Non-Conforming No Parking... Signage
On May 1, 2025, I received a shocking phone caIl from a Meritage salesperson who accused me of driving away Meritage's business and threatened me with arrest because, as I understand it, I told a set of new homeowners that they could not park their 2 vehicles at the end of the motor court in front of my garage (see post no. 4 for details). This event would mark the beginning of our legal dispute against the Meritage-controlled HOA.
In response to that call, I resolved to document all future incidents of unpermitted motor court parking in the Willow community in an effort to demonstrate that the HOA has been negligent in its enforcement of motor court parking rules (among many other things!) which has, in turn, affected us in terms of blocked egress/ ingress on several occasions, Meritage Sales' and the HOA's false accusations of harassment and threats of arrest; taunting and antagonizing by Meritage Sales agents; neighbors calling the police on us; neighbors falsely accusing us of being pedophiles; and a hostile environment in which we cannot foresee that we will ever be able to walk around our neighborhood without the protection of a bodycam to be able to refute bogus accusations of harassment.
I do not see an end in sight to my documentation efforts- despite the 3 signs that, in its Better Business Bureau (BBB) response to my complaint, Meritage boasted about putting up at its own expense in response to my concerns (eyeroll). I'd like to discuss those signs in greater detail.
"No Parking in Motor Court" signs installed by Meritage in response to my BBB complaint do not conform to CA Vehicle Code and Davis-Sterling Act requirements.
It's imperative that I begin the discussion by stressing that the rules regarding parking in the motor courts are NOT MY RULES- these are clearly outlined in Section 4.28.2(b) of the community's CC&Rs which unambiguously states that "There shall be no parking of any vehicle within the Motor Courts... temporarily or otherwise."
CC&Rs Section 4.28.2(b) re Parking (Motor Courts)
Section 4.28 specifically addresses enforcement and states that "... The association shall enforce the respective parking restrictions by all lawful means, including... towing of any violating vehicle. [And that] the Association shall contract with a towing company to remove vehicles that violate the no parking restrictions and ... provide [Homeowners] with a telephone number to report violations...
Live Oak CC&Rs Section 4.28 Re Parking and Vehicle Restrictions
- is in plain view at all entrances to the property,
- is not less than 17 inches by 22 inches in size, with lettering not less than 1 inch in height,
- states that public parking is prohibited and unauthorized vehicles will be towed at owner's expense,
- provides the telephone number of the local traffic enforcement agency, and
- provides the name and number of each company party to the towing agreement with the association.
Thus, based on the aforementioned requirements, it is evident that the 3 No Parking...signs erected by Meritage along Bergamot St do not conform to the Vehicle Code. My husband and I are demanding that the HOA immediately replace these with conforming signs and provide homeowners with the towing company's phone number (as required by the CC&Rs) so that we may begin to tow vehicles that are improperly parked in the motor courts to help ease - if not definitively resolve- the matter of unpermitted motor court parking in the Willow community.
UPDATE 03/21/26: For the second time since the Summer of 2025, in March 2026, we again requested a copy of the HOA's towing contract, but the HOA flat-out ignored our California Civil Code §5200 Records Request. As such, we are confident that no such contract exists.
UPDATE 03/21/26: I recently discovered that the rule regarding motor court parking - i.e., that this is NOT permitted temporarily and/ or regardless of duration - is also unambiguously spelled out in the Disclosure Statement dated March 5, 2024 which was included in our Residential Purchase Agreement.
The Disclosure Statement dated March 5, 2024 in our Residential Purchase Agreement, much like Section 4.28.2(b) of the community's CC&Rs, unambiguously states "There is no parking allowed in the motor courts, regardless of the duration."
UPDATE 03/05/26: The HOA installed non-conforming signage in each motor court.
UPDATE 8/11/25: Per IDR, the HOA indicated it is in the process of procuring a towing contract and vehicle-code conforming signage for the motor courts, though the HOA's legal counsel was unable to provide an ETA.
