Should neighbors be held responsible for keeping property at community standards?

[Libertarian01]

To All,

Many years ago I was watching one of those really trashy talk shows. It was about a woman in a neighborhood who got ticked at her neighbors. So to get back at them she painted her house black and white like a cow!

People came from all over town to drive by and see "the cow house." She was on the program just smiling and grinning the whole time. She was a royal jerk.

Her yard was neat and well kept. She mowed, planted flowers. All fine.

However, according to the neighbors her "cow house" brought down the average property value on her street by about $10k! This was reflected by the professional opinion of a real estate broker.

I think people should suffer the just consequences of their decisions. Did she have a right to paint her house anything she wanted to? My answer is - "yes." ALSO, do her neighbors have a right to sue her for damages when they want to sell their house - "ALSO YES!"

This puts the burden of responsibility where it should be - NOT with an oppressive set of codes turning neighborhoods into cookie cutter copies of each other, but with the opportunity to review each case on its merits in front of a jury of your peers. It takes longer and is a little messier but sometimes this is required to protect the essential liberties enjoyed by all.

Now for me to flipflop: There was the story of one neighborhood where everyone who lived there had a private pilots license. The neighborhood was designed from its inception to put a runway in the middle of the neighborhood. That way these folks could fly wherever they wanted, land, and walk home! Sounds cool to some.

Later on someone moved in and did NOT like the noise at night from "all those darned airplanes." So a lawsuit ensued and the runway had to be shut down because it harmed the new guy.

To me this second scenario is equally ridiculous. If I move into a neighborhood with full knowledge of some preexisting situation then I should have to deal with it.

What really ticks me off here in Allen County is that there is a County Ordinance that MANDATES every new housing edition MUST have a neighborhood code! This means that if I want to buy a new home with neighbors I MUST accept some code of some type.

It is truly sad that almost everyone is willing to sign away freedom for property value without even thinking about it. And we wonder why it is so difficult to convince some Americans that their liberties are being taken from them...?

Regards,

Doug

PS - IF you can't tell I do NOT like the idea of neighborhood codes!

 

[jeremy]

If you do not like the way I keep MY property then buy it off me and give me a reason to leave. Until then stay on your side of the line and I'll stay on my side...

By the way I really do not care about the Value of your Property at all...

 

[Jack Ryan]

YES. Contrary to what others here think. Having tall weeds next to you does bring more mosquitoes and in some cases mice.

That's strange, the feds and the state NEVER mow the ground they have next to me and I've never lived any where with less mosquitoes. Plenty of mice though.

 

[Jack Ryan]

If you dont mow the ditches the trees start growing into the power lines and the roads.

I'm doing my best but it's a battle.

They can't seem to hire any one who can read so I put in some wooden and stone posts to help them remember where the road ends and what belongs to me begins.

Pavement is for driving on, grass is for getting the F off. Why's that so hard for these people to comprehend?

 

[308jake]

As long as my neighbors don't complain when my son, dog and I pee in the front yard, I don't complain when they don't mow or rake.

 

[Lex Concord]

As long as my neighbors don't complain when my son, dog and I pee in the front yard, I don't complain when they don't mow or rake.

I hope you're doing this in your front yard...

 

[Lex Concord]

I agree. But what should happen when the neighbor refuses to meet those standards? What is his neighbor's recourse.

Simple. First, politely discuss the situation with the neighbor.

If that doesn't work, there is always court. Of course, to win, you have to prove you have been harmed in some way.

While I believe our society is, in general, overly litigious, I would rather see people with actual disputes settle them in this manner as opposed to the government (city, county, whatever) having one more power.

 

[DarkRose]

I have a small wetlands area on my property. I wonder if I don't drain it, and pirates infest it then swarm over my neighbors property, raping, pillaging and forcing people to walk the plank at cutlass-point?

snopes.com: Beaver Dam Letter

It doesn't matter if you drain or dam it or not, see above!

 

[ATOMonkey]

As it was addressed earlier, if you believe that you should be able to OWN your land, then you also believe that your neighbor can do what he wants with his land.

If you think that you have the power to dictate to him how he will live, then you also forfeit ownership of your land to a governing power.

If you're fine with forfeiting ownership, then jump on that bandwagon. Just don't call me when someone decides to expand the scope of your initial endeavor.

When you vest power into the government it is always a double edged sword, whether you do it through the courts litigously or through the legislature. Both carry equal weight in our world.

 

[G_Stines]

I voted No, but I would like to add a little note to it. As far as I am concerned, your property is your property and you may do whatever you like with it as long as it doesn't invade on someone else's rights, including safety and happiness. However, if you buy property that is regulated by a Homeowners Association, you made that choice and should abide by it and accept the consequences of such. If you don't want that responsibility you shouldn't have purchased the property.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Any property dispute should be kept between property owners. The moment you invite the wolf into your home to dine is the moment you lose control of your home.

 

[RichardR]

Any property dispute should be kept between property owners. The moment you invite the wolf into your home to dine is the moment you lose control of your home.

I've noticed some of that on television lately, a show called "hoarders" I think it was called.

