You know, I think I'd be on team hoa if the amount in question wasn't less than $300. While I don't do real estate, I've done a fair amount of foreclosure work and nothing will convince me it was worth it to foreclose on a home over $288. Foreclosure in kind of a pain in the ass.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using proboards
This is six years of HOA fees.
Again, so what? Forclosures tend to drive property values down, yes? It was worth it to spend the money to get this forclosure, sell the house at auction,etc. so that the neighborhood could sell the property at a loss? Over $300?
Again, so what? Forclosures tend to drive property values down, yes? It was worth it to spend the money to get this forclosure, sell the house at auction,etc. so that the neighborhood could sell the property at a loss? Over $300?
Punishment =/= crime here.
I totally agree. That's kind of my point. I just dont see how its practical.
Post by wrathofkuus on Nov 18, 2013 17:24:03 GMT -5
If anyone is still team HOA after that lurker's "we don't have to inform you and this is totally legal" response..
And wtf at "if you don't like it, move somewhere without a HOA" - didn't you JUST say that in some areas of the country they're ubiquitous? Do you think people can just pick up and move wherever, rather than following where they can get a decent job? That's privilege talking.
A new homeowners association fee increase for some condominium owners in Atlantic Station would force them to pay 54 percent more each month, plus additional new fees.
For homeowner Tyler Hastings, that means he will pay hundreds more in HOA fees than his mortgage.
"My monthly payments were $563 a month," Hastings said. "With the new company that has taken over, my new fees have gone to about $1,200 a month."
An Atlanta-based company called Cocke Finkelstein, Inc. recently bought the building in which Hastings lives, the ATL Lofts.
The company bought 105 units, making it the majority property holder, so the company was able to raise HOA fees without approval from other owners.
"With the majority, they're able to do whatever they want, so they're trying to force out the remaining 46 or so owners," Hastings said.
We, as closing attorneys, are not required to get anything signed by a purchaser consenting to join the HOA. The purchase of the property consents to the HOA, if there is one.
So it's very possible that she had no clue about the HOA because there was no requirement to even tell her about it.
That appalls me. And it's indicative of the power that these HOA companies have over state legislatures that they're able to get such favorable laws.
I think we do have an affirmative duty to inform but what I said was that we don't have to have anything signed. Practically, when you get a settlement statement, there is generally a pro-ration showing that the seller paid the dues in advance or that the dues are not yet payable.
As to why they didn't just garnish or place a lien-the HOA dues are a lien against the property but the lien is only really good when the owner goes to sell the house. It is more or less "insurance" that eventually they will get paid but how long do they have to sit and wait? Garnishing isn't necessarily practical because they don't know where find her to garnish her but they do have security in the form of real estate that they can leverage.
Not an attorney, but I do national relocation. In a cash sale there wouldn't necessarily be a settlement statement right? I'm sure it's recommended, but not required, or am I wrong?
A new homeowners association fee increase for some condominium owners in Atlantic Station would force them to pay 54 percent more each month, plus additional new fees.
For homeowner Tyler Hastings, that means he will pay hundreds more in HOA fees than his mortgage.
"My monthly payments were $563 a month," Hastings said. "With the new company that has taken over, my new fees have gone to about $1,200 a month."
An Atlanta-based company called Cocke Finkelstein, Inc. recently bought the building in which Hastings lives, the ATL Lofts.
The company bought 105 units, making it the majority property holder, so the company was able to raise HOA fees without approval from other owners.
"With the majority, they're able to do whatever they want, so they're trying to force out the remaining 46 or so owners," Hastings said.