In article ,
"D. Stussy" wrote:




To Jeff: What part of "unenforced CC&Rs" don't people understand? Failing
to complain eventually estops an action when too much time has passed.

AFAIK that depends on the locality. I know locally if one CC&R is not
enforced the courts -tend- to want to ignore all of them.

A point to consider, if there are CC&R (say like banning antenna''s),
but there is no HOA. In most localities the CC&R has to be enforced by
private court action of another home owner. Since their court costs have
to come out of their personal pocket, it does really reduce the odds of
the CC&R being enforced

--
--------------------------------------------------------
Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org
This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read
RV and Camping FAQ can be found at
http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv

On Jan 24, 1:10 pm, Ralph E Lindberg wrote:

A point to consider, if there are CC&R (say like banning antenna''s),
but there is no HOA. In most localities the CC&R has to be enforced by
private court action of another home owner. Since their court costs have
to come out of their personal pocket, it does really reduce the odds of
the CC&R being enforced

It's a very good point, Ralph. A person who lives in a place with an
HOA at some level wants to live there and is accepting of that fact.
One of the other less pretty aspects of human nature is that there are
people who either want to mess with the HOA, or want it, but want
special privileges. I would personally find it a little odd that a
person who is accepting of such intense outside control would under
normal circumstances both live in such a place, and simultaneously
want to put up a AR antenna.

On Jan 24, 8:10�pm, "Michael J. Coslo" wrote:

A person who lives in a place with an
HOA at some level wants to live there and is accepting of that fact.

Maybe.

Or maybe they don't have much choice.

Real estate is different from other things in that it's not portable.
Plus you can only buy what people want to sell.

What I mean is that if your job is at X and your spouse's job is at Y
and the decent schools are at Z, there's a practical limit on where you
can live and not spend your entire life commuting. On top of that, most
people have definite money and time limitations.

The result is that, in at least some cases, there aren't so many
options to buy a non-restricted place. Particularly when there's atime
limit.

One of the other less pretty aspects of human nature is that
there are
people who either want to mess with the HOA, or want it, but want
special privileges. I would personally find it a little odd that a
person who is accepting of such intense outside control
would under
normal circumstances both live in such a place,
and simultaneously
want to put up a AR antenna.

There's also the case of the person who was not informed of the rules
and limitations.

Some years back I considered moving, and looked at a number of homes in
my area. All of them had nice fact sheets and disclosure sheets to look
at and take away. None of them - absolutely none - mentioned an HOA,
CC&Rs, etc. Most of them had some CC&Rs, but the unsuspecting homebuyer
wouldn't know that until closing - if then. When your old house is sold
and your stuff is on the truck and you're at the closing, it's just too
late.

Some might say "do your research first!" and that's good advice. But
back when I was looking, the RE market was so hot around here that a
house would go on sale at noon and have three no-contingency offers,
often at or above the asking price, before the sun went down.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Jan 25, 8:22 am, wrote:
On Jan 24, 8:10 pm, "Michael J. Coslo" wrote:



A person who lives in a place with an
HOA at some level wants to live there and is accepting of that fact.

Maybe.

Or maybe they don't have much choice.

I just don't know, Jim. Perhaps I have a different idea of choice.

I'd rent before living in a HOA development.


What I mean is that if your job is at X and your spouse's job is at Y
and the decent schools are at Z, there's a practical limit on where you
can live and not spend your entire life commuting. On top of that, most
people have definite money and time limitations.

And I suspect that they have a strong sense of "Right now!"

I waited until a combination of market prices, interest rates and
availability showed me the house I wanted.
There are some canards going around about houses. One is that you have
to have a house immediately and anything other than buying a house now
is throwing money away. That perception on many people's part's has
led them to making bad decisions.

I bought my house in 1994. Until that time, I lived in a mobile home.
We looked at houses the entire time, but saved money and waited until
the right house came along. It was a nice house that came on the
market during a mini-slump. It had sat for some months, so the sellers
were "motivated". We got the house at 75 percent of it's appraised
value, at a good interest rate, and it was in that neighborhood that
doesn't restrict antennas. Then we didn't refi except to reduce the
interest rate. It'll be paid off later this year. I live 2 miles from
work, and the kid walked to school until he went to high school.

