HOA Parking Restrictions on Kids Classic

[Grayfox]

Thing about solar panels is it will offend someone in some way.

If one house has it, it will offend the people who cant afford it or the ones that have OCD about the whole neighborhood since all other homes have bare roofs and this home has solar panels which makes it stand out.

 

[Slash]

Jesus, you overreact as much as Justin with these incredible reaches against Tornado's posts. Kid has 2 options, sell the truck or move out if he can't get the rule changed.

He shouldn't have to sell it. He shouldn't have to move out. There is absolutely no valid reason why this should be happening, period. It's almost like vehicle discrimination or something. Any vehicle should be allowed to be parked on their driveway at any given time, regardless of it was a freaking airplane or not.

Again, I have to wonder if you would have made this thread if it had been anything but a Ford pickup.

I couldn't give a crap if it was this truck or a Chevy Citation.

 

[TenEightyOne]

...absolutely no valid reason why this should be happening, period. It's almost like vehicle discrimination or something.

I rent a city flat to use during some weeks at work, I have an agreement with the landlord (actually via the Tenants' Association, nasty old grumbling farting whinging old people...) that I won't keep pets.

If I turned up riding a pony and screaming about discrimination, I'd be properly showing them, wouldn't I?

 

[McLaren]

He shouldn't have to sell it. He shouldn't have to move out. There is absolutely no valid reason why this should be happening, period. It's almost like vehicle discrimination or something. Any vehicle should be allowed to be parked on their driveway at any given time, regardless of it was a freaking airplane or not.

Because you don't understand HoAs strive on image. And pick up trucks, esp. the one pictured do not associate with the image a HoA strives for.

The key phrases are right in the letter; property value & image is a big part of keeping property values up.

I couldn't give a crap if it was this truck or a Chevy Citation.

But the fact is you posted it specifically because of the vehicle in question.

 

[Slash]

Pets I can understand, maybe because of allergies or something of that nature.

There's no good reason why someone shouldn't be allowed to have the vehicle they want, and park it on the property they bought. It would be different if it was parked in the street all night long (you can't do that with any vehicle past a certain time at night here).

Because you don't understand HoAs strive on image. And pick up trucks, esp. the one pictured do not associate with the image a HoA strives for.

The key phrases are right in the letter; property value & image is a big part of keeping property values up.

Ok, but the guy down the street the Chevy get's away with it because it's put in his garage at night? People sleep at night, no ones going to see anything anyways.

 

[Tornado]

Hooray for not having transportation then! No where to park it? No problem! Don't do anything with your life!

How about "try to get the rule changed before you commit everything to buy something you're not supposed to have".

Again, this is the most friendly HoA I've ever heard of. They gave him an entire year of owning the thing before they started pinging him for a rule he was violating. Most HoA's I've seen are made up entirely of the kind of people who circulated that flier in the OP, so he would have been nailed within the first week. They put the rule to a vote to let them see if there was enough support to overturn it. Most HoA's I've seen would make you pay the fine and then tell you to go screw yourself if you objected. They purposely given him an indefinite amount of time to get the rule changed rather than closing the issue when the vote failed. Most HoA's I've seen would consider the matter closed immediately then tow the car if it continued happening. They circulated two official fliers around the community to try to help the kid get the support he needs so the rule can be overturned; against an unofficial flier pleading other residents to keep the rules the same. Most HoA's I've seen would distribute those exact fliers in the OP, but they would be the official view of the HoA board members instead of just some random neighbor.


If all of that still isn't enough to get the support of the neighborhood to overturn the rule, then in no way should he get to keep the truck as he has been, no.

He shouldn't have to sell it. He shouldn't have to move out. There is absolutely no valid reason why this should be happening, period.

There's no good reason why someone shouldn't be allowed to have the vehicle they want, and park it on the property they bought.

The contract his parents signed forfeiting their ability to have their home appear in a way outside of what the neighborhood collectively agrees is proper is a pretty damn valid reason, I'd say.

It's almost like vehicle discrimination or something.

It definitely is. It's too bad that that's not actually a thing, legally speaking.

 

[Slash]

How about "try to get the rule changed before you commit everything to buy something you can't have".

Again, this is the most friendly HoA I've ever heard of. They gave him an entire year of owning the thing before they started pinging him for a rule he was violating. They put the rule to a vote to let them see if there was enough support to overturn it. They've purposely given him an indefinite amount of time to get the rule changed rather than closing the issue when the vote failed. They circulated two official fliers around the community to try to help the kid get the support he needs so the rule can be overturned; against an unofficial flyer pleading other residents to keep the rules the same. If all of that still isn't enough to get the support of the neighborhood to overturn the rule, then in no way should he get to keep the truck as he has been, no.


The contract his parents signed forfeiting their ability to have their home appear in a way outside of what the neighborhood collectively agrees is proper is a pretty damn valid reason, I'd say.


