When Is a Massachusetts HOA Rule Unenforceable?

Because Massachusetts has no general HOA statute, the enforceability of association rules in non-condo communities turns almost entirely on the recorded documents and on Massachusetts caselaw. For condos, Chapter 183A and the master deed supply the framework. In both contexts, Massachusetts applies a reasonableness standard with real teeth. For your specific situation, a licensed Massachusetts attorney is the right resource. This is general information, not legal advice.

For the general framework that applies across states (where rule power comes from, adoption, reasonableness, and federal overrides), see When Is an HOA Rule Unenforceable?.

Rules flow from authority, not preference

A Massachusetts community association's rule-making power comes from the recorded master deed/declaration and bylaws (and, for incorporated entities, from M.G.L. ch. 180). A rule has to fit within what those documents grant. A board cannot use a rule to reach a result the master deed or CC&Rs do not authorize. The recorded documents are the source of the authority — and the ceiling on it.

The reasonableness standard

Massachusetts courts apply a reasonableness standard to community association rules. A rule must be:

• Tied to authority in the recorded documents
• Reasonable in scope and effect
• Adopted under the procedure the documents require
• Applied evenhandedly across similarly situated owners

Massachusetts caselaw has invalidated rules that fail any of these tests, especially where rules are arbitrary, vague, or used selectively.

Selective enforcement

Selective enforcement is a recognized fairness problem in Massachusetts. A rule applied to one owner but not to identically situated neighbors weakens — and may defeat — enforcement against that owner. The association's own records and minutes are usually where any pattern of selective enforcement surfaces.

What can't an HOA ban in Massachusetts?

Solar and EV charging, among others. M.G.L. ch. 184, § 23C voids restrictions that "forbid or unreasonably restrict" solar energy systems, and M.G.L. ch. 183A, § 10A bars condo and homeowners' associations from prohibiting or unreasonably restricting EV charging equipment in an owner's separate-interest or exclusive-use area. Fair housing law also requires reasonable accommodations, including for assistance animals.

Some rules fail no matter how they were adopted, because higher law preempts them:

• Fair housing — the federal Fair Housing Act and Massachusetts's anti-discrimination law (M.G.L. ch. 151B) bar discrimination and require reasonable accommodations, including for assistance animals
• Display rights — the federal Freedom to Display the American Flag Act and the FCC's OTARD rule limit bans on the U.S. flag and on certain antennas and satellite dishes
• Solar — M.G.L. ch. 184, § 23C voids any covenant or restriction in an instrument concerning real property that "purports to forbid or unreasonably restrict the installation or use of a solar energy system"
• EV charging — the 2024 clean-energy law (St. 2024, c. 239, "An Act promoting a clean energy grid, advancing equity and protecting ratepayers") added M.G.L. ch. 183A, § 10A, which provides that an association "shall not prohibit or unreasonably restrict an owner from installing electric vehicle supply equipment" in an area subject to the owner's separate interest or exclusive use; if a board does not deny a properly submitted application within 60 days, it is deemed approved. The provision applies to condominium, homeowners', community, and cooperative associations alike.
• Servicemembers — the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act protects owners on active duty

A rule that collides with any of these is not saved by being in the master deed.

Can old HOA covenants expire in Massachusetts?

Some can, particularly in non-condo communities. Under M.G.L. ch. 184, § 23, restrictions "unlimited as to time" are limited to 30 years after the date of the deed or other instrument creating them, except gifts or devises for public, charitable, or religious purposes. That limit is subject to the extension and benefit rules in the surrounding sections.

For non-condo communities in particular, Massachusetts caps how long a time-unlimited restriction on land can be enforced. Under M.G.L. ch. 184, § 23, "conditions or restrictions, unlimited as to time, by which the title or use of real property is affected, shall be limited to the term of thirty years after the date of the deed or other instrument . . . creating them," with exceptions for gifts or devises for public, charitable, or religious purposes. A restriction that does not state an express term and is otherwise unlimited in time can therefore become unenforceable 30 years after the instrument that created it (subject to the extension and benefit rules in the surrounding sections). Whether a particular covenant has expired under § 23 is a fact-specific question for a licensed Massachusetts attorney.

What people generally do

Steps owners questioning a Massachusetts rule commonly take:

• Tracing the rule back to the specific master deed/CC&R or bylaw provision that authorizes it is a common first step
• Many owners confirm the rule was adopted in accordance with the bylaws' own procedure
• Gathering evidence of how the rule has been enforced against others creates a record
• Framing the challenge in terms of the Massachusetts reasonableness standard is a common approach
• Before a disputed fine feeds the association's lien, a licensed Massachusetts attorney is the right resource

Sources

• M.G.L. ch. 183A — Massachusetts Condominium Act
• M.G.L. ch. 180 — Nonprofit corporation law
• M.G.L. ch. 151B — Anti-discrimination law
• M.G.L. ch. 184, § 23C — Solar energy systems; restrictive provisions void
• M.G.L. ch. 183A, § 10A — Installation of electric vehicle supply equipment
• St. 2024, c. 239 — An Act promoting a clean energy grid
• M.G.L. ch. 184, § 23 — Conditions or restrictions; term of years