Renewed effort in Texas legislature to limit HOA powers (Austin: tax lien, foreclosure)

[nomore07]

kvue.com | KVUE News Video | Breaking news | Austin, Tx

State lawmakers have tried unsuccessfully to reduce the powers of HOAs for years. A new offensive will use a victimized homeowner to illustrate the need for change.

[eileenkeeney]

I agree they should have a court order,
but otherwise, how does it differ from foreclosure due to not paying home taxes?

If my home is foreclosed due to a tax lien, doesn't the city need a court order?

Perhaps the first step (if a person can not afford their HOA dues) should be to reduce their HOA dues, to an amount to only cover the things that it is not easy to exclude the person from taking advantage of; and then deny access to other HOA covered facilities.

After that, a lien for the amount of the back dues, seems reasonable.

[TexasHorseLady]

Good for them! An HOA is neither a government agency or a bank, and they should quit acting like it!

[oldtoiletsmkgdflrpots]

HOA's are scary.

[nomore07]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Good for them! An HOA is neither a government agency or a bank, and they should quit acting like it!

Right on The story say the house was paid off, who ever heard of an HOA foreclosing on a house... are they legal lienholders?

There was an episode of the "X Files" which dealt with extreme HOAs.

Homeowners Associations: X-FILES series and the episode

"The X Files" Arcadia (1999)

[llkltk]

HOAs are not scary. Half the time they don't even enforce anything. Cars on the street, unkept yards, etc. I'll take an HOA anyday over no HOA. People seem to not care about their surroundings. An HOA often can help with that even though people choose to ignore them at times.

[TexasHorseLady]

And there are many very nice neighborhoods where the homes are kept very nicely without the necessity of an HOA. I find myself appalled (and somewhat frightened) at the attitude I see displayed sometimes that if people aren't forced to take care of their home, that they will inevitably not do so, and that taking care of someone's home by definition means doing it exactly the way one person or committee prefers in every respect. HOA's generally are not just bout taking care of one's home, they are about uniformity. That's very, very different.

As your second sentence proves, it's not the HOA or lack thereof that truly maintains the property values (and the more clients I hear from that will buy anywhere BUT in a neighborhood with an HOA, the more I doubt that claim on the part of people who defend them, because if the trend is to people insisting on buying in non-HOA neighborhoods, there go the property values in those neighborhoods that have them). It's the people.

[txtoal]

So this woman's house was paid off and just because she was behind on her HOA dues, the HOA foreclosed on her? Is that correct? If so, that is crap. I was not aware that HOA's had the authority to do so. I have a love-hate relationship with mine. They can be strict however they always get things done on time, keep the neighborhood in tip-top shape, etc. so I have been more pleased than pissed off with them.

My spouse and I are looking at houses and we don't know if we want to live in an HOA ran property. Frankly, I don't want to live next to a purple house with turquoise trim with crap all over the yard. It is a shame because the house that we looked at next door was beautiful but no thanks.

[tongpa-nyi]

Originally Posted by llkltk

HOAs are not scary. Half the time they don't even enforce anything. Cars on the street, unkept yards, etc. I'll take an HOA anyday over no HOA. People seem to not care about their surroundings. An HOA often can help with that even though people choose to ignore them at times.

Another point, in case nobody has mentioned it yet, is that HOA's are legal and should exist, in spite of those of us who hate them, because many people prefer them. They are privately controlled developments where the original deed-holder creates an HOA for the purpose of attracting people who want to live there. It exists in perpetuity because of the deed.

What some of us dislike is the increasing enforcement of long-neglected neighborhood zoning laws, which may even end up with some of the yard art having to be removed in places like Bouldin, a historic neighborhood well worth preserving.

[G Grasshopper]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

And there are many very nice neighborhoods where the homes are kept very nicely without the necessity of an HOA. I find myself appalled (and somewhat frightened) at the attitude I see displayed sometimes that if people aren't forced to take care of their home, that they will inevitably not do so, and that taking care of someone's home by definition means doing it exactly the way one person or committee prefers in every respect. HOA's generally are not just bout taking care of one's home, they are about uniformity. That's very, very different.

I sure agree with you there, THL. I now live in a neighborhood with an optional HOA that has no power at all, but provides helpful services and information to residents. Even without that threat, people keep their houses very well and are constantly improving them. There is no forced uniformity, but I've never seen anyone's taste expressed in a way that would decrease our property values. Personally, I hate the cookie-cutter uniformity of some HOA communities, and in looking for a new house, will look to communities where people can make their own decisions about their homes. To me, any HOA that can force someone out of their home has way too much power.