It definitely is. It's too bad that that's not actually a thing, legally speaking.

Again, how was he supposed to know?

Regardless, good for him for working against it. Apparently 17,000 other people who liked his page don't agree either. I don't care how friendly they are, it's a bunch of BS and that's all I've got to say.

 

[McLaren]

Ok, but the guy down the street the Chevy get's away with it because it's put in his garage at night? People sleep at night, no ones going to see anything anyways.

First off, what guy with a Chevy was even remotely mentioned? Second, if it abides by the rules, yes, he can get away with it because it's in the garage. And this kid is given the exact same chance. It's not the HoA's job to make his parents move their cars or expand the garage if his truck doesn't fit.

 

[TenEightyOne]

There's no good reason why someone shouldn't be allowed to have the vehicle they want, and park it on the property they bought.

You're absolutely right!

They gave him an entire year of owning the thing before they started pinging him for a rule he was violating. They put the rule to a vote to let them see if there was enough support to overturn it. They've purposely given him an indefinite amount of time to get the rule changed rather than closing the issue when the vote failed. They circulated two official fliers around the community to try to help the kid get the support he needs so the rule can be overturned; against an unofficial flyer pleading other residents to keep the rules the same. If all of that still isn't enough to get the support of the neighborhood to overturn the rule, then in no way should he get to keep the truck as he has been, no.


The contract his parents signed forfeiting their ability to have their home appear in a way outside of what the neighborhood collectively agrees is proper is a pretty damn valid reason, I'd say.

Oh, wait... bad luck, Slash.

Again, how was he supposed to know?

Maybe his parents should have mentioned it? In a truck-mad place like Muricky he'll have noticed that no one parks their trucks on the drive overnight.

It's not credible that he squeaked and sprouted his way through life without ever being aware that the clause existed, and his parents certainly knew about it. He's had a long time to sort something out and hasn't. Tough.

 

[Tornado]

Again, how was he supposed to know?

Because since he was only 16 years old when he bought it, his parents (who are required to know as part of their choice to live there in the first place) were the ones who would have signed all of the paperwork anyway.

 

[Slash]

First off, what guy with a Chevy was even remotely mentioned? Second, if it abides by the rules, yes, he can get away with it because it's in the garage. And this kid is given the exact same chance.

Did you even watch the video? The neighbor even was on camera....

Even another car; any car; wouldn't fit in there, so it really doesn't matter what he comes home in.

It's not the HoA's job to make his parents move their cars or expand the garage if his truck doesn't fit.

Correct, but they are the first to bitch about it which is what I don't agree with.

You're absolutely right!


Maybe his parents should have mentioned it? In a truck-mad place like Muricky he'll have noticed that no one parks their trucks on the drive overnight.

It's not credible that he squeaked and sprouted his way through life without ever being aware that the clause existed, and his parents certainly knew about it. He's had a long time to sort something out and hasn't. Tough.

What part of "no one is going to think twice about what vehicle they can or can't have" doesn't anyone here understand?

Because since he was only 16 years old when he bought it, his parents (who are required to know as part of their choice to live there in the first place) were the ones who would have signed all of the paperwork anyway.

Fair enough, but why wasn't the kid informed? At least he could have put the money aside at the time. Are the parents to blame?

 

[McLaren]

Did you even watch the video? The neighbor even was on camera....

Even another car; any car; wouldn't fit in there, so it really doesn't matter what he comes home in.

The rule says no trucks. Does it say no cars on the driveway as well? If it does, I'd like to see the proof that he's screwed either way. Until then, he has no case against the HoA.

Correct, but they are the first to bitch about it which is what I don't agree with.

It's their rules. They can bitch if they want.

What part of "no one is going to think twice about what vehicle they can or can't have" doesn't anyone here understand?

What part of a contract do you not understand?

 

[Slash]

The rule says no trucks. Does it say no cars on the driveway as well? If it does, I'd like to see the proof that he's screwed either way. Until then, he has no case against the HoA.



It's their rules. They can bitch if they want.



What part of a contract do you not understand?

Why no trucks then? I want a good explanation from them. There's no reason for said rule. Period.

I can understand banning them entirely, but not from just overnight parking. That's 🤬 stupid.

 

[Dhalism]

Why is it only the bad guys like WBC that are aware of the way justice system works?
This is exactly what the courts are for. Suing the ****ers should be your first inclination when you encounter something like this.

The rule says no trucks. Does it say no cars on the driveway as well? If it does, I'd like to see the proof that he's screwed either way. Until then, he has no case against the HoA.



It's their rules. They can bitch if they want.



What part of a contract do you not understand?

Contracts are not laws. It's like the all the EULAs and ToAs. A lot of them won't hold up in court, and is written to just cover every available angle.

