[Rzepecki]

Originally Posted by Stu4206

I believe you should know who your accuser is.

But that’s not the point, is it? The point is the homeowner is out of compliance with the restrictions he/she agreed to abide by. It doesn’t have anything to do with the person reporting the infraction. No accusing being done.

[Golfer222]

The problem as see with the complaint system is that I could have a complaint over a yard item and have to remove it and my next door neighbor could have the exact same item in their yard and be able to keep it if no one complained about theirs. CDD even told me the same thing- They said if they came to my house due to a complaint, i had to remove the item and if even if CDD saw with their own eyes the exact same item in a neighbors yard, they had no authority to tell them the item needed removed without a formal complaint- Seem fair?

[skipalong]

Originally Posted by Golfer222

After data showing complaints dropped to less than 10% of what they used to be.
Time for all CDDs to follow suit.

I’m 1000% for dropping the anonymous complaints, you get people that have nothing better to do than to find small, idiotic, minor in fractions to complain about things that don’t bother anyone else in the neighborhoods and most of the time it’s against someone they don’t like but having the guts to confront the people in person, so they keep giving anonymous complaints.

[PugMom]

a easy, neighbor-to-neighbor conversation would probably be in order before filing a complaint. if i was doing something wrong, i would LOVE it if someone i knew told me 1st, rather than relying on the clipboard ladies to do it for them.

[defrey12]

Different enforcement. Interior vs exterior. ONLY TV can enforce interior (renting) and they don’t.

[joelfmi]

Never a true word spoken

[defrey12]

Originally Posted by Golfer222

The problem as see with the complaint system is that I could have a complaint over a yard item and have to remove it and my next door neighbor could have the exact same item in their yard and be able to keep it if no one complained about theirs. CDD even told me the same thing- They said if they came to my house due to a complaint, i had to remove the item and if even if CDD saw with their own eyes the exact same item in a neighbors yard, they had no authority to tell them the item needed removed without a formal complaint- Seem fair?

No, it’s not fair. BUT, if they did pull your neighbor’s WITHOUT a complaint, it could be seen by that owner as “selective enforcement”…a BIG NO-NO in the world of HOAs. This is why CS vehicles can not “police” violations. If they missed even one, out comes the selective enforcement banner. Once the neighbor wars in start in CDD5 and/or or it starts looking like hell, anonymous reporting will be back. As for the “clipboard ladies”? Make them PROVE they live in that district before accepting their complaints. Better yet, eliminate their need by having the RE agents at closing actually set aside 15 minutes and MAKE people read the covenants they sign for. Novel concept.

[Altavia]

Originally Posted by tuccillo

Two possible reasons. The first reason is because it is not their job. Secondly, and more importantly, if the CDD essentially took over the role of reporting deed restriction violations then they could possibly be accused of selective enforcement. With the current system of only investigating possible deed restriction that are reported by others, it is hard to see how that could happen as long as they uniformly investigate possible deed restriction violations. If the CDD was to take on the job of reporting deed restriction violations then they will have to essentially catch all of them.

Three Common Covenant Enforcement Defenses – Waiver, Estoppel, and Selective Enforcement | Florida Condo & HOA Law Blog

But then there is this?

Waiver is the intentional or voluntary relinquishment of a known right or conduct which infers the relinquishment of a known right.

The right to enforce a restrictive covenant may be lost due to waiver where, by failing to act, one leads another to believe that he or she is not going to insist upon enforcement of the covenant.

Courts have found that when an association is aware of the violations for a lengthy period of time without raising any objections it may have waived its right to later pursue enforcement of such activities.

If an association postpones enforcement of violations of which it is aware for such a lengthy period that the reasonable inference can be made that the association will tolerate the violations, then waiver has occurred.

Since most associations will begin enforcement activities soon after learning of a violation, successful waiver defenses are rare.

[asianthree]

When our neighborhood was visited by what some call is the elusive clipboard ladies, 48 complaints filed on the same day. We were one of 48, our complaint was a white cross in a planter at our house.

