MoH winner to be sued for Flagpole

[rory_20_uk]

The rules are clear. He broke them. Simple. Whether he would allow someone else to do something is not relevant.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

The rules are clear. He broke them. Simple. Whether he would allow someone else to do something is not relevant.

Rosa Parks broke the rules too.

They were simple. They were clear. If you are black, you have to sit at the back of the bus. Clearly she thought she was an exception.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Well, I'm joking around with that.

So you aren't claiming he thinks he's an exception any more?

Some rules are dumb and it's perfectly legitimate to say so. The HOA is probable going to catch some well deserved flack for this, can't see that as a bad thing.

[Subotan]

except that he is a total patriot, thats why he served in 3 wars and has a real flagpole.

Which is why I said he should make a point. By the logic of the HAA, they would prefer to see the Hammer on Sickle flapping around in their neighbours garden on a little pole than their nation's flag on a big one.

I'm sure he could just plead the first or something and be done with it.

[TinCow]

Flagpoles aren't forbidden in the agreement, the board made the ruling.

From another article on the OP link website:

There is no provision in the community's rules expressly forbidding flagpoles, Barfoot's daughter said. But she said the board ruled against her father's fixture and ordered it removed in July, deciding that free-standing flag poles are not aesthetically appropriate. Short flag stands attached to porches dot the community.

My house is in a community that has a homeowner's association. That association is also very concerned with aesthetic standards. The reason for this is that the entire street is very attractive because of the way it is designed. There is a uniformity of tree plantings and lighting that makes the entire area look and feel like a single community. It creates a very friendly feeling. The property value of each individual house is increased as a result of this. If the aesthetics of the street are broken up, then the property value of each house will go down.

Free-standing flagpoles are much more intrusive than flag holders that are attached to the sides of buildings. If someone put up a flagpole on my street, I would complain very quickly. That flagpole would be damaging the property value of my home.

It's worth noting that a Homeowner's association is comprised of representatives of the residents of that area. Thus, the ruling was made by his neighbors, who are the ones who would directly suffer from any decrease in property value as a result of his actions. So, we've got a situation where the majority of the elected representatives of his street feel that his actions risk damaging the property values of all the houses in the area. Yet he refuses to take it down. Medal of Honor or not, in that situation, he's just a jerk.

[Whacker]

I am in 100% agreement with what Tincow has stated in both of his posts.

The gentleman in question is out of bounds and in breach of his community covenant. Large flagpoles are very intrusive, and his is probably damaging the property value of his neighbor's houses. He can put up a normal hanging flagpole just like dozens of his other neighbors probably have (and we have here) and fly a flag that way. This is the exact same situation that I would expect and hold myself to and my neighbors to in our community.

In short, cry me a river.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

From another article on the OP link website:



My house is in a community that has a homeowner's association. That association is also very concerned with aesthetic standards. The reason for this is that the entire street is very attractive because of the way it is designed. There is a uniformity of tree plantings and lighting that makes the entire area look and feel like a single community. It creates a very friendly feeling. The property value of each individual house is increased as a result of this. If the aesthetics of the street are broken up, then the property value of each house will go down.

Free-standing flagpoles are much more intrusive than flag holders that are attached to the sides of buildings. If someone put up a flagpole on my street, I would complain very quickly. That flagpole would be damaging the property value of my home.

It's worth noting that a Homeowner's association is comprised of representatives of the residents of that area. Thus, the ruling was made by his neighbors, who are the ones who would directly suffer from any decrease in property value as a result of his actions. So, we've got a situation where the majority of the elected representatives of his street feel that his actions risk damaging the property values of all the houses in the area. Yet he refuses to take it down. Medal of Honor or not, in that situation, he's just a jerk.

That makes sense for your neighborhood. But it's pretty clear that he lives in an old people suburb type of neighborhood. Property values are not an issue here, and his house is butt ugly anyway

Eh, trying to find a picture of the street it does look like one of those "picturesque" neighborhoods. I find the whole thing goofy, but they are within their rights to removed the flagpole.

In short, cry me a river.

That's probably what he thinks when people start complaining about their property value

[Crazed Rabbit]

I detest homeowner's associations.

CR

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I detest homeowner's associations.

