HOA/POA's are financial institutions now? (Dallas, Grapevine: houses, neighborhoods, maintenance)

[NP78]

Originally Posted by UnfairPark

Who maintains common areas like entrance, club house, neighborhood wall, landscaping, etc. in non HOA subdivisions?

Depends on the neighborhood. I have lived in two non-HOA neighborhoods in Austin and Dallas respectively and much prefer them to previous experience in a HOA neighborhood. My neighborhood in Austin had a community pool and tennis courts that were maintained and operated by a voluntary neighborhood association. If you didn't want to use the amenities, you could choose not to participate. This group also maintained the entrance, etc., but it was pretty minimal.

My neighborhood here also has a voluntary neighborhood association whose members maintain what little signage is required as well as organizing community activities (Halloween block party, etc.). We don't have a community pool, and there aren't really common areas to maintain as the parks/playgrounds are City parks.

I have found the neighborhoods with voluntary neighborhood associations to be much more close knit than what I experienced when I owned a home in a HOA neighborhood. I attribute that primarily on the difference between established neighborhoods vs. the brand new neighborhood I lived in with a HOA.

Basically, I think it comes down to individual HOA's. Some of them certainly add value and consistency to a neighborhood. Some of them deliver very little value. However, they are hardly necessary for maintaining property values. All the areas in North Dallas, Lakewood, etc. are evidence of that.

[ChristieP]

We're in a non HOA neighborhood in Grapevine. We don't have the community center or pool to maintain, so there's no need for an HOA. The City makes people take care of their yard and house, and prohibits junked cars, etc. I've never had a problem with how our neighbors maintain their houses.

[IC_deLight]

Originally Posted by Rakin

The Board of the HOA is free to change managemnet companies as they desire. How do you know the extra income does not go into the HOA operating Budget and not the Management company? The extra funds would be to pay expenses like maintaining the lawn care and walls if there are any. May even help reduce overall HOA fees.

The management agreement provides for the creation and collection of these fees for the management company, not the HOA. The management company will claim they are for the HOA but they are not. Typically also the HOA doesn't even own the bank account if a management company is involved. Indeed there will frequently be no member of the HOA that has any signing authority on the accounts.

The management companies have also implemented provisions to put barriers up to being terminated.
1. They will have a compensation provision that requires compensation for the full term of whatever the agreement provides regardless of whether engagement continues to that date.
2. They will have a contingency fee provision for late fees that provides that the management company gets them if it collects them and that the HOA is not otherwise liable to the management company for them - unless the management company is terminated in which case the management company demands all these windfall fees it didn't earn for "late fees".
3. The management company or its affiliate will have sold insurance coverage to the HOA. The insurance coverage is maintained only so long as the management company is engaged. So the management companies go in and wreak havoc to promote litigation. The HOA can't fire the management company and retain coverage during litigation - and the HOA cannot get alternative coverage during the lawsuit.

You need to look at the management agreements and insurance policies purportedly providing coverage to the HOA and understand who owns them.

[IC_deLight]

Originally Posted by octo

Well, that's what you voluntarily signed up for. Don't buy a house that comes with rules you don't like.

Texas Constitution provides for 3 branches of government. HOAs aren't on the list bub.

Originally Posted by octo

That will exclude lots of new neighborhoods but that's still up to you. No one forces you to buy into an HOA. If that excludes hot areas for you then it's a matter of limited supply of what you want. I also want a lot of things that are either not for sale or way out of my price range. Looks like what you want is not available.

Kinda like a bus seat for Rosa Parks. Don't think that worked out too well for the people trying to enforce bogus "rules". There is not an option for property that isn't burdened by rules and liens of questionable validity so people put into those positions will challenge them. HOAs have never "preserved property value" but they have certainly been responsible for tanking them and divesting owners of all the equity in their homes. I suspect as more and more challenges occur those insisting upon being tied to HOAs might rethink their positions when they realize they can go down with the ship.

[Heidi60]

I have only experienced one HOA which is enough for me. The BOD would recieve free home repairs in exchange for allowing the lawyers/mgt to charge the homeowners for anything and everything. If only one or two homeowners are elected that do not support the system, they are excluded and basically forced out so a player can be appointed to the board. So called elections were also manipulted through the proxy votes, which the legislature finally got rid of. Open Meeting Laws were ignored so prior to a public meeting, all the decisions were made so little open discussion took place.

There may be some good HOA around but for the rest, it is beyond the homeowners ability to change the system unless the state legislature enacts strong laws and enforces them. We certainly didn't understand all the implications when we moved to an HOA which is why I feel it is important to share experiences so others can learn. We are now free from it and have no regrets about leaving.

[TurtleCreek80]

Originally Posted by UnfairPark

Who maintains common areas like entrance, club house, neighborhood wall, landscaping, etc. in non HOA subdivisions?

Most non-HOA neighborhoods don't have neighborhood walls, gate houses, club houses, etc. Public parks and landscaping are maintained out of the city budget.

