Tag: constitution

HOA foreclosure ratio of 36 times violates the 14th Amendment against cruel and unusual punishment

Matt Tomsic wrote an important article in the Charleston Region Business Review on HOA foreclosures with some revealing statistics.  SPECIAL REPORT: YOUR HOME, THEIR RULES.  For example, 68% of the foreclosures were for $5,000 or less in Charleston County, SC.

I wrote the author for some additional statistics. What he had available was just median values for debt owed the HOA and home value, which were $4,500 and $160,000, respectively.

 

That amounts to a punishment of 36 times the debt owed. The US Supreme Court in State Farm v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408 (2003) set criteria of punitive damages exceeding 10 times actual damages constitutes a violation of the 14th Amendment against cruel and unusual punishment. In the jargon of today, HOA foreclosure is the iconic instance of cruel and unusual punishment. And the HOA did not advance any hard cash like a bank to justify foreclosure rights.

 

BUT, your elected representatives see no evil and continue to support the real estate industry’s business interests, with the people being the pawns and “marks” in the con game.

Media still sees HOAs only in monetary terms

My comments to the investigative reporter from KTHR.TV in Indianapolis, IN.

I congratulate you on your very detailed report on what HOAs are all about (13 Investigates: HOAs). Your article joins the newly emerging HOA Enlightenment Movement that looks beyond the special interest, national lobbying trade entity, CAI, propaganda. For more detailed info on HOAs, beyond my short comments, please visit my links below.

Take maintaining property values covenant, the very basis of the pro HOA argument. Show me where the CC&Rs warrant or guarantee property values? Don’t look too hard as you will not find any. In short, the buyer gives up his rights and freedoms, offers his home as collateral for the survival of the HOA, and agrees to pay the assessments no matter what, even if there’s a dispute with the HOA, for an empty promise. Some deal!

In general

The HOA legal scheme is seriously defective in regard protecting people who are citizens of their state and the US, but who are now under a private regime not accountable to the state. The CC&Rs “contract” is based on equitable servitudes and not constitutional or contract law, making these de facto HOAs independent principalities. But, you only see the money side of HOAs that can be viewed as a con job.

For example, the HOA is very much like a closely held business with restricted exit opportunities, and where the members are jointly and severally liable for the debts of the HOA – if a member can’t pay, his “share” can come from the other members’ pockets. Did you know that? Wasn’t that explained to you?

Did you know that the buyer does not have to even read the CC&RS to be held to the binding agreement? All that is necessary is to file the CC&Rs with the county clerk’s office and the buyer is bound by simply accepting his deed, sight unseen and unsigned. Why isn’t the buyer told before he signs the purchase contract? Isn’t this misrepresentation?

Let’s jump to “Steps to Take Now.”

In general, although Indiana has a very limited HOA statutes, the CC&RS are an adhesion contract — take it or leave it in favor of the HOA – that contain provisions that a municipal government could not impose on its citizens. And don’t forget the misrepresentation mentioned above when you hear arguments that “they agreed to and signed” the contract.

See The Truth in HOAs Disclosure Agreement.

Your discussion of “Homeowner Rights” is woefully deficient!

You speak only of the “laws” of the HOA and its CC&RS “constitution.” Do you really believe that the buyers willingly and openly agreed to waive and surrender explicitly stated and implied rights when they took their deed? In a manner that would pass judicial scrutiny? For example, “fines” and the “notice of a hearing” as commonly found in the top-down CC&Rs mock the Constitution. And, the absence of fair elections protections makes political machines a reality.

See the Declare your US and State Citizenship for the legislature.

I hope you will make a serious effort to read these materials, backed by evidence, court decisions, statutes and the statements made by the pro-HOA special interests. And publish your review and summary.

Restoring American principles and way of life in HOA regimes

This is another HOA Enlightenment Movement article on speaking frankly and openly about HOA abuse, about common sense and reasonableness, about the rejection of the HOA attorney insistence on CC&Rs enforcement uber alles, and about legal decisions concerning the rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities of those living in HOAs who have not surrendered their US citizenship.  The fact that the media are publishing more and more about “the Truth in HOAs” signals the twilight of the unspoken alliance of  “No Negatives About HOAs.”  It’s about time!

I congratulate the author, Eve Samples, for spreading the word about this event where it cost an HOA $250,000 in legal fees over a homeowner’s screen doors.  I congratulate Martin County, FL Judge Roberts for her perspective that returns America to the people and not defend these usurper HOA private governments. I congratulate TCPalm for publishing this return to sanity incident.

Judge Roberts held that the HOA was

championing the letter over the spirit, evasion over the truth and quibbling over common sense. . . . The truth, despite evasive answers to the contrary, is that he [the homeowner] was never going to get approval, and rather than deal with that issue directly, the petitioner [HOA] chose subterfuge to create the impossibility.

The HOA president, a True Believer, said she would not change her attitude.   “[I would change] Nothing, to be honest with you, because the violation was there.” The new president, a Reformer, believes that,

it might be reasonable to ask residents to vote on legal action that exceeds a certain dollar amount. . . .  to have litigation reviewed by experts other than the association’s attorneys, to ‘see if the association’s position really is well founded.’ 

(This is a direct reference to the rules of civil court, generally R 11(a) requiring the attorney to make a reasonable inquiry into the facts.)

Those seeking justice and fair play in their HOA should spread this Commentary to all other interested parties to help them see the light.  We all are Americans living under the US Constitution, and must be subject to the equal application of the laws, not to special real estate laws.

the age of HOA enlightenment is coming?

