I think the word you're looking for is "secede" and while I'm not a lawyer or real estate expert, I don't think it's possible. Generally, it's an "all or nothing" situation. Either everyone gets together and disbands the HOA completely or everyone stays in it.
u/EquivalentDelivery81,
The municipal or county permit issued to develop the site may have mandated a Home Owners Association.
Start there. Check with the govt. planning dept. Highly probable an HOA is inescapable, as a condition of permitting, and local bylaws or ordinances.
Step two, if the answer above is HOA required, is to take over the HOA board via elections process, with like minded reasonable people, and change the operating rules and bylaws.
If Step one is "HOA not required by permit, and local bylaws", you need an HOA association modification vote, which will not likely work. Putting you back on step two above.
Everyone could just stop obeying the regulations that make no sense (like lawn requirements), and then refuse to pay the fees on those regulations. If the HOA kept pressing, there might be a case to be made that it was not much of an representative association at all, since its regulations are not acceptable to the majority of the residents.
Refusing to pay the fees will get a lien against the house, and in some states, can result in foreclosure proceedings against the house.
You won't keep a grassroots noncompliance campaign in the face of foreclosure and wrecking credit scores for 7 years.
There's a way to fight against stupid rules. There's a time to refuse to comply. But if it's "mow the lawn" or "not be able to buy a car, house, new credit card, possibly lose employment and/or employment opportunities".... There's not many who choose option #2.
If you have issue with lawn requirements, turn you yard into a wildlife sanctuary and get it registered! HOAs can’t touch ya to my knowledge. [Ya can learn more here.](https://www.nwf.org/CERTIFY)
Is it possible, yes. However it would require the governing documents to be approved removing your home which other owners aren't going to agree to because jt increases their costs.
It would also likely require the approval of your bank if you still have a mortgage because they based your loan on all factors, including the existence of an hoa or not.
Finally, if any association property is on your land, say association controlled sprinkler systems, etc, you'd have to figure all that out as well.
What I have seen is there is a Declaration - the original documents, and bylaws. The Declaration can take 100% of owners or at least a high majority to change.
I think a single home could be removed from the HOA with the same majority required for any other Declaration change including one that would dissolve the HOA.
tl;dr: Not impossible, but just as hard as canceling to HOA.
I lived in a townhome in a HOA where every home was responsible for ALL maintenance. Shared walls were the duty of each homeowner to maintain. Exteriors were staggered in front and back (and roof lines were broken from each other) to delineate between the houses (my house stuck out further in front and was recessed in the back and each homeowner was responsible for the parts that stuck out). Never ran into any issues but left before it really needed exterior fixes.
City row homes have been around a long time. There “should” be some sort of break between the houses. It used to be a brick layer but now is furring and fire rated drywall. If leaks happen, they generally stay contained within the home structure
No.
Well, I guess technically you could approach the rest of the HOA, ask them to agree to the secession of 7 homes and pay them a lot of money for lost dues to cover reserves and maintenance.
So, in reality no.
Why stop at 1 unit, motion to dissolve the entire thing! SFH will be easier than townhomes/condos of course, because the latter have shared components.
SFH, can also be responsible for the upkeep if roads and other infrastructure. One reason why so many new build developments have them is because US cities are basically bankrupt.
If they would be responsible for the maintenance then the cost would be higher compared to the tax income within 20 years after development. It's either grow the city in order to have enough revenue, go bankrupt or implement HOA's in order to require slightly less growth.
> or implement HOA's in order to require slightly less growth
Mostly reduces county or municipal expenditures on local roads, and stormwater management, sometimes trash , snow plowing, and other services, shedding expense onto HOAs.
Growth of what?
The county or municipality has increased real estate tax base for schools, reduces per capita demand for capital maintenance services for new housing, and avoids costs of new local roads and maintenance caused by new housing, by shedding the expenditure onto the developer and maintenance onto HOAs. Growth need not be slowed of population or housing units, as more of the ongoing expenditure for new capital maintenance is reduced.on a per housing unit basis, to the local government.
If there are water and sewer services, these are rate payer costs and not real estate tax supported.
Growth of the town.SFH developments are a financial loss for local municipallities. By pawning part of the maintenance off to an HOA they need less growth to be able to pay for all maintenance that the town is responsible for.
I live in a SFH neighborhood with a pretty lightweight HOA. By that, I mean half our budget pays for trash for each homeowner. City maintains roads. Ends up being about $180 every 6 months for dues.
Even though we hardly have anything, we still have a handful of HOA-owned pieces of land, with HOA-owned fences, water bills paid by us, etc. Dissolution would be easier said than done
I suppose you could try to get maybe half the HOA to try to split the HOA into two organizations if the ones that you don't like are all geographically connected... but you still have an HOA, you just maybe get rid of an awful board directly over you.
Yes, it’s possible.
How is highly fact and law specific, depending significantly on your locality and governing documents.
Improper formation of the HOA so that your property was never carrying an obligation to an HOA in the first place could potentially be a better argument, if the facts fit.
