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

Create Free Account →

⚡ Takes 30 seconds

Already a member? Log in

EricS12 (Indiana)
Posts: 4
Posted:
I live in Indiana and I bought a new house in a new development in 2007. We have a Building covenants that states the basics of what your house has to look like, has some guidelines on fences, etc.. but the words HOA never appear in the document.
The development now has 42 owners out of 90 lots, with 8 being built on, and 40 still open and owned by the developer.
The developer is now going nuts trying to get an HOA formed, that was never filled with the state and not on record with the recorders office. There is a mad rush to form an HOA and I don't want any part of it. I have been paying into the Developer "HOA" (that doesn't exist). We have reason to believe that a majority of the money she has 'fraudulently' collected was not used for the up keep of the common areas, or if it has, it was VERY unwisely spent on the magnitude of $500+ a month for lawn care with only ~1 acre to manage.
I'm particularly worried that the developer, along with her buddy builders, and an uninformed community could easily create a majority vote to modify the covenants to require membership in a HOA (and also instate several other items i don't agree with on her 17 page document).
What is required to amend the covenants in a partially finished development?? %vote? majority, unanimous? <- Help on this one!!
I don't care if they form an HOA, as long as I'm not part of it! (I'm just overly angry with her inability to manage money, something that with her amendments, she will manage until the development in almost 100% complete - I'd rather join after the financial irresponsible developer no longer gets my money!)
Any advice or experience would be greatly appreciated!
MicheleD (Kentucky)
Posts: 4,491
Posted:
Eric, you likely may have no choice. It will depend on what the developer is able to get created while the development is still under her control.

Do you have deed restrictions? Those normally run with the land anyway, irrespective of an HOA.
SteveM9 (Massachusetts)
Posts: 3,699
Posted:
Quote:
I don't care if they form an HOA, as long as I'm not part of it!


Its true Eric, you have no choice. The developer is in control. You stated you already have common areas, so its not a voluntary HOA. The words "HOA" or anything like it do not need to appear in any of your documents. The fact that you have building covenants or any other restrictions means an HOA can be formed at any time to enforce the restrictions.

Too bad you didn't realize what you were purchasing.
MaryA1 (Arizona)
Posts: 7,043
Posted:
Steve,

If there was no intent to have an HOA when the first home was sold, then one cannot be formed w/o member approval. However, it depends upon the state as to the % of member approval required. Some states require a 100% approval. However, if the covenants indicate assessments are to be charged to each prop owner then that really means an HOA will be formed to collect the assessments. So, if it is just that the declarant hasn't gotten around to forming the HOA yet, then a vote of the members would not be required and every prop owner would automatically become a member.

The fact that "HOA" may not be mentioned anywhere in the docs does not mean an HOA was not planned. If the declaration talks about "the association" and/or the "board of directrs" that is an indication that an HOA is to be formed. Also, as I pointed out above, mention of assessments is another indication. IF articles of inc and bylaws have been drawn up that means a corp has been formed.
RobertR1 (South Carolina)
Posts: 5,164
Posted:
Eric,
Only hope I can offer is to check all the courthouse records for how the property was listed and recorded, plus anything else you can find in court records about the legal end of your adversaries.......always good to know who you are going to do battle with. Check tax records and also pay a visit to county planning office and see what has happened to the master plan. Most developers cover all these bases but with the economic situation and the bottom line thin maybe she made a mistake. In any event if you are stuck and ready to fight because you didn't understand what you were getting into you can always do the American way of organizing private opposition. The may require you to be a member of the HOA but they can't stop you from joining other organizations.

But before you get rolling down the highway, look on the left side of this page and highlighted in yellow is a sponsor CAN, they have a great library and also they have posted state statutes. Then use the search feature at top of page
EricS12 (Indiana)
Posts: 4
Posted:
The PUD Rider does mention an "association" and all the fun legal talk of "constituent documents" that go along with paying assessments, board of directors, etc...
However, from what I understand she filed the papers a long time ago with the building covenants. She filled things incorrectly and a large majority of papers, such as the "constituent documents" were never recorded and the HOA never officially formed.
There is a line item in the current covenants that states the law of the land, all must abide by the covenants and changes can be made with a majority of the lot owners.
This is where the situation gets nasty as she doesn't have majority but she is already very close by owning so many undeveloped lots. In fact, I believe she is trying to coerce 3 homeowners as the "HOA board" (which she appointed - personally not a big fan of an HOA that wasn't elected by the homeowners), which those signatures along with any one builder would give her majority without the consent or concern for any of the other homeowners - she even refuses to show the amended covenants to the homeowners or talk of discussing them. Sorry, ranting....
We are getting a lawyer today to have a consultation regarding what our abilities are to avoid joining the HOA, and at the very least understand how we can get our "HOA" dues back that were cashed fraudulently.
I appreciate all the advice, keep it coming!
EricS12 (Indiana)
Posts: 4
Posted:
I should add there are no actual common areas according to the GIS. All "common area" is actually the property of each lot owner. There are not separate lots defined for "common" areas. The common areas have no utilities run to them (no electric) and water used for irrigation is run from each lot. Unless they are defined in the amended covenants (which aren't official - yet), it is just the community giving courtesy to those lot owners to have that section of their lot maintained (except they still pay the irrigation bill I believe - i'm sure this issue isn't resolved yet since only 1 of 3 lots has a house on it, and that house already had an irrigation system install for the whole yard, now when someone builds on the other two and they don't install an irrigation system and they get the bill, then things will get interesting).
EricS12 (Indiana)
Posts: 4
Posted:
On a positive note, the developer owns 36 lots, builders own 7, and the Actual home owners own 47. Still not much comfort room if 3 homeowners cross over, without even consulting the rest of the neighborhood - that would make for a friendly community discussion.....

🎯 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