Hunting or Fish Camp Co-op rules

[timberland]

I am creating a co-op of 6 guys to buy a cabin in a campground. there will be one "major share" owner. we are setting up rules for maintenance and use. some of the things we need to organize is how to schedule weeks of use, how to handle it if someone wants out (i.e. sell their share), protect it from death and divorce, etc.
One of the items we discussed is that the share owner must be present if any guests use the cabin, for example.

for those that have done this, what are some things that you wish you would have put in writing at the onset?

what are some things that you didn't see coming that caused strife in the group?

I don't want to get buried in a bunch of legal stuff, but have an open dialogue with everyone in the group so we are all on the same page.

 

[Ucsdryder]

Good luck! No advice other than have someone pay for it all then lease to others. Always seems to go better that way!

If that’s not an option make some very clear “outs”, voluntary and involuntary. Imagine worst case scenario and plan accordingly.

 

[Weldor]

Don't forget the maintenance, There is always things that need to replaced or repaired. Always good to put the obligations in writing, so owner doesn't end up doing it all or a majority of it. A new septic can cost plenty etc.

 

[mikkel318]

We've written up a similar agreement using ChatGPT and then modifying it to our situation. It's surprisingly good. Just enter your parameters and start with a prompt like: "Write an ownership agreement for a multi-owner cabin with..... and fill in what you just put"

 

[ben h]

I'm wrestling with something similar. My family built a family cabin which my dad paid for, but my brothers and I built. There are 6 kids myself included that will own it when my parents pass. They're in their 80's and don't use it much themselves anymore. I'm proposing the siblings just go ahead and take ownership responsibilities now as I don't see the point of waiting there. Some of the siblings use it very frequently and others not so much. The vast majority of the expenses are independent of use such as taxes, insurance, HOA fees, and most maintenance. Other costs are directly tied to use such as utilities, wear and tear, household incidentals etc. I'm in favor of splitting the fixed costs according to ownership and then having use costs in addition to that. We have a calendar that we schedule weeks that people want a private reservation that have a limit of 1 week from Memorial-Labor day and 1 week for the balance of the year. If it's not a private reservation anyone can go whenever they want.

I suspect some of my siblings won't want to be an owner and will just want their share of the value. In this event we'll get an appraisal and the remaining members will buy them out. If we don't agree with the appraised value, I'm proposing we list it for sale with 1st right of refusal to the remaining members to match. I suspect we'll have to do the latter because there are so few comparable sales in the area the appraised value will have a wild margin, i.e. could be $600k or could be $1.5M and neither one would be "wrong", but who knows what it would sell for.

 

[Sccritterkiller]

Good luck! No advice other than have someone pay for it all then lease to others. Always seems to go better that way!

This. People and their situations change you have to be able to send someone off the island as easy as possible.

I just went thru this in the end the easiest solution was for me just to buy the property.

 

[GSPHUNTER]

I have always had the same rules, and so far they work just great. Rule #1, do as I say, rule #2, see rule #1. When ever more than two people are involved, someone has to be in charge.

 

[RS3579]

Get it incorporated. If not you’re screwed. It’s not worth the hassle. Can’t please everyone. Trust me. I’m in one and it’s trouble. FYI. Don’t include WOMEN! That’s the downfall!

 

[GSPHUNTER]

Get it incorporated. If not you’re screwed. It’s not worth the hassle. Can’t please everyone. Trust me. I’m in one and it’s trouble. FYI. Don’t include WOMEN! That’s the downfall!

That^

 

[TSAMP]

Splitting things makes sense when its 2 or 3 close friends and the amount makes sense that you wont care if it all goes belly up. I did it with a mud boat and a wall tent. I can't imagine 6 guys who I like enough or trust enough to make your scenario work. The fact you feel you need to do the legal write up makes sense given the likely dollar amount your working with, but I'd also take it as a sign to Simplify the scenario and have 1 or 2 buyers max as mentioned above.

 

[CorbLand]

How good of friends are you with these guys and are you willing to lose the friendship?

Like suggested above, I would look at one person buying it and renting it to the others. This makes it so one person is in control and responsible.

Maintenance costs add up and what happens when one person doesnt pay up? Can the others foot the entire bill or are you going to have a cabin that no one can use because the septic doesn't work? Those are the kind of questions I would be asking and thinking about.

We have a family cabin and it worked great until everyone started having kids of their own and people got older and made more money. Once all the grandkids starting using it, the aunts and uncles started to complain about how much it was getting used and the extra wear and tear. Then income disparities started to happen and those with more money wanted to do updates that others couldn't afford to help with. It started to cause problems to the level that the two with money bought there own and left the others to foot the bill.

Just some things to think about.

 

[timberland]

All great input and much appreciated. To add more info, the major shareholder is fronting about $20,000, and the secondaries about $3,000, so not a lot of money invested. also, its in a campground with an annual fee for utilities and external maintenance like yard and driveway, so I would assume this would limit the amount of upgrades one would want to invest in.

