Skip to main content

Legal advice on HOA covenant, conditions, and restrictions in Wyoming

Can a land developer change the definition of a water CCR to the detriment of those who have purchase lots from him?
The subdivision contains over 100 two-acre horse parcels with water serviced by several wells specific to the subdivision. Each parcel has in place water lines to the lots. CCRs require homebuilders to enhance their properties with landscaping and lawns within 1 year of initial construction on their lot. CCRs prohibit using the water lines for "irrigation." For years, home owners have used the water lines attached to their homes to sprinkle their lawns and water trees and shrubs immediately around their homes as pertaining to their immediate landscaping. Some home owners have access to canal water for purposes of irrigating their pastures. Those who don't have access to the canal essentially do not irrigate or water in anyway their pastures. The developer, irritated that one of his proposed new subdivisions did not pass the county's planning and zoning committee, has now sent nasty letters to all existing home owners in the existing subdivision stating that the county's planning and zoning committee denied his proposed subdivision on the basis of insufficient water infastructure (where he intended to commute some of the water resouces from the existing subdivision to the new subdivision). In retaliation, he is now claiming that no one can use their water lines to sprinkle lawns or water trees and shrubs because, as he puts it, the CCR that prohibits "irrigation" is inclusive of lawns, trees, and shrubs included in landscaping, and he is now claiming that he will fine or monetarily penalize anyone who he catches watering their lawns, trees, shrubs, etc. with the existing water lines by enforcing $100 to $250 fees per month on water bills, which he has historically regulated. He claims the existing water lines can only be used for "culinary" or inside-the-improvements purposes. The specific subdivision has no formal water association or home owners association. Folks purchased lots in this particular subdivision because it allowed substantial freedoms to develop the lot to individual tastes. No one who purchased lots in the existing subdivision received any sort of disclosure in advance of the purchase that would indicate that the water lines could not be used for watering lawns or immediate trees, shrubs, flowers, etc. Nor did anyone receive any sort of disclosure indicating that it could be necessary to dig a well or find other water resources in order to comply with the CCR requiring lawns and landscaping. Can the developer get away with redefining the terms and conditions of CCRs after he has sold lots? Can he prohibit individual parcel owners from watering their lawns, trees, shrubs, flowers as part of their immediate landscaping now, after years of allowing it? Has he created a legal conflict with between the CCR that requires landscaping and the new defined CCR the prohibits watering immediate landscaping? Does he have a fiduciary responsibility to act in the best interest of those to whom he has sold lots? What recourse do parcel owners have now? Can we claim deterioration in value due to this newly defined CCR? Can we seek recourse for that deteriorated value?

Ask your own legal question, it's free

Get your questions answered

Avvo helps you learn about your legal situation, connect with lawyers, and get advice.