I point his out because it's apparently quite different than what most
people think is the way to go about doing the house thing. Some may
say I got lucky. Luck had nothing to do with it. I just waited and
pounced when the time was right. Anyone can do that.

Now some people have issues with living in mobile homes, or fear that
any money spent on anything other than a mortgage is wasted. They have
to have a house, and they have to have it now. Okay, then they have to
put up with the idea of buy in haste, repent at leisure.

Some years back I considered moving, and looked at a number of homes in
my area. All of them had nice fact sheets and disclosure sheets to look
at and take away. None of them - absolutely none - mentioned an HOA,
CC&Rs, etc. Most of them had some CC&Rs, but the unsuspecting homebuyer
wouldn't know that until closing - if then. When your old house is sold
and your stuff is on the truck and you're at the closing, it's just too
late.

That's putting yourself in a bad situation. Remember, the real estate
agent is not your friend. After firing several agents, for reasons
like continually showing me houses outside my price range, (that I
determined, not them) and not disclosing HOA and other important
stuff, I was pretty well convinced of that. They are the sellers
friend, and the more they can get out of you, the better they serve
their customer. If that means allowing the buyer to think that
something is true while it isn't, they are happy to do that.

My point is that there are always options for a Ham, if people think
they just have to take whatever comes along, well, they've taken an
option that isn't Ham oriented.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On 1/25/2010 2:44 PM, Michael J. Coslo wrote:

That's putting yourself in a bad situation. Remember, the real estate
agent is not your friend. After firing several agents, for reasons
like continually showing me houses outside my price range, (that I
determined, not them) and not disclosing HOA and other important
stuff, I was pretty well convinced of that. They are the sellers
friend, and the more they can get out of you, the better they serve
their customer. If that means allowing the buyer to think that
something is true while it isn't, they are happy to do that.

My wife and I looked at over 100 houses before we selected the one I
live in now. I have *no* HOA, *no* CC&R's, and *no* problem putting up
antennas: I had to fire three agents who hadn't heard me when I told
them what *my* requirements were.

Michael is right: the agent represents the *SELLER*, not the buyer. He
is legally obligated to disclose _some_ things, but professionally
obligated not to disclose anything else that might lower the house's
value. Agents are not your friends.

I remember one occasion, when I was asked to put a deposit on a home I
was considering: the agent looked at the paper, and said, "The deposit
isn't five hundred, Bill, it's five thousand", and I replied, "You're
right, it's not five hundred: it's Five dollars". He tried to stare me
down, and then said "I don't think you're serious about buying this
house, and I won't convey that offer", to which I replied "You'll
convey the offer or I'll have your license on a plate"!

The agent had a counter-offer for me within two hours. You have to
remember that these guys are salesmen, and they get paid to move the
product: the moment you let them dictate to you, you lose.

HTH. FWIW. YMMV.

Bill, W1AC

Bill Horne wrote:

Michael is right: the agent represents the *SELLER*, not the buyer. He
is legally obligated to disclose _some_ things, but professionally
obligated not to disclose anything else that might lower the house's
value. Agents are not your friends.

There's an agent for the seller, and there's an agent for the buyer.
They should be in a professional adversarial relationship. The seller's
agent is out to get the highest price, and the buyer's agent is out to
get the lowest. If, as the buyer, you don't think your agent is
performing that task, find another agent.

Real estate agents most certainly should be your friend. As a buyer, I
cannot possibly know the market and keep up with it as well as someone
who does that as their full time job. My real estate agent knows vastly
more about what questions to ask and what to look for than I do. While
a buyer or buyer's agent may not be required to volunteer information,
they are required to truthfully answer questions IF you know what
questions to ask.