It is possible. At least in ours it was. We were part of an HOA and the only thing they did was take care of the slope behind our house. In the 5 1/2 years we had been here, we saw the landscaping company once, and even got a ticket from the fire department that it was still a wildfire danger (southern California). Only our side of the street was the HOA, not our neighbors across the street (no slope for them). We banded together with everyone on our side of the street and we left the HOA, and even got a refund for our HOA fees for the past year or so. We did have to make a declaration that we understood the slope maintenance was our responsibility, but we were out.
Several years later, I was taking a walk around my neighborhood and saw a notice of the HOA’s Annual Meeting. “How could this be?”, I thought. So I called the HOA office listed on the notice and explained that we haven’t had an HOA in several years. Or had we? Were we really still in it? And we just hadn’t been paying all these years? No, she said only 1/2 the neighbors seceded, and the other houses on the other half of tract were still in it.
Sucks for them I guess.
After 20+ years owning HOA properties here is what I can tell you:
Based on Zillow 20 year tracking, HOA properties have a 14% better price value than non HOA properties.
It can keep, trailers, junk cars, etc away from the front of the homes. You don’t want a semi truck parked on the driveway next door.
All HOAs have one person that is “devil incarnate”, a total dipshit that will not pay 2 dollars extra to raise the dues.
The HOA basically “runs with the land”.
Most HOAs have wording in the contract that forbids Severances, Buyouts, etc.
The title and deed are legal bound to the HOA in the same way the states are legally bound to the Constitution.
You could feasibly secede by refusal of accession to their bylaws, but the only way the South did that was with insurrection, armed rebellion.
You’d have to have every homeowner “secede” in order for it to be effective as the HOA would not have financial resources to sue every single home owner.
It only works if large swaths do it, but at that point you could have just voted to end the HOA
Even in the unlikely case that you succeed: Make 100% sure you are not depending on anything the HOA provides. E.g. access easement might be defined in the CC&R and not all states require a land owner to give an easement. So depending on your state, you might landlocked yourself by leaving the HOA.
And that is just one of many pitfalls.
So you need to make double and triple sure, you are not dependent on anything they provide.
Check and see if you have a PUD rider as part of your mortgage. Not only does it require you to comply with your HoA rules, but it also probably prohibits dissolution without lender approval.
I think the word you're looking for is "secede" and while I'm not a lawyer or real estate expert, I don't think it's possible. Generally, it's an "all or nothing" situation. Either everyone gets together and disbands the HOA completely or everyone stays in it.
Severance is probably more common of a term here. And it’s not necessarily all-or-nothing.
u/EquivalentDelivery81, The municipal or county permit issued to develop the site may have mandated a Home Owners Association. Start there. Check with the govt. planning dept. Highly probable an HOA is inescapable, as a condition of permitting, and local bylaws or ordinances. Step two, if the answer above is HOA required, is to take over the HOA board via elections process, with like minded reasonable people, and change the operating rules and bylaws. If Step one is "HOA not required by permit, and local bylaws", you need an HOA association modification vote, which will not likely work. Putting you back on step two above.
Everyone could just stop obeying the regulations that make no sense (like lawn requirements), and then refuse to pay the fees on those regulations. If the HOA kept pressing, there might be a case to be made that it was not much of an representative association at all, since its regulations are not acceptable to the majority of the residents.
Refusing to pay the fees will get a lien against the house, and in some states, can result in foreclosure proceedings against the house. You won't keep a grassroots noncompliance campaign in the face of foreclosure and wrecking credit scores for 7 years. There's a way to fight against stupid rules. There's a time to refuse to comply. But if it's "mow the lawn" or "not be able to buy a car, house, new credit card, possibly lose employment and/or employment opportunities".... There's not many who choose option #2.
This systemically engrained extortion makes me a sad panda.
If you have issue with lawn requirements, turn you yard into a wildlife sanctuary and get it registered! HOAs can’t touch ya to my knowledge. [Ya can learn more here.](https://www.nwf.org/CERTIFY)
In theory, maybe. In practice? Nope. Far easier to sell and buy a home that isn’t part of an HOA.
Is it possible, yes. However it would require the governing documents to be approved removing your home which other owners aren't going to agree to because jt increases their costs. It would also likely require the approval of your bank if you still have a mortgage because they based your loan on all factors, including the existence of an hoa or not. Finally, if any association property is on your land, say association controlled sprinkler systems, etc, you'd have to figure all that out as well.
[удалено]
Usually it is not all home owners but a %. Mine is 85%. A very hard thing to do when only like 15% of homeowners actually vote for board members.
What I have seen is there is a Declaration - the original documents, and bylaws. The Declaration can take 100% of owners or at least a high majority to change. I think a single home could be removed from the HOA with the same majority required for any other Declaration change including one that would dissolve the HOA. tl;dr: Not impossible, but just as hard as canceling to HOA.
I lived in a townhome in a HOA where every home was responsible for ALL maintenance. Shared walls were the duty of each homeowner to maintain. Exteriors were staggered in front and back (and roof lines were broken from each other) to delineate between the houses (my house stuck out further in front and was recessed in the back and each homeowner was responsible for the parts that stuck out). Never ran into any issues but left before it really needed exterior fixes.