 

[TenEightyOne]

What part of "no one is going to think twice about what vehicle they can or can't have" doesn't anyone here understand?

Well, you say that, but to me it says that you wouldn't think twice about it. People owning or renting property tend to be a bit more aware of the minefield.

Enjoy your bliss while it lasts!

 

[McLaren]

Why no trucks then? I want a good explanation from them. There's no reason for said rule. Period.

I can understand banning them entirely, but not from just overnight parking. That's 🤬 stupid.

The explanation is right in the letter if you would read it. It's a property value concern because the truck does not fit in with the image the HoA wants to keep property values rising.

And before you bitch about that, yes, the HoA has every right to set that rule because the kid's family signed a contract upholding that agreement.

 

[Tornado]

Contracts are not laws. It's like the all the EULAs and ToAs. A lot of them won't hold up in court, and is written to just cover every available angle.

I don't see why one of the rules of an HoA contract, one that has been in place since the 1970s (presumably) without being challenged in such a way and has plenty of provisions to overturn naturally through a community vote, wouldn't hold up in court just because some kid's parent's ignored it. Contracts are not laws, but there needs to be a reason for a court to void them rather than just "it's unfair that we have to follow it like we said we would".

 

[Slash]

The explanation is right in the letter if you would read it. It's a property value concern because the truck does not fit in with the image the HoA wants to keep property values rising.

And before you bitch about that, yes, the HoA has every right to set that rule because the kid's family signed a contract upholding that agreement.

This is what's wrong with America.

I would think they would downright all out ban them if it was so big of a damn issue, instead of disallowing them to be parked at night when as I said before, most people aren't even going to be seeing it because they are sleeping...

That makes a 🤬 ton of sense.

 

[McLaren]

This is what's wrong with America.

Oh please, because some Association won't let a kid park a stupid pickup in public view is totally why America sucks.

For your sake, don't ever move into an apartment complex.

Contracts are not laws. It's like the all the EULAs and ToAs. A lot of them won't hold up in court, and is written to just cover every available angle.

No, but most courts will dismiss the case because you willingly signed the contract. It is no one's job but your own to read a contract before signing on the dotted line.

As Tornado again nicely says, you need a stronger reason than what's in this thread to have the court rule in your favor.

 

[Slash]

Oh please, because some Association won't let a kid park a stupid pickup in public view...

But it's ok for him to do it all day long right?

For your sake, don't ever move into an apartment complex.

I don't plan on it.

No, but most courts will dismiss the case because you willingly signed the contract. It is no one's job but your own to read a contract before signing on the dotted line.

The kid is his own person. He never willingly signed any paperwork. That said, he is underage, so I'm not sure what the stipulation would be once he turns 18.

 

[McLaren]

But it's ok for him to do it all day long right?

It's not there all day long, though, is it? If it was, it would most likely be an issue as well.

 

[Slash]

It's not there all day long, though, is it? If it was, it would most likely be an issue as well.

No it wouldn't, because that's not in the contract. The contract states it's only an issue for overnight parking. That's the big problem here.

It's not that he can't have the truck, he can have it. It can be parked there all day long if he wants it to be. The problem is when dusk arrives, it can't be there anymore. Which is stupid in mine, and many other peoples opinions. Why because it's dark, is it all of a sudden an issue?

If they were really concerned about property value, they would be all of them, at any time of the day.

 

[Joel]

I don't see him bitching though, I see him trying to change a rule he sees as being unjust. What it seems you are saying is that people shouldn't fight for things like gay marriage because they knew the rules before they got engaged to a person of the same sex so tough 🤬.

The difference here is we're comparing a discriminatory law that carries the authority of the government and the police with a contract that the parents voluntarily signed. It is not even remotely the same thing.

If you don't see the difference there I don't know what to tell you. You're really reaching here.

Why no trucks then? I want a good explanation from them. There's no reason for said rule. Period.

I can understand banning them entirely, but not from just overnight parking. That's 🤬 stupid.

Relax for a second and evaluate what you're saying. You're essentially saying that the contract should be invalidated because of reasons and because it's a cool truck.

The HOA doesn't want trucks parked outside all night because if you let it go unchecked there's nothing to stop people from having a bunch of F-350's with work equipment in the bed on their driveways all night. The HOA has a vested interest in protecting property values and projecting a certain image in the neighbourhood. The reality is that trucks have a blue collar stereotype around them which doesn't fit the image the HOA wants to protect. They have put terms in the contract to prevent things like this happening and to protect the property value of their homes.

That's the reasoning. You might disagree with it, but the reality is the parents agreed to the terms of the contract. This one probably doesn't lower surrounding property values but where do you draw the line between a classic truck in great shape and a rotting POS from the 80's?

This is what's wrong with America.

