# homeowners, homeowner's or homeowners' association?



## KL_Phelps (Nov 7, 2013)

I complained to the "______" association. Which is the correct way? I'm inclined to use homeowners, but would like conformation.


----------



## A.C. Scott (Mar 25, 2014)

I think it should be homeowners association, right? I mean it's not possessive is it? homeowner's doesn't make sense either way because there is more than one homeowner.


----------



## KL_Phelps (Nov 7, 2013)

that was my thinking, but I needed a second brain to confirm it


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

I think it's homeowners, as in an association of homeowners. If it was homeowners', then that would be an association belonging to multiple homeowners.


----------



## Rayven T. Hill (Jul 24, 2013)

Perhaps it's none of the above?

According to wiki, it's homeowner association.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeowner_association


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Rayven T. Hill said:


> Perhaps it's none of the above?
> 
> According to wiki, it's homeowner association.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeowner_association


Except that within that article, they mention "homeowners' association". 

My HOA uses 'homeowners' association'. It's possessive because it's our association. Once the real estate entity sold off enough lots, they transferred ownership of the association to the homeowners.


----------



## H. S. St. Ours (Mar 24, 2012)

"When in doubt, leave it out."


----------



## ricola (Mar 3, 2014)

Here's my cheat:  Replace the plural possible possessive person with the word "men."  Men association.  Sounds ridiculous.  So the "s" really is possessive.  That makes it the homeowners' association.


----------



## Maggie Dana (Oct 26, 2011)

My copy editor who goes by CMoS says it's homeowners' association, so that's what I've used in my books.


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here (Apr 8, 2013)

Darn it. I thought were gonna complain about HOAs. Got my hopes up. 


Carry on.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Maggie Dana said:


> My copy editor who goes by CMoS says it's homeowners' association, so that's what I've used in my books.


+1

Always go by CMoS in fiction. This isn't journalism.

The s' form is apropos in this case because it's a group possessive form. Trouble is that journalism in general and the AP Style Book and Libel Manual have destroyed most people's perception of proper use. AP does what it does to save column inches, not to be correct usage.

It's the AP that gave rise to such faulty rules of thumb as "when in doubt, leave it out." That's AP/journalism/advertising thinking, not fiction/book publishing thinking.

I say this as a former journalist who uses AP when in that world and have won awards for my journalism.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## KL_Phelps (Nov 7, 2013)

Dang, checking in for the night and couldn't believe this thread is still alive!! And now everyone is saying it's with an s' !!!!!


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

Some editors will say it's a stylistic choice between homeowners' and homeowners, even the CMoS says that it's a preference, not a hard and fast rule. I would still choose the latter because the ' implies possession and homeowners don't own the association. In fact, if you live in a neighborhood with one, it often seems the other way around. sigh


----------



## A.C. Scott (Mar 25, 2014)

Jana DeLeon said:


> Some editors will say it's a stylistic choice between homeowners' and homeowners, even the CMoS says that it's a preference, not a hard and fast rule. I would still choose the latter because the ' implies possession and homeowners don't own the association. In fact, if you live in a neighborhood with one, it often seems the other way around. sigh


+1

I agree with this. How can a person, or persons, own an association? That doesn't make sense to me. An association is a grouping of people, so how can the people in the group own the group they belong to? What about a marriage? Would you say: The Smiths' marriage?


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

Here in Frederick, we spell it "ho moaners".


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

We're getting silly now.

Manuals of style are never intransigent, laying down hard-n-fast rules. But a preferred use is preferred for a reason and is generally considered, therefore, the better option.

But simply because a rule isn't preceded by a "Thou shalt not" or "Thou shalt always," doesn't mean it's just "do whatever you want," either.

One utilizes a Manual of Style to get a ruling. Then one abides by it, unless one has a very good reason to make an exception. Otherwise, toss the Manual of Style in the trash and burn it up good, because that's how much use it is to you if you ignore it or look for any excuse to do your own thing.

No one makes anyone use a style manual anyway!

One uses one to look professional in their presentation. If you'd rather do your own thing, do it. But then, keep in mind you might get slammed with some low-rated reviews because the book appears "unedited and/or unprofessional."

I just love how these sorts of topics go.

Someone comes in asking "which way is the right way?"

Then someone says, "According to X, this is the right way."

Then someone else pipes up and says, "Screw the rules, we're indies, we can do what we want!"

Then people pile on and start arguing about which source to pay attention to, or why one shouldn't let any source tell them what to do, and the OP?

The OP ends up just as confused, or worse, than before anyone answered their question.

So, in any of these things:

1) Only ask what's right if you want an actual answer, based on a source or authority. (CMoS, dictionary, what have you.)