To try to interject the slightest bit of ham-radio-related content into
this submission . . . if being able to erect an antenna is an important
consideration for you when buying a house, find an agent who understands
CCRs and related issues. If the agent doesn't understand the issues,
they cannot do what you need them to do. If the agent cannot or does
not perform, failing to ask the right questions or showing you houses
that don't meet your needs, get another agent. You would do the same
thing if you explained that you needed a minimum of three bedrooms and
the agent persisted in showing you houses with two bedrooms.

73, Steve KB9X

On Jan 25, 3:44�pm, Bill Horne wrote:
My wife and I looked at over 100 houses before
we selected the one I
live in now. I have *no* HOA, *no* CC&R's,
and *no* problem putting up
antennas: I had to fire three agents who hadn't
heard me when I told
them what *my* requirements were.

Thanks for proving the point, Bill.

Having to look at 100 houses after telling an agent what you want means
something's really wrong somewhere.

Having to fire three agents after telling them what you want means
something's really wrong somewhere.

I don't think the problem was that you were excessively choosy; I think
the problem was a lack of suitable houses, so the agents showed you
"almost good enough" houses.

You had the resources and patience to go through all that. Many folks
don't. If you spent just 1 hour per house on research, that's over
2-1/2 weeks work before the actual job of buying and moving begins.

Michael is right: the agent represents the *SELLER*,
not the buyer. He
is legally obligated to disclose _some_ things, but professionally
obligated not to disclose anything else that might lower the house's
value. Agents are not your friends.

I disagree; they can be. But the main point is that the agent, whether
a buyer's agent or a seller's agent, doesn't make any money until a
sale happens.

I think all this is having a negative impact on amateur radio.
Here'swhy:

1) Lots of people who live in restricted homes never pursue an interest
in amateur radio because they don't want the antenna hassle. Not every
restricted home has a suitable attic or yard where an antenna can be
hidden. Many restrictions are such that flagpoles, birdhouses, awnings
and other things are prohibited too. Plus Gladys Kravitz type neighbors
who look for *any* infractions (it only takesone).

The effect is particularly strong on young people, who can't just move
and whose resources are usually less.

2) Lots of hams who live in restricted homes are much less active
amateurs than they would be if they didn't have the hassle.

3) Certain areas become "no-hams" zones, because more and more hams
steer clear of them.

4) The publicity and visibility of amateur radio decrease over time,
because nobody sees antennas, and hams operating stealth don't
talkabout it.

How many of us first discovered amateur radio, or found our first
Elmer, by seeing his/her antenna(s)?

For decades the trend in amateur radio has been to make the licenses
easier to get, the equipment less expensive, more reliable and higher
performing, and the choices of activities greater. But at the same
time, there's been a slow but steady trend to make more and more homes
ham-radio-unfriendly. That's not a good thing.

I'm not sure how to meet the challenge head-on; we don't have the
resources of the satellite-dish folks.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:
I don't think the problem was that you were excessively choosy;

You had the resources and patience to go through all that.

When I decided to move out of the Los Angeles area, My wife and I
spent almost 6 months looking for property online. We had a basic
set of "conditions" to meet (as it were).

I fly out here in June last year to look at the properties and
when I got home told my wife, "I think I just bought the farm."

How many of us first discovered amateur radio, or found our first
Elmer, by seeing his/her antenna(s)?

Slight topic drift, but in my case it was because my dad worked
for North American Aviation. He took me to the employee recreation
park and I wandered into the Amateur Radio Club station. W6UUI.
End of story, I was "ruined".

Jeff-1.0
wa6fwi


--
“Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity.â€
�
Frank Leahy, Head coach, Notre Dame 1941-1954

http://www.stay-connect.com

On Jan 27, 8:29 am, wrote:

Having to look at 100 houses after telling an agent what you want means
something's really wrong somewhere.

Having to fire three agents after telling them what you want means
something's really wrong somewhere.

Yes, there is, but it's what we have to work with. All the agents I
worked with were of the big picture on the billboard type. It would
veer way OT, but my XYL who works in the flooring industry and has
regular contact with contractors and RE agent, could tell you stories
that would make you hair stand on end. The closest comparison I can
make is that there is a strong "carny vs rube" relationship going on.
And they are the carney.