An Extraordinary Level of Incompetence and Negligence
I can only speculate as to why this was overlooked, but would argue that a diligent and experienced developer would have complied with its own CC&R rules and installed Vehicle Code-conforming signage in each motor court prior to allowing the very first homeowners to move-in to the development. We are adamant in that this type of planning would have spared us from the stress we've endured in connection to false accusations of harassment, threat of arrest and antagonizing by Meritage Sales agents in connection to the multitude of incidents of unpermitted motor court parking in our community.
The Meritage-controlled HOA Board clearly dropped the ball, but had ample opportunity to address the issue going back to the time when the first complaints were filed - which, per our conversations with Mr. Estrada, precedes our arrival to the community in February 2025. For whatever reason(s), it did not... and, when push came to shove (i.e., a negative BBB complaint), Meritage responded by installing signage that does not begin to conform to the Vehicle Code nor Davis Sterling Act. It is incredible that no one - including the author of Meritage's condescending BBB response (per below) - was aware that the No Parking signs which Meritage boasted about installing were non-conforming. As such, I dare say that what we're dealing with is an extraordinary level of incompetence that evidently, permeates both organizations - Meritage and Keystone Pacific.
I believe it was in July 2025 when my husband discovered that the CC&Rs required that the HOA contract with a towing company and that homeowners be provided with the telephone number for said towing company to be able to report violations. We reviewed our correspondence and found the following text message in which Mr. Estrada reassures us (after a March 18, 2025 incident during which our garage was blocked by 2 vehicles belonging to new homeowners) that Keystone actively addresses the matter regarding parking in the motor courts and tows vehicles after an initial courtesy notice to violators.
Text message from Meritage Customer Service re HOA's Enforcement of Motor Court Parking.
Of course, we've never witnessed any vehicle being towed and the HOA never communicated that we had the right to tow any vehicle parked in the motor courts. My husband spent a considerable amount of time trying to obtain the towing company's phone number, but Keystone never responded to his phone calls. My bet was that no one would since there is probably no such contract between the HOA and a towing company.
UPDATE (08/06/25): Ahead of IDR, we confirmed that the HOA had not contracted with a towing company contrary to requirements per Section 4.28 of the CC&Rs.
Communication to Facebook Group re HOA's Failure to Secure a Towing Contract
(as required by CC&Rs)
I would argue that, given the absence of Vehicle Code-conforming signage, it is a lie, as Mr. Estrada asserted in his text message, that the HOA was towing vehicles. Quite simply, it's probably not lawful to tow a vehicle without proper notice to the community. We asked the HOA's legal counsel for 2025 YTD records of Courtesy Violation Notices associated with motor court parking and towing in the Willow community, but he pushed back based on "privacy" concerns. So, we asked for redacted records (because this is NOT about WHO, but WHETHER OR NOT the HOA is enforcing parking rules) and were hit with deafening RADIO SILENCE. Assuming they exist, we do expect to receive these records as part of discovery as we proceed with litigation against the HOA. However, to be clear, we do not believe that the HOA ever investigated our reports. As of 02/26/26, we have documented several interactions with various homeowners who, according to our records, have had at least one dozen motor court parking violations, who indicated that they were never notified by the HOA that their habitual motor court parking activity is not permitted. The following is one of several examples:
If we are mistaken and the HOA is actively towing vehicles (as Mr. Estrada asserts in the above text message), we need (1) evidence of towing; (2) an explanation as to why the HOA may have stopped towing vehicles that were improperly parked in the motor courts; and (3) an explanation as to why we continue to see homeowners who habitually use the motor court as parking - e.g., we have documented 30+ motor court parking violations for a certain tenant-occupied property since mid-April 2025 whose unpermitted motor court parking activity has persisted into February 2026 despite a Cease & Desist from our attorneys.
