On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 12:54:45 -0600, "amdx" wrote:


"Pedro Sanchez" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 09:06:20 -0500, "Slow Code"
wrote:

Hey Steve, does your landlord let you put up an antenna? Mine won't. :-((

Shove those antenna up the landlords ass. Ask him if he would rather
have the antenna in the air or up his ass. If he says he wants it up
his ass then break it off for him.

Landlords suck assholes.

Gee, maybe you should save your money and buy your OWN home,
then you can do what you want with it.
An even better experience would be, buy a home with your own money
and rent it to those that think "Landlords suck assholes"
After a few missed rent payments your outlook will suddenly change, you
will
wonder why does that %^&$#^$ think I should support him. It's not my fault
he lost
a job, got fired, car broke down, had to take the kid to the emergency room.
It's not my fault he didn't save any money for a rainy day!
My most fun story is the guy that replaced a mailbox, he was in the middle
of
being kicked out. He went out and bought a $40 mailbox expecting me to pay
for it.
I told him to keep the mailbox. When he left he took the mailbox. The post
for this
mailbox was a buried telephone pole, it wasn't going anywhere.
When I installed my new $5.00 mailbox I mounted a 2"x6" board to the pole
with
5" x 5/16" lag bolts, then I mounted the mailbox to the 2x6 with seven 3
1/4" drywall
screws.
I would have liked to seen his face when he whacked that mailbox and it
didn't go
flying away. I hope he didn't hurt himself, NOT
He was gone about three days before he did this. I waited another week and
put up a new mailbox.
Mike
PS. One day the toilet overflowed I had to remove about 40 kotex from the
sewer
pipe one cold day in January.

PSS. sold all the rentals no more %^&$#^$ to put up with.


So, you're saying you like/defend suck-asshole asshole landlords? or
what?

Cecil Moore wrote:
Brenda Ann wrote:
Covenant communities should be outlawed.

Actually, all that is needed is for consumers to
reject covenant communities, as I have always
done.


Tough to do, today. In a number of states, Illinois being one, new
developments are required to have HOA's with a standard, boilerplate
CC&R statement provided by the Assembly for simplicity.

Pre-existing non HOA communities are forming HOA's to protect
themselves from intrusion by commercial interests that cannot get
traction in other HOA communities.

AND...in at least two counties, here, there are basic CC&R's in place
on undeveloped land, levied by county boards, in speculation that
developers may wish to move that way. Meaning, you can buy a piece of
land in deep weeds, build a home with your own hands, and before you
close the door, be in violation of antenna restrictions. Even though the
nearest neighbor may be an hour away.

Rejecting HOA communities, today, may mean having to move a half a
continent away.

You can't even homestead property on the tundra, anymore.

D Peter Maus wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Brenda Ann wrote:
Covenant communities should be outlawed.

Actually, all that is needed is for consumers to
reject covenant communities, as I have always
done.


Tough to do, today. In a number of states, Illinois being one, new
developments are required to have HOA's with a standard, boilerplate
CC&R statement provided by the Assembly for simplicity.

when did Illinois do that

Pre-existing non HOA communities are forming HOA's to protect
themselves from intrusion by commercial interests that cannot get
traction in other HOA communities.

AND...in at least two counties, here, there are basic CC&R's in place
on undeveloped land, levied by county boards, in speculation that
developers may wish to move that way. Meaning, you can buy a piece of
land in deep weeds, build a home with your own hands, and before you
close the door, be in violation of antenna restrictions. Even though the
nearest neighbor may be an hour away.

glad I left the state a few years back

Rejecting HOA communities, today, may mean having to move a half a
continent away.

You can't even homestead property on the tundra, anymore.

well I hard live in tunadra and your tendecy for hyperbole makes me
question the accuratcy of what you are saying

an_old_friend wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Brenda Ann wrote:
Covenant communities should be outlawed.
Actually, all that is needed is for consumers to
reject covenant communities, as I have always
done.

Tough to do, today. In a number of states, Illinois being one, new
developments are required to have HOA's with a standard, boilerplate
CC&R statement provided by the Assembly for simplicity.

when did Illinois do that



That's a good question. I don't believe it was in place when I
bought my house eleven years ago. But I've been hearing it now for a
number of years from sources within both the real estate community, and
media.


Pre-existing non HOA communities are forming HOA's to protect
themselves from intrusion by commercial interests that cannot get
traction in other HOA communities.

AND...in at least two counties, here, there are basic CC&R's in place
on undeveloped land, levied by county boards, in speculation that
developers may wish to move that way. Meaning, you can buy a piece of
land in deep weeds, build a home with your own hands, and before you
close the door, be in violation of antenna restrictions. Even though the
nearest neighbor may be an hour away.

glad I left the state a few years back



You are not alone in that sentiment. And I'm not far behind you.

D Peter Maus wrote:
Rejecting HOA communities, today, may mean having to move a half a
continent away.

Texas ain't full yet. Y'all come on down.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:
Rejecting HOA communities, today, may mean having to move a half a
continent away.

Texas ain't full yet. Y'all come on down.

Hmmm. Rumor, in Calif, is that the illegal aliens squatters have all
the land!

Chuckling,
JS

D Peter Maus wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:

Brenda Ann wrote:

Covenant communities should be outlawed.


Actually, all that is needed is for consumers to
reject covenant communities, as I have always
done.