2) If you get an answer, there's no need to say, "We don't have to, we're indies!" because... DUH! No one's holding a gun to anyone's head. An answer is just an answer.

3) If you want to do your own thing anyway, just do it. Why even ask what's right if all one wants to do is debate the source?

It all becomes a bit pointless after a while...

Speaking of which, I've decided to ignore all style books, dictionaries, professors, teachers, and otherwise sane people and start off all my books with a random chapter, then lay out the rest of the book with all the chapters placed in completely random order! Just imagine... you might find the final chapter, Ch. 94, about 12 chapters in! After all... it's COMPLETELY RANDOM!

It'll confuse readers, you say? It's against all common sense, you say? Narrative must flow, not jump around randomly, you say?

For every person who says that, I'm sure there will be 1-2 who say, "Wow! What a creative idea! You're indie! Go for it! Don't let anyone tell you you're wrong! I'll be first in line to buy it!"

Sales results: -5

I'll now start sending monthly payments to Amazon just to keep them from deleting that book... I just hope it doesn't turn into a runaway bestseller in reverse! I can't afford that level of success!


(NOTE: The above "random chapter order" proposal IS satire, but I trust it underlined my point.)


----------



## A.C. Scott (Mar 25, 2014)

There are lots of style guidelines, so a person shouldn't feel compelled to follow a particular one just because somebody else thinks it's the best. Obviously we can all do whatever we want, so why even bother to say that? I could write a book entirely in dingbats. 

Common sense, in my opinion, tells me that homeowners' association is wrong, and you haven't given any reason why it should be correct other than outsourcing your opinion to another source. What makes that source authoritative anyway? The fact that a lot of people use it? That doesn't mean it's correct. 

Please explain to me how an association of homeowners is possessive plural?


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

A.C. Scott said:


> There are lots of style guidelines, so a person shouldn't feel compelled to follow a particular one just because somebody else thinks it's the best. Obviously we can all do whatever we want, so why even bother to say that? I could write a book entirely in dingbats.
> 
> Common sense, in my opinion, tells me that homeowners' association is wrong, and you haven't given any reason why it should be correct other than outsourcing your opinion to another source. What makes that source authoritative anyway? The fact that a lot of people use it? That doesn't mean it's correct.
> 
> Please explain to me how an association of homeowners is possessive plural?


Yeah, I don't see where it would be possessive either. They don't own the association, they make up the association. If you say Teamsters Union Local 355, you don't make the Teamsters possessive.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Erm...in my case, the homeowners DO own the association. The real estate entity that created the neighborhood and then the HOA created it as a LLC and then once there were enough sales of lots and enough homeowners (some number that was written in to the formal docs, I don't remember how many) the real estate entity transferred ownership of the HOA to the homeowners. We are now responsible for electing board members who deal with the budget and all the fun stuff associated with an LLC and an HOA.

How it works here, anyway. YMMV. But in our case, we own the HOA. Making the possessive plural right for our situation.


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

JimJohnson said:


> How it works here, anyway. YMMV. But in our case, we own the HOA. Making the possessive plural right for our situation.


Which is exactly why CMoS says it's a preference or applicable to a specific situation. In my neighborhood, we do not own the association. It is a separate legal entity run by a board of directors and tied to the land deeds.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

A.C. Scott said:


> Common sense, in my opinion, tells me that homeowners' association is wrong, and you haven't given any reason why it should be correct other than outsourcing your opinion to another source. What makes that source authoritative anyway? The fact that a lot of people use it? That doesn't mean it's correct.


The fact that CMoS is the default standard of about 90 percent of traditional publishing. Citing a source is not weak argumentation; citing an authoritative source is actually quite responsible. It means one's response has a basis in something other than personal, subjective opinion.

Otherwise it's all just personal opinions and "correct" becomes an illusion.

And one person's "common sense" is another's nonsense.

Like I said above... if you want to do what you want simply because you want to, then do it that way. No one's forcing you to do anything or abide by any source.

Unless you want to look professional and well-edited. Then you need to rely on the same sources of authority that other professionals utilize.

For book publishing, that's CMoS. For journalism, that's the AP. For academic writing, it's generally the APA.

But when a person asks a question, I give an answer and cite a source outside of myself. Unless they're asking about my personal experience or opinion on something.

But a "what's correct" question is not a "personal experience or opinion" question. A source is required.


