HOA preventing members from speaking

[Silverplum]

His girlfriend would be a damned fool to deed even 1% to this guy.

There was a guy here a while back, a twin of sorts to the OP. He coveted 1% of his gf's home so that he could mess with the HOA.

 

[AndyTampa]

Check your governing documents (or state law): I think you will find that a contract buyer is considered an owner and member.

CCR Definitions, Section 2 reads: "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons or entities, of a fee simple title to any Lot which is a part of the Properties, including contract sellers, but excluding those having such interest6 merely as security for the performance of an obligation.

I will take your ideas and see which is best. Thank you.

Yes, they can create a rule just for you, along the lines of "owners and invited guests only".

If they aren't enforcing it against every non-owner, can they still enforce it on me? Renters are non-owners and have been to meetings.

His girlfriend would be a damned fool to deed even 1% to this guy.

I've already covered that much in the payments, but doing this could cause too many problems with the mortgage. I don't want to be on the deed, insults aside.

There was a guy here a while back, a twin of sorts to the OP. He coveted 1% of his gf's home so that he could mess with the HOA.

Look who's talking about twins. You and FlyingRon need to take a flying leap. You don't help people, you only chastise and berate. I've been on the board and am an active participant in this community. I am a member of this community and have been for some time. The dictators just don't want anyone making waves on their agenda.

 

[TigerD]

If they aren't enforcing it against every non-owner, can they still enforce it on me? Renters are non-owners and have been to meetings.

Depends on the lease and other issues to which you may not be privy.

Look who's talking about twins. You and FlyingRon need to take a flying leap. You don't help people, you only chastise and berate. I've been on the board and am an active participant in this community. I am a member of this community and have been for some time. The dictators just don't want anyone making waves on their agenda.

Silverplum and FlyingRon have helped a great many people in the years they have provided free advice to thankful souls like yourself. Sometimes the best advice a lawyer can give is the advice to stop the foolishness and let it go.

TD

PS: Still not your circus; still not your monkeys.

 

[AndyTampa]

Depends on the lease and other issues to which you may not be privy.

PS: Still not your circus; still not your monkeys.

There is no lease. I'm not one of the renters. I'm a 20 year resident and participant in the community. So yes, it is my circus. They affect US.

My credit wouldn't have let us have the house so I'm not on the deed and adding me now would affect the mortgage. It would effectively be a sale and the mortgage company could demand the entire amount due. That doesn't make me any less a community member.

Telling me what I already know isn't advice. It's unhelpful. If there was nothing I could do, then that might be considered advice, however incorrect it may be. Obviously, there are options, feasible for me or not. That is what I asked about.

That said, can they legally enforce a rule against only one individual or is this considered selective enforcement?

 

[OK-LL]

A way around the 'transfer affects mortgage' issue would be to marry your gf and then transfer the title to the both of you. In that case, the mortgage would not be affected. Then you can attend meetings and vote, legitimately.

 

[TigerD]

That said, can they legally enforce a rule against only one individual or is this considered selective enforcement?

I have attempted to be nice, polite, and even whimsical, but you need direct.
Yes they can enforce their rule any way the damn well please. You have no standing to speak, vote, complain, or even observe the meeting if they don't choose to let you.

You are not the owner. You are not a lawyer. You are not entitled to speak for the owner.

TD

 

[AndyTampa]

I have attempted to be nice, polite, and even whimsical, but you need direct.
Yes they can enforce their rule any way the damn well please. You have no standing to speak, vote, complain, or even observe the meeting if they don't choose to let you.

You are not the owner. You are not a lawyer. You are not entitled to speak for the owner.

TD

Then what is the purpose of anyone having a power of attorney for anything if it isn't any good for anything? And why would they allow an agent for the owner to look up the documents under a document request? If you'd like to be direct, then answer the questions I'm asking. It's really simple. My questions are quite specific.

 

[TigerD]

Then what is the purpose of anyone having a power of attorney for anything if it isn't any good for anything? And why would they allow an agent for the owner to look up the documents under a document request? If you'd like to be direct, then answer the questions I'm asking. It's really simple. My questions are quite specific.

I have. The answer is NO. You are just too dense to accept it.

TD

 

[AndyTampa]

Let's see how helpful this has been. In my original post I asked three questions:

1) Am I the only one that sees anything wrong with the above?

2) Can I be designated a proxy, agent or power of attorney to be allowed back into the meeting and speak for my girlfriend? Which would be best?