We for the life of us couldn’t figure out where said cross was. Since not our faith for white crosses, we thought it was a mistake.

4 weeks later knock on door, with a official notice to remove cross from our premises, or fines would start. So we walked through our yard looking for white cross, and couldn’t find one. But the person did find vine had died in the flower pot, And if you looked at it sideways it may or may not have looked like a very thin cross.

Apologies were given and the exact words were if we charged these people five dollars for every complaint they reported, 90% would cease completely.

If complaint had value, Then the submitter would not be charged, if it was false then they would pay five dollar fine. His words not mine.

[Altavia]

Originally Posted by asianthree

When our neighborhood was visited by what some call is the elusive clipboard ladies, 48 complaints filed on the same day. We were one of 48, our complaint was a white cross in a planter at our house.

We for the life of us couldn’t figure out where said cross was. Since not our faith for white crosses, we thought it was a mistake.

4 weeks later knock on door, with a official notice to remove cross from our premises, or fines would start. So we walked through our yard looking for white cross, and couldn’t find one. But the person did find vine had died in the flower pot, And if you looked at it sideways it may or may not have looked like a very thin cross.

Apologies were given and the exact words were if we charged these people five dollars for every complaint they reported, 90% would cease completely.

If complaint had value, Then the submitter would not be charged, if it was false then they would pay five dollar fine. His words not mine.

I had a complaint for unapproved landscaping. The landscaping was installed by the builder before sale. They said nevermind :-)

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by PugMom

a easy, neighbor-to-neighbor conversation would probably be in order before filing a complaint. if i was doing something wrong, i would LOVE it if someone i knew told me 1st, rather than relying on the clipboard ladies to do it for them.

Yeah I had that easy, neighbor-to-neighbor conversation about a homeowner's multiple cats roaming the neighborhood, crapping in my flowerbed, and tormenting my (singular) indoor cat through the screen. It didn't end well. Turned out this neighbor was truly unhinged.

She threatened the neighbor on the other side of her property with calling the police, because the guy was hanging out on the side of his own house, ON HIS OWN property, smoking a cigarette. She actually went over the property line, approached him, and poked him on his forehead and told him that he was a problem.

He didn't want trouble so he didn't try to fight back - he just told her she should absolutely call the police. Sadly - this guy and his partner moved out because they couldn't deal with the crazy lady next door, and she moved out shortly after to go be with "her people" whatever the heck that means.

These are the kinds of nut-jobs you do NOT want knowing that it was you who called Community Standards for violations of the rules.

[Vermilion Villager]

Originally Posted by Stu4206

I believe you should know who your accuser is.

Your accuser is The Villages CDD.

[Vermilion Villager]

Originally Posted by GpaVader

I don't think people's issues are with deed restrictions but as characterized, by Mrs. Kravitz driving the neighborhoods with her clip board and phone and recording what she feels is a deed restriction.

That is not how it works.
Let's use a crazy example… Mrs. Kravitz reports you for having asphalt shingles on your roof. That is clearly not an infraction of a deed restriction. If Mrs. Kravitz reported this the CDD would not be sending you an enforcement letter. The CDD only sends enforcement letters out if the reported violation is actually a violation of the deed restriction.
Before a letter is sent out by the CDD, a representative from the CDD does come to the property and makes a visual observation. If in fact the accusation is true then… And only then do you receive a letter from the CDD.

[HJBeck]

Mixed emotions about the issue. Certainly good that frivolous complaints are significantly reduced. Then we have those complaints that are truly legit. Unfortunately we have our own share of crazy people in TV (1 OR 2 in 100). Some own guns and truly shouldn't, which gives me pause about calling them out. Something to think about.

[Dusty_Star]

Originally Posted by Rzepecki

But that’s not the point, is it? The point is the homeowner is out of compliance with the restrictions he/she agreed to abide by. It doesn’t have anything to do with the person reporting the infraction. No accusing being done.

Not necessarily. A report is made by someone, who may or may not know the deed restrictions. The report is then investigated. Only then, if in non-compliance is verified will a notification occur. This move seems to be to cut down on frivolous complaints.