[TowerTalk] HOA Abuse

[Art Trampler]

One thing is certain: None of us have all the facts, so there's a lot of speculation here.
 
On the one hand, the idea that if they owned the house free and clear, certainly they could afford the dues may be specious; the man does not appear to be a career officer, as he was "called up" to active duty.  He may have taken a 60% pay cut when called from reserves to active duty, creating real hardship.
 
On the other hand, per this article, http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/HOA-that-Foreclosed-on-Active-Duty-Officer-Getting-Death-Threats-96842614.html, the family was behind on HOA dues before he was even called up and deployed and had been sent notice of such delinquency; and when gone overseas, his wife did not open mail from HOA, return calls, etc.
 
Does the law create unjust enrichment?  Perhaps, but that's a question of substantive due process, perhaps: does the law, when duly followed, deprive someone of property without due process?  Some of us think that line of reasoning is a slippery slope, but it's used in many cases.
 
Some states require all developments to have HOAs and covenants, without dictating the terms of those covenants; combined with the issue of HOA 'annexing" it does raise a question as to when a voluntary association becomes a body of government, or is no longer voluntary.

At a deeper level it may be a symptom of how a society can move from a system of minimal necessary restriction on individual choice to increasing regulation/limitation of choice, as more bureaucracies are created, bureaucracies which often do not have the power to say "yes" but can safely say, "No."
 
KØRO

--- On Tue, 7/6/10, Jim Nail <james.nail at att.net> wrote:


From: Jim Nail <james.nail at att.net>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] HOA Abuse
To: "Paul Christensen" <attorney at immigration-lawyer-us.com>, TOWERTALK at contesting.com
Date: Tuesday, July 6, 2010, 9:54 AM


Normally any HOA ive been  around only has the ability to place a lien on the property, not foreclosure! Are these new laws so dominating that you can't do anything? Jim WA2MBP
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: "Paul Christensen" <attorney at immigration-lawyer-us.com>
Sender: towertalk-bounces at contesting.com
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 10:30:37 
To: <TOWERTALK at contesting.com>
Reply-To: Paul Christensen <attorney at immigration-lawyer-us.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] HOA Abuse

> 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 of 
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, regardless 
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 influence?

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 to 
work with their HOAs to place dues/fees in escrow ahead of time they become 
due and payable.

Paul, W9AC 

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk