HOA pool ban for prior vandalism of HOA property

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ Apparently the young man who built the little free library enjoyed helping to choose the books that were donated and also loved watching members of the community use it. Whether these boys damaged it to specifically hurt his feelings is unknown, but their actions certainly accomplished that.

The boys have a history of ruining HOA property with the little free library and the one family has a known history of specious lawsuits. There's a good reason why the HOA doesn't want that kid anywhere near the property until he's an adult.

Special needs kid being sad if unfortunate, but really doesn’t have any legal penalty. It wasn’t his property. I keep seeing “have a history” of ruining HOA property, well then they have more evidence for a case. His parents being sue happy does not make a difference- banning them for this reason is discriminatory. They have to right to file whatever lawsuit they want. The board has no legal grounds to ban them. That needs to come from a court of law

It is clear that you have no idea what the law will or will not allow. Many of us on this forum do understand the law, and your statements are wildly legally deficient! I hope the parents do sue the HOA, because then the HOA will get to speak, but now they are being smart and keeping their mouths shut and not talking to the press, while letting the parents and others take, which gives the HOA a free deposition. "He who speaks first, looses", and I am confident that the parents loose in this matter, especially if they sue. I can see the HOA counter-suing the parents for defamation!!! Then they could own a couple of homes in the association by enforcing the judgment and kick this irresponsible parents out of the community. Based upon what I read, there would be a celebratory party if that happened.

Yes. And someone that doesn’t know the difference between loses and looses is well versed in all legal matters.

+1
The dcum "lawyer" is like a broken record, rambling on incessantly about liability, liability, liability blah blah blah.

Residents would be much more supportive of the HOA if they actually trusted the HOA. When you consistently display poor judgement and try to throw your weight around, your support quickly goes down the drain. And that "free little library" is actually a glorified birdhouse.

You can say the library is small, tiny, free, whatever. The kid still vandalized it, the family didn’t show for the meeting, and now the kid had to go somewhere other than the pool. Parents thought the HOA would forget by summer, which didn’t happen.

The kid who ripped the door off of the birdhouse doesn't live in Kingsbrooke. Why are you so hateful?

[Anonymous]

What are the names of the board members?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ Apparently the young man who built the little free library enjoyed helping to choose the books that were donated and also loved watching members of the community use it. Whether these boys damaged it to specifically hurt his feelings is unknown, but their actions certainly accomplished that.

The boys have a history of ruining HOA property with the little free library and the one family has a known history of specious lawsuits. There's a good reason why the HOA doesn't want that kid anywhere near the property until he's an adult.

Special needs kid being sad if unfortunate, but really doesn’t have any legal penalty. It wasn’t his property. I keep seeing “have a history” of ruining HOA property, well then they have more evidence for a case. His parents being sue happy does not make a difference- banning them for this reason is discriminatory. They have to right to file whatever lawsuit they want. The board has no legal grounds to ban them. That needs to come from a court of law

It is clear that you have no idea what the law will or will not allow. Many of us on this forum do understand the law, and your statements are wildly legally deficient! I hope the parents do sue the HOA, because then the HOA will get to speak, but now they are being smart and keeping their mouths shut and not talking to the press, while letting the parents and others take, which gives the HOA a free deposition. "He who speaks first, looses", and I am confident that the parents loose in this matter, especially if they sue. I can see the HOA counter-suing the parents for defamation!!! Then they could own a couple of homes in the association by enforcing the judgment and kick this irresponsible parents out of the community. Based upon what I read, there would be a celebratory party if that happened.

Yes. And someone that doesn’t know the difference between loses and looses is well versed in all legal matters.

+1
The dcum "lawyer" is like a broken record, rambling on incessantly about liability, liability, liability blah blah blah.

Residents would be much more supportive of the HOA if they actually trusted the HOA. When you consistently display poor judgement and try to throw your weight around, your support quickly goes down the drain. And that "free little library" is actually a glorified birdhouse.

You may not have much luck drawing support from HOA opponents. I’m not a big HOA fan, but this HOA did the right thing by revoking pool privileges of a kid who vandalized.

They didn't just revoke his pool privileges. That is just the main focus now because it is early summer and everyone is excited about the pools being open. They have banned him from the entire community. Literally shunned a CHILD for 7 years. Absolutely despicable. The other area communities ARE talking about them and from what I have seen/heard/read it is not a "good buzz" like the residents of Kingsbrook are feeling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ Apparently the young man who built the little free library enjoyed helping to choose the books that were donated and also loved watching members of the community use it. Whether these boys damaged it to specifically hurt his feelings is unknown, but their actions certainly accomplished that.

The boys have a history of ruining HOA property with the little free library and the one family has a known history of specious lawsuits. There's a good reason why the HOA doesn't want that kid anywhere near the property until he's an adult.

