HOA's Take Aim at Our Hobby!

The "rest" of the story is right here (below). The Clauers got their house back, thanks to the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act and having a lawyer represent them. The terms of the final deal are not disclosed. But the follow-up story is here:

 

LOL, turned out he didn't show tonight. I think he found an 811 running grounded grid...

 

Thanks for the update. I thought there was more to the story than what was originally presented. And I'm glad they were able to get it settled.

Jerry, AI0K (I want my slash zero!)

 

Yes, they did, and the articles 'seem' to imply they collected some damages, but this is not clear and the details are not divulged.

Good for them.

HOAs in some states are notorious for specifically looking for violations which can lead them to foreclosures. Here in CA it's much more difficult. Evidently in TX it's very easy.

This is one great reason why such laws should be federal, and not by state. As it is, the states grant them their powers. Make it federal, and take away a lot of the powers, and this country would be a nicer place to live.

 

I got yer slash zero right here: Ø.
I used Windoughs Character Map but, you can also use the keyboard by typing "ALT+0216" on the number keypad.

vy 73 es gl,
Bryan WA7PRC

 

The problem with that is a little thing called the Tenth Amendment.

You don't get to invent new powers of the federal government simply because it would be convenient.

 

Maybe he left his filaments on by accident and ran his battery down! Them things (807) were hell on batteries! And you almost had to "race" your motor when the dynamotor kicked in! The "whippersnappers" don't remember the days of DM 35 dynamotors and the glow of 807's!

 

Of course. That's why we need a new amendment to supersede Amd. 10.

Desperately.

It makes no sense. 224 years ago this was a new, small republic.

Now, it's not. A lot of things need to change to bring it up to date.

 

Au contraire. We don't need to change the Constitution, we need to enforce its constraints on government, Federal government
especially.

Property rights, freedom to contract, and freedom of association are part of the basis for advanced civilization. Those principles
hold regardless of what century it is. I know and loathe HOAs, and some HOA board members are some of the most unpleasant
power-hungry would-be tinpot dictators I have had the misfortune to meet. That does not mean that Federal law trumps property
rights, the right to contract, or the right of association.

The way to avoid the problems of HOAs is NOT TO BUY PROPERTY IN AN HOA. Gutting property rights and the right to contract
in exchange for a 'special favor' for your particular hobby is a really bad idea. Anyone advocating the repeal of the 9th and 10th amendments,
which limit the power of the Federal authority, so that they can more readily enjoy their hobby, is extraordinarily ill advised.

 

Oh please.

It's easy to say "don't buy an HOA house", "don't buy a house with restrictions", etc.

In some places, and at some times, it's not so easy to do.

Here's an example:

Back in 2005 or so, the real estate market around here was REALLY hot.

At that time, I was considering moving. House had to be in the same school district for obvious reasons.

I recall one house that came on the market at noon. I was there when they opened the door. Looked around, nice place, might be able to afford it. Called the bride, said she'd look when she got home that night.

When she got there, about 5:30 PM, there were already three offers on the place. All without conditions.

That's how hot the market was back then.

Now, with a market like that, how is someone supposed to do due diligence, get a home inspection, check for HOA/CC&Rs, etc.?

There are lots of other examples.

 

No, but when there's a precedent, they're not "new powers".

 

The Southgate Type 7 runs a pair of 807s in the final. They are easier to power than 6146s.

I have a DM-35 somewhere too.

 

Using that logic, because the United States did not have an
air force in 1781, the government should not been able to create the USAF in 1948.

 

That's right - the Constitution still only talks about land and sea military forces. Nothing about flying machines.

Oh....wait.....what about things like military communications and surveillance satellites? They're in SPACE! And GPS - that's space-based too!

omg....GPS is unconstitutional!!!

 

It's not just that.

States have the right to lots of things where such rights should never be left to the states. I've already provided examples of this, but the one that struck me earliest in life, when I was about 12 years old, is that states test for and issue drivers licenses. That would be fine, if the license limited the driver holding the license to only drive in that state.

It doesn't. With a license from any state, you can drive anywhere in America. Despite the fact that the examinations are quite different as are the regulations and the conditions. It should be a federal license, and a tough one to get, since it's basically a license to operate a 4000 lb lethal weapon. Here in southern CA, the police records indicate 2 percent of our drivers are actually licensed elsewhere, but are involved in more than 10 percent of the accidents, some of which are fatal.

Gun laws, ditto. They vary by state and shouldn't. Even health care...every state was offered a lot of money by the federal government to set up its own health care administration under the new ACA laws. Some did -- my state did, and it's operated flawlessly. Many didn't and just left their citizens in the hands of the federal administration of their plans. Those states did not fare as well with regard to percentage of the population covered, or satisfaction of their citizens. That never should have been left up to the states.

Too many examples to cite.