Some faceless non-elected bureaucrat is always trying to take peoples homes away from them because the homeowners are unorganized pack-rats.

As I was watching the show I just couldn't help but wonder what George Washington or Thomas Jefferson would have done if some King George crony had tried to take their house from them for having "too much stuff" in it?

 

[x10]

My rights end at the tip of my fist and your rights start at the tip of your nose. (ben F.)

If the nieghbors aren't storing Nuclear waste or burning oil then they are not affecting you.

You may not like cars in thier yard or grass high but thats none of anyone elses business.

Now a decent guy won't let that happen, the problem isn't with the property its with the person.

I think things are getting out of hand, Covenents and laws are getting way too intrusive.

BUT anyone who buys into a place with covenents gets what they ask for, I can't believe people don't ask/read/ and accept the restrictions put on them

 

[Praetorian13]

Never forget about living in the country, don't have to worry about too many neighbors out there. But technically it is your property and you should be able to do whatever you please, even though some people take offense to what your house looks like.

 

[Prometheus]

This is a big area of contention for those who espouse property rights and at the same time was community (socialist) control of their property.

What some argue is that the property rights of others, over rule the property rights of the individual.

This is a very complex issue, and ultimately I'm a bit conflicted, but we must understand who actually has rights and how another persons rights are actually affected.

First we need to realize that only and individual has Rights. The community or association has none. ZERO.

Entering into a HOA or COA is voluntary and an individual voluntarily sets aside their (property) Rights by entering in to it.

Keep in mind that city ordinances and other HOA/COA like nonsense is not comparative because the city does not have the authority to overrule your property rights by making blanket city wide "covenants" aka ordinances. *This doesn't mean that in todays nanny state that cities don't, won't and do these blatant violations every day.

Anyway, back to Rights.

Does my neighbor NOT mowing his lawn, directly impact MY property? The answer is no. While it may indirectly affect perceived property values, it does not DIRECTLY effect my property.

In the other initial examples, does my neighbors toxic run off of oil or sewerage pump coming onto my property (or infiltrating my well water supply) directly affect my property? YES!

Should the 90 y/o lady with 2 dozen cats be of any concern to Bob the neighbor provided those cats stay on her property/in her house? NO!

Should the neighbor with a trash heap in the back yard that is breeding rats that run amok on Bob the neighbors property a violation of Bob's property Rights? YES!

A persons Right to their Rights extends only so far as to when it directly and actually affects the other persons Rights.

The short answer to the question (which is extremely complex) is no because "community standards" are socialist and incompatible with property Rights and individual liberty.

This is an extremely complex issue to wrap a person mind around. Decades of "socialist standards" have become the norm. Rights have been so devalued, most people don't understand what a Right actual is and how difficult it should be to even approach those Rights, let alone infringe upon them.

 

[rjstamp]

It depends on where you live...If you're in a subdivision you may have to abide by the community rules within reason. The rules should never be so intrusive that it infringes on our personal liberties. FREEEEEDDDOOMMMMMMMM!

 

[ATOMonkey]

This is a big area of contention for those who espouse property rights and at the same time was community (socialist) control of their property.

What some argue is that the property rights of others, over rule the property rights of the individual.

This is a very complex issue, and ultimately I'm a bit conflicted, but we must understand who actually has rights and how another persons rights are actually affected.

First we need to realize that only and individual has Rights. The community or association has none. ZERO.

Entering into a HOA or COA is voluntary and an individual voluntarily sets aside their (property) Rights by entering in to it.

Keep in mind that city ordinances and other HOA/COA like nonsense is not comparative because the city does not have the authority to overrule your property rights by making blanket city wide "covenants" aka ordinances. *This doesn't mean that in todays nanny state that cities don't, won't and do these blatant violations every day.

Anyway, back to Rights.

Does my neighbor NOT mowing his lawn, directly impact MY property? The answer is no. While it may indirectly affect perceived property values, it does not DIRECTLY effect my property.

In the other initial examples, does my neighbors toxic run off of oil or sewerage pump coming onto my property (or infiltrating my well water supply) directly affect my property? YES!

Should the 90 y/o lady with 2 dozen cats be of any concern to Bob the neighbor provided those cats stay on her property/in her house? NO!

Should the neighbor with a trash heap in the back yard that is breeding rats that run amok on Bob the neighbors property a violation of Bob's property Rights? YES!

A persons Right to their Rights extends only so far as to when it directly and actually affects the other persons Rights.

The short answer to the question (which is extremely complex) is no because "community standards" are socialist and incompatible with property Rights and individual liberty.

This is an extremely complex issue to wrap a person mind around. Decades of "socialist standards" have become the norm. Rights have been so devalued, most people don't understand what a Right actual is and how difficult it should be to even approach those Rights, let alone infringe upon them.

I agree. Where I differ, and maybe this is your opinion also and you just didn't state it, is that I would talk to my neighbor about his trash heap or toxic waste disposal and come up with some kind of solution that benefitted both of us.

By criminalizing his activity, you really don't solve anything other than making the city/town revenue.

Even if you are able to get a judgment against your neighbor to pay restitution, there is no guarantee you'll ever get it.

Just my $.02.