Homeowner's association vs disabled child

[Shangri-laschild]

Yeah, I know people can just "Choose" to not live in an HOA neighborhood, but is it really a good idea to limit where people can live?

When I was looking for a place to rent, there were several places that I refused to rent from because of who owned them. That limited where I could rent quite a bit. Same goes with bad neighborhoods. That limits where I can live even more.

Oh come on people. These rules are idiotic, stupid, and unnecessary. I don't see why they should even have to justify putting the house there. It's an obvious control freak move on the HOAs part and control freaks are not worth defending.

"I signed your contract/agreement but your rules are stupid so I don't have to follow them"? They could have tried to work something out with the HOA. If they were approached before hand, they might have been willing to work something out. No way of knowing now. They agreed to the rules and then without even asking about it, did it anyway.

[Rageaholic]

"I signed your contract/agreement but your rules are stupid so I don't have to follow them"? They could have tried to work something out with the HOA. If they were approached before hand, they might have been willing to work something out. No way of knowing now. They agreed to the rules and then without even asking about it, did it anyway.

When they moved in, they may not have thought they'd have a disabled child (depending on when the moved in) and may not have thought the rules, however assine they were, would be a problem.

Even then, the rules are still stupid and not worth defending. Seriously, what does it matter if they have a playhouse? Who is it hurting? Everyone is supporting this family so obviously it's not much of a problem for the neighbors. It's just the HOA being a bunch of control freak douchebags.

[Andara Bledin]

This neighborhood is not cheap; every one of these houses is a mcmansion worth about half a million dollars.

I do have a few quesitons: First off, what sort of therapy does this custom miniature house provide that could not have been provided within one of the many rooms in their house? You could probably fit about 5 of my house in there. That's if they only have the 4 bedroom model, and not one of the 5 bedroom variations.

Also, I'm curious as to why they would build the house just barely inside the gate at the end of the drive. Why not have it built, say, in the back yard proper, behind their house where almost nobody would see it? Although, considering that they're at the end of a cul-de-sac, it's likely that a neighbor actively complained about the structure, which in no way matches the appearance of the houses in the subdivision. So, another question: Why not have it built to match the architecture of the mcmansions, which are almost universally of brick construction reminiscent of antebellum homes of the south, only usually without the columns (some do have them).

I also question why anyone would build a structure on their property (any property) without getting all of the proper permits and clearances prior to beginning construction. $5,000.00 may or may not be a lot of money to the mcmansion set, but it's still not a small amount to toss out there without checking to see you even have bases, much less that they're covered.

^-.-^

[MrsEclipse]

Even then, the rules are still stupid and not worth defending. Seriously, what does it matter if they have a playhouse? Who is it hurting? Everyone is supporting this family so obviously it's not much of a problem for the neighbors. It's just the HOA being a bunch of control freak douchebags.

http://www.fakeposters.com/posters/rules/

Pictured above: an accurate representation of a typical Home Owners Association.

I think both sides are just being difficult about this. The HOA rules are stupid, no question but in all the articles I read, it feels as if couple building the thing seemed to go out of their way to do EVERYTHING wrong in this situation. If it was more apparent that tried to do it right and were shot down, I wouldn't have so much trouble vilifying the idiocy of the HOA.

[DrFaroohk]

Didn't we just have a thread about how people should NOT be able to just make up their own rules and enforce them as they see fit, with their excuse always being "Well, we wrote it down, so it's fact now!" Fuck the HOA's. How about can I own a neighborhood and say "Ok, sign this contract that says you will never call the police about the extreme loud noises coming from my house."

[bara]

Except when you move in somewhere you have to agree to the HOA rules first. Its not like arbitrariyl throwing up a sign.

While I hate HOAs, they do at least give fair warning to thier douchebagery before you are victim to it. Its stupid of course. But thats where we live.

[DrFaroohk]

So other than the "It's illegal" argument, how is that different from me, say, putting in my rent contract that the tenants agree to never ever report my building for being below code? Or writing "I reserve the right to refuse anyone from living here, whether it's for marital status, children, race or religion."

[Hyena Dandy]

What's wrong with the "Its illegal"?

I'm fairly sure that there are laws against banning people for race or religion. Might be some for marital status (but I doubt it) and I know there aren't for children.

[Andara Bledin]

So other than the "It's illegal" argument, how is that different from me, say, putting in my rent contract that the tenants agree to never ever report my building for being below code? Or writing "I reserve the right to refuse anyone from living here, whether it's for marital status, children, race or religion."

It isn't.

Your place, your rules. Welcome to the world.

However, since certain things are mandated by law, you have to abide. So, while you can't forbid a tenant from complaining about, say, unsafe living conditions, you can forbid them from ever parking a car in the garage as part of the lease. Or you could mandate that only one tenant per bedroom or similar, provided you don't have a rule regarding a status that's protected by law in that locale.

^-.-^

[Canarr]

What Andara says. In a contract, you're free to put anything you want - as long as the law of the land doesn't say different. So, if you rent a property to someone, you're free to put whatever asinine rule you can think of in the contract - and they're free to go ahead and not rent from you if they think you're stupid.

[DrFaroohk]

What's wrong with the "Its illegal"?

Because that in itself is a really bad idea. Supporting something JUST because some idiot in washington wrote it down on a piece of paper and called it a law? No no no. Laws must have reason. Law without reason is.....basically high school.

[Canarr]

And if you don't like a law, your country has an established process that people need to follow in order to get said law changed or abolished. Unfortunately, "Ignoring it because I don't like it!" is not part of this process. You may believe a certain law has no or no good reason behind it, but The Law as a whole certainly *does* - and therefore, citizens living in a country are generelly not free to choose which laws they want to follow, and which they want to disobey.

Same goes for the rules set forth in a contract you sign (say, when moving into a neighborhood with an HOA). With your signature, you basically say, "Yes, I promise to follow these rules!" If, at a later date, you may feel the need to disobey one or more of these rules, you take it up with your contract partner and try to work out whether or not there is a way that you may do so; if necessary, through a court. Again, there is a process here, and for good reason.

If you just disobey a law, or a rule, you face punishment. That's the way things work, and you were actually supposed to learn that somewhere around Kindergarten, I think.

[MadMike]

And if you don't like a law, your country has an established process that people need to follow in order to get said law changed or abolished.

Unfortunately, most of us can't afford to buy a congressman.

Unfortunately, "Ignoring it because I don't like it!" is not part of this process.

Sometimes it's the only way. If enough people ignore a bad law, then sometimes that's what gets it changed. It's called "civil disobedience."

[Canarr]

Unfortunately, most of us can't afford to buy a congressman.

Well, I hear some of 'em are cheap... but yeah, I get your point. It's unfortunately easier to bring about an unjust law than to abolish one.

Sometimes it's the only way. If enough people ignore a bad law, then sometimes that's what gets it changed. It's called "civil disobedience."

Correct. But a central point of civil disobedience is accepting the punishment it brings about. Boldly stating, "Here I stand, defiantly, because I believe this is *right!", then turning around to whine, "But I reaaaaalllly don't wanna get in trouble for it!" is kinda lame.

[Mytical]

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." - John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton. While I agree people can live anywhere, and do not have to live somewhere where an HOA is in place....

HOA's are one of those things that is good on paper, and if run by GOOD people, can be a GOOD thing. Sadly, we all know people can be jerks. Many things are good..until you introduce people. Speaks a lot about humans doesn't it?

There are a lot of concepts that are good..on paper..until the chaotic entities known as humans are mixed in. Then it falls apart at the seems.