If Mr. Estrada's text message were true- i.e., that the HOA will tow after a courtesy notice- how have the Top 09 motor court parking violators in the community gotten away with anywhere from a dozen to 30+ incidents of unpermitted motor court parking dating back to April 2025? Are there residents who are exempt from the CC&R rules? We were unable to find anything regarding variances for motor court parking and, therefore, believe that what we are dealing with is the HOA's negligence in enforcing the community's parking rules... and an obvious attempt by Mr. Estrada to cover-up for the Meritage-controlled HOA Board's negligence.
Someone clearly dropped the ball on the motor court parking signage, but would it had been so difficult to - at the very least - communicate the motor court parking rules to new Willow homeowners via friendly email reminders and/ or a regular and consistent monthly newsletter (as of early December 2025, we've only ever received one in June)? (For the record, we have begged for education regarding the community's motor court parking rules on many occasions to no avail!) Why couldn't this have been part of Meritage Sales' hand-off process to homeowners? Oh wait, never mind- that's too much of an ask since, once a home is sold, Meritage does not care! As we recall, there was no meaningful assistance with the transition from the Close of Escrow to the delivery of our home aside from an orientation that was heavily geared towards Meritage's aggressive solicitation of a perfect AVID score (as discussed in my first post).
And why wouldn't Meritage, Keystone and the HOA follow their own rules re parking enforcement? The attorney that represented us during IDR informed us that the HOA's attorney cited time, cost, and member approval among the excuses (none of which are valid!), but I have other theories.
To be perfectly clear, I believe that the HOA failed to follow its own CC&R rules regarding the installation of Vehicle-Code conforming signage and enforcement of motor court parking rules due to sheer and utter incompetence. Aside from that, however, I can think of two reasons as to why the HOA may have made a deliberate decision to hold off on the installation of Vehicle-Code conforming signage and enforcement of motor court parking rules: the first reason is that vehicles being towed from motor courts is simply not a good look for the Meritage Sales team who is still aggressively attempting to offload homes (kind of, sort of like a current homeowner who tells new homeowners and/ or prospective buyers that they are not allowed to park in front of her garage).
My guess as to reason number two, is that, aside from the negative optics of vehicles regularly being towed from motor courts, Meritage intends to pass the buck (and cost!) to the new homeowner board when this transfer takes place.
UPDATE 8/11/25: Per IDR, the HOA's legal counsel informed us that the HOA is in the process of procuring a towing contract and vehicle-code conforming signage for the motor courts, though an ETA was not provided. As of 02/26/26, signage and a towing contract have yet to be procured and our requests for status updates have gone unanswered).
UPDATE 01/15/26: Keystone informed the group of 4 homeowners or so who attended the HOA Board meeting that motor court parking signage bids have finally been obtained. Not surprisingly, the Board voted to accept the lowest priced bid for signage which would be affixed to the walls/ fences located at the END of each motor court. We reached out to the Board President with our concerns regarding this option and have yet to receive a reply:
Mr. Joelson:
I was reviewing my notes from last night's Board meeting and want to provide our input re the motor court parking signage which was discussed in connection to the bids obtained by Keystone.
Keystone informed the Board that it obtained 3 proposals from 2 different vendors. One vendor submitted a bid for signage, including metal posts and installation; the second vendor provided 2 bids: one for signage with metal posts and installation, and another bid for just signage. The Board voted to accept the lowest priced bid for signage priced at $2151 which DOES NOT include metal posts and their installation, thereby opting for the option in which said signage would be affixed to the walls/ fences located at the END of each motor court. Keystone steered the Board away from the bids which included pricing for metal posts and installation citing concerns with possible damage to the existing landscaping.
Our concern with this option- as homeowners who have been repeatedly affected by unpermitted motor court parking during the last 10 months- is two-fold:
1) Visibility: We anticipate there to be issues with visibility given our experience with our own NO PARKING sign which was installed at the end of our motor court for 9 months or so and repeatedly ignored.