CR

I don't know much about buying houses, but surely he could have found a place that didn't come with a homeowners association?

I think the "nice neighborhood" look is silly, but he wanted to live there.

[Reverend Joe]

I detest homeowner's associations.

CR

Indeed. I guess I can see it Tincow's way, in that he is in violation of the contract and the HA has an interest in keeping everything uniform. But on the other hand, Homeowner's Associations can be really bad for neighborhoods. For example, my family moved into a neighborhood that was later taken over by something similar to a homeowner's association, called the *insert street name here* Historical Society. The Historical Society then proceeded to stop people from doing things like putting up artificial siding that, in addition to being much better for a house than wooden siding, is indistinguishable from the real thing (I'm not talking about the older stuff that people put up on cheap houses decades ago; I've seen real siding and this stuff, and believe me, it looks completely real.) Their reasoning? It wasn't historical or aesthetically pleasing. So they would rather have houses with old rotting wooden siding falling off the walls and destroying the property value, aesthetic appeal and overall structural integrity of the houses than a perfectly good-looking house that will last decades longer just because it requires artificial siding. And it gets worse: people have complained about not being allowed to cut down old, rotting trees that are a serious danger to their house and their neighbor's houses because the Historical Society wants to preserve the historical appeal of the neighborhood.

You can argue that these people could just move to another neighborhood. But that requires them to be able to move to another house, and that's just not something most people can do whenever they please. So much for a man's house being his castle.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Can neighborhoods really be taken over by a HOA? I don't see how that works.

[Major Robert Dump]

Typically, the group who is ultimately in charge of the HOA (ie board of directors, not elected reps) are the people who owned the land where the houses were built and membership in the HOA was required up front before building the houses.

In other words, a HOA who pops up in your neighborhood years and years after it is built is not going to have much power.

However, if me, joe snuffy and jane doe own 48 acres and decide to subdivide and allow people to buy lots and build houses if they agree to abide by the HOA chaired by us for our wonderful neighborhood XXXXX, then by god you are stuck, because even tho u own the lot, the roads, sidewalks, pool and everything else belongs to us.

HOAs are most common in fenced communities and areas with roads that are not kept by the city

The people who really get screwed are the folks who move into the home as the 2nd, 3rd owners, etc, and may not realize what they are getting in to, as the previous owners whitewashed the situation so they could GTFO

It also means if the original owners of the subdivided property, me, jane and joe, go bankrupt and lose our assets and have to skip town, that the bank who forecloses us is now the HOA because they won the rights to our little enclave.

beautiful, eh?

[Subotan]

I detest real estate in general. Speculators, landlords, most estate agents, and all the other types who buy houses as an "investment" artificially inflate the price of land, and deny first time buyers; i.e. everyone under 30 from being able to own their own house. Why should Bob own three houses when he only lives in one, just because he happens to have been alive when a property bubble started?

[TinCow]

Eh, trying to find a picture of the street it does look like one of those "picturesque" neighborhoods. I find the whole thing goofy, but they are within their rights to removed the flagpole.

Yeah, I can't find a good picture either. The news articles just have close-ups of the guy and the flag without showing the pole in the context of the street. Google streetview goes right past the community, but not down the street.

[miotas]

Did you just blatantly rip this from the Minaret thread?

Of course he didn't. He couldn't keep up, remember?

Eh, trying to find a picture of the street it does look like one of those "picturesque" neighborhoods. I find the whole thing goofy, but they are within their rights to removed the flagpole.

All those dead trees everywhere must be terrible for property value, why do they care about one little pole?

[Centurion1]

^ its winter

[Azathoth]

It's ok Centurion, he's just Australian.

[pevergreen]

It's ok Centurion, he's just Australian.

I resent that.

[Prussian to the Iron]

My house is in a community that has a homeowner's association. That association is also very concerned with aesthetic standards. The reason for this is that the entire street is very attractive because of the way it is designed. There is a uniformity of tree plantings and lighting that makes the entire area look and feel like a single community. It creates a very friendly feeling. The property value of each individual house is increased as a result of this. If the aesthetics of the street are broken up, then the property value of each house will go down.

Free-standing flagpoles are much more intrusive than flag holders that are attached to the sides of buildings. If someone put up a flagpole on my street, I would complain very quickly. That flagpole would be damaging the property value of my home.

