Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gatorade Frost
I get that some Home Owners Associations are nazis, but in some of these cases it just doesn't make sense to me that there's a problem with what they're having you do.
Having your tree on some one else's property is a liability for you in case it falls, and it's also just an enforced courtesy that you should keep what's yours on your property. I think ultimately they're trying to keep the highest house value on the market and that's how they're doing it by making sure each plot of land isn't encroaching on some one else's property.
|
That's not always the case. I owned a house at the bottom of the slope leading to another house above. The developer arranged that the people at the bottom of the slope owned their slice of it, probably to avoid liability issues in case of rock or mudslides. He also planted quite a few trees on the slope.
When they got tall enough to block the view my upslope neighbor desired, he pretty much demanded (through the HOass) that I cut them. He also claimed that I had planted them, and that the roots were tearing up his patio. He
had to claim it was the roots, because the limbs didn't come near his property. His patio was fine--it was easily visible from my property, and there was no damage to it.
My lawyer sent him a letter, complete with declarations from original owners that the developer planted the trees, which basically told him to fuck off. Which he did.
However, people like my neighbor are a pain in the ass to everyone else. If he'd just asked, I would have given him permission to trim the trees, but maybe he didn't want to do that, since he'd have to foot the bill.