2) More importantly, please be reminded that the Code requires that NO PARKING/ TOWING signage be installed at the ENTRANCE of each property (i.e., the FRONT of each motor court):
Please be reminded that the Davis-Stirling Act states that, as provided for in Vehicle Code § 22658(a)(1), associations may tow vehicles without first issuing parking violations if they install proper signage. Signage must meet the following requirements:
- in plain view at all entrances to the property,
- not less than 17 inches by 22 inches in size, with lettering not less than 1 inch in height,
- stating that public parking is prohibited and unauthorized vehicles will be towed at the owner's expense,
- providing the telephone number of the local traffic enforcement agency, and
- provide the name and number of each company party to the towing agreement with the association."
Thus, installing the signs at the end of the motor court would be misguided and we urge the Board to seriously reconsider its decision to ensure compliance with the Davis-Stirling Act and Vehicle Code.
Lastly, we were unclear as to whether these bids consist of towing services and would appreciate clarification.
Claudia and Matthew Snyder
Help Us Understand
If I could have a discussion with the Meritage-controlled HOA board members and obtain a meaningful answer, I would ask for clarification as to who they believe bears financial responsibility for the community's parking signage given Meritage's BBB response in which Meritage boasts that it installed these at its own expense- implying that this may have been another party's responsibility. I'd also ask why an adequate number (i.e., 1 per motor court) of Vehicle-Code/ Davis Sterling Act-conforming signage was not immediately installed when homes and the motor courts had been built... or at the time when Meritage and the HOA first learned of the issue of unpermitted motor court parking (which precedes our arrival in late Feb 2025)... or as of the March 18, 2025 incident during which our garage was blocked by 2 new homeowners and we clearly asked for signage... or, at the very least, in May 2025 when it finally conceded that signage was necessary (and installed the 3 non-conforming signs along Bergamot)?
I'd ask why the Meritage-controlled HOA appears to resist to take definitive enforcement action given our +/- 100 reports of unpermitted motor court parking violations and +/- 300 pieces of photographic evidence. In other words, why is Meritage dragging its feet on NO PARKING/ TOWING signage given that unpermitted parking in the Willow motor courts is obviously an issue?!
On second thought, when we meet for IDR on August 11, 2025, my husband and I will simply demand that signage (per Vehicle Code § 22658(a)(1),
as referenced in the Davis Sterling Act, be installed in each motor court and that the motor court curbs be painted red, as suggested by a Redlands Police officer who recently responded to a foolish neighbor's complaint that we were harassing him because we tried to speak to him about the HOA's motor court parking rules and rules which prevent homeowners from using their respective garages as gyms and storage facilities if/ when such use would preclude the parking of 2 vehicles.
Neighbor's Garage Used as Storage (vs Parking As Required Per CC&Rs); Report Submitted to HOA on 07/25/25; no acknowledgement as of 09/29/25
08/20/25 circa 8:10AM - It appears that, despite the report submitted on 07/25/25, the HOA has yet to inform our neighbor that he is required to use his garage for parking (vs storage) of at least 2 of his 3 vehicles.
... My husband saw a note on our neighbor's vehicle: "Dont Park Here Fool it's a hydrant!" [sic]. He was tempted to add "Maybe use your garage?", but decided against it since this neighbor might allege "harassment" and again call the police to our home.
Anyway, the responding Redlands Police officer informed us that our neighbor is a first-time homeowner, that he doesn't appear to know much about HOAs, and that we should keep a distance since he appears to be ready to escalate with a restraining order. We requested that the officer relay that we would vigorously defend ourselves with legal representation for which we would request reimbursement of attorney fees. Bodycam video of the conversation with the officer, as well as my conversation with the homeowner is available upon request. We can't imagine how this foolish neighbor got the police to respond to his call, but our video clearly demonstrates there was no harassment.
Definition of “Harassment” per CA Law (Code Civ. Proc. §527.6)
“unlawful violence, a credible threat of violence, or a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, or harasses the person, and that serves no legitimate purpose. The course of conduct must be that which would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress, and must actually cause substantial emotional distress to the petitioner.”
Live Oak Parking Rules Per the HOA's Rules and Regulations
Live Oak CC&RS Section 4.28.1 Re Garages
Comments