Are HOA Staffed by Moroons and Goobers?

[gpflepsen]

OK, I admit the title may be a bit inflammatory

From the Omaha World Herald

Rooftop antenna provokes lawsuit

BY RICK RUGGLES


WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER

Wendy and Arthur Erickson's antenna is getting a bad reception in their northwest Omaha neighborhood.

Arthur and Wendy Erickson are being sued over the TV antenna atop their house in the Diamond Head subdivision in northwest Omaha.

The Diamond Head Homeowners Association has sued the Ericksons, contending that the antenna on their roof violates the neighborhood's covenants.

The lawsuit, filed this week in Douglas County District Court, asks that the Ericksons remove the antenna and pay court costs.

Arthur Erickson said he and his family placed the antenna atop their house in the Diamond Head subdivision, about 152nd and Corby Streets, nine months ago to receive high-definition television.

"I didn't think they were going to go this far with it," Erickson said of the lawsuit.

Paul Bretsen, president of the association, said the covenants were created by the developer to set standards for the appearance of the neighborhood, which has homes in the $200,000 range.

"We feel the covenants are valuable," Bretsen said. "They maintain the integrity of the neighborhood."

Erickson referred to a Federal Communications Commission rule in effect since 1996. The FCC rule "prohibits restrictions that impair the installation, maintenance or use of antennas used to receive video programming."

Various FCC employees reached by phone Friday in Washington, D.C., said they weren't qualified to comment on the rule.

Erickson refuses to acknowledge the association's authority, saying there was no association in existence when he bought the house 10 years ago.

Erickson said he was familiar with the covenants, which were drawn up before he purchased his house.

The lawsuit says the covenants state: "No exposed exterior television, broadcasting or radio antenna of any sort shall be permitted on any lot."

The Ericksons' antenna appears to be about 4 feet tall, with steel rods and wires running parallel, horizontally and diagonally to the roofline.

Bretsen said there were provisions for a homeowners association when the neighborhood was developed in phases about a dozen years ago. An association board may have gone dormant, he said. A new board was created three to four years ago, he said, with officers elected at neighborhood meetings.

Bretsen said the Ericksons didn't respond to letters about the situation. Erickson said he did send a letter about the FCC rule to the association's attorney, Christopher Curzon. Curzon had no recollection of that and couldn't find such a letter Friday, Bretsen said.

Michelle Mittlieder, secretary of the association board, said the board has received two complaints about the antenna.

The board takes no pleasure in suing, Bretsen said. "We kind of regret that it's come to this."

Is the lawyer clueless about the FCC and the past rulings on antennas and their use on private homes?

Kudos to the homeowners for not caving in.

 

[riffjim4069]

Yes, this HOA is indeed staffed by Morons, Goobers, Dolts, and Rubes! This is my opinion and it is a extremely biased one mind you.

 

[HokieEngineer]

Heres the idiot attorney that apparently didnt read the FCC regs.

http://pview.findlaw.com/view/2471481_1?noconfirm=0

 

[HokieEngineer]

Yes, this HOA is indeed staffed by Morons, Goobers, Dolts, and Rubes! This is my opinion and it is a extremely biased one mind you.

I would tend to think Rubes would live in such an area that would not have a HOA, nor know what one is.

 

[gpflepsen]

What's really amazing is that these folks are not doing anything nearly as outrageous as some people have done in the past, and been backed up by the FCC. I hope to hear the ultimate outcome of this case. I hope the HOA has to pay some sort of damages and expense incurred by the couple.

 

[riffjim4069]

I would tend to think Rubes would live in such an area that would not have a HOA, nor know what one is.

All I can say is there were two of them on my HOAs Architectural Control Committee (ACC) when I dealt with this issue 3 or 4 years ago. I simply sent them a well worded letter correcting their Commissioner and erected a 2nd antenna a short while later.

 

[stevelite]

Yes, this HOA is indeed staffed by Morons, Goobers, Dolts, and Rubes! This is my opinion and it is a extremely biased one mind you.

Most HOA staff members are elected to the board and when sometimes they have to appoint ppl to take over if any member fails to serve entire term.

Sometimes HOA are run by power hungry ppl, some are run by really good people who try to make better place to live and make house an increase in home values.

I do wonder what the outcome will be.. I would like to see the antenna owner to win, so that antenna doesn't have to come down and get receive FTA.

 

[gpflepsen]

On what grounds could a court order the antenna taken down? This is as clear cut as the issue can get, no?

 

[Cokeswigga]

GO home owners! Booo on the HOA

I have a dormant HOA, and I am the only one on the block with an antenna, mine is about 8' above the roof line, and the antenna is 95" long!
I'll admit it looks a strange in the neighborhood, but one neighbor has 5 sat dishes (only 2 of which actually have lnbs attached and working) another neighbor has 2 broke-down cars.