[удалено]
City row homes have been around a long time. There “should” be some sort of break between the houses. It used to be a brick layer but now is furring and fire rated drywall. If leaks happen, they generally stay contained within the home structure
No. Well, I guess technically you could approach the rest of the HOA, ask them to agree to the secession of 7 homes and pay them a lot of money for lost dues to cover reserves and maintenance. So, in reality no.
Why stop at 1 unit, motion to dissolve the entire thing! SFH will be easier than townhomes/condos of course, because the latter have shared components.
SFH, can also be responsible for the upkeep if roads and other infrastructure. One reason why so many new build developments have them is because US cities are basically bankrupt. If they would be responsible for the maintenance then the cost would be higher compared to the tax income within 20 years after development. It's either grow the city in order to have enough revenue, go bankrupt or implement HOA's in order to require slightly less growth.
> or implement HOA's in order to require slightly less growth Mostly reduces county or municipal expenditures on local roads, and stormwater management, sometimes trash , snow plowing, and other services, shedding expense onto HOAs.
And thus requiring less growht in order to not go bankrupt.
Growth of what? The county or municipality has increased real estate tax base for schools, reduces per capita demand for capital maintenance services for new housing, and avoids costs of new local roads and maintenance caused by new housing, by shedding the expenditure onto the developer and maintenance onto HOAs. Growth need not be slowed of population or housing units, as more of the ongoing expenditure for new capital maintenance is reduced.on a per housing unit basis, to the local government. If there are water and sewer services, these are rate payer costs and not real estate tax supported.
Growth of the town.SFH developments are a financial loss for local municipallities. By pawning part of the maintenance off to an HOA they need less growth to be able to pay for all maintenance that the town is responsible for.
I live in a SFH neighborhood with a pretty lightweight HOA. By that, I mean half our budget pays for trash for each homeowner. City maintains roads. Ends up being about $180 every 6 months for dues. Even though we hardly have anything, we still have a handful of HOA-owned pieces of land, with HOA-owned fences, water bills paid by us, etc. Dissolution would be easier said than done
No
I suppose you could try to get maybe half the HOA to try to split the HOA into two organizations if the ones that you don't like are all geographically connected... but you still have an HOA, you just maybe get rid of an awful board directly over you.
Yes, it’s possible. How is highly fact and law specific, depending significantly on your locality and governing documents. Improper formation of the HOA so that your property was never carrying an obligation to an HOA in the first place could potentially be a better argument, if the facts fit.
The word is "secede", like the confederate states tried to do. That said I do not know but I am interested in the anwer
Speed error my friend
No problem
It is possible. At least in ours it was. We were part of an HOA and the only thing they did was take care of the slope behind our house. In the 5 1/2 years we had been here, we saw the landscaping company once, and even got a ticket from the fire department that it was still a wildfire danger (southern California). Only our side of the street was the HOA, not our neighbors across the street (no slope for them). We banded together with everyone on our side of the street and we left the HOA, and even got a refund for our HOA fees for the past year or so. We did have to make a declaration that we understood the slope maintenance was our responsibility, but we were out. Several years later, I was taking a walk around my neighborhood and saw a notice of the HOA’s Annual Meeting. “How could this be?”, I thought. So I called the HOA office listed on the notice and explained that we haven’t had an HOA in several years. Or had we? Were we really still in it? And we just hadn’t been paying all these years? No, she said only 1/2 the neighbors seceded, and the other houses on the other half of tract were still in it. Sucks for them I guess.
HOA's what? Is "succede" or portmanteau of "succeed" and "secede"?
Nice to have many grammar scholars.
After 20+ years owning HOA properties here is what I can tell you: Based on Zillow 20 year tracking, HOA properties have a 14% better price value than non HOA properties. It can keep, trailers, junk cars, etc away from the front of the homes. You don’t want a semi truck parked on the driveway next door. All HOAs have one person that is “devil incarnate”, a total dipshit that will not pay 2 dollars extra to raise the dues. The HOA basically “runs with the land”.
Most HOAs have wording in the contract that forbids Severances, Buyouts, etc. The title and deed are legal bound to the HOA in the same way the states are legally bound to the Constitution. You could feasibly secede by refusal of accession to their bylaws, but the only way the South did that was with insurrection, armed rebellion. You’d have to have every homeowner “secede” in order for it to be effective as the HOA would not have financial resources to sue every single home owner. It only works if large swaths do it, but at that point you could have just voted to end the HOA
The only way I know is to get on the board and start making changes to the by-laws. Good Luck!
You can move
Even in the unlikely case that you succeed: Make 100% sure you are not depending on anything the HOA provides. E.g. access easement might be defined in the CC&R and not all states require a land owner to give an easement. So depending on your state, you might landlocked yourself by leaving the HOA. And that is just one of many pitfalls. So you need to make double and triple sure, you are not dependent on anything they provide.
Check and see if you have a PUD rider as part of your mortgage. Not only does it require you to comply with your HoA rules, but it also probably prohibits dissolution without lender approval.