Does the rule apply to current owners or just after the house is sold to a new owner? Since 2012 for example in CA newly enacted HOA no leasing rules can only be applied to new owners not current owners.

That is what I would think too... keep us updated on what you find out.

I previously lived in a very large subdivision with many large lakefront homes and there were quite a few that were used as weekly/weekend rentals. The HOA Board of Directors had the ability to change the HOA restrictions without a majority vote and banned nightly/short term rentals 2 years ago...6 month lease or longer now. Many of these lake homes rented for $1,000.00 and more a night and were purchased as investment properties and at least 2 owners were attorneys and could not stop this change in the HOA.

I lived about 1/4 mile from the nearest rental home and the renters never bothered me. Nelly (the rapper) rented 2 lake homes and had a HUGE party with his entourage and the closest neighbors started the ball rolling on getting resident support for banning rentals.

To answer your question...it depends on how your HOA rules are written and there might even be state regulations.

ChristopherH...Most Warranty Deeds in my State Of Missouri I see (and I see a bunch) simply say" Subject To All Easements, Restrictions, Reservations Of Record" and by changing the Covenants/Restrictions this does not change your Deed. When a title search is done the changes will show up as another recorded document.

I 110% guarantee that at least in my area the Covenants/Restrictions can be changed without a vote of even one single member other than the Board of Directors..it just depends how they (Covenants) are set up and there were some very good attorneys that contested the changes and lost. There are some subdivisions that have a Board of Directors who make decisions.

I have a home listed for sale right now and the HOA had a meeting to ban nightly rentals and did so with a simple majority vote and there were no changes to the deed....my Client is the President of a Bank so he does know a little about HOA's.

Just because something is the "norm" in one area doesn't mean it will be the same in others and offering the advice to say "stick it" with limited knowledge of the situation is not sound advice.

In my area (MD suburbs of DC) new Condos are being developed that prohibit smoking. To my knowledge this has not happened retroactively, but is would seem a very similar situation.

My area is very much non smoking. No smoking almost anywhere, soon to probably include one's auto with youngsters present. When I inquired about non-smoking Condos in Indianapolis it drew a laugh.

Our AOAO on Maui just managed to pass a smoking ban that required a two-thirds vote of all owners. It was quite a feat, considering that some years we have to resort to telephoning owners to get enough proxies for a quorum for the annual meeting!

Now there will be no smoking anywhere except on a few designated benches on the far edges of the property. The three units that currently house smokers (out of 316) are grandfathered in, but a sale will trigger the smoking ban in those units too.

Other short term vacation rental complexes here have totally smoke-free *without* any designated areas. I rarely see a guest smoking on our property, but I will be happier once the three 'smoking' units are sold. Phew!

It is hard to give any guidance on HOA's because they are just now getting tested in courts. I can tell you that HOA's are probably the most unsuccessful group I have seen in court, I would guess they win no more than 30% - 40% of the time. They constantly make rules that stretch the limits of what they are allowed to do and get swatted down in court. Recently our HOA got a 2 dog only rule smacked down in court.

In general there are two competing ideas - (1) HOA's have the power to govern and improve common areas and property sites. However, (2) owners have the right to enjoy their property as they see fit.

website on rent restrictions

Summersatthelake,

I guess it again shows the wonder of our country that in each state there are different laws.

When we built in PA we got a copy of the covenants attached to the deed. These were a list of the restrictions. They were part of the deed itself, and unless I agreed to changing those restrictions, at least in PA, they stood as recorded.

Christopher....my opinion only but I think that having a State Law that prohibits any changes to covenants unless 100% of the owners agree is not in the HOA and residents best interest. There are items that evolve over the years and sometimes changes are needed to keep up with the times.

Example...we have had several sewer districts start up over the years and offer public sewer and water connections to many subdivisions...almost every subdivision overwhelmingly voted for the connections. If this were in PA I guess that 1 person voting no could hold up progress...in one subdivision alone this numbered over 500 homes and many had septic tank problems. In many of the subdivisions the original covenants say each home shall have it's own septic system and it is not to be shared with any other homeowner.

Now if the covenants are in fact Deed Restrictions and recorded as such then yes it might be very difficult to change without a 100% vote.....I have saw hundreds of deeds and on occasion there are deed restrictions but nothing ever stating a 100% vote is needed for changes in a subdivision...between 2-5 parties yes I have saw that deed restriction but again this is Missouri and I can only speak about my State.