I like the idea of setting limits on duration of stay and number of uses, I have seen people get butt hurt because one of their partners used the cabin way more (due to location and convenience) even though they were paying the same.

How about the sharing aspect? Anybody have partners that took advantage of the others unfairly? i figured if I leave ketchup or beer in the fridge its there for the others to share.

 

[WCB]

Terrible idea...Have a couple primary owners and lease/rent it out to the others. Our hunting place in ND used to be owned by 4 people, my dad, uncle and two of their friends. There is always a guy or two or their kids that use it that don't pull their weight. When that became way to obvious to avoid friendship got strained so my dad, uncle and one of their buddies just wrote out a check to the 4th guy and bought him out (it was written in the agreement majority ruled but would have to pay you out).

As far as sharing...fridge is too be cleaned out upon leaving. Anything left in freezers/fridge is fair game. This is where it gets tricky with more people. What happens when one or two guys leave stuff and the others just take...etc.

Everyone is going to want certain weekends/holidays and rotating is B.S. take 4th of July. 6 "owners" so you can go there once every 6 yrs? The share holder having to be there is 100% needed...otherwise guest without accompanying share holder pay for their stay, unless otherwise agreed upon by all shareholders. As far as guys using it more than others...if the weekend is open and no one is there who cares as long as that person that uses it more realizes it and pitches in with restocking toilet paper, paper plates, dish soap etc.

That is one thing in our ND place that gets frustrating is the one owners son uses it more than anybody which in itself is fine...but when he is there 3 weekends in a row and doesn't change the air filter, fix a broken float in a toilet, weed eat around the house and garage, fix the front door so it locks properly...etc, it gets frustrating. I use it probably the least (basically now it is My dad and his buddy that own it and myself and the other guys son use it when we please). So when I go out there for a long weekend I'm the type that fixes the crap and pays for it (which is fine I use the place and help out any way possible) and uses up 1/2 a day or more doing basic stuff that should take an hour here or there. I also ask "what do we need out there" any time I go out there.

If it is only $3000 per share other than the main guy...just cut most the other people out and have two guys pay the rest. More share, more money, more feeling of ownership and easier to agree and get stuff done. No idea why guys want to get involved with a large group whether is a hunt or an investment.

 

[CorbLand]

All great input and much appreciated. To add more info, the major shareholder is fronting about $20,000, and the secondaries about $3,000, so not a lot of money invested. also, its in a campground with an annual fee for utilities and external maintenance like yard and driveway, so I would assume this would limit the amount of upgrades one would want to invest in.

I like the idea of setting limits on duration of stay and number of uses, I have seen people get butt hurt because one of their partners used the cabin way more (due to location and convenience) even though they were paying the same.

How about the sharing aspect? Anybody have partners that took advantage of the others unfairly? i figured if I leave ketchup or beer in the fridge its there for the others to share.

Just sharing the experiences we have with ours.

It doesn't have to be big upgrades. Our cabin is set up as basically a place to eat, sleep and shower. It sleeps 15 or so people. One of the cousins started to complain that the mattresses sucked (they weren't great but they beat the floor) so the one uncle wanted to replace the mattresses in the place. That adds up when you talking 8 to 10 beds. The stove wasn't the greatest but it worked, but someone complained about that so we got a new stove.

Things like that really do add up and arent things people think about. The problem comes in when people have two different ideas of what the cabin should be. Some people go on vacation to not have to deal with things (like fix things) some dont mind doing those things. The least amount of people involved the better.

 

[GSPHUNTER]

My most important rules is, trust nobody.

 

[NRA4LIFE]

I just went through this with some property I co-own (It was given to me by my dad) in N. WI with 6 others, mostly relatives. All I can say is this is a bad idea. I hate to say this but a lawyer may have to be involved. Make damned sure you cover yourself for liability insurance. We put in place a system where any non-owner who uses the cabin, has to sign a waiver for insurance purposes. This includes wives, children, friends, etc. A concise, legal set of by-laws should be executed as well, making sure every owner knows the rules.

 

[VernAK]

Be sure a members share doesn't transfer to his family upon the members death without consent of other members. Members family should not have access to the cabin without member present.

 

[wyosteve]

Agree with those that say it's a bad idea. Trouble just waiting to happen as others have described. In my experience, you will run into one or more of the 'owners' who just don't have the money when it comes time to pay their share of maintenance, taxes, etc. Trying to collect in some fashion is likely to cause hard feelings at a minimum and ruined friendships are likely. I did it once with just one partner in a boat and it didn't work well.

 

[displacedtexan]

What we've used in partnership contracts is thst if we can't decide unanimously, a game of chance decides (roll of dice usually.)

Removes the "told you so" and animosity of minority votes. Cuts back on arguments too

The majority share changes that, but maybe for the 5 minority?

 

[Sccritterkiller]

Be sure a members share doesn't transfer to his family upon the members death without consent of other members. Members family should not have access to the cabin without member present.

Or divorce...know a guy lost his share of a hunting camp in a divorce...luckily she sold it back to the original group for pennies on the dollar...she didn't want it, she just didn't want him to have it.