Randy or Sherry Guttery wrote:
Bill Jeffrey wrote:


It seems we have this discussion every year or so, and the same sad
group of naysayers chimes in with "Can't be so. My mother-in-law's
great-grand-uncle lives in a condo in East Buttend and they won't let
him do it." I think that the HOAs write this stuff into their CCRs
because they assume that the homeowners either won't know the truth,
or won't hire a lawyer to fight for them. It's a power thing.

No - it's a financial thing, a practical "relationship" thing, - and (at
least what I'm familiar with) a California thing.

In the case of dishes, it's a hidden agenda thing. They try to argue
that they are trying to ban them because they are unsightly, and that's
horses**t. If you scratch the surface, the real reason (usually) is that
the HOA has cut a deal with a cable company for monopoly access to
subscribers in exchange for wiring the community. Naturally, they can't
use that reason in court;the judge would not be very sympathetic, so
they claim that the ban is because dishes are unattractive. In all the
years I've been alive, I've never heard one comment from an actual
person about the incredible fuglyness of DBS dishes. The HOAs enforcing
these CCRs would have you believe that such people exist in droves.



First - it costs a lot of money to hire a lawyer to fight such - right
or wrong - it costs a lot.

Yeah and the real bitch here is that you pay even if you win, and you
are compelled to pay your legal adversary to fight you in the form of
HOA yearly dues.

It makes for bad relationships with the neighbors. They may be wrong -
but you still have to live with them.

IMHO any neighbor that would get their panties in a bunch over a dish
installed in my own yard already would have a bad relationship with me.