PDA

View Full Version : We won!


Mike
December 15th, 2007, 03:00 AM
In July, we bought a house in a community with an HOA.

During an open house in May, we had a discussion with a neighbor whose car was parked in the shared driveway. The neighbor informed us that neither he nor the previous occupants used the garage for parking their cars, and they had an "agreement" to park there, alternating months.

Brent went inside and talked to the listing realtor, who told us we had both a garage and a parking space. Brent then called the City the next day; the City representative said the neighbor could not block access, but that the HOA would have to have his car towed since it is private property.

We also reviewed all the disclosures, and none placed any limitations on use of the garage.

Brent called the HOA Board President and told him of our concern, and that we did not want to buy a house if we could not park in the garage at any time due to a neighbor blocking the driveway. The President told Brent it would not be a problem--he would talk to the neighbor, so it would be a moot point. Brent told the President to hold off actually informing the neighbor until we learned whether our offer would be accepted--in case another offer was accepted and that buyer did not have a car.

Based on the Board President's statement and the disclosures, we made an offer on May 8, it was accepted on May 10, and we closed on July 31.

Once our offer was approved by the court, we informed the President and asked him to talk to the neighbor and let him know the house no longer was going to be vacant so he would stop parking in the driveway. The President then said that the neighbors should work it out on their own.

When we moved in, the neighbor continued to park in the shared driveway area. We started an email dialog with the President. He definitely was not sympathetic to our concerns. The Board Secretary, who has a similar situation, also was not sympathetic, essentially telling us, "I don't park in my garage... why would you want to park in yours?"

Brent and I had a conversation with the neighbor, who said his wife likes to park the car close to the house's back door. However, they do not want to park in the garage because the laundry is in there. Both the President of the Board and the neighbor suggested we park in the driveways of people who don't have cars. That was not acceptable to us.

Brent had conversation with the Board President, who said he'd spoken with the HOA's lawyers, who suggested this should be taken to small claims court. However, this was not a dispute about an unpaid debt.

Finally, in frustration, we made an appointment with a lawyer who specializes in real property issues. We had a consultation with him, and at the end, he requested that we obtain a letter from the Board that indicated they would not enforce the CC&Rs, if we wished to pursue the matter.

Brent conveyed that request to the Board. Because both Mike and the neighbor are on the board, they were recused from deliberations on the issue. The Board Secretary was traveling until the week after Thanksgiving, so the Board could not meet until her return. However, during that time, we followed the attorney's advice and started a PR campaign.

Fortunately, one of the neighbors with whom we discussed the matter had participated on the committee to review/rewrite the CC&Rs a couple of years earlier, and she immediately engaged several other members of that committee. They were offended that the Board President planned to "just change" the CC&Rs to alter the parking rules to accommodate certain neighbors' whims, and several wrote notes of protest to the President.

A couple of weeks ago, a quorum of the Board met and unanimously voted to enforce the current CC&Rs, without modification. The neighbor was directed not to block the shared driveway.

We get to use our garage!

ktinkel
December 15th, 2007, 09:00 AM
Congratulations!

But what a wacky thing — crazy enough your neighbor could assume he had the right to block your driveway, no matter what sort of informal arrangement he had with the prior owner. But that the association refused to step in and enforce its own rules?

ndebord
December 15th, 2007, 10:33 AM
Congratulations!

But what a wacky thing — crazy enough your neighbor could assume he had the right to block your driveway, no matter what sort of informal arrangement he had with the prior owner. But that the association refused to step in and enforce its own rules?

Kathleen,

Sounds like the Prez and the neighbors had a "prior" relationship of some kind.

:-(

Judy G. Russell
December 15th, 2007, 11:13 AM
We get to use our garage!Congrats!! (Amazing,isn't it, how people decide to view the rules as if nobody else could possibly care if they violate them?)

ktinkel
December 15th, 2007, 02:44 PM
Sounds like the Prez and the neighbors had a "prior" relationship of some kind.

:-(Maybe. Or maybe he is just a coward, unwilling to get into a brouhaha between neighbors. No matter — he, or someone else in the association management, should have intervened.

ndebord
December 15th, 2007, 06:55 PM
Maybe. Or maybe he is just a coward, unwilling to get into a brouhaha between neighbors. No matter — he, or someone else in the association management, should have intervened.

Kathleen,

Lots of these "associations" are one pointed head run. Looks like the case here for sure!

Lindsey
December 15th, 2007, 11:36 PM
We get to use our garage!
I'm very glad that you won your case, but it's distressing what you had to go through just to establish your right to use your own garage!!