That's why I find the HOA subdivisions hilarious- I grew up in the Park Cities, the most expensive and exclusive part of Dallas, and yet there is no wall around either city. The developers set aside 20-25% of HP and UP's land for public parks, including each town's public pool ($100-ish resident fee each summer) and many tennis courts (which are reserved with a phone call). All are well maintained from a portion of property taxes that goes into the city's operating budget. I'd much rather pay property taxes and hold elected city officials accountable for the budget than a renegade HOA board of neighbors on a power trip.

Other parts of Dallas have other systems - ie, Sparkman Club is a gem of a neighborhood in northwest Dallas that happens to have a neighborhood clubhouse and swimming pool. Owners pay $500/year if they want to join the private neighborhood club. It's not mandatory but the neighborhood has a high participation rate. Greenway Parks has a mandatory HOA but it has two purposes: 1) pays for additional DPD patrol and 2) maintains the neighborhood's iconic greenbelts. No rules about house paint colors or fines for planting an "unapproved" tree variety.

[mSooner]

That's why I find the HOA subdivisions hilarious- I grew up in the Park Cities, the most expensive and exclusive part of Dallas, and yet there is no wall around either city.

Who needs a stone wall when there is an invisible one made of extreme social pressure and the aura of cash?

I'm not a huge fan of HOAs myself, but you cannot assume that all neighborhoods without an HOA are going to do just fine by themselves. You could say people self-select into nicer areas by income. For example, I'm pretty sure a certain older, but nice, Coppell neighborhood has no HOA. 95% of the neighborhood is beautiful. You would never know, except for a few homes that have interesting ideas of what constitutes normal looking landscaping.

My neighborhood also has no HOA and isn't low-income by any means, but it is the "starter" neighborhood. We do not look like we have an HOA. In some ways, I'm thankful for that at this point in my life, because we are occasionally those people that take too long to mow the lawn when my husband is on a rough month at work. In other ways, it would have been nice to keep the hoarder home down the street in better shape before it was foreclosed--it was baaadd. It's only the rise in property values that have improved things. It looked pretty rough on my street in 2011.

Take much of Carrollton & Irving as an example.

[TurtleCreek80]

Originally Posted by mSooner

Who needs a stone wall when there is an invisible one made of extreme social pressure and the aura of cash?

I'm not a huge fan of HOAs myself, but you cannot assume that all neighborhoods without an HOA are going to do just fine by themselves. You could say people self-select into nicer areas by income. For example, I'm pretty sure a certain older, but nice, Coppell neighborhood has no HOA. 95% of the neighborhood is beautiful. You would never know, except for a few homes that have interesting ideas of what constitutes normal looking landscaping.

My neighborhood also has no HOA and isn't low-income by any means, but it is the "starter" neighborhood. We do not look like we have an HOA. In some ways, I'm thankful for that at this point in my life, because we are occasionally those people that take too long to mow the lawn when my husband is on a rough month at work. In other ways, it would have been nice to keep the hoarder home down the street in better shape before it was foreclosed--it was baaadd. It's only the rise in property values that have improved things. It looked pretty rough on my street in 2011.

Take much of Carrollton & Irving as an example.

True, there are neighborhood that aren't as well kept and have bigger problems than what city code enforcement can keep up with- see many neighborhoods in South Dallas / Fair Park for example. . However, I think you'd be hard pressed to find any non-HOA neighborhood in DFW where home values are $200-250k+ that aren't nicely maintained by residents and city code. Does that mean that 100% of residences look 100% perfect at all times? No. But does it mean that the great majority of residents take pride in their homes and lawns? Yes. Even if "pride" is the quirky neighbor who spends hours gardening his exotic plant collection

[Aceraceae]

We live in an HOA. Have never even needed to talk to them in almost 2.5 years. I'm not a fan of them in general though.

[BigDGeek]

Originally Posted by UnfairPark

My HOA is pretty decent. I certainly don't want to live in a subdivision without HOA where neighbor can cover his windows with barb wire and starts raising pigs in his backyard. Living and selling home can be a nightmare without HOA rules. If homes are far apart and lots are in acres then you don't needs HOA but for suburban subdivisions with two dozen homes on your street, it's a necessary evil.

ROFL...come over to Richardson sometime. We don't have any of that.

Originally Posted by ChristieP

Most cities have Code Enforcement departments to prevent that sort of thing.

^^^ This.

Originally Posted by UnfairPark

Who maintains common areas like entrance, club house, neighborhood wall, landscaping, etc. in non HOA subdivisions?

Entrance: the voluntary neighborhood association sometimes does the landscaping around it. The entrance signs themselves were built & are maintained by the city.

Club house: We don't have one.

Neighborhood wall: LOL...don't have one of those either. Some neighborhoods here do. The city generally maintains them.

Landscaping: Since we have no common areas that aren't in a city-maintained park, it's not applicable.

You didn't ask, but sign toppers: Neighborhood association buys them and the city installs them.