Need Clarification
 

It is my understanding that families under the age of 55yrs old can reside in the villages (either purchase or rent a home) , the fair act law states that as long as 80% of the community is 55yrs or older than 20% can be under 55yrs old.
Can someone confirm this.

This is your second post. Are you trying to encourage a coup against us old folks?

No, I am just posting in 2 areas in the event my post is missed. WOW - calm down there - just asking a question. SMH!!!

Housing for Older Persons Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Section 2, defining "housing for older persons", amends Section 807(b)(2)(C) of the Fair Housing Act,[5] as that being


intended and operated for occupancy by persons 55 years of age or older, and--

(i) at least 80 percent of the occupied units are occupied by at least one person who is 55 years of age or older

(ii) the housing facility or community publishes and adheres to policies and procedures that demonstrate the intent required under this subparagraph; and

(iii) the housing facility or community complies with rules issued by the Secretary for verification of occupancy, which shall--

(I) provide for verification by reliable surveys and affidavits; and
(II) include examples of the types of policies and procedures relevant to a determination of compliance with the requirement of clause (ii). Such surveys and affidavits shall be admissible in administrative and judicial proceedings for the purposes of such verification.

You may also lighten up my friend. No need to send another nasty gram PM. I get it.

You are essentially correct. However, the deed restrictions state that no one under the age of 19 can live here full time, no matter how old the homeowner/renter is. Anyone under 55 would probably have to buy a re-sale home, since I don't think TV will sell that person a new home. I know that when we were starting our house search, one of the first things the TV sales rep asked us to prove was that at least one of us was 55 or over.

So I am confused - where does the Fair Act law play out in the scenario you mentioned? Are the TV sales rep only allowing 55yr old or older to purchase and not allowing under 55 to purchase. Seems like age discrimination and not abiding by the Fair Act Law.

Not true...our friends, at 50, built a beautiful home here...

Thanks for the info - I was not aware that those under 55 could purchase a new property. I stand corrected.

NO, NO, and NO! We started looking before we were 55 and had no problem purchasing a home then. It was never an issue with our Sales Associate. Granted, things may change periodically, so it's best you call the Sales Office and speak with someone, I guess. Also, have friends that built a lovely home on a golf course when they were 50.

No problem...we just happen to know someone that did, and we tried ourselves at 53 and 51. Again...things may change as the population and therefore, the percentages,
change.

Thank you for the information :)

[///

We have neighbors who purchased a new home from the Villages, while it was under construction. They are both in their 40's. No kids.

Purchasing from The Villages while under 55 is not a problem. Having anyone under 19 in the home for more than 30 days is a violation of the covenants.

That's one of the things I am going to put on my survey--to see if or how they track what the actual percentage is. Between all of the under 40 and under 50 that have built down south, and all of the linger ons that live with parents and grandparents, and all the renters under age that star in that other online news because of their "fun activities", I can't help but believe that we are way over 20%. and yes, I know within reason what 20% would approx. be based on who know what the population is at different times of the year. I just would be very interested in knowing. Not that I have any doubt that The Villages would find a way to sell to anyone who could buy a house. Before anyone sends nasty comments, my note is part tongue in cheek, part sarcasm, and part real question.

Real simple to track. All ID cards have date of birth. If not on the card, on the application info.

The 20% is based on ownership, not by who is renting.

You may have a common misperception about the law. It reads that 80% of the homes must be occupied by at least one person over the age of 55. Many people construe this to mean that 80% of the residents must be over the age of 55. Not true. Under the law it is possible for as much as 80% of the residents and maybe more to be under 55.

Sorry asianthree, but that is not correct. The law states that 80% of the homes must be OCCUPIED by at least one person over the age of 55. It says nothing about renting or owning. There are some over 55 communities made up entirely of rental units.

Are you sure? I have never heard of new house in TV being sold while the construction was ongoing. Maybe I haven't been paying attention.

Haven't met one under 40 living down here other than some disabled children living with their parents...as well they should be. Just sayin'....

I believe she is correct. When we moved here 3 years ago it was possible to select a lot and build the home of your choice. I have a neighbor who bought a home while it was under construction. I believe the original purchase deal fell through while the home was under construction.

This first link is to the official HOPA (Housing for Older Persons) Act. It is not exactly light reading. The second link is a FAQ page which is much more easy to read and should answer most, if not all, questions.

http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/library/hopa_final.pdf

http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/library/hopa95.pdf

Note that the 80%, one person 55+ requirement is the absolute minimum to comply with federal law and maintain HOPA status. If a community fails to maintain and properly document their compliance, then the community would lose their HOPA status. However, individual communities can have much more stringent policies if they so desire. For instance, they could require that 100% of Homes be occupied by a 55+, or 60+, etc.

