If it's true they didn't buy the house, I guess I see this as having their cake and eating it too. They want the benefits with none of the responsibilities...?
Bottom line for me: If they moved into the community -- as original buyers or inheritors or what have you -- with knowledge of the "no minors" rule, I don't think they have a case. Again, how many people nationwide are "giving" their houses away in this market? Plenty. No one wants to take a loss on a house, but these days it's not uncommon. These folks are no different just because they have a cute granddaugher.
Let me turn it around and ask you: Should they be allowed to "break" the rules indefinitely? If not, for how much (longer)? What about other residents in the community with situations that could be similar? Should the HOA just say "okay, anything goes" and everyone's grandchildren come to live in an "adults only" neighborhood?
“If it’s true they didn’t buy the house, I guess I see this as having their cake and eating it too. They want the benefits with none of the responsibilities...?”
Well the article didn’t mention the taxes being in arrears, and they have been paying the HOA dues or that would be mentioned in the article so they are being responsible plus the clip showed a well kept lawn and the house was in seemingly good repair. The womans parents left her the house the same way many peoples parents leave an estate. My parents are going to leave me money and property, should I not care if I recieve it or not because that would be having my cake and eating it too.
“Again, how many people nationwide are “giving” their houses away in this market? Plenty. No one wants to take a loss on a house, but these days it’s not uncommon. These folks are no different just because they have a cute granddaugher.”
You’re right. The cute granddaughter doesn’t come into it. These people aren’t the same as people who bought more house than they could afford. They own the house. Not them and the bank, just them, so you’re comparing apples and oranges. These people aren’t being forced to sell for less because they can’t pay for their house, and they’ve already reduced the price, twice from what the article inferred. So you think these people deserve to be pushed out of their home because they broke the HOA rules.
” Should they be allowed to “break” the rules indefinitely? If not, for how much (longer)? “
Nope they should sell their house and they are. They seem to be trying to resolve this and the HOAs position seems to be that they’re not resolving it fast enough, but all you can do is all you can do, and nobody should be forced to forfiet their home at give away prices to satisfy the HOA. Again they haven’t said “we’re not moving”. They seem to be trying to comply.
Now let me ask you this put yourself in their place. your daughter became addicted to drugs, you fell responsible for her daughter except you’re in an age restricted community.Without selling the house you can’t afford to move. You put your house up for sale, but you don’t get any offers. You lower the price, and still no offers. The HOA files a lawsuit. Should you be forced to either give away your property, be put in the street, or give your granddaughter up to foster care.
JMHO but the HOA is a bit over the top on this one.