Can HOA Tell Me Who Can and Cannot Live With Me

My question involves real estate located in the State of: PA. I got a letter the other day telling me that I'm not allowed to have my boyfriend live with me because he is not my husband nor a direct relative. Can they do that?
Thanks

Quote:

---

Quoting gi1978

---

My question involves real estate located in the State of: PA. I got a letter the other day telling me that I'm not allowed to have my boyfriend live with me because he is not my husband nor a direct relative. Can they do that?
Thanks

---

Are you renting the condo from a unit owner or are you a unit owner?? If you are simply renting, the lease only has your name on it, then it is legal to tell you someone else just can't just move in.

If you are the condo owner, then you can certainly have a roommate. I rarely seen CC&R's barring roommates for unit owners.

I am a landlord, and when I was not as experienced, I let any Tom, Dick or Harry move in. The trouble starts when the original tenant has a fight with this new roommate, he moves out, and I have no idea who this new person is, never qualified him or her.

In fact, one guy that was left behind is unemployed, and I have no idea even if he is a wanted fugitive or sex offender. If he is, and something happens to my other tenants, or occupants, I can be sued. And if he is a "sex offender", I can even be violating the law myself for renting to him.

Hi, SChinFChin, thanks for replying. It's my condominium...I own it. I got a letter the other day saying that my condo is for single family residence. This is what they said verbatim

The units shall be used solely as single family residences. Webster states that a single family is -mother, father, children- mother, children- father, children. Any other combinations are considered extended family.

That's what they have on their letter to us. They're referring to the declaration for the HOA. This is the section that they're referring to:

Second: The property is being submitted in its entirety. The improvements include buildings containing a condominium or family dwelling units (hereinafter referred to as "units"). The units shall be used solely as single-family residences. Each unit is capable of individual utilization, having its own exit to the common elements of the CONDOMINIUM. Each of the units, as more particularly described herein and in the DECLARATION PLAN, is hereby declared to be held in fee simple and may be retained, occupied, conveyed, transferred, encumbered, inherited or devised in the same manner as any other parcel of real property independent of the other individual units, to one or more owners, hereinafter referred to as "Co-Owners," each Co-Owner being a person, corporation, trust or other legal entity or any combination thereof which obtains a particular and unique property right in the exclusive elements, as defined below, all of the above in accordance with the provisions of the Act and subject to the conditions herein set forth.

That is to what they were referring. And when I looked up "single family" in Webster, I got something different than what they were quoting. I'm no lawyer, but do you think I have a chance to fight this, SChinFChin?

I'm sorry....I should be a little clearer. I own it the condominium and it's my boyfriend living with me that they're having an issue.

Quote:

---

Quoting gi1978

---

Hi, SChinFChin, thanks for replying. It's my condominium...I own it. I got a letter the other day saying that my condo is for single family residence. This is what they said verbatim

The units shall be used solely as single family residences. Webster states that a single family is -mother, father, children- mother, children- father, children. Any other combinations are considered extended family.

That's what they have on their letter to us. They're referring to the declaration for the HOA. This is the section that they're referring to:

Second: The property is being submitted in its entirety. The improvements include buildings containing a condominium or family dwelling units (hereinafter referred to as "units"). The units shall be used solely as single-family residences. Each unit is capable of individual utilization, having its own exit to the common elements of the CONDOMINIUM. Each of the units, as more particularly described herein and in the DECLARATION PLAN, is hereby declared to be held in fee simple and may be retained, occupied, conveyed, transferred, encumbered, inherited or devised in the same manner as any other parcel of real property independent of the other individual units, to one or more owners, hereinafter referred to as "Co-Owners," each Co-Owner being a person, corporation, trust or other legal entity or any combination thereof which obtains a particular and unique property right in the exclusive elements, as defined below, all of the above in accordance with the provisions of the Act and subject to the conditions herein set forth.

That is to what they were referring. And when I looked up "single family" in Webster, I got something different than what they were quoting. I'm no lawyer, but do you think I have a chance to fight this, SChinFChin?

I'm sorry....I should be a little clearer. I own it the condominium and it's my boyfriend living with me that they're having an issue.

---

You can fight this on two levels.

First, you might check around who handles "civil right" issues in your state, such as the state "human rights commission". The definition of family had evolved through the years, and you can argue that while "unmarried", you and your boyfriend constitute "one family unit".

Second, you can take a "real estate" legal approach, and you can add your boyfriend's name onto your deed. Think carefully of this as you might have a problem taking him off later. For condo units, if both your names are on the deed, both are given as much right to it.