Tough to do, today. In a number of states, Illinois being one, new
developments are required to have HOA's with a standard, boilerplate
CC&R statement provided by the Assembly for simplicity.

SNIPPED

If the CC&R is "provided by the Assembly" is that to be understood as an agency
of government?

Dave wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:

Brenda Ann wrote:

Covenant communities should be outlawed.


Actually, all that is needed is for consumers to
reject covenant communities, as I have always
done.



Tough to do, today. In a number of states, Illinois being one, new
developments are required to have HOA's with a standard, boilerplate
CC&R statement provided by the Assembly for simplicity.

SNIPPED

If the CC&R is "provided by the Assembly" is that to be understood as an
agency of government?




The Assembly is an agency of government, yes. The boilerplate CC&R's
provided, as I've read them, are provided as a guideline. Local HOA's
are free to amend them as necessary, or as desired. Or to create CC&R's
of their own.

There are in a number of states, now--Maryland and Delaware among
them--agencies of government which, at least in theory, oversee the
operations of HOA's within the state, and are the authority to which
residents may appeal cases of malfeasance, or abuse. In Maryland, this
agency has relatively broad powers, and works quite effectively at
bringing errant HOA's into compliance. In other states...not so.

In many states, HOA's, and their oversight agencies, are not aware of
the federal exemption protecting TV and small dish antennae, Ham and CB
antennae, and--at least in the opinion of a couple of FCC
Commissioners--shortwave receiving antennae. It's up to the homeowner to
keep current of the regs, rulings and opinions of FCC regarding antennae
for radio hobbycraft. These may be the homeowner's only weapons when
the issue becomes heated on the front lawn.

There is a growing number of books out there, today, regarding the
gathering nightmare of HOA abuse, offering accurate information state by
state, and remedies in the event of abuse. Do a websearch. There's a
LOT of information out there.

D Peter Maus wrote:


SNIPPED


If the CC&R is "provided by the Assembly" is that to be understood as
an agency of government?




The Assembly is an agency of government, yes. The boilerplate CC&R's
provided, as I've read them, are provided as a guideline. Local HOA's
are free to amend them as necessary, or as desired. Or to create CC&R's
of their own.

There are in a number of states, now--Maryland and Delaware among
them--agencies of government which, at least in theory, oversee the
operations of HOA's within the state, and are the authority to which
residents may appeal cases of malfeasance, or abuse. In Maryland, this
agency has relatively broad powers, and works quite effectively at
bringing errant HOA's into compliance. In other states...not so.

In many states, HOA's, and their oversight agencies, are not aware of
the federal exemption protecting TV and small dish antennae, Ham and CB
antennae, and--at least in the opinion of a couple of FCC
Commissioners--shortwave receiving antennae. It's up to the homeowner to
keep current of the regs, rulings and opinions of FCC regarding antennae
for radio hobbycraft. These may be the homeowner's only weapons when
the issue becomes heated on the front lawn.

There is a growing number of books out there, today, regarding the
gathering nightmare of HOA abuse, offering accurate information state by
state, and remedies in the event of abuse. Do a websearch. There's a
LOT of information out there.

Your response goes right to the point. If the HOA is from a government entity
the PRB-1 exemption should be claimed and defended prior to purchase.

Dave wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:


SNIPPED


If the CC&R is "provided by the Assembly" is that to be understood as
an agency of government?




The Assembly is an agency of government, yes. The boilerplate CC&R's
provided, as I've read them, are provided as a guideline. Local HOA's
are free to amend them as necessary, or as desired. Or to create
CC&R's of their own.

There are in a number of states, now--Maryland and Delaware among
them--agencies of government which, at least in theory, oversee the
operations of HOA's within the state, and are the authority to which
residents may appeal cases of malfeasance, or abuse. In Maryland, this
agency has relatively broad powers, and works quite effectively at
bringing errant HOA's into compliance. In other states...not so.

In many states, HOA's, and their oversight agencies, are not aware
of the federal exemption protecting TV and small dish antennae, Ham
and CB antennae, and--at least in the opinion of a couple of FCC
Commissioners--shortwave receiving antennae. It's up to the homeowner
to keep current of the regs, rulings and opinions of FCC regarding
antennae for radio hobbycraft. These may be the homeowner's only
weapons when the issue becomes heated on the front lawn.

There is a growing number of books out there, today, regarding the
gathering nightmare of HOA abuse, offering accurate information state
by state, and remedies in the event of abuse. Do a websearch.
There's a LOT of information out there.

Your response goes right to the point. If the HOA is from a government
entity the PRB-1 exemption should be claimed and defended prior to
purchase.



Absolutely. But how many really know about that exemption going in?
And frankly, how many really think about this issue when the realtor is
throwing around numbers?

You would. I would. There are others here who would.

But by and large, no. Home buyers, as a group do not consider this
issue when making the purchase. Preferring to bitch after the fact.

Then, again, most HOA's that I've gotten to deal with have been
absolutely unwilling to both answer questions or provide copies of
bylaws and regulations to which they hold homeowners responsible. One
former member, here--who worked at VOA for years, is an active ham and
SWL--lived under the shadow of an HOA which refused to provide him a
copy of the bylaws, even after a ruling in his favor by the Maryland HOA
oversight agency.


You're right. Exemptions and unlawful restrictions SHOULD be claimed
and defended prior to purchase.

It doesn't happen.