I’m beginning to see more and more evidence of enlightenment by pro-HOA supporters. The dogmatic insistence on enforcing the CC&Rs is falling away to a proper concern for the principles of democratic government and the fair and just treatment of homeowners. The strict view of the covenants is weakening.   There is a growing awareness that HOA boards are governed by other laws and ethical and moral considerations, if indeed HOA regimes are to meet the CAI propaganda of vibrant and harmonious communities.

The Berding-Weil blog, Condo-issues.com (California), shows recent evidence of this enlightenment as is recent posts introduce a degree of reality of events. Now, Donna DiMaggio Berger in Florida reminds boards of good government practices with,

Lastly, when you poll your community members and they voice an opinion on a proposed course of action, boards who disregard that input do so at their own peril. This is not to suggest that the membership must be polled on every course of action, particularly on routine maintenance which is one of a board’s main functions, but if you ask for input on discretionary spending it’s probably best to heed the message your members delivered.

 Avoiding the appearance of self interest as an association director

 Wow! What a thought — poll your community! Why didn’t I think of that very democratic tool? As claimed, the HOA board is the representative of the owner-members. Gee, asking for input is a radical suggestion for an undemocratic corporate form of government. Long overdue as HOA regimes are de facto political governments. Congratulations Donna! Excellent message for HOA boards as HOA member servants.

Now, Mr. Berding, why didn’t you address the recognition of the HOA de facto government in your “Reform Community Associations?” post? After all, you do hold a PhD in Government from the prestigious Claremont School. Your message was that HOAs were too big to fail, and we all have to live with the way things are.

 Every year the California legislature, and the legislatures of other states tinker with the enabling statutes for homeowner’s associations, but these efforts are usually paternalistic, constituent-favoring amendments that do little or nothing to solve the fundamental problems.

 How about the simple amendment that would go a long way to solving problems by restoring the equal application of the laws and due process protections of the 14th Amendment to homeowners, as it should be, and create a unified country rather than a myriad of independent HOA principalities?

The association hereby waivers and surrenders any rights or claims it may have under law and herewith unconditionally and irrevocably agrees 1) to be bound by the US and State Constitutions, and laws of the State within which it is located, as if it were a subdivision of the state and a local public government entity, and 2) that constitutional law shall prevail as the supreme law of the land including over conflicting laws and legal doctrines of equitable servitudes.  

HOA member Declaration of US and State citizenship.

 

HOA foreclosure: an unconstitutional punishment

Writing on the Hindman-Sanchez blog (Colorado) in 2011, attorney Sanchez asks, “Is Foreclosure the Right Option?”  She offers 3 options: 1) just lien the property and wait, 2) get a money judgment on the debt owed and garnish money source, and 3) foreclose. Sanchez answers that option 1 is not quick; option 2 will not work if there is no cash available; so that leaves option 3, foreclose on the house.

However, working on behalf of the HOA and its supposed survival concerns, Sanchez fails to address the practical matter of 1) not enough equity in the home to for the HOA to collect its debt after the mortgage is paid off, or assumed, and 2) the moral and ethical question of a discriminatory, unethical, and inequitable option that amounts to a cruel and unusual punishment. It affects only those who have paid their mortgage and assessments obligations over many years. 

And remember, the HOA has not advanced any hard cash as a bank or lender to warrant a special foreclosure law, but is functioning as a state entity collecting on the failure to pay taxes.  Nor has it performed any services to warrant special treatment under a mechanics lien analogy.  Its services have been performed on behalf of the fictional but legal and separate person, the HOA.

From a broader aspect on the nature of the “contract” between the homeowner and the HOA, the homeowner was not told that buying into the HOA corporation is like buying into a closely held business that has limited marketability (ease of selling out, which amounts to selling his home), and whose source of additional funds is very, very limited – increased assessments, special assessments, and obtaining a bank loan if possible.  That’s the bargain the homeowner made when he bought his home.  That is the hidden downside of HOA corporations kept hidden by the HOA, the developer, the real estate agent and the consumer protection agency, if any. 

The use of foreclosure focuses the members’ attention to the other guy and not on the nature of the contract.  It is an irrational attempt by an HOA attorney to “get blood from a turnip,” which after all, is just what one would expect when dealing with “deadbeats.”  It serves to intimidate and punish homeowners by taking away the homeowner’s home, leaving him nothing. 

Sanchez ignores the reality of the present economic situation, which she admits to. She speaks, however, of foreclosure as a “necessary tool” to punish and to intimidate.

While associations have other options available, foreclosure is a powerful and necessary tool in the association’s collection efforts arsenal. People take notice when there [sic] property is being foreclosed. Foreclosure may motivate those who have not been making assessments to bring their account current. More often than not once a delinquent homeowner gets notice of a pending foreclosure on their property, they make some type of payment arrangement or refinance.

If HOA covenants and statutes that allow the HOA to take a member’s home or money based on an HOA fine was held to be an unconstitutional punishment or penalty[i], so must foreclosure statutes be held as an unconstitutional preemption of government power.  The argument that foreclosure is just a legal collection method and not a punishment falsely states reality.

(Loura Sanchez and Hindman are Colorado attorney members of CAI  and members of its College of Community Associations Lawyers (CCAL)). 

[i]In  Unit Owners Association v. Gilman, 292 S.E.2d 378 (1982), the Virginia Supreme Court heldthat a fine was  “A pecuniary punishment imposed by lawful tribunal upon person convicted of crime or misdemeanor. A pecuniary penalty. It may include a forfeiture . . .” and that “The imposition of a fine is a governmental power. The sovereign cannot be preempted of this power, and the power cannot be delegated or exercised other than in accordance with the provisions of the Constitutions of the United States and of Virginia. Neither can a fine be imposed disguised as an assessment.”