It states in the article that the captain and his family are still in their
home pending litigation, and State Senator Carona isn't the only state
senator here. We have 30 others beside him. People are working on the
Like most laws, it had a reason when it was enacted. However, the law has
been abused and misapplied and is under review due to cases like this.
And, for the record, he is a captain, meaning he has likely been military a
while, so let's not denigrate the wife here too quickly. Military wives tend
to be VERY responsible, so who knows how she managed to miss making the
Bottom line, one of the photos shows the family together at home and says
they are litigating it. With any luck at all, it will go away.
Michael Goins, k5wmg
University of Texas at San Antonio
Northwest Vista College
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Paul Christensen <email@example.com> wrote:
> > The guy agreed to the HOA rules. They did not respond to
> > the bills. You don't pay your bills, you lose what you have.
> > I am not real sure where the issue is.
> Good point, but if you were serving in Iraq and the situation occurred to
> you (however unlikely), I am 100% confident you would not sit back and say
> "I deserve to have lost my $300,000 home while serving my country because
> my wife's failure to make timely payments." If the NPR story is correct,
> two payments went delinquent. That said, even though the covenants operate
> under the general principles of contract law between parties, an important
> part of general contract law relates to the concept of "unjust enrichment."
> Notwithstanding any potential relief under the Servicemembers Civil Relief
> Act, he may have a defense in the unjust enrichment that resulted in the
> loss of his home, triggered by language in the agreement. Whether or not
> the State of Texas understands that concept remains to be seen.
> In effect, the circumstances in the captain's case amount to "legalized
> theft." Another general principle of contract law is that a breach
> resulting in damages is generally limited only to actual damages,
> of what's been agreed to in writing. Even an agreement between parties to
> liquidated damages or specific remedies in the event of breach must be
> reasonable. It's pretty difficult to believe that missing one or two HOA
> payments results in damages to an aggrieved HOA that far exceed actual
> damages. If that kind of condition operates as a matter of law, then the
> constituents of Texas need to apply pressure to their elected officials to
> change the law. However, consider that in Texas, Republican State Senator
> John Carona owns the largest HOA management company in the country -
> Associa, which has more than 100 offices, 6,000 employees and 7,000 HOA
> clients in 30 states and Mexico. So, as a tax payer in his legislative
> district, do you take your issue to a senator who has a clear
> conflict-of-interest in the very law for which he has significant
> I hope the present homeowner doesn't get too comfortable in his or her new
> surroundings. Frankly, even if the captain later loses his case in court, I
> hope his community pulls together to apply substantial pressure on their
> state legislature to find an alternate means of dealing with this -- for
> example, allowing other personal property to satisfy a debt while leaving
> foreclosure of the home as a last resort. Also, property owners may want
> work with their HOAs to place dues/fees in escrow ahead of time they become
> due and payable.
> Paul, W9AC
> TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk mailing list