I wonder how the daughter feels about her 82 year old father being barred from his own house?

I think it is wrong for the court to issue a restraining order that results in a man being barred from living in his own house, when the daughter has no right to live there. I have to think that the judge is at fault and should have arranged for a better solution between the parties.

Is it a good idea to raise an 8 YO in TV? Are there other kids to play with, sports teams, dance, karate, music, etc?

It doesn't matter, it is not allowed. I doubt if ANYONE in this situation has given much thought to this kid. All that has happened is being absorbed by the child for sure. Actions speak louder than words. Not very good lessons for a little one, I don't think.

Actually I think the judge may have based his/her decision with the child’s immediate welfare as the highest priority. The judge did not want to throw the poor child out onto the street. Long term housing is of course another matter.

My hope is the man gets to move back into his home and the mother and child move out of TV.

As I understand it since The Villages management is not a governmental entity it does not have police powers. It will be interesting to see what steps are taken and how the law is invoked to achieve a lasting result.

If The Villages wants to have a rule that prohibits children from living here, then they also need to have a process to enforce the rule. Otherwise, what is the point? Apparently, this 8 year old has lived in The Villages his entire life. I guess the neighbors and the school he attends were both complicit in allowing his mother to violate the rules.

The rule isn't something The Villages made up or imposed.

The rule come from HUD and the deed restrictions imposed on an age restricted community. We have lived here for more than ten years and that rule has been effectively followed. I bet it will be in this situation as well.

This is a very interesting thread. I now (and I assume thousands more) always thought anyone under 19 years could not live in TV for more than 30 days per year based upon a signed contract law. Now we know of at least three kids living/going to school here and most importantly it appears to be not against any law. So let’s see, if you put an 8 inch white cross or a pink flamingo in your front yard and don’t remove it you can be fined $250 per week or month..... very interesting in deed

Yeah, right! Don't you mean soon to be ex-friends?

Exactly.

The friends are Kennedy's and they were like Ah, big deal.

Having the Grandfather on the outside looking in is just unbelievable. I feel bad that the child is in a stressful situation like this. There can be no winner at this point. I wonder why no one ever reported the child? Where is the child's father? Isn't there another answer to this problem than Grandad on the street?

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished. I would never call on them even though they were breaking the rules, I'm not Barney Fife.

Quite to the contrary, they were grateful to get the link as they have nightmare alky/druggie worthless felon adult children who try to squeeze everything they can from their parents who attend Al-Anon meetings regularly and work their programs.

I think there is a lot more to this story than what has been posted. We call all speculate like:
1. Is the grandfather mentally competent?
2. If the daughter does not own this house, how did she get him evicted?

I think there must be some extenuating circumstances and hopefully this will be resolved. I don't think it's healthy for an 8 year old to be living in TV not to mention, it's against the rules.

As I understand it the rule does not come from HUD. HOPA allows rules concerning children living in 55 and over communities.

The second paragraph in the summary explains. Housing for Older Persons Act - Wikipedia