May 08, 2004
Live Up to Your Contracts

[Updates below.]

I'm a big fan of property rights. I'm also a big fan of binding contractual agreements. So I'm not very upset about this story.

Patriotic signs stir neighborhood controversy

Yard signs are outlawed by deed restrictions in the Lakeline Oaks neighborhood in Cedar Park.

The rule, being enforced on signs of patriotism, is ruffling some flags and feathers.

"We have troops across the ocean. We support them. What other better way to do it than by putting a sign out," Sgt. Maj. Anthony Sandoval said.

He posted a sign in support of troops and the president in his front yard more than a year ago.

Last week he received this letter from his neighborhood association telling him to remove the sign or face a fee of $10 a day.

The Lakeline Oaks Homeowners Association says the sign violates a rule in their deed restrictions prohibiting the display of signs in yards.

"That's my home. I'm paying for that home. I should have some say as far as what's in my yard," Sandoval said.


You do have some say, Sergeant Sandoval. However, you abrogated a portion of that "say" when you signed up with the homeowner's association.
According to the homeowners' association manual, the rule doesn't just apply to political signs. It applies to any and all signs posted on the homeowner's property. An exception is made for real estate signs. Before moving into a neighborhood with deed restrictions, home buyers are given a copy of the neighborhood rules and are required to sign an agreement to keep the rules when closing the purchase of the home.

There you go. You should have been responsible enough to read the documents you put your name to, especially when those documents pertain to something as important as your home and your land.

The deed restrictions (PDF) say this is a "Minor Violation." It also mentions this:

    I. "Restriction" shall have the same meaning herein as given to that term in Section 54.237, Texas Water Code, which is a limitation on the use of real property that is established or incorporated in properly recorded covenants, property restrictions, plats, plans, deeds or other instruments affecting real property in a district and that has not been abandoned, waived, or properly rescinded.


It's plain that if you want to live in this community, you have to agree to their rules and those rules necessarily mean you aren't allowed to do certain things.
Sandoval and others went the homeowners' association meeting to ask for leniency.

"We're just sensitive about this thing. We think they need to be more flexible," resident Bill Bonner said.


If the association decides to change it's ways voluntarily, then that's fine. However...
Some residents who showed up say the subdivision's rules are there for a reason.

"People pay to go into a subdivision like this because they want rules defined. You just can't posterboard your house with your views of the world," resident Robert Kenny said.


...I'll take Sgt. Sandoval's side over Mr. Kenny's side on this particular issue. As the owner of your property, do start off with the right to do what you want with it. You have to take the step of voluntarily agreeing to not do certain things with your property in order for Mr. Kenny's remark to make sense. Otherwise, his statement is best responded with, "Why, do you own my property?"
"Let everybody have their will to have whatever they want to put on there. It's their piece of land. If somebody wants to say, we don't want the war, that's their freedom of speech," Sandoval said.

It's a freedom some residents say they didn't give up when they moved into the neighborhood.


On the other hand, I'd say these petitioners can't have it both ways. Either they live on their own in the absence of a homeowner's association, or they live with one and abide by the rules they adopt. You want real freedom?

Don't sign a contract with an entity that imposes rules on you that are formed by collective decision.

Sandoval and other active and retired soldiers in the neighborhood plan to contact various veterans groups to help them pursue other legal avenues.

Copyright ©2004TWEAN News Channel of Austin, L.P. d.b.a. News 8 Austin


This is just horribly misguided. You have no moral (or, I'd assume) legal standing to bring a lawsuit, man. You're in breach of contract and ignorance of the contract's details is your fault.

UPDATED 11/17/2006 11:55am
Live Up to Your Contracts, II



Posted by Drizzten at May 08, 2004 11:45 AM

ATTENTION: Comments are closed. You are viewing my old blog, archived for search engine purposes.
To view the new blog, please go to the homepage. To find the current version of this entry, search here.

Comments

This may seem like a respnse regarding an old issue, but it isn't. I happen to live in the next subdivision over and we share membership in the Williamson-Travis MUD #1. Two things with this particular case. First, the MUD has signed over enforcement of these rules to a contractor, who sees black and white, no grey, seen through the eyes of someone who does not live there, does not know the individuals.

Second, and much more significant is that for some reason, most of the homeowners in my subdivision do not know the details of the restrictions, and a very large number of them don't know they exist. When I bought here first time in '86 I demanded a copy when I was lookig at the house, before I signed the contract. The seller, then the developer, actually refused. I persisted, homes weren't selling well, they gave in. Later, after the closing I at first believed that I had never signed and agreed to them. But I did. They're clever. There's a page that I signed stating that I agreed to the provisions in Volume 1361 Page 404 of teh records of Williamson County. The title company people and real estate people, bith sides were silent about it. Same thing when I bought another on here in 2001.

So people like Mr. Kenney claim that people move here because they like the restrictions, and I say that's pure eletist nonsense. Most people don't want them, they have no choice realistically. I will guaranty that there has been no subdivision built out since about 1984 that does not have them. But if tehy're so darned good, why all the slight of hand and hiding the fact that they exist "here"? Answer can only be that everyone understands that most people don't want them, except the people who like being "king", and the real estate agents that believe them.

George Csahanin

Posted by: George Csahanin on April 9, 2006 06:01 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


ATTENTION: Comments are closed. You are viewing my old blog, archived for search engine purposes.
To view the new blog, please go to the homepage. To find the current version of this entry, search here.

HTML formatting is disabled. However, you may post a raw URL as it will show up as a clickable link.

Comments are the property and responsibilty of the commenter.

I reserve the right to delete any comment I wish as this is my property you are commenting upon, but I'm pretty laid-back so it isn't likely to happen unless you are some psycho idiot jerk. Oh, and unless you have my permission to promote your good or service, you are wasting your time: unsolicited advertisements will result in comment deletion and URL banning. This blog ain't for you spammers or the crap you want to sell.


Dislike the format, layout, color, or having a hard time reading the text? Comment here and let me know what you think.

Remember info?



Back to the top