----------



## A.C. Scott (Mar 25, 2014)

JimJohnson said:


> Erm...in my case, the homeowners DO own the association. The real estate entity that created the neighborhood and then the HOA created it as a LLC and then once there were enough sales of lots and enough homeowners (some number that was written in to the formal docs, I don't remember how many) the real estate entity transferred ownership of the HOA to the homeowners. We are now responsible for electing board members who deal with the budget and all the fun stuff associated with an LLC and an HOA.
> 
> How it works here, anyway. YMMV. But in our case, we own the HOA. Making the possessive plural right for our situation.


Yes, in your particular case, the homeowners own the company that runs the association, but that is just syntactic trickery. You own the company, which nobody would argue should use possessive plural, the fact that the association is ugh... associated with the company is a formality. The concept of owning an association doesn't make sense. That was the point I was making.


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

JimJohnson said:


> Erm...in my case, the homeowners DO own the association. The real estate entity that created the neighborhood and then the HOA created it as a LLC and then once there were enough sales of lots and enough homeowners (some number that was written in to the formal docs, I don't remember how many) the real estate entity transferred ownership of the HOA to the homeowners. We are now responsible for electing board members who deal with the budget and all the fun stuff associated with an LLC and an HOA.
> 
> How it works here, anyway. YMMV. But in our case, we own the HOA. Making the possessive plural right for our situation.


Interesting. So it's a case-by-case basis? Do you guys get a monthly newsletter? We get one and it's not possessive. (p.s. Can we completely eliminate the singular possessive? I think we can, right?)


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Going back to the OP:

"I complained to the association."

"Which association?"

"The homeowners' association."


----------



## Rayven T. Hill (Jul 24, 2013)

In legal speak, it's homeowners association.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/528


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

vrabinec said:


> Interesting. So it's a case-by-case basis? Do you guys get a monthly newsletter? We get one and it's not possessive. (p.s. Can we completely eliminate the singular possessive? I think we can, right?)


Weekly newsletters, annual budget stuff, and regular hate-emails when the single-family homeowners do something WRONG, such as paint a fence a wrong color or don't cut their lawn grass to a sufficient height. I'm currently in a condo, so I chuckle at the weird stuff the HOA is concerned about (and the fact that they have people actually going out to MEASURE GRASS). Ridiculous.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Rayven T. Hill said:


> In legal speak, it's homeowners association.
> 
> http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/528


Good source, if writing a legal brief or contract.

If used in the context of a novel, the CMoS would be the style guide of choice, though.

The source one relies on depends so much on intended use...  Context is everything.


----------



## A.C. Scott (Mar 25, 2014)

CraigInOregon said:


> Good source, if writing a legal brief or contract.
> 
> If used in the context of a novel, the CMoS would be the style guide of choice, though.
> 
> The source one relies on depends so much on intended use...  Context is everything.


Jim, you were begging the question (literally) when you asked "who's association", which implies that it has an owner and therefore is possessive. The question doesn't make sense. In almost every other context, using possessive plural doesn't make sense for a group.

If the question here is, what does the CMoS, then the answer has already been given. If the question is about what makes sense given how the rules are supposed to be applied, then I think it's pretty clear that homeowners association appropriate. If you are talking about a corporation that runs the association and happens to be owned by the homeowners, then maybe it makes since in that one narrow usage, but it isn't obvious by that usage why that should be the case without further explanation such as Jim gave.


----------



## Mandy (Dec 27, 2009)

I love threads like this one! I start reading the thread feeling pretty confident with my opinion ('homeowners' association' is my guess, btw); but, by the end of the thread, I'm utterly confused.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 8, 2012)

ebbrown said:


> Darn it. I thought were gonna complain about HOAs. Got my hopes up.
> 
> 
> Carry on.


Me too! LOL 

Just to add my $.02, all of our old HOA paperwork has it as homeowners' association. Which to me does make sense. The association is supposed to belong to all of the homeowners in a selected area, thus making it possessive. Personally, I'd decide on a style guide and go off of that for consistency. Or you could find out what your editor uses and try to save both of you some editing time down the line.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Really, gentlemen?  Knives drawn over an apostrophe?  Let's keep it civil.  Arm wrestling competition is in the gym, on the other side  of the swimming pool, down the hall from the whine bar.  Be nice.  

I'm also seeing a major outbreak of "last-word-itis" here.  *sprays room with last-word-remover.*

Betsy
KB Moderator


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

[email protected] said:


> Me too! LOL
> 
> Just to add my $.02, all of our old HOA paperwork has it as homeowners' association. Which to me does make sense. The association is supposed to belong to all of the homeowners in a selected area, thus making it possessive. Personally, I'd decide on a style guide and go off of that for consistency. Or you could find out what your editor uses and try to save both of you some editing time down the line.


A totally reasonable approach. Making your editor's life easier when you can? They'll love you for it.

Sent from my LG G2 Android Phone.


----------