You had the resources and patience to go through all that. Many folks
don't. If you spent just 1 hour per house on research, that's over
2-1/2 weeks work before the actual job of buying and moving begins.

Thanks for proving my point, Jim. I spent a lot of time researching my
house. When a house reached "serious status", I took measurements, I
talked to the neighbors, I had my lawyer go to the courthouse to check
over the deed - in addition to the completely worthless deed insurance
they make you buy. And he found an issue that we made the owners pay
for. But the point is there is a choice, and if a person lacks the
patience to find out what they are buying into, then I don't know how
to advise them.

There's the old saying about buy in haste and repent at leisure.


1) Lots of people who live in restricted homes never pursue an interest
in amateur radio because they don't want the antenna hassle. Not every
restricted home has a suitable attic or yard where an antenna can be
hidden. Many restrictions are such that flagpoles, birdhouses, awnings
and other things are prohibited too. Plus Gladys Kravitz type neighbors
who look for *any* infractions (it only takesone).

hehe, I was wondering when Gladys would come up... 8^)

But you brought us back to Ham radio specifically, so that's great.

I agree wholeheartedly. Old Mr Bloom from up the road was my
introduction to two way radio. He had a tower with one of those triple
vertical dipoles on it that you could switch the pattern on - I forget
what they are called. But a friend and I knocked on his door, and
politely asked if we could see his radios. He told us to have our
parents call him to make sure it was okay, and then we stopped by
again to see his shack. Pure magic! Lights and glowing meters and that
electronic smell of tubes that whenever I smell tube equipment these
days it takes me right back.

Otherwise I agree with all those points.


For decades the trend in amateur radio has been to make the licenses
easier to get, the equipment less expensive, more reliable and higher
performing, and the choices of activities greater. But at the same
time, there's been a slow but steady trend to make more and more homes
ham-radio-unfriendly. That's not a good thing.

I'm not sure how to meet the challenge head-on; we don't have the
resources of the satellite-dish folks.

For as much charm as our introduction to Ham radio was, it is going to
be different today.

If we decide that we need to get young people interested in Ham radio,
it will have to be in a manner in which they are used to.

I had an idea about making a 2 meter HT that had texting ability, as
well as voice. The texting mode would be PSK-31. Note that PSK31
actually does work with FM - it isn't as useful as the SSB version,
but it still works. A kid with a Technician license and his/her
friends of like qualifications would use these things similarly to
cell phones, but it would be their own channels. After starting, the
more adventurous might look into repeater construction. Regular Ham
type stuff. Eventually they would likely gravitate to HF if they found
that interesting.

It would certainly be a different paradigm than what most people who
became Hams when very young went through. But we don't have novice
class any more, and have to come up with something else.

Some Hams I have pitched this to have been vehemently oppose to the
idea.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

wrote:

I don't think the problem was that you were excessively choosy; I think
the problem was a lack of suitable houses, so the agents showed you
"almost good enough" houses.

You go to a real estate agent. You give them your wish list. They do
the best that they can to meet it. The chances of them finding a house
that meets 100% of your requirements is nil if your wish list is
comprehensive.

House buying is a tradeoff. The items on your wish list related to ham
radio are no different than anything else. It's as silly to tell a real
estate agent that you absolutely must have three bedrooms as it is to
tell them that you absolutely must not have a CCR.

Maybe the house for you actually has four bedrooms. Maybe the house for
you actually has a CCR but it's something that you can live with. Those
are YOUR decisions. If you never see the potential properties, you
won't have the opportunity to make the decision.

The key is to find a real estate agent who understands what you're
looking for and is able to show you a reasonable number of homes; not
everything that might conceivably meet your need, but not rule out
something arbitrarily because it is 2002 square feet and your max was 2000.

Yes, CCRs are a real issue for ham radio today. But condemning them as
inherently evil isn't going to accomplish anything because it's only a
tiny minority of the population that wants to erect a tower in their
back yard. Most everyone thinks CCRs are good and in that environment
they're not going away. Best to understand how to work within the system.