[Golfer222]

really the only way it will ever be an equitable system is when it is no longer complaint driven- either anonymous or non-anonymous.

[Altavia]

Originally Posted by Vermilion Villager

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.

I received a letter due to an erroneous complaint filled without verification as mentioned in a previous post.

[tuccillo]

That is the selective enforcement issue. I have actually seen this in a previous community with deed restrictions.

Originally Posted by Altavia

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.

[DAVES]

Originally Posted by Velvet

I disagree. I think in fact, it is a very bad idea - as we are in a complaint driven enforced community. We don’t seem to have any by-law officers. There is much latitude in my neighborhood already and people seem to get along just fine. So people move in to TV for its beauty and then ….. ? I am concerned of maliciousness and vindictiveness towards a complainer if it is not anonymous. As it is, the situation gets investigated and nothing happens if it is not a legitimate complaint. Now if one person complains often and without a legitimate reason, in my opinion, such a person should be fined, to discourage them making frivolous charges.

This has been debated before. Under our legal system you have the right to face your accuser. The original post states that complaints went down by 90% when no longer
anonymous.
There are few of us that have nothing that is in violation. Is that a garden plant? Your neighbor ANONYMOUSLY thinks it is an ugly WEED.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

What difference does it really make when violations are selectively enforced. They seem to go after people with little white crosses with vengeance but totally ignore people disrupting a whole neighborhood by renting a revolving door room out of their house to transient customers on a nightly basis. Go figure?

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Since one violates the deed restrictions but the other does not (in most areas) that might explain it.

Both violate deed restrictions in most areas. There are at least two deed restrictions violated by running short term rentals out of one’s home while living there at the same time. Renting to non family members while living in the home violates the deed restriction requiring the home be used as a single family residential unit. And since the homeowner is essentially running a one room hotel for a fee that generates taxable income, they are also violating the restriction that prohibits running a business from the home. Unfortunately, these violations are not enforced.

Rentals of one’s home while they are NOT living there, regardless of the length of the rental, does not violate any deed restrictions as long as the tenants are a single family.

[Altavia]

Originally Posted by tuccillo

That is the selective enforcement issue. I have actually seen this in a previous community with deed restrictions.

Seems more a potential Waiver issue than Selective Enforcement.
.

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.

[DAVES]

Originally Posted by Golfer222

really the only way it will ever be an equitable system is when it is no longer complaint driven- either anonymous or non-anonymous.

Most of these things are debatable. We seek perfection but, perfection rarely exists.
Perhaps, teasing. An equitable system is when they BOTHER anyone else but ME.

in other communities they elect an architectural committee that travels the neighborhood looking for violations. What happens is, OH that is John, I play bridge with him, I didn't see his violation.

Many years ago my neighbor hired a, "landscaper," to design and build his landscape. They built a cement structure that was in violation. I spoke to my neighbor and pointed it out to him. My neighbor spoke to the contractor who refused to redo the work. The guy was nasty to me-swearing etc. He is the expert, kind of stuff. I told him I would be calling the villages.
The villages were great. They sent someone to look. The, "expert landscaper," was wrong, he never filed a plan. The villages told my neighbor not to pay him. I did not want to complain BUT, if you choose not to it sort of becomes grandfathered.

[Kjbatl]

Originally Posted by Velvet

I disagree. I think in fact, it is a very bad idea - as we are in a complaint driven enforced community. We don’t seem to have any by-law officers. There is much latitude in my neighborhood already and people seem to get along just fine. So people move in to TV for its beauty and then ….. ? I am concerned of maliciousness and vindictiveness towards a complainer if it is not anonymous. As it is, the situation gets investigated and nothing happens if it is not a legitimate complaint. Now if one person complains often and without a legitimate reason, in my opinion, such a person should be fined, to discourage them making frivolous charges.

Here is another thought on this. All the CDD boards use the one group of complaint administrators. The budget for the compliance office is then divided up and paid for based on the number of complaints they handle for your CDD. Each anonymous complaint that is then found to be bogus still cost you money. If you have to put your name to the complaint and CDD 5 complaint numbers are down 90%, then their cost for the complaint system should be down by 90% also. Seems like a way to trim our expenditures as a CDD without much effort.

[Velvet]

Originally Posted by DAVES

This has been debated before. Under our legal system you have the right to face your accuser. The original post states that complaints went down by 90% when no longer
anonymous.
There are few of us that have nothing that is in violation. Is that a garden plant? Your neighbor ANONYMOUSLY thinks it is an ugly WEED.

The CDD is the accuser, as the violation is against the deed restriction not one person in particular.

[MandoMan]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

If the accuser is suing you in a court of law, then sure. But this isn't a court of law.
This is deed restrictions. Your accuser is Community Standards.

It's not a violation of law. It's a violation of the community rules that you agreed to abide by when you bought the property.

And I agree with whoever said that it shouldn't be anonymous to CS. CS should absolutely have a record of everyone who lodges a complaint against a property in The Villages. But the person the complaint is lodged against - should not be entitled to that information. That's what creates neighbor wars.

That seems like a sensible compromise. Signed public complaints reminds me of countries where people are allowed to vote, but their vote is public. It discourages people from voting. Sort of like the complaint rate dropping by 90%.

On the other hand, perhaps most of those complaints are coming from one or two people in an area. I’ve seen plenty of violations but never considered reporting them.

[RICH1]

The Clipboard ladies have a weakness , Margaritas and a Prolapsed Bladder…having a collection of clipboards hanging from your headboard is similar to a “get out of jail Free” card…

[golfing eagles]

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. One would hope the CDD would clamp down and discourage this behavior. Neighbors can police themselves and often do. I do think the Community Watch could provide some assistance as well since they drive through the area anyways, not to enforce but to report. Stay in your lane....

I agree. It's fine to keep the reporter anonymous from the violator, but that person should live in the same section. That way it is only those with a vested interest in the appearance of the neighborhood that can complain, and the two old biddies can shove their clipboard you-know-where.

[Laker14]

Originally Posted by WharfRat

I wonder if any of you have been the subject of an anonymous complaint? Shortly after we moved here, we received a note on our door stating we were out of compliance due to two metal sand hill crane figures in our front planter. The cranes were held over from a previous owner and according to our next door neighbor had been there for years. We removed the cranes despite the fact that there are other homes in our village and elsewhere that display the same cranes in their front yard (and also various other lawn ornaments) and continue to do so. Does this seem fair to you?

I am not in favor of anonymous complaints, which is a good thing since I happen to live in
CDD 5. When I drive around I sometimes see things I suspect are not in compliance, but look nice, and one such example is a flower bed with a couple of metal sandhill cranes. I have often gone by there and thought "Gee, I hope the anonymous clipboard ladies don't complain about that"...
I think complaining anonymously is cowardly. If you can't look a person in the eye and politely explain why you want them to change something, maybe you are nitpicking and should find something else to worry about.

[Annie66]

Originally Posted by shut the front door

Op did not suggest that the identity of the complainer would be revealed to the violator. It may be that only the CDD knows. I don't know which it is, but before the hand wringing begins and the clip board ladies jump off a cliff, we should be aware of the whole story.

We were the subject of a complaint in CDD5. When we asked the Community Standards rep who filed the complaint, we were told the name. We had already guessed but he confirmed our suspicions.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Annie66

We were the subject of a complaint in CDD5. When we asked the Community Standards rep who filed the complaint, we were told the name. We had already guessed but he confirmed our suspicions.

If you violated a deed restriction why not just correct it?