Let’s say that you buy a home in cash and have 100% paid off. Could you still lose it somehow?

  • Kid_Thunder@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I rent in a medium-high-density non-US housing complex.

    Well, we’re talking about home ownership here. If you’re renting then your landlord/management company or whatever decides policies that are compliant with your laws. If they allow some sort of HOA-like structure where residents can participate in a sort of ‘council’ that advises them or has some sort of authority of the landlord, then so be it.

    I did however, bring up condos, where a person essentially has an ownership stake in a housing complex but other people also have ownership of their dwelling and the land is shared. It absolutely makes sense to have an HOA then. Someone’s got to arbitrate in shared spaces and since the person that owns the dwelling doesn’t have a landlord, then well, it would be terrible not to have an HOA.

    Local governing bodies are not necessarily based in racism

    I didn’t say they were. I am stating a fact, that in the US, HOAs started as way to enforce gentrification. There were actual racist deed agreements and binding covenants. This isn’t an opinion or speculation.

    Sources:

    University of Washington
    Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society
    Housing Matters
    Denver Post
    Business Insider

    But experience has also told me that this works better when the overarching legal systems are more accessible and corruption-resistant.

    OK but that’s not everyone’s opinion. My neighbors and I get along fine without an HOA, except for the lady who denied receiving my package once even though I had it on camera and my wife’s curtains are hanging on her windows now but an HOA wouldn’t have solved that anyway.

    • fiat_lux@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Well, we’re talking about home ownership here. If you’re renting then…

      Yes, even as a mere renter myself I am extremely familiar with the workings of home ownership in my area and the legal rights and responsibilities of each. I just didn’t feel it necessary to elaborate on how I know. It didn’t seem relevant.

      I am stating a fact, that in the US, HOAs started as way to enforce gentrification. There were actual racist deed agreements and binding covenants. This isn’t an opinion or speculation.

      Yes, I am aware many home owners organisations were begun in the US out of xenophobic backlash after slavery was partially abolished. However, the concept of groups of owner-occupiers and investors/developers governing their community is not a uniquely US thing, and likely existed in practise before the term “Home Owners Association” was coined. I could have been clearer that i was speaking more globally and generally, but this is why I used the non-US-specific term “local governing bodies” which could cover everything from favella gang leaders to democraticly dlrected government councils.

      OK but that’s not everyone’s opinion. My neighbors and I get along fine without an HOA,

      Yes, most owner occupiers where I live also luve without being under an HOA, but they are still also subject to the laws and regulations of their local councils, state governments, federal governments, strata bodies and everyone else in between. Renters like me, or owner occupiers too are able to seek legal recourse through those courts. Depending on the value in dispute, they are able to do it without lawyers. In other communities, such as small towns where the sheriff is the mayor and the local judge was elected with no legal experience… this would be a much bigger problem for the person with little cash.

      I wouldn’t even want to live again in a building where the majority vote on repairs was held by non-occupying investors. It leads to stupid amounts of decay.