Special needs kid being sad if unfortunate, but really doesn’t have any legal penalty. It wasn’t his property. I keep seeing “have a history” of ruining HOA property, well then they have more evidence for a case. His parents being sue happy does not make a difference- banning them for this reason is discriminatory. They have to right to file whatever lawsuit they want. The board has no legal grounds to ban them. That needs to come from a court of law

It is clear that you have no idea what the law will or will not allow. Many of us on this forum do understand the law, and your statements are wildly legally deficient! I hope the parents do sue the HOA, because then the HOA will get to speak, but now they are being smart and keeping their mouths shut and not talking to the press, while letting the parents and others take, which gives the HOA a free deposition. "He who speaks first, looses", and I am confident that the parents loose in this matter, especially if they sue. I can see the HOA counter-suing the parents for defamation!!! Then they could own a couple of homes in the association by enforcing the judgment and kick this irresponsible parents out of the community. Based upon what I read, there would be a celebratory party if that happened.

Yes. And someone that doesn’t know the difference between loses and looses is well versed in all legal matters.

+1
The dcum "lawyer" is like a broken record, rambling on incessantly about liability, liability, liability blah blah blah.

Residents would be much more supportive of the HOA if they actually trusted the HOA. When you consistently display poor judgement and try to throw your weight around, your support quickly goes down the drain. And that "free little library" is actually a glorified birdhouse.

You may not have much luck drawing support from HOA opponents. I’m not a big HOA fan, but this HOA did the right thing by revoking pool privileges of a kid who vandalized.

They didn't just revoke his pool privileges. That is just the main focus now because it is early summer and everyone is excited about the pools being open. They have banned him from the entire community. Literally shunned a CHILD for 7 years. Absolutely despicable. The other area communities ARE talking about them and from what I have seen/heard/read it is not a "good buzz" like the residents of Kingsbrook are feeling.

The parents should sue if they have such a strong case against the HOA. That is the only way the parents can clear their names. If their attorney has advised them to take their complaints to tv and social media, then they must have a really good case. If their attorney didn't not tell them to go on tv or talk about this subject in any media, that probably is not a good sign. If they haven't or don't file suit, I would assume that they haven't found an attorney that believes they have a case. It would be interesting to see this decided by a court. If someone here finds-out if there is a lawsuit, please post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here - I feel I need to state it was not my intention for folks to dredge up backstories on the families involved. I posted simply as I thought it was a strange story about teens/teens, and not necessarily one that would be covered on a popular DC news station!

It's unfortunate that a demented resident is spreading irrelevant and hateful information about residents that could adversely impact children in our community.

The focus should be on what transpired and the Nervous Nancy board members.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ Apparently the young man who built the little free library enjoyed helping to choose the books that were donated and also loved watching members of the community use it. Whether these boys damaged it to specifically hurt his feelings is unknown, but their actions certainly accomplished that.

The boys have a history of ruining HOA property with the little free library and the one family has a known history of specious lawsuits. There's a good reason why the HOA doesn't want that kid anywhere near the property until he's an adult.

Special needs kid being sad if unfortunate, but really doesn’t have any legal penalty. It wasn’t his property. I keep seeing “have a history” of ruining HOA property, well then they have more evidence for a case. His parents being sue happy does not make a difference- banning them for this reason is discriminatory. They have to right to file whatever lawsuit they want. The board has no legal grounds to ban them. That needs to come from a court of law

It is clear that you have no idea what the law will or will not allow. Many of us on this forum do understand the law, and your statements are wildly legally deficient! I hope the parents do sue the HOA, because then the HOA will get to speak, but now they are being smart and keeping their mouths shut and not talking to the press, while letting the parents and others take, which gives the HOA a free deposition. "He who speaks first, looses", and I am confident that the parents loose in this matter, especially if they sue. I can see the HOA counter-suing the parents for defamation!!! Then they could own a couple of homes in the association by enforcing the judgment and kick this irresponsible parents out of the community. Based upon what I read, there would be a celebratory party if that happened.

Yes. And someone that doesn’t know the difference between loses and looses is well versed in all legal matters.

+1
The dcum "lawyer" is like a broken record, rambling on incessantly about liability, liability, liability blah blah blah.

Residents would be much more supportive of the HOA if they actually trusted the HOA. When you consistently display poor judgement and try to throw your weight around, your support quickly goes down the drain. And that "free little library" is actually a glorified birdhouse.

You may not have much luck drawing support from HOA opponents. I’m not a big HOA fan, but this HOA did the right thing by revoking pool privileges of a kid who vandalized.

They didn't just revoke his pool privileges. That is just the main focus now because it is early summer and everyone is excited about the pools being open. They have banned him from the entire community. Literally shunned a CHILD for 7 years. Absolutely despicable. The other area communities ARE talking about them and from what I have seen/heard/read it is not a "good buzz" like the residents of Kingsbrook are feeling.

The kid is a known menace - this wasn't an isolated incident. Sounds very fair.

The people I know in VL think this is fair, and would rather HOAs hold repercussions for this kind of behavior rather than say, door color.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ Apparently the young man who built the little free library enjoyed helping to choose the books that were donated and also loved watching members of the community use it. Whether these boys damaged it to specifically hurt his feelings is unknown, but their actions certainly accomplished that.

The boys have a history of ruining HOA property with the little free library and the one family has a known history of specious lawsuits. There's a good reason why the HOA doesn't want that kid anywhere near the property until he's an adult.