It's worth noting that a Homeowner's association is comprised of representatives of the residents of that area. Thus, the ruling was made by his neighbors, who are the ones who would directly suffer from any decrease in property value as a result of his actions. So, we've got a situation where the majority of the elected representatives of his street feel that his actions risk damaging the property values of all the houses in the area. Yet he refuses to take it down. Medal of Honor or not, in that situation, he's just a jerk.

ok......no. I don't know much about real estate...but a single flagpole is not going to lower anybodies property values. why? because they aren't "aesthetically displeasing". I personally find those half-assed, 5 dollar little hanging flagpoles "aesthetically displeasing".


flag poles are not "intrusive". they are not ugly, they are not displeasing, they are not malicious. they are patriotic, and that does not lower home values. even if someone construed them as ugly:

A) they dont have to look at it

B)the value wouldn't drop down or anything, it could drop a few dollars and thats it.

[TinCow]

ok......no. I don't know much about real estate...but a single flagpole is not going to lower anybodies property values. why? because they aren't "aesthetically displeasing". I personally find those half-assed, 5 dollar little hanging flagpoles "aesthetically displeasing".

flag poles are not "intrusive". they are not ugly, they are not displeasing, they are not malicious. they are patriotic, and that does not lower home values. even if someone construed them as ugly:

That's totally subjective. I live in a townhouse community, where the front yard of each house is no more than about 10' x 10'. A 20' flagpole would look horrendous there. The same 20' flagpole would look perfectly fine in front of a large house set back a good ways from the street. You can't just say that flagpoles always look fine, because they don't... or at least most people won't think they do. Obviously the HOA in this case doesn't think that one looks good, or they wouldn't have ruled against it specifically for aesthetic reasons.

A) they dont have to look at it

On my street, I have to look at every other house every day I drive down there. If I close my eyes, I will crash my car.

B)the value wouldn't drop down or anything, it could drop a few dollars and thats it.

A few dollars? We're talking about real estate prices here. A 'small' change in a house price is measured in the thousands of dollars. A quick google search shows that the house prices in that guys' community are in the $200k to $250k range. So, if that flag pole made prospective buyers dislike the community enough to drop their offer by half of one percent, that's still a drop of $1,000. That's not "a few dollars."

[Louis VI the Fat]

Some Black family wanted to move into my block. My homeowner association voted against it to protect our real estate value.

[Strike For The South]

Some Black family wanted to move into my block. My homeowner association voted against it to protect our real estate value.

Did they try and put up minnarets?

[Major Robert Dump]

This is why I bought a house in the country. I'm going to paint it with zebra stripes and put up signs that label it as a Zombie Safe Zone. And no one can do anything about it.

[Prussian to the Iron]

Did they try and put up minnarets?

Minarets and Flag-Poles. And Medals of Honor.

[Prussian to the Iron]

That's totally subjective. I live in a townhouse community, where the front yard of each house is no more than about 10' x 10'. A 20' flagpole would look horrendous there. The same 20' flagpole would look perfectly fine in front of a large house set back a good ways from the street. You can't just say that flagpoles always look fine, because they don't... or at least most people won't think they do. Obviously the HOA in this case doesn't think that one looks good, or they wouldn't have ruled against it specifically for aesthetic reasons.


A few dollars? We're talking about real estate prices here. A 'small' change in a house price is measured in the thousands of dollars. A quick google search shows that the house prices in that guys' community are in the $200k to $250k range. So, if that flag pole made prospective buyers dislike the community enough to drop their offer by half of one percent, that's still a drop of $1,000. That's not "a few dollars."

well, in the area the guy lives in the houses appear to be somewhat large, and a flag pole wouldnt reduce prices.

[Samurai Waki]

I could hardly see how THAT could reduce the price of surrounding property, if the pole was 40 feet tall, and the flag was 50ftx36ft; then it would be a problem. That's small, and the flag is hardly an eyesore (the houses themselves don't seem to be overly spectacular anyways) if I was that guy I'd walk over to the HOA and Stick my 90 year old hardass military boot so far up each one of their rectal cavities, they'd be singing The Star Spangled Banner.

[Subotan]

I can play The Star Spangled Banner on bass. It's quite cool.