and also the fine print in the contract
because someone that owned the land decided that would be a condition in order to sell said land.
besides, the same principle exists when it comes to property taxes.
and also the fine print in the contract
Good question.
so then the evilness of a non military family in the same boat is what
6 out of 10 on the evil scale as opposed to a 10 out of 10 for a military family or whatever?
Except that it leaves out some pretty important facts.
What if its $10,000 in back taxes.
Is it ok to foreclose at that level? There has to be some level where it is ok, right?
Clearly, some negligent depressed should be above the law because her bully of a husband is killing islams on some god-forsaken desert halfway around the world.
they fight for our freedoms
![]()
at least the poor wifey is falling in line with old school thinking of being dependent on her husband for everything in her life.
:cool
I smell a rat though unless every ing bill was unpaid.
Seriously, I'd love to live in this fantasy world where I somehow become a champion of civil rights by refusing to pay my bills because I feel![]()
I'm going to stop paying my bills I think. That will show them!
An evil someone.
in some ways, that's evil too.besides, the same principle exists when it comes to property taxes.
Even then,
the tax principle exists across the board equally for all property owners that go to direct goods and services.
I live in a subdivision that has public streets, no gates, no parks and no pools. My forced HOA fees go to a management company whose main office is out of Arizona if I'm not mistaken.
They take in at least $20k+ a year from my subdivision, probably more, and all I directly see from this is a maintained entrance to the front of the subdivision and a neighborhood picnic three times a year.
The rest of the money obviously is pocketed by the association company.
It's a scam in the name of property value and maintenance.
Evil stuff.
well then you live in a ing ty HOA, should have probably done more research before buying your home.
mine provides real services like security and what not (pools, basketball courts, tennis courts, et al). well worth the 230 bucks i pay a year.
but wasnt that within their rights to do as they please with their private property?
I get a gym, pool, 24 hour securituy, several open areas, happy hours, and some other that I don't even know about.
Blke
na, the question is fine on it's own because that's exactly what happened.
how about if it's in the contract that you must refuse to allow blacks on the property?
Her deliberate decision not to read any of the certified letters the HOA was sending her over several months is a pretty important fact to be aware of..........
I don't want an HOA at all, but I also didn't want to move into an older neighborhood.
If you can find a neighborhood with homes built in the last ten years or so without built in HOAs, let me know, thanks.
Nope. Not relevant to the question of ”does the punishment fit the crime”
I'm just curious if he really is Rand Paul crazy as he sounds
Not really. Let's leave out the current contract for the moment. We know that people can sign contracts that detriment them, and that's their fault.
The question is... should HOA contracts exist as cons uted, where one could forfeit a home that was paid for? Or should that homeowner be recons uted for their loss?
Not paying $800 in dues and losing a $300,000 home sounds a bit one-sided to me.
more downstairs IQ level posting.
neat![]()
Federal law took care of that in the 60s. Prior to that it was perfectly legal.
Go cry to the Do Nothing Congress to actually do something.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)