HOA sues homeowners over signs: "An election-season dispute between homeowners displaying political signs in their front yards and the Grand View subdivision’s homeowners association, who removed the signs, has spilled into the courts.
Six homeowners in the 198-home subdivision, northeast of Patterson and 28 roads, were served notice this week that the Grand View Homeowners Association has filed a lawsuit against them in Mesa County District Court.
In late October, the association’s president, Tom Lowrey, removed several political signs from front yards. Lowrey said the signs were a violation of the HOA’s covenants, conditions and restrictions. Homeowners, many of whom replaced the signs in their yards after their removal, say they are protected under the Constitution and Colorado state law.
“After the election we took the signs out and thought it was over and done with, and then lo and behold, he served us these papers,” said Jim Rozman, a homeowner in the subdivision. “He (Lowrey) is on a one-man mission, it seems to me.”
The lawsuit requests a judge to award damages to the HOA in the amount of $15 per sign for every day the political signs were displayed in people’s yards."
------------
Imagine being a judge and having to spend your time on this. What I can't imagine is how an HOA officer could think this is worth a lawsuit.
3 comments:
This case could go one of two ways. As you hint, the judge getting this case could tell the HOA to get this ridiculous cause out of his/her courtroom and find a mediated solution.
Or if first amendment and public interest groups intervene, it could become Colorado's version of New Jersey's Twin Rivers case.
As usual, the CID industry has misled consumers into believing that these types of covenants "protect property values" and that unless they fight every "violation" tooth and nail, it will mean certain economic doom for the neighborhood.
Look at the President's comments "We can not enforce our CCRs (covenants, conditions and restrictions) selectively, or we jeopardize all of them” - who do you think told him that? How ignorant do people really have to be to actually believe such things without any evidence whatsoever. Yet this individual is so convinced, he has caused the HOA to file suit against his neighbors - as if that is going to improve property values.
I hope the neighbors put up a website and POST the antics of this Board. This battle should not be limited to the courtroom. Moreover, it is very difficult for homeowners to try to get out of the "box" that the HOA and its agents put them into. The homeowners need to put the entire neighborhood into the same box they've been put into by the HOA. Post this on a website.
There is no doubt that fines aren't the only things the HOA is "asking" for. Undoubtedly, the HOA attorney will be asking for attorney fees. I hope the homeowners ca successfully countersue for trespassing and conversion of their property.
If HOAs are being mandated by municipalities, then aren't they really creating unconstitutional ordinances in these subdivisions? How would you feel if the city required the developer to impose restrictive covenants to prohibit political signs, ownership of guns, or to allow the police to enter into your property and home at any time (like many CCRs already provide for HOA agents). There are certain rights which should simply be inalienable. We are told we "own" the property, yet 1) the freedom to use it is severely curtailed, 2) the ability to exclude others such as the HOA is nonexistent, and 3) you cannot sell what you purchased because of the nature of HOAs. These are core principles of property ownership which illustrate that you don't own property in an HOA. All you own is a liability for which the industry folks have coined the phrase "common interest" as a euphemism.
This "our rules must be good rules or they wouldn't be the rules" mentality has a lot to answer for. I'm glad I don't live in this community. What a waste of everyone's time and money.
Post a Comment