The parents entered into a contract voluntarily. I know it hurts your feelings because it's a gorgeous Ford truck but you're being ridiculous. They signed a contract and the terms are being breached, end of story. HOA's generally suck but it's the reality of buying a house in that neighbourhood. if you don't want to deal with the HOA, don't sign the contract and don't buy a house there.

 

[Dhalism]

I don't see why one of the rules of an HoA contract, one that has been in place since the 1970s (presumably) without being challenged in such a way, wouldn't hold up in court just because some kid's parent's ignored it. Contracts are not laws, but there needs to be a reason for a court to void them rather than just "it's unfair that we have to follow it like we said we would".

You'd be surprised how much common sense is used in a small claims court(granted i have no experience with housing court which i assume is where this will be going).

Besides it's unlikely to ever go to court either way. It's easier for HoA to settle and avoid the rule being changed than it is to bother with a court case and setting a precedent.

Granted I'm not a lawyer, I'm just friends with a habitual sue-er.

 

[Slash]

Work equipment is part of society. Get over it.

 

[McLaren]

No it wouldn't, because that's not in the contract. The contract states it's only an issue for overnight parking. That's the big problem here.

Post the contract, then. I'll bet money now if that truck sat in the same place all day as well as night, it would be an issue.

It's not that he can't have the truck, he can have it. It can be parked there all day long if he wants it to be. The problem is when dusk arrives, it can't be there anymore. Which is stupid in mine, and many other peoples opinions. Why because it's dark, is it all of a sudden an issue?

It's not an issue during the day because it's not there during the day. It is there every night when people come & go.

And the issue has been told you three times now.

If they were really concerned about property value, they would be all of them, at any time of the day.

Again, the truck is not there all day like it is at night.

Work equipment is part of society. Get over it.

The irony.

 

[Tornado]

No it wouldn't, because that's not in the contract. The contract states it's only an issue for overnight parking. That's the big problem here.

Does the contract only say that? Or is that the only thing in the contract that he's run afoul of? I live about as far away from an HoA as possible, but I still live in a (rural) village and I can't leave a car sitting in my driveway for more than a couple weeks without getting a little slip on the windshield saying to move it. It stands to reason that if he left the truck there all the time rather than just at night it would be no less of an issue.

You'd be surprised how much common sense is used in a small claims court

Common sense would dictate that when all of this is true:

• They gave him an entire year of owning the thing before they started pinging him for a rule he was violating.
• They put the rule to a vote to let them see if there was enough support to overturn it.
• They purposely given him an indefinite amount of time to get the rule changed rather than closing the issue when the vote failed.
  
• They circulated two official fliers around the community to try to help the kid get the support he needs so the rule can be overturned; against an unofficial flier pleading other residents to keep the rules the same.

That no judge would even touch the case.

Work equipment is part of society. Get over it.

Something tells me the 16 year old kid living in an upper class closed community didn't work two jobs and spend $8000 on a 50 year old truck so he use it to put manure in the bed.

 

[Slash]

Post the contract, then. I'll bet money now if that truck sat in the same place all day as well as night, it would be an issue.

It was straight up said it's not an issue during the day. You seem to be ignoring this. Notice the Chevy parked in the background.

Does the contract only say that? Or is that the only thing in the contract that he's run afoul of? I live about as far away from an HoA as possible, but I still live in a (rural) village and I can't leave a car sitting in my driveway for more than a couple weeks without getting a little slip on the windshield.

Yes, it's been said several times now. As far as the "can't leave a vehicle sitting thing", at least where I am, I've had one sitting for about 7 years without anything.

If the contract didn't say this, there wouldn't be trucks at all.

Something tells me the 16 year old kid living in an upper class closed community didn't work two jobs and spend $8000 on a 50 year old truck so he use it to put manure in the bed.

It was in reply to Noob's comment.


__________________


Here's the link to his page. Tell him yourself. Many people aren't agreeing.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Save-Matts-Truck/718832338141977

 

[McLaren]

It was straight up said it's not an issue during the day. You seem to be ignoring this. Notice the Chevy parked in the background.

Noted, then.

Doesn't change the fact he agreed to the rules when he moved on, & has been given 2 chances at changing the ruling from other neighbors. You keep ignoring this. The HoA doesn't need an explicit reason why they don't want trucks on the driveways over night, though I'm sure they have one.

 

[Dhalism]

That no judge would even touch the case.

You pay a 15 dollar fee to fine in a new york to file small claims and 300 to file if a federal rule is violated. Your case goes before the judge regardless of how ludicrous it is. You have to find a law that resembles your problem even if slightly and then that gives the judge excuse to execute his common sense under the thinly veiled guise of law.
For example in this case I could argue for example that if disabled people are allowed to have special access trucks in their driveway than it's a discrimination against able bodied. And if they don't allow that for disabled, well then theyre even more screwed.