3) Since directors routinely gather proxies from members for the annual election, wouldn't I also be allowed to gather them from multiple members and speak twice on each item for each member or would I have to group them?

I got 3 responses telling me to give up and 1 sympathetic acknowledgement of "nobodies with a little power" that included the advice to check the documents and state law (which I'd already done extensively before coming here) but didn't actually address the questions I asked. OK-LL did state, "I would argue that barring non-members is in direct opposition to the obvious intent of the governing documents which allow a non-member to become a Director." He just didn't state how he'd go about arguing it.

I then asked three more questions:

4) Doesn't the fact that I have been allowed to represent her at the meetings for years, plus the fact that I am allowed by the by-laws to be a Director and have in fact been a Director set a precedent?

5) If non-homeowners are now barred from the meeting, should the serving Directors also be barred?

6) What if they don't ask attendees to present proof of membership or take an attendance to match against the ownership list? Didn't they just make a rule that is specific to me? Is that legal?

I posted a section of State Law giving members the right to vote by proxy and another section of State Law that states that the voting membership is made up of parcel owners or their agents to support my questions. Then asked the question,

(7) "What does it take to become an agent?"

I got 1 more response telling me to give up and that I don't have a stake in this. I didn't ask if I had a stake in this. The three amigos who keep trying to tell me that instead of answering my questions don't have a stake in this either, but act as if they do. All three have basically told me to shut up.

I then had to reiterate that the questions I asked are not being answered and had to restate that I wanted to know about proxies, agents, and powers of attorney and what they are for.

I got 1 sarcastic comment from Silverplum about complaints that I hadn't made.

Finally, I got some useful advice from festival that gave me several options to choose from followed by insults from the unhelpful FlyingRon and Silverplum.

I responded to festival's post with another question,

(8) "If they aren't enforcing it against every non-owner, can they still enforce it on me?"

TigerD gave an answer that conflicted with the facts presented followed by another "shut up and give up" comment. I then added detail to further address festival's post.

Then I reworded the question,

8) "Can they legally enforce a rule against only one individual or is this considered selective enforcement?"

OK-LL gave another bit of advice which fit in with festival's advice, followed by another post by TigerD to give up.

I asked two more questions.

9) What is the purpose of anyone having a power of attorney for anything if it isn't any good for anything?

10) Why would they allow an agent for the owner to look up the documents under a document request?

TigerD's answer was No. None of the three amigos answered a single question I asked. Festival and OK-LL were the only helpful people here. However, some of the questions have been left unanswered.

So if FlyingRon's, Silverplum's, and TigerD's only response is to tell me to quit, then you've done what you intended to do. Now shut up and let someone helpful have a chance to answer. You don't have a stake in this.

 

[quincy]

... Now shut up and let someone helpful have a chance to answer. ...

It is interesting to me that you want to prevent the members of this forum from speaking.

Sort of reminds me of an HOA that is trying to prevent speech.

The difference is that those whom you are trying to silence are MEMBERS of this forum. The HOA is trying to silence a NON-MEMBER.

Although you believe you have a stake in the decisions made by the HOA, you really don't. It is not in the best interests of the HOA to have non-members have a voice in what is and is not done in their community. You, afterall, can walk away from your girlfriend's house and the decisions made by the HOA at any time (or your girlfriend can insist that you walk away).

But, hey, consult with an attorney in your area if you feel you must insert yourself into the HOA meetings and you want to find a way to do this legally. Marrying your girlfriend is a way that might work if your girlfriend is amenable to this - she might find this an awful idea.

 

[AndyTampa]

It is interesting to me that you want to prevent the members of this forum from speaking.

It is just as interesting to me how you can take a sentence out of the context of the entire post to make some biased and irrelevant point. The three members, and now you, have told me over and over again to shut up and give up. They have had their turn and I've asked others to provide helpful advice. That is not the same thing nor the same context.

she might find this an awful idea.

Just another useless disparaging remark.

You four seem to have come up with an opinion of what type of person I am based on questions that you refuse to answer. Your innuendo about my character doesn't help and isn't advice.

Quincy, obviously, you haven't read the entire discussion. I'm not trying to address the board on a whim. I've been a participating member of this community and the board for years. This is a single board that is trying to get away with things of which they have no authority so they've taken action to quiet not only me but the members themselves.