I am certainly not an attorney, but reading the vast number of Google hits suggests to me that historically the courts weighed in on the side of the HOA being able to change the C C &Rs IF the basic agreement provided that the board or a majority or whatever percent was able to amend the controlling document, then that served as notifying the new buyer of that "risk/possibility."

Seems like in recent years the court decisions seem to have changed such that they seem to lean toward protecting the new owners rights from subsequent change. I do not suggest to understand if this is a change in over all judicially bent OR legislative changes.

In CA it seems clear that there were numerous court determinations that allowed HOA s to amend CC&Rs if so provided for in the basic document and apply those changes to existing owners. This seemingly was reversed by legislation enacted in 2012 to exempt existing owners.

In the states I have lived in when the town says there's going to be a sewer line to replace the septic systems, it's done whether or not the covenants say so. The subdivisions aren't asked whether or not they wish to participate because the town government overrules the HOAs in this instance.

The sewer districts I speak of are not owned by the town/city/state/government but most of them are private entity's and some are set up just for one subdivision by the HOA. These are very common in my area due to the new rules/regulations on septic systems. Without these new sewer districts some of these homes would not be sellable due to failed septics and not enough room to replace/repair. Sure there are some homeowners that are not happy because they have a perfectly good and working septic system but some changes are for the betterment of the entire community.

I have lived in two homes on septic that the local government added sewer lines to serve. In neither case was I required to connect. Indeed, I am aware of cases where the Govt would not run a sewer line to serve a street unless a critical mass of users agreed to connect.

Retired lawyer here - did zoning and land use law.

(1) Do NOT even think about considering Google as a source of legal advice. You get what you pay for including all the myths and nonsense.

(2) The answer is It Depends

*It depends upon the original deed and HOA agreement

* It depends upon what state or locals laws there maybe about HOAs and their powers.

No One on Houzz can tell you anything. They are not qualified (beyond urban myth and " I heard that" and their own experience in some place that is not where you are and did not have your deed or HOA agreements.

Go hire a local attorney who does land use law and take all your documents with you.

Although this is 5 years old, I don't agree with Ann... that is the "lawyer" response to make sure the field is employed. "It depends" is a frustrating answer because it tells you NOTHING, not even how to tackle finding out the answer.

I was a lawyer as well (inactive because it is a conflict of interest to be lawyer in my field). I have found a lot of pertinent answers - on all subjects - on google. Is it better to have the experience of 100 people, or of 1 "expert" who might not be thinking straight that day or doesn't have experience with your particular issue but doesn't want to seem clueless? Of course take everything with a grain of salt, including what a doctor says. I've had doctors misdiagnose me on at least 3 occasions, because to them I'm another case in a day of 10 cases, and I am aware of my symptoms and care more about my health than they do.

While it is unlikely someone on Houzz can tell you your situation in particular, but:

(1) The first place to start is to get a copy of your current CC & Rs and also the one you signed. Have they changed? Was there a vote which changed them which you were not aware?

(2) The second place WOULD be Google - google your State laws governing HOAs... most State laws are online now, and they are reliable if put out by the state. Can you read English? Read it slowly, and read EVERY word, because every word matters. What is the % of homeowners that must vote for a motion to pass? NOT just of the % of people voting. Like if only 10 homeowners (1 vote per household) out of 100 homes vote and all of them YES to no renting, and you need 50% approval, it would never pass because the most you would get is 10%.

Even some Q & A about HOAs by attorneys in your state would help you with a ballpark.

It bothers me when you ask someone online about a particular issue, let's say wondering if a cut is infected, and everyone plays dumb and says "see a doctor." Well you won't run to a doctor for every cut, but if someone online - and it's the power of many minds including people who have experience - might say "that's a possible staph infection, check it out." In fact, real doctors misdiagnose all the time, and actually this happened to me. After making an appointment and hoofing it up there, a doctor told me this "pimple" on my hip was an "ingrown hair" when I never get ingrown hairs there. It was tender and angry looking, so I googled it - it was a possible staph infection which could lead to dire consequences if not treated. So I ended up going to a different place - Urgent care, and they agreed it was a staph infection- obvious by then because it was a purple volcano, and got antibiotics, and it soon went away after letting go of a stream of blue pus. One of my sister's friends ended up losing his leg, as well as constantly falling near sepsis, because his doctor diagnosed his staph infection as a spider bite.

Oh, and you can google "staph infection" to recognize what it looks like.