HOA Law Injustices

Nevada homeowners lack real ways to challenge HOA governance abuses. Here’s what the CIC Task Force should fix — and why it matters now.

Nevada HOA boards are eliminating physical meetings and going fully virtual. State law still requires a “place.” Regulators haven’t clearly authorized the change.

The recent rise in corporate ownership of residential homes—and the governance influence it carries within HOAs even at relatively small concentrations—places new strain on the assumptions underlying the HOA equity bargain. Common-interest community (CIC) laws rest on a foundational compromise: homeowners and the law tolerate extraordinary intrusions on traditional property rights only so long as governance remains aligned with resident interests rather than external profit m

Most HOA disputes are not about money damages, but about interpretation and compliance with governing documents—CC&Rs, bylaws, and rules that bind homeowners as servitudes on their property. Yet Nevada’s dispute-resolution framework forces these governance disputes into forums that cannot resolve them, ultimately destined for civil litigation so costly and risky that most owners rationally abandon their claims before a neutral ever examines the issue.

Nevada must recognize HOAs as private governments. The Restatement of Property shows why governance with government-like powers needs government-like accountability

Nevada Real Estate Division (NRED) rulemaking appears to be proceeding without the very procedural foundation the APA requires.

Nevada’s HOA dispute resolution system was built on a well-intentioned premise: most conflicts between homeowners and associations are ill-suited for civil litigation- but it fails to deliver.

Nevada HOAs use foreclosure-backed assessments to fund entertainment and commercial ventures. This post calls for property-based limits on “common expenses.”

Nevada’s HOA laws promise accountability but deliver little enforcement. NVHOAReform explains how the Business Judgment Rule shields boards from scrutiny, leaving fiduciary duties unenforceable—and what reforms can fix it.

Nevada’s HOA Task Force was meant to empower homeowners. Instead, political pressure and industry influence may be steering reform offstage before it even starts.

In Nevada HOAs, attorney-fee clauses silence homeowners and shield abuse. One homeowner’s story shows why reform can’t wait.

Ambiguity in Nevada’s HOA laws lets boards disqualify opponents and developers control elections. Reform is needed to protect homeowners.

Judicial decisions shape Nevada’s HOA system and beyond. When Nevada Supreme Court justices run unopposed and courts reshape laws instead of applying them, accountability vanishes. NVHOAReform calls for a public review of judicial elections and their impact on homeowners.

Many believe HOA control passes to owners once most homes sell. But Nevada’s laws have holes that let developers retain power indefinitely.

Learn how statutes meant to protect homeowners are being reinterpreted to shield developers, and why reform is urgent.

HOA buyers face complex private governments with no screening—unlike private markets that use accredited investor rules to protect the public.

Nevada law lets developers assign almost anything to HOAs as “common elements” — from pools to private sewer systems. With no oversight or limits, are volunteer boards being handed risks they can’t see?

Nevada HOA boards are quietly voting by email — bypassing open meeting laws and shutting owners out. Here’s why it’s illegal, risky, and must be stopped

Nevada’s HOA dispute system is broken. This blog explains why ADR reform is urgent and why the Legislature must act to protect homeowners.

Developers an HOA boards use attorney fee clauses to intimidate and silence homeowners. Learn why prevailing-party provisions must be reformed.