Judge says Ferentz can stiff neighbors on HOA fees

[HaydenHawk56]

That's a terrible comparison. A) HOA's have nothing to do with democracy or government. B) That's like saying Native Americans should have just rolled over and accepted US rule because "it's a democracy".

KF was there first. He was there before the HOA, and he wanted no part in it, fees OR benefits.

If KF was somehow profiting off of the HOA's existence while not paying his dues, maybe you'd have a point. But he's not, so he shouldn't have to pay, which the courts rightfully agreed with.

Actually they do. HOA are a still of laws that can be upheld by the courts (there by governmental systems).

I'm not sure what Native Americans have to do with this argument and going to that extreme. No one is trying to kick Ferentz out of the neighborhood. The neighbors just want the Ferentz's to pay their fair share in what the community vote on to have a HOA. But, the court ruled in Ferentz's favor in this first round of court action...so that is that.

 

[HaydenHawk56]

Do you typically submit, because resistance is too hard?

Not sure what you are getting at here.

 

[Hawknigh]

Ha, your opinion. Some of you are taking this way to seriously. I think this is a silly legal thing anyway. Pissing over 9500 dollars.

You don't think that Ferentz saw where this was probably going? If he "settled," it wouldn't be "over," but just be getting started with demands that would be restrictive of his property rights and cost him much more money.

 

[HaydenHawk56]

I vote we solidify our online community and make HH56 pay $9000 so that we don't have to have as many pop up adds.

Your neighbors should no be able to force you to join into a legally binding covenant after the fact.

The amount of money is meaningless. How much of your money are you willing to give your neighbors for something you don't want, knowing that it will open the door to them taking what they want when they want?

Well, if that is the case, then everyone here would be paying in association fee to be on this site. So, that would also include you. So pony up.

 

[HaydenHawk56]

You don't think that Ferentz saw where this was probably going? If he "settled," it wouldn't be "over," but just be getting started with demands that would be restrictive of his property rights and cost him much more money.

Who knows. Ferentz won in court anyway so moot point.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

Actually they do. HOA are a still of laws that can be upheld by the courts (there by governmental systems).

I'm not sure what Native Americans have to do with this argument and going to that extreme. No one is trying to kick Ferentz out of the neighborhood. The neighbors just want the Ferentz's to pay their fair share in what the community vote on to have a HOA. But, the court ruled in Ferentz's favor in this first round of court action...so that is that.

The Ferentzs got the house there prior to neighbors building around them and subsequently they then started an HOA. The Ferentzs were under no obligation to join it. So all the HOA talk is null and void and the court obviously ruled in accordance to that.
They probably got their rural place hoping for this sort of thing to never happen to them. They couldn't prevent neighbors buying up land around them and developing it so here they are like the rest of us with crazy nosy entitled neighbors trying to make them pay for things they dont want and follow their made up rules... Glad they won

 

[okeefe4prez]

They couldn't prevent neighbors buying up land around them and developing it so here they are like the rest of us with crazy nosy entitled neighbors trying to make them pay for things they dont want and follow their made up rules

My HOA has dozens of pages of rules. That's the issue. If you're Ferentz and you win the Rose Bowl or National Title, you want to be able to have a proper firework display when you get home, but the HOA would frown upon that. Our HOA bans fireworks, but on 4th of July and New Year's they allow them and they also did not fine anyone for launching fireworks when Clemson won the national title, but the guy the Ferentz's would be in bed with in the HOA does not seem like the type of guy who would give a waiver.

 

[Hawkfnntn]

My HOA has dozens of pages of rules. That's the issue. If you're Ferentz and you win the Rose Bowl or National Title, you want to be able to have a proper firework display when you get home, but the HOA would frown upon that. Our HOA bans fireworks, but on 4th of July and New Year's they allow them and they also did not fine anyone for launching fireworks when Clemson won the national title, but the guy the Ferentz's would be in bed with in the HOA does not seem like the type of guy who would give a waiver.