We were never asked for an ID. I guess it was pretty obvious that we were both over 55 ;-).

Here is what my deed restriction says for my neighborhood.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3.../Capture_1.jpg

Been here long enough to hear about several exceptions.
1. Heard the under 19 year old children with 30 day visit limitation does not apply to special needs children.
2.Heard that the under 55 age rule does not apply to retired military or police & firemen.
3. Have also heard of many younger folks who purchase homes while under the 55 age and rent the homes out until they are ready for retirement.

Have also heard that the big change years ago that allowed Villagers to use their golf carts after sundown and before sunrise could be changed if the exception to the State Rules about golf carts results in too many deaths, accidents or violations of the Motor Vehicle Statutes.

Following are FL Statute items that remain in effect and are worth noting. It took a long time for local authorities to allow 24/7 operation of golf cars in TV, but these same authorities while it is unlikely, could change things back to what they were.

From Florida Statute 316.212

(5) A golf cart may be operated only during the hours between sunrise and sunset, unless the responsible governmental entity has determined that a golf cart may be operated during the hours between sunset and sunrise and the golf cart is equipped with headlights, brake lights, turn signals, and a windshield.

(6) A golf cart must be equipped with efficient brakes, reliable steering apparatus, safe tires, a rearview mirror, and red reflectorized warning devices in both the front and rear.

(7) A golf cart may not be operated on public roads or streets by any person under the age of 14.

(8) A local governmental entity may enact an ordinance relating to:
(a)  Golf cart operation and equipment which is more restrictive than those enumerated in this section. Upon enactment of such ordinance, the local governmental entity shall post appropriate signs or otherwise inform the residents that such an ordinance exists and that it will be enforced within the local government’s jurisdictional territory. An ordinance referred to in this section must apply only to an unlicensed driver.

MCV, it is the Fair Housing laws that deal with age discrimination. The Housing for Older Persons Act (HOPA) was enacted as an amendment to the Fair Housing laws for the purpose of providing communities designed and intended specifically for older adults. As I pointed out in my previous post, the 80% rule is the minimum required by law in order for a community to retain their age-restricted status with the federal government. It doesn't mean that the community has to allow younger people to reside in the other 20% of the homes. They have the option to, but they don't have to. The communities can place much more stringent rules in place if they wish. The 55+ community that I lived in prior to moving here required that 100% of the homes be both owned and occupied by at least one person who was 55+.

There are NO restrictions as to the age of a property owner in a 55+ community. The age restrictions are for residents.

Correction Indy...the HOPA itself does not restrict ownership to 55+, but an individual community can. Just like HOPA doesn't restrict residency to 19 and older, but the community can add that addition rule. In my previous residence, we could not purchase the house unless one buyer was 55+.

I stand corrected. I should have restricted my criteria to The Villages. Your previous community must have had their hands full when owners' estates included under age heirs.

It was small compared to the communities in FL. It was actually (one of many) age-restricted developments within an otherwise "normal" city. They had rules in place to cover all contingencies, and the HOA board of directors would meet and vote on unique issues on a case by case basis. But their rules were very stringent and I'm sure, complicated. They employed an attorney to oversee the decisions of the HOA to ensure they were consistent and legal. But when it came to buying and selling, it was pretty straight forward.

It is not a concern, since the villages is currently only about 8% households that don't have a 55+ owner. I know this because I closed in January, and I am 51. To be honest, I had to bring up the issue with the villages staff, they forgot to ask. They don't seem to worried about it. Why are you worried about it? I am not sure why you seem so concerned. It is really not an issue - on top of it, we are ALL getting older :22yikes:

My final view on this - I am 51 and the villages did not care if I lived here or rented. I was told specifically that they track this, and only something like 8% of the houses don't meet the HOPA requirement, so they are nowhere near the point of having to worry about it. From my experience, the majority of people we see when we are in the villages at a minimum are old enough to remember the Beatles coming to America, so they are over 55. I am more of a Styx/REO Speedwagon generation guy. I was born in 1963, and don't really consider myself a baby boomer (I know some classify us as such, but we have little in common with the Beatles/Vietnam crowd, and a lot more in common with Gen X).
What I am trying to say is - the majority of the homes in the villages obviously meet the 55+ requirement - I am not sure how anybody could think any differently.

Champion6.
I am positive.

It is a golf front cul de sac home. The entire street was built out and sold under the custom design program, with the exception of the last 2 homes. These were started and the owners bought them while under construction.

Maybe they simply put a deposit down and then closed after the home was turn key. But I do know they "bought" before the home was finished.

Good neighbors. They were just fortunate enough to retire early.