I understand you probably paid for the condo yourself, and you might want to have a side agreement saying you own 99%, and he 1%, and also some agreement on how to take him off the deed later on.

Thank you so much, SChinFChin, you were most helpful!

Quote:

---

Quoting SChinFChin

---

.

Second, you can take a "real estate" legal approach, and you can add your boyfriend's name onto your deed. Think carefully of this as you might have a problem taking him off later. For condo units, if both your names are on the deed, both are given as much right to it.
.

---

NNOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

do not retitle the unit for this. It so often results in a lot of problems (very serious problems) in the future. As well, it may cause problems with any mortgage you might have such as activating a "due on transfer" clause which would make the mortgage due and payable in full on demand.

You need to refer to the CC&R's contained in your deed or the rules of the HOA. That will be either your source of a defense or understanding of their claims.

Quote:

---

Quoting gi1978

---

Thank you so much, SChinFChin, you were most helpful!

---

You're quite welcome.

I read your earlier quotation more carefully, and I have a good laugh if they really said "Webster states ..." Based on that definition, sounds like they are applying SHARIA ( Islamic ) law.

Unless you live in a ultra-conservative area, the local papers would have a field day. The ACLU would jump all over it. I can imagine a news report saying "some HOA says a women's boyfreind can't live with her in a condo she owns because they are not married.

It's PA USA, not Saudi Arabia.

I'm trying to picture in this day and age of "gay marriage", and "civil unions", that some HOA sends a letter out saying "Webster states ... ", and thinks they can get away with it. They might as well say "the Holy Bible says ... ".

...seriously, Chin, HOAs can make an awful lot of similar demands and be absolutely protected from a legal standpoint.

That's why I would never, ever become part of such an entity.

I'm not saying that they're in the right here - but if such a clause is part of their rules (which OP would have reviewed first, no?) they often have the right to enforce.

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

NNOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

do not retitle the unit for this. It so often results in a lot of problems (very serious problems) in the future. As well, it may cause problems with any mortgage you might have such as activating a "due on transfer" clause which would make the mortgage due and payable in full on demand.

You need to refer to the CC&R's contained in your deed or the rules of the HOA. That will be either your source of a defense or understanding of their claims.

---

If the CC&R defines what a family is, as it appear to be the case here, the CC&R itself might well be illegal, on civil right grounds, as evidenced by recent "gay rights" discussions. I can picture the HOA explaining that "two gay people" living together is not a family according to Websters.

As you probably read into my post, I have some reservations myself on adding a name, with issues it might create. However, I had negotiated with banks over this issue, they have problems with "deleting a name" on the deed that is also on the mortgage. They don't have that big a problem where an additional name is added, with the original mortgagee still on the deed.

Also, with adding names, in community property states, it is quite common when someone marries, the spouse is automatically added anyway, whether the deed is amended or not.

Quote:

---

Quoting Dogmatique

---

...seriously, Chin, HOAs can make an awful lot of similar demands and be absolutely protected from a legal standpoint.

That's why I would never, ever become part of such an entity.

I'm not saying that they're in the right here - but if such a clause is part of their rules (which OP would have reviewed first, no?) they often have the right to enforce.

---

I can't say about PA, here is NY, HOA and COOP board rules are pretty absolute EXCEPT when they violate "civil rights", or state rules. I owned and rented out condo units, but got rid of them because I don't care for dealing with HOA's.

So in NY, they told Richard Nixon he can't move into the COOP because his being there might violate the resident's quiet enjoyment. That is totally legal, they can't prove it, but Nixon can't do a thing about it. However, they can't tell two people they can't move in because they are not married based on the COOP or HOA rules ( according to Websters ), or "two gays" does not constitute a family according to Websters. That would violate their civil rights.

The rules here are HOA's can say or do anything they want as long they don't violate someone's civil rights UNDER STATE LAW. I would say if the ACLU ever gets hold of this, they'll jump all over this HOA.

I will definitely look into this, jk. Thanks for the advice!

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

NNOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

do not retitle the unit for this. It so often results in a lot of problems (very serious problems) in the future. As well, it may cause problems with any mortgage you might have such as activating a "due on transfer" clause which would make the mortgage due and payable in full on demand.

You need to refer to the CC&R's contained in your deed or the rules of the HOA. That will be either your source of a defense or understanding of their claims.

---

SChinFChin, may I ask how you know all this? Are you a lawyer? Regardless of what you do, you really did give great advice and come Monday morning I'm going to call and ask to meet with them. I'm going to tell them the things you said to me. If they refuse to cooperate, then I will tell them that I'll go public with this to the media and to the ACLU.