Quote:
Originally Posted by Randall55
Not exactly. Yes, There are places that restrict strs through their deed restrictions. All it takes is legal action to show a clause is not enforceable because it goes against government laws. People in communities do not challenge their deed restrictions. They are happy to follow. But, all it takes is one individual who is willing to seek legal action. Sometimes, a person does just that and the only people privy to the legal action are the lawyers, person contesting, and developer.
It is similar to signs posted in some areas. Beware! Look for trippng hazards, or something similar. They then try to avoid paying out when someone does indeed fall and is injured. The person injured can easily get a lawyer and have their medical bills paid.
You can write whatever you want. It doesn't mean it is legal. I believe the Developer removed the no rental clause in Fenney because he is intelligent enough to understand this. Or, he has a great team of lawyers checking and rechecking the legality of each clause in his deed restrictions.
|
Right back at you.
Quote:
|
Why do you believe the no rental clause was removed? Just curious to hear another viewpoint. I believe the counties were grandfathered in when new legislation was passed. It has nothing to do with deed restrictions.To the best of my knowledge, Sumter is not one of those counties.
|
I honestly don't know why it was removed. Seeing that it was removed in two steps, I assume it was because an influential individual purchased in that area and petitioned the developer to ease the restrictions for him. But, I really don't know.
The restrictions were not removed from "Fenney." The restrictions didn't cover "Fenney." The restrictions were removed from one unit within CDD12. In fact, that unit is not listed as Fenney but rather, it is listed as Southern Oaks (of which Fenney may be a part). However, there is another unit within CDD12 that had non-rental language
added in an amendment. That unit is named Fenney in the deed restrictions.