Homeowner's association vs disabled child

[Andara Bledin]

I lived in a neighborhood in Anaheim. They didn't need HOAs in that area, because the city had laws on the books that governed what you could or could not do with your house. From what I understand, the whole "attached or not" issue is also a legal matter in the city of Long Beach and not subject to HOAs and inescapable if you live in the city.

^-.-^

[Panacea]

Guys: HOA doesn't stand for Homeowner's Administration.

It stands for Homeowners Association.

Completely different thing.

[Giggle Goose]

Why are we arguing over semantics? The point is that the organization/administration/association/whatever used bullshit logic to do something asinine.

[FArchivist]

The dictionary is winning. ;p

And you know as well as I that when speaking of terminology specific to an area of government, the vernacular dictionary is not how things are defined. When you speak of medicine, you define things in accordance with medical terminology, not the vernacular. When you speak of law, you define things in accordance with legal terminology, not the vernacular. And so it is with political science.

By....describing them with the actual words that describe them?

A homeowner association, or HOA, is a corporation formed by a real estate developer for the purpose of marketing, managing, and selling of homes and lots in a residential subdivision. They are subject to state statutes that govern non-profit corporations and homeowner associations.

In the United States, an administration in reference to a governing authority is either the executive branch of a government under a specific executive leader OR an executive branch agency headed by an administrator. Administration in business does not have anything to do with organization, but instead implementation of process.

A bureaucracy is an organization of non-elected officials of a governmental organization who implement the rules, laws, and functions of their institution.

Did anyone say they were?

If we're calling them "bureaucracies" and "administrations", then it is reasonable for someone assume that they have the public immunity that most bureaucracies and administrations do. Or at the least, the same governmental/legal authority.

Why are we arguing over semantics? The point is that the organization/administration/association/whatever used bullshit logic to do something asinine.

Semantics are EXTREMELY important. Law is composed of semantics; how you go about things and how things are viewed are defined by semantics. Precision in language is absolutely vital.

[Andara Bledin]

Dude, if you're going to quote Wikipedia (among others) verbatim, you need to start giving credit and stop plagiarizing.

^-.-^

[FArchivist]

Dude, if you're going to quote Wikipedia (among others) verbatim, you need to start giving credit and stop plagiarizing.

If the links are going to be edited out, why bother?

[Andara Bledin]

You can cite your work without giving a link.

^-.-^

[FArchivist]

You can cite your work without giving a link.

Then I could make up citations on the spot, which is just about the same as not citing at all.

[Panacea]

Why are we arguing over semantics? The point is that the organization/administration/association/whatever used bullshit logic to do something asinine.

Precision in language is important if you are trying to make an convincing argument. Problem is, both GK and FArchivist have been using the wrong language.

If we're calling them "bureaucracies" and "administrations", then it is reasonable for someone assume that they have the public immunity that most bureaucracies and administrations do. Or at the least, the same governmental/legal authority.

Unfortunately this statement is not supported by facts.

HOA's do not have any kind of public immunity because, as you yourself pointed out, they are corporations. The only authority they exercise is that granted by contract law. When you buy a home with CCR's you are signing a legal and binding contract that states you will abide by the rules of the HOA.

If you break a CCR, the HOA can forclose on your house. However, if the HOA breaks its own rules and you are harmed as a result, you can sue the HOA as a corporation (and possibly the officers as individuals).

I'm afraid you are completely wrong on your assumptions of HOA's as bureaucracies or government agencies. They are neither.

[Tanasi]

The kids parents definity screwed up, but I think if they used the ADA (American's with Disability Act) they just might get some relief especially so when it's for an child.

Personally I dispise HOA and wouldn't live in one. I've done battle with two different HOA for the last 20 years where they were trying to force their rules upon me and my property even though my property isn't and has never been part of their association. One group is barred by court order from contacting me in any manner without a judge's prior permission.

[Shangri-laschild]

While I know there have been instances of people being lied to about the property they are buying and not knowing there was a HOA before it was too late, for the most part when you buy a property you are aware and are agreeing to follow their rules. While for the most part I think HOA are more trouble than they are worth and I would never move into one, I am not against the existence of them. If you don't want to follow the rules of one, don't move into one (hence why I won't ever live in one).

It sucks that the HOA won't make an exception but it comes down to the fact that they weren't allowed to build this and they did anyway. Instead of seeing if something could be worked out, they went ahead with it. Like I said, it does suck that they won't make an exception, but I'm also irritated by the idea that the rules shouldn't apply to them because they have a disabled child.

[HYHYBT]

And you know as well as I that when speaking of terminology specific to an area of government, the vernacular dictionary is not how things are defined.

And you, in turn, know that we are NOT speaking of the government, but of a Home Owners Association. You have made the point that HOAs are not part of the government. Therefore, logically, it would *not* be the government-specific definitions in use.

Why would links be edited out, by the way? People post links here all the time.

[Kheldarson]

I think he's referencing the fact that one of his posts got reworded in a separate post to give it some clarification. And from what I've read of that thread, the original post had lots of links.

But HOA's are a bit silly. And over and under regulated at the same time >.< The one in my parents' neighborhood barely does anything (partly because they can't get anyone to pay the dues) and then pitches a fit when those that do pay (like my parents) try to do things (like build a shed) to make life easier for them.

[jackfaire]

What's really messed up is the ones that use their kids. As I mentioned my parents bought a house in a neighborhood that later became an HOA. My mom at one point had had her Van parked on the street because my little brother was fixing it for her and there wasn't room for it in the driveway.

This was not illegal but it was against the HOA's rules which as we were not part of it they couldn't enforce it so they sent their kids to egg our place.

We know they sent their kids because they made it a point to make it clear to my mom that it was they who set it up without admitting it.

You know like a gangster in a movie talking about how sad it would be if your business burned down cuz it didn't have protection.

[SkullKing]

In this situation, can´t you call the police on the kids for vandalism?(which would implicate the parents since they are the legal guardians?)