Slashdot Mirror
HOA Orders TARDIS Removed From In Front of Parrish Home
An anonymous reader writes A Florida couple learned that they are much bigger fans of Doctor Who than their homeowner association, after receiving a notice to remove the TARDIS from their driveway. Leann Moder and her husband David were given 15 days to get rid of the big blue box. From the article: "It was built by Moder's father as a wedding set piece, and she and her husband, David, were married in front of it. 'My husband mentioned, "Do you want to do a Doctor Who themed wedding?"' Moder said. 'That could be fun.' Since then, their TARDIS has been used at sci-fi conventions and parties, and was even the focus of a Halloween haunt the Moders set up on their driveway in October." The HOA had no comment on their stance on sonic screwdrivers, or the Eye of Harmony.
Leaving a TV prop replica sitting in your driveway is douchey. Store it in the garage, or your storage shed, or the back yard, or a storage facility. Nobody in your neighborhood likes Doctor Who so much that they want to come home to your driveway TARDIS every day. Stop being a douche.
Die by the sword. If you dislike the rules, don't go live in an HOA. Zero sympathy.
If you don't want to conform, don't buy a home there.
HOAs are completely up front about those things and if you don't read the bylaws before buying, you're a dumb motherfucker.
Not in my case. I didn't see the bylaws of my HOA until I had been it's president for 18 months. It didn't help that it was in a messed up master-sub association hierarchy intended to leave the power in the hands of the developer, so there were multiple sets of rules flying around, only a subset of of which were passed to homeowners.
Fortunately, that leaves the HOA relatively powerless if it comes to a lawsuit and my goal as president was to stop the crazies trying to use the HOA as a tool to crap on their neighbors and settle old differences.
HOAs are evil, in that they are perfectly constructed to set neighbor against neighbor. We would be better off without them.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
This is not exactly true. Many HOA's "make it up as they go" and you find out later you are in violation of somebody's made up rule.
Mine, for instance, sent me a warning letter giving me 15 days to remove an "above ground pool" from my back yard (that had been there 4 years previously) but nowhere is "above ground pool" or anything approaching that even mentioned in the deed restrictions. I know, I read though the 30 pages three times looking for it. I even called the property management company and asked them where it was and THEY couldn't find it. Turns out, it was in ANOTHER document, one that I was not aware existed and one that the HOA board had authored well after the deed restrictions where filed on my home, without my knowledge or consent.
So, what you say is NOT always true. They often do change the rules AFTER the fact and Realtors often gloss over the HOA's authority except to tell you if there are any dues. Usually there is the "transfer paperwork" that is supposed to give you all the details, or at least warn you that there are details you should be warned about, but that is presented to the buyer at closing to sign in a 3 inch stack of paper with hundreds of "initial here" and "Sign here" stickers and who has time to actually understand all that mess? Besides, the REAL details of the HOA are in the deed restrictions and in the 5+ closings in two separate states I've attended in my lifetime I've NEVER seen them in the stack of paperwork.
Personally, I think HOA's are an OK idea that has been made into a really bad one by the builders who use them. My primary problem with them is that they NEVER ever end. It doesn't matter what happens to my current house, in 100 years the HOA will STILL be there. Something tells me that in 100 years, circumstances are likely to change and the HOA will be a legal problem with no good solution.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
And to think, some folks think we could have *no* government at all because private parties would never do such things...
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
I once had a next door neighor that had 4 cars on blocks in his driveway.
A) This guy is cooler than any neighbor I've ever had in an HOA
B) This guy's car collection did not devalue my home one bit or make it harder for me to sell it (location baby).
HOAs are just an affront to your personal liberties and a money pit. Their enforced conformity preserves nothing and gives you nothing (except some light fascism).
They don't even enforce the useful (safety) rules.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
You can, if you buy private land. If you buy in an HOA, you cannot.
This works exactly the same way in Europe: you can buy private land, and there are a variety of restrictions, easements, and rules depending on where you buy.
Learn something about the world around you before spouting such nonsense.
" The lines between the corporation and the government continue to get thinner"
quick, somebody solve this problem with more government.
A HOA is upfront about the fact that they don't want a TARDIS in your driveway? I doubt it.
This may be the reason why so few Doctor Who episodes are set in the States...
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
if you think HOAs are "completely up front about those things", you're a dumb motherfucker.
No matter where you go though there will be petty politics when you arrive. If you ever find a group of like minded and enlightened indivuduals maybe things will work out briefly until someone cranky moves in and disagrees with everyone else. Soon you get a big collection of nutty guys in the neighborhood and they start getting elected to the HOA board, which is actually pretty common because the sane people want nothing to do with being on the board.
Then it turns out that to "take your business elsewhere" is an extremely onerous task - uproot yourself and the family, sell the house at a loss, move to another neighborhood, and take your chances all over again.
I agree with AC. By sending the money directly to a board member you may be exposing them to risk (losing the money, misusing it etc). You are playing the passive aggressive approach and then getting upset that they are fining you. You are causing the fight.
I am in Australia and HOA are totally unknown to me. The closest is the agreements that unit (condo) owners have to abide by and i have heard of similar petty issues. One was where the association would not agree to having cable TV laid throughout the condo building so most owners had to install satellite instead. That happened simply because some older owners did not want cable themselves so would not allow the buildings funds to used to install it. Even though it would add value to the building, even if they don't use it themselves. Sometimes people just look for something to fight about.
An HOA is basically a local government.
People make this artificial distinction between public (government) and private. Elected officials and employees of the government are not some different species with different behavior from regular people. They are regular people. Just like all corporation owners and employees are people. There is no public vs private, corporate vs. individual. It's all just people. If private individuals can do corrupt things, then so can a government - because a government is just a collection of private individuals. And vice versa. There are good people, and there are bad people. If bad people get control of a HOA, they can do bad things. Just like if bad people get control of a corporation or government, they can do bad things.
The libertarian vs socialist argument is merely one of degree - what is the optimal amount of organization? Some people believe little is best. Others believe a lot is best. IMHO, both groups make self-serving arguments. Libertarians point out the failures of large-scale organization while ignoring the successes. Socialists point out the success of large-scale organization while ignoring the failures. I'm of the opinion that it's irrational ideology to believe there is some one-size-fits-all optimal level of organization for everything. Each different task has a different optimal level. Some things are best solved by letting individuals or small groups decide for themselves. Other things are best solved by the country or world as a unified whole.