But then there are goofy neighbors everywhere. When my sister and her husband moved into their house, the people next door to them were so peeved at the fact that water ran from my sister's property (which is at the crest of a small rise in the terrain) onto theirs (which is lower), that after the previous owners moved out, and before my sister and brother-in-law moved in, they sneaked onto the property and dug a 6-inch "ditch" all the way down the length of the property -- on my sister's side of the fence, of course.

They also got upset when my brother-in-law cut the grass and the lawnmower would blow bits of grass under the fence onto their property. Once they even called the police about it.

I will keep my fingers crossed that this is the last you'll have of any dispute with the people next door to you!

--Lindsey

Mike
December 17th, 2007, 01:34 AM
...unwilling to get into a brouhaha between neighbors.
Precisely. He wants problems to go away on their own.

We have two residents in the complex who are in arrears on their assessments. The President wants us to take a "soft" approach, rather than forcing them to pay, or else.

I'm sure that our lawyer's advice was the only way we got this resolved.

Mike
December 17th, 2007, 01:35 AM
Amazing,isn't it, how people decide to view the rules as if nobody else could possibly care if they violate them?
Indeed. We're sure that the neighbors were expecting that (a) we wouldn't pursue it, and (b) that the Board wouldn't take action.

Mike
December 17th, 2007, 01:44 AM
I will keep my fingers crossed that this is the last you'll have of any dispute with the people next door to you!
Thanks, Lindsey, but I expect there will be future tiffs.

We've heard from many of the other neighbors that this particular couple is not a set of nice people. I could tell many (MANY!) examples, but I'll avoid boring you and share just this one: they adopted another daughter (they have grown kids who've moved away from home and started families of their own). The wife, who is a teacher in a Catholic school, wanted to take a three-hour nap each afternoon upon getting home from work. To ensure she would have maximum peace and quiet to take her nap, she locked the "designer" daughter out of the house for the full three hours. Another neighbor, upon learning what happened, took the daughter in each day.

As you might guess, we're not particularly concerned whether we have a good relationship with these people. I do, however, remember the principle a mentor taught me many years ago: hold your friends close, and hold your enemies closer. So I always smile and wave whenever I see them.

Judy G. Russell
December 17th, 2007, 10:27 AM
To ensure she would have maximum peace and quiet to take her nap, she locked the "designer" daughter out of the house for the full three hours. Another neighbor, upon learning what happened, took the daughter in each day.I'd have called Child Protective Services... and the principal of the school where "mom" taught.

Lindsey
December 18th, 2007, 01:33 AM
The wife, who is a teacher in a Catholic school, wanted to take a three-hour nap each afternoon upon getting home from work. To ensure she would have maximum peace and quiet to take her nap, she locked the "designer" daughter out of the house for the full three hours.
Well, thank God for the neighbor, but I'm with Judy -- locking a minor child out of the house for three hours every afternoon constitutes child abuse. It would be bad enough if she had made some provision for the girl to go elsewhere after school where there would be an adult to look after her, but to leave her entirely to her own devices -- that's just cruel. If she wanted undisturbed peace in the afternoons to take a nap, they should never have adopted another child.

--Lindsey

Mike
December 19th, 2007, 01:50 AM
I'd have called Child Protective Services... and the principal of the school where "mom" taught.
Unfortunately, that happened before we moved here. But I agree with both of you--if the "mom" didn't want the responsibility that's associated with having a child, then don't choose to have one. And in this situation, it definitely was a choice!

Ok, one more tale to illustrate how disturbed these people are.

Background. There are four pairs of houses in in the complex with garages that share a driveway. Most of the occupants do not use their garages, and have agreed amongst themselves to alternate parking their cars in the shared driveway, changing on the first of each month.

Another neighbor, Rosalie, told us that Kathy, the lady whose estate sold us the house, had agreed to the arrangement, as she also didn't want to use the garage. (That was one of the arguments raised by the neighbors--that since she had agreed to the informal arrangement, it should apply to us, too.) However, Kathy was gone for over three months at Stanford, undergoing chemo and other treatment for cancer. When she returned, weak from the treatments, she was told in no uncertain terms that she could not park in the shared driveway, because "it wasn't [her] month," and she would have to park in the street.

After these *!@#s had full use of the driveway for three months!

Judy G. Russell
December 19th, 2007, 10:39 AM
Kathy was gone for over three months at Stanford, undergoing chemo and other treatment for cancer. When she returned, weak from the treatments, she was told in no uncertain terms that she could not park in the shared driveway, because "it wasn't [her] month," and she would have to park in the street.These people are evil.