interior of a person's home. The proposed amendment explicitly states ". . .excluding the interior of any residence loacted thereon. . .". What they really want is to have the authority to enter your property to, I suppose, look for any CCRs violations that might exist. This is not an uncommon provision in the CCRs, but I would certainly advise against doing so, especially unannounced. Walking up the sidewalk is one thing, entering the back yard is quite another if doing so unannounced and without the owners prior knowledge. Privacy issues abound and the homeowner has the right -- in many states -- to protect his property and his person by whatever means he chooses!! Hope you get the drift. We have a "castle" law here in AZ and I would not be afraid to use it if someone appeared in my backyard who I perceived to be threatening me!!! In some large assn's you may not even know who your board members are much less what they look like. Hope you catch my drift! This proposed amendment needs to state the board shall make arrangements with the property owner to enter their property.

Yes I read your post and while you say the nebulous "they" want to change an existing provision you never said that you have seen this. I think you’re the one doing the chain yanking here.

No I read the text, Mary even quoted it in her response, I must have had the reply window open when Dwight posted so I didn't see his. While you can say they want to change exclude to include; given the slant of most of your posts and your animosity with the HOA that surrounds you but doesn't include you due to their attorneys screw up and how they tried to bully you into joining and how glad you are that you didn't (see I read your posts) excuse me if I remain skeptical.

Maybe this will help Dwight, the existing CCR's also have this which demonstrates why a change to allow the 'interior' isn't necessary to the other CCR.

Windows: Within thirty (30) days of occupancy each Owner shall install permanent draperies or suitable window treatments on all windows facing the street. All window treatments that are visible from neighboring property must show white, unless otherwise approved by the Architechtural committee. No reflective materials, including, but without limitation, aluminum foil, reflective screens or glass, mirrors or similar types, shall be installed or placed upon the outside or inside of any windows."

All of this would already be able to be inspected from the exterior as it seems the intent is to control the visible impact from the exterior (view).

As mentioned there were multiple versions of CCR and we didn't discover this version until our lawyer discovered the mess with having many properties which didn't have any ccr's registered thus excluding us from the HOA.

Funny thing is we paid ~1500.00 to have reflective window film installed on our windows about a year after taking possession because the builder's crappy windows didn't have UV protection and weren't very energy efficient among other problems. 3M makes some great films that do that plus provide privacy due to the reflectivity during the day.

Kind of confused Dwight since it would be obvious to anyone looking at the house from the outside if there is any film or offending window treatment on the inside of the glass..unless you have your exterior windows shuttered close of course. Inspection from the inside won't tell you anything different than from what could be accomplished from an inspection from the outside.

Could you give me some example contrary to this logic?

I would question the ability to further encumber a property with the CC&Rs. You could certainly reduce the burden but increase???

But you also have to consider privacy laws which could easily trump the CC&Rs. Consider that the police can't go through your gate looking for a problem. It is an invasion of privacy. And while HOAs often duck some of those requirements they don't always.

But then also, I think any of the home owners considering coming under the jurisdiction of the HOA must be either insane or stupid. Obviously some people in your neighborhood are on a power trip.

But like Nevada, in Texas you might get shot if you enter a backyard without homeowner permission.

When you buy into a HOA, don't most make you sign an acceptance of the CC&RS? Mine did. It states that you have read and acknowledge that the CCRs must be followed. (in small print, under access to property, the Board has the right to access the outer property under certain circumstances, like for violation inspections). If you didn't read this, then it surely is not the Boards fault that you did not understand what you were buying into.