Would you folks that seem to think a person can just walk away say the same thing about a home intruder? If they want to rape or kill her, it's not my business, right? I should just walk away and not fight, right? I mean, I don't have a stake in her life, right? Would my questions sound better if I didn't use the term "girlfriend" and used the term "significant other" or "life partner"? Again, you feel you must tell me I have no stake in this as if I haven't heard it yet. That doesn't answer any question I asked. I'll say it again. If you (any you) don't have any advice other than "go away", then just go away. If I wanted to be defeated, I wouldn't have posted in the first place.

All I'm asking is what I CAN do. You keep telling me what I can't do. It's the opposite. How about if I pretend to be on the board already and want to keep a non-owner out. Would you then tell me the full range of ways he'd get back in?

 

[Proserpina]

It is just as interesting to me how you can take a sentence out of the context of the entire post to make some biased and irrelevant point. The three members, and now you, have told me over and over again to shut up and give up. They have had their turn and I've asked others to provide helpful advice. That is not the same thing nor the same context.


Just another useless disparaging remark.

You four seem to have come up with an opinion of what type of person I am based on questions that you refuse to answer. Your innuendo about my character doesn't help and isn't advice.

Quincy, obviously, you haven't read the entire discussion. I'm not trying to address the board on a whim. I've been a participating member of this community and the board for years. This is a single board that is trying to get away with things of which they have no authority so they've taken action to quiet not only me but the members themselves.

Would you folks that seem to think a person can just walk away say the same thing about a home intruder? If they want to rape or kill her, it's not my business, right? I should just walk away and not fight, right? I mean, I don't have a stake in her life, right? Would my questions sound better if I didn't use the term "girlfriend" and used the term "significant other" or "life partner"? Again, you feel you must tell me I have no stake in this as if I haven't heard it yet. That doesn't answer any question I asked. I'll say it again. If you (any you) don't have any advice other than "go away", then just go away. If I wanted to be defeated, I wouldn't have posted in the first place.

All I'm asking is what I CAN do. You keep telling me what I can't do. It's the opposite. How about if I pretend to be on the board already and want to keep a non-owner out. Would you then tell me the full range of ways he'd get back in?

We only know of your character by your words.

In this instance, you're behaving like a petulant child. Grow up.

 

[quincy]

It is just as interesting to me how you can take a sentence out of the context of the entire post to make some biased and irrelevant point. The three members, and now you, have told me over and over again to shut up and give up. They have had their turn and I've asked others to provide helpful advice. That is not the same thing nor the same context.


Just another useless disparaging remark.

You four seem to have come up with an opinion of what type of person I am based on questions that you refuse to answer. Your innuendo about my character doesn't help and isn't advice.

Quincy, obviously, you haven't read the entire discussion. I'm not trying to address the board on a whim. I've been a participating member of this community and the board for years. This is a single board that is trying to get away with things of which they have no authority so they've taken action to quiet not only me but the members themselves.

Would you folks that seem to think a person can just walk away say the same thing about a home intruder? If they want to rape or kill her, it's not my business, right? I should just walk away and not fight, right? I mean, I don't have a stake in her life, right? Would my questions sound better if I didn't use the term "girlfriend" and used the term "significant other" or "life partner"? Again, you feel you must tell me I have no stake in this as if I haven't heard it yet. That doesn't answer any question I asked. I'll say it again. If you (any you) don't have any advice other than "go away", then just go away. If I wanted to be defeated, I wouldn't have posted in the first place.

All I'm asking is what I CAN do. You keep telling me what I can't do. It's the opposite. How about if I pretend to be on the board already and want to keep a non-owner out. Would you then tell me the full range of ways he'd get back in?

I read the entire thread, AndyTampa, and it seems to me that you have difficulty understanding what has been communicated.

Here is a link to Florida's Condominium Act, Section 718.112(2)(c): http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0718/Sections/0718.112.html

Find in the Condominium Act the definition of owner, Section 718.103 (28) and tell me how that applies to you (Hint: It doesn't).

The right to attend and speak at board meetings is the legal right of the unit owner. The HOA bylaws can restrict POAs from attending meetings and the bylaws can restrict tenants from attending meetings and the bylaws can restrict non-members from attending meetings.

It seems you have been told several times what you can do (although I have a feeling we are all thinking of a few other things you can do that we are too polite to list ).

If you believe you have the legal right to speak at an HOA meeting when you are not one of the homeowners, speak to an attorney in your area.

Insulting the members of this forum and telling us to shut up is not apt to work too well for you.