Special needs kid being sad if unfortunate, but really doesn’t have any legal penalty. It wasn’t his property. I keep seeing “have a history” of ruining HOA property, well then they have more evidence for a case. His parents being sue happy does not make a difference- banning them for this reason is discriminatory. They have to right to file whatever lawsuit they want. The board has no legal grounds to ban them. That needs to come from a court of law

It is clear that you have no idea what the law will or will not allow. Many of us on this forum do understand the law, and your statements are wildly legally deficient! I hope the parents do sue the HOA, because then the HOA will get to speak, but now they are being smart and keeping their mouths shut and not talking to the press, while letting the parents and others take, which gives the HOA a free deposition. "He who speaks first, looses", and I am confident that the parents loose in this matter, especially if they sue. I can see the HOA counter-suing the parents for defamation!!! Then they could own a couple of homes in the association by enforcing the judgment and kick this irresponsible parents out of the community. Based upon what I read, there would be a celebratory party if that happened.

Yes. And someone that doesn’t know the difference between loses and looses is well versed in all legal matters.

+1
The dcum "lawyer" is like a broken record, rambling on incessantly about liability, liability, liability blah blah blah.

Residents would be much more supportive of the HOA if they actually trusted the HOA. When you consistently display poor judgement and try to throw your weight around, your support quickly goes down the drain. And that "free little library" is actually a glorified birdhouse.

You may not have much luck drawing support from HOA opponents. I’m not a big HOA fan, but this HOA did the right thing by revoking pool privileges of a kid who vandalized.

They didn't just revoke his pool privileges. That is just the main focus now because it is early summer and everyone is excited about the pools being open. They have banned him from the entire community. Literally shunned a CHILD for 7 years. Absolutely despicable. The other area communities ARE talking about them and from what I have seen/heard/read it is not a "good buzz" like the residents of Kingsbrook are feeling.

The kid is a known menace - this wasn't an isolated incident. Sounds very fair.

The people I know in VL think this is fair, and would rather HOAs hold repercussions for this kind of behavior rather than say, door color.

OH really?! What did he do, murder someone? And what is VL?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They didn't just revoke his pool privileges. That is just the main focus now because it is early summer and everyone is excited about the pools being open. They have banned him from the entire community. Literally shunned a CHILD for 7 years. Absolutely despicable. The other area communities ARE talking about them and from what I have seen/heard/read it is not a "good buzz" like the residents of Kingsbrook are feeling.

The kid is a known menace - this wasn't an isolated incident. Sounds very fair.

The people I know in VL think this is fair, and would rather HOAs hold repercussions for this kind of behavior rather than say, door color.

OH really?! What did he do, murder someone? And what is VL?

VL is "Victory Lakes," one of the other HOAs in the area.
"The area is mostly upper-middle-class residential managed communities including Braemar Community, Bridlewood, Bridlewood Manor, Brookside, Crossman Creek, Foxborough, Kingsbrooke, New Bristow Village, Lanier Farms, Saybrooke, Sheffield Manor, Amberleigh Station, and Victory Lakes."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristow,_Virginia

I'm the first pp that said "They didn't just revoke..." And apparently I know different people in Victory Lakes that that other poster, because the ones I know have definitely not said it's "fair."

[Anonymous]

Honestly, whatever HOA and “middle upper class” neighborhood/area this is sounds terrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, whatever HOA and “middle upper class” neighborhood/area this is sounds terrible.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, whatever HOA and “middle upper class” neighborhood/area this is sounds terrible.

+1000

We are looking to leave...

[Anonymous]

When I first read the story I thought good for them they should be banned but I only read the headline. When I actually read the details I was shocked how much hate went into the punishment. Not only are these kids 12 years old but they can’t even be in common areas? It’s extreme and unnecessary. Have the kids write an apology, pay a fine and even help rebuild the library.

Yes, the kids were awful, but the HOA punishment was 10 times worse.

[Anonymous]

Are all HOAs like this? Honestly sounds like a bunch of adult bullies who like to make and enforce arbitrary rules. Not to make light of vandalism, but this whole story and and HOA reaction is beyond stupid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are all HOAs like this? Honestly sounds like a bunch of adult bullies who like to make and enforce arbitrary rules. Not to make light of vandalism, but this whole story and and HOA reaction is beyond stupid

Bristow resident here. I have never heard of anything like this before. I'm the one who quoted the Wikipedia article above that lists the HOAs in Bristow. I live in one of them, and I know at least a few people in most of them, through my kids' sports, schools, just the local community in general-though I don't know the families actually involved in this story.

People were definitely talking about this last week, and I don't know one person that said banning a child from all community events/property for seven years is a "fair" consequence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are all HOAs like this? Honestly sounds like a bunch of adult bullies who like to make and enforce arbitrary rules. Not to make light of vandalism, but this whole story and and HOA reaction is beyond stupid

Naaaaah, it all depends on who sits on the board. The members on this board were bullied as kids, and now it's payback time. Their actions are a sign of weakness, not strength.