Right he sure dont seem to be that type at all. Thankfully for the Ferentzs they aren't a part of it and can tell them to go fly a kite.

 

[Adam]

Not sure what you are getting at here.

Your statement was that Kirk should submit because he has the money and resistance is too hard. I wanted to know is that usually the way you live your life.

 

[Adam]

No one is trying to kick Ferentz out of the neighborhood. The neighbors just want the Ferentz's to pay their fair share in what the community vote on to have a HOA. But, the court ruled in Ferentz's favor in this first round of court action...so that is that.

This thought that you have concerns me. Am I to understand your position is that your neighbors should be able to majority vote away your personal property rights?

Don't mistake the issue. Entering into an HOA is a voluntary forfeiture of certain personal property rights. It is wholly unamerican to even consider the idea that a property owner could be forced into property rights forfeiture because their neighbors want it that way. It has to be voluntary.

 

[HaydenHawk56]

The Ferentzs got the house there prior to neighbors building around them and subsequently they then started an HOA. The Ferentzs were under no obligation to join it. So all the HOA talk is null and void and the court obviously ruled in accordance to that.
They probably got their rural place hoping for this sort of thing to never happen to them. They couldn't prevent neighbors buying up land around them and developing it so here they are like the rest of us with crazy nosy entitled neighbors trying to make them pay for things they dont want and follow their made up rules... Glad they won

I get that and obviously the lower court ruled in their favor. I still don't fault the neighbors though for trying to argue their case though. Through time, obviously zoning can change, housing developments can change, circumstances can change.

Really, I think this whole case amounts to a pissing match. Can't they all just get along?

 

[HaydenHawk56]

Your statement was that Kirk should submit because he has the money and resistance is too hard. I wanted to know is that usually the way you live your life.

Wow, you can up with that conclusion (of how I allegedly live my life) all by my one statement. Note I said Ferentz has the right to argue his case in court. He did and he won.

I think paying the fee is more of a nice thing to do to help out that neighborhood and the HOA. But, obviously a line was drawn there.

 

[okeefe4prez]

I think paying the fee is more of a nice thing to do to help out that neighborhood and the HOA. But, obviously a line was drawn there.

It's not the fee, it's the restrictive covenants that come with the fee. Never ever ever ever let an HOA "annex" your house. Just don't do it. That other guy would have been the "declarant" on the restrictive covenants and been able to impose to all sorts of crap on Coach because the way those things work the developer or declarant has full control until they sell 100% of a project.

 

[Adam]

Wow, you can up with that conclusion (of how I allegedly live my life) all by my one statement. Note I said Ferentz has the right to argue his case in court. He did and he won.

I think paying the fee is more of a nice thing to do to help out that neighborhood and the HOA. But, obviously a line was drawn there.

Wow dude, reading comprehension is lacking here.

First I asked you a simple question. Second if I made any assumption it was that you were being hypocritical. Saying Kirk should do something because he has the money while in your life you actually wouldn't do what you were calling for Kirk to do.

 

[HaydenHawk56]

This thought that you have concerns me. Am I to understand your position is that your neighbors should be able to majority vote away your personal property rights?

Don't mistake the issue. Entering into an HOA is a voluntary forfeiture of certain personal property rights. It is wholly unamerican to even consider the idea that a property owner could be forced into property rights forfeiture because their neighbors want it that way. It has to be voluntary.

If the area is declared an HOA

Wow dude, reading comprehension is lacking here.

First I asked you a simple question. Second if I made any assumption it was that you were being hypocritical. Saying Kirk should do something because he has the money while in your life you actually wouldn't do what you were calling for Kirk to do.

I was about to say the same thing about you. And, I'm not saying that at all. Those are your words, not mine.

 

[HaydenHawk56]

By the way, despite all I have said, I understand why the law ruled Kirk's way...unless it can be proven he did agree to join the HOA. I still think it was a silly thing to go to court over though. That is all. Maybe I'm wrong, but I can also see the upsides to HOAs. Don't agree with everything with them, but this is a neighbor pissing match.