I'm not complaining about the cars or the excessive dishes because they're not complaining about the antenna (and I'm sure vice versa)

 

[stevelite]

<<mine is about 8' above the roof line, and the antenna is 95" long!>>

You must be grabbing some nice signals.
I am using Terek indoor antenna..

 

[OoTLink]

We have a homeowners' association in vegas but they don't really give a damn as long as you keep paying the membership fee.

I don't think they'd really care about dishes on the house anyway, the wiring running along the exterior common with a free install would bug the hell out of them though.

 

[Van]

I'll say this, given what I do I tend to frown on outdoor antenna's because they really are a great deal more obtrusive into the enviroment as compared to a 20 inch dish but even then Im not keen on a nuetral 16 grey pizza dish on the outside of homes either. I would really like to see the couple win but only on the basis that the person(s) that setup the hoa failed to do the proper leg work and the attorney for the hoa has displayed an encredible amount of ignorance for the law and his job.

 

[OoTLink]

I always wondered why a "pipe" antenna hidden under the eve of the roof wouldn't work for most somewhat suburban areas.

I guess the idea never caught on with flush mounting, because I can think of a ton of ways to get away with that where the antenna wouldn't be visible unless you looked for it

 

[The Big Wood]

Funny, my wife was just elected to be on the board of our HOA and notified that she won tonight.

We didn't have cable in our 20 year old subdivision until about 7 years ago (we built our house 6 years ago). Most of the homes in the early phases have the largest VHF/UHF antennas available still attached to their homes (we are on the fringe of reception due to the terrain and trees). Actually, I never noticed these large antennas with their own masts sticking up 10 feet and more above the roofline of the houses...until I wanted to mount my own antenna and was making comparisons to my neighbors' installations. Once I began looking for them, I noticed there were antennas everywhere.

Our HOA covenants were written stating the sat dishes could be no larger than whatever inches (I think 36"), and it could not be mounted on the front side of the house. A competent lawyer drew those up, obviously.

The lawyer representing the HOA in the article probably gets paid to file the lawsuit and whatever paperwork that needs to be done. I bet he knew there was no chance of winning, but he could get some easy money from the HOA. I'll recommend to my wife that when our HOA uses lawyers that they only pay the lawyer when the case is won...but there probably is no lawyer that would be willing to sign up for that!

 

[Texanmutt]

Our HOA covenants were written stating the sat dishes could be no larger than whatever inches (I think 36"), and it could not be mounted on the front side of the house.

If the only place that the home owner can get sat reception is on a pole in the middle of the front yard (for line of sight reasons), then the FCC ruling overrides any HOA garbage.

 

[riffjim4069]

Unfortunately, some unscrupulous HOAs send nasty grams and hire lawyers to intimidate and bully the homeowner. Far too often their tactics are successful simply because the homeowner gives in rather than digs in. The law and the FCC are---as case after case has proven---on the side of the homeowner and his or her right to erect an OTA antenna. Unless the HOA can prove this particular homeowners antenna is in violation of safety and/or historic property concerns, they haven't a prayer of winning this case.

 

[iKramerica]

I was elected to our HOA board, and some on the board before me were bad, but our group was full of builders, lawyers and professionals. Our Architectural committee was stocked with competent and moronic people, depending on who you were talking about (or to).

In our draft revised CCRs, they had wording about 24" dish, or something. I informed them that the law was 36", and that they could state only that the homeowner MUST look for a non-visible location if that location can provide clear line of sight, but are not restricted if they can't.

But as a matter of fact, most homeowners in HOAs are not allowed to erect a pole in the front yard of any kind, and the law doesn't allow for it, either. It allows for placing on the structure, but not in "common area or common apurtement area" since you don't own that. Some HOAs "own you roof and walls" but this is considered extreme and can't be used to prevent installation of satellite dishes or antennas.

External wiring is another matter. The CCRs can insist you not string RG6 outside the house other than from the antenna to the nearest viable entry point, and if you don't comply, you can be cited and fined. Same for lazy cable companies who don't want to deal with installing in attics or walls.

 

[Texanmutt]

Same for lazy cable companies who don't want to deal with installing in attics or walls.

The reason for a house wrap is for a tv on an outside wall of the room it is in. Or in the case of a 2 story house, because you cant wall drop to the first floor.

 

[Mr Tony]

technically the law is 1 meter, which my conversion isnt the best but its 39.67 inches

 

[gpflepsen]

technically the law is 1 meter, which my conversion isnt the best but its 39.67 inches

Not to pick on the nits... but the conversion on 1 meter to inches would go like this:

1000mm x 1inch/25.4mm = 39.37 inches

1 inch = 25.4mm, exactly.