Stranger
moves into foreclosed home, citing little-knownTexas law |
|||
|
scream-of-consciousness; "If you're trying to change minds and influence people it's probably not a good idea to say that virtually all elected Democrats are liars, but what the hell."
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Don't Know Squat?
"If the number of Islamic terror attacks continues at the current rate, candlelight vigils will soon be the number-one cause of global warming. " |
This will be the comment box |
12 comments:
-
-
Good for him. I hope it works out.
- 7/19/11, 9:40 AM
-
-
Expect more of this in places where the market was overbuilt. There is a reason why adverse possession exists.
Casca - 7/19/11, 9:41 AM
-
-
So you go to your hunting cabin that you haven't been to since the last hunting season, someone is living there. Still live the concept of adverse possession?
- 7/19/11, 10:58 AM
-
-
Sorry, should be:
Still like the concept of adverse possession? - 7/19/11, 10:59 AM
- Kristophr said...
-
Adverse possession was created to settle issues like fences and buildings being accidentally built with a corner or such sticking over the property line.
The best way to fix such issues is to catch them in time and to just settle with a paid-for easement.
This guy is a slug.
The bank should contract with the former owner to formally trade debt for the property so they can pay a neighbor to guard the house and shoot this asshole. - 7/19/11, 11:19 AM
-
-
There certainly are a lot of hard-hearted souls around here. The place was sitting empty, abandoned by the note holder, and the previous owner of record. I suppose you'd rather that it go to the courthouse steps to be auctioned for taxes at some point? As the police point out, if he didn't break in, it's a civil matter. I should think that the neighbors would be happy that someone is mowing the lawn and keeping the local meth lords from turning it into a lab.
Casca - 7/19/11, 12:08 PM
-
-
Steve in Cal that i9s a red herring; said vacation cabin is not abandoned nor foreclosed upon. It would be a B&E and the sheriff would be involved.
- 7/19/11, 2:44 PM
-
-
No, Steve_in_CA. If someone is on your property and you don't want them there, you can get the sheriff/courts to evict them. In the case in TX, neither the original homeowner or the bank seem to care. There is no one with standing to sign the eviction papers.
And it's a three year period in TX so if you go back to your cabin year after year, you are preventing adverse possession of your cabin. - 7/19/11, 2:48 PM
-
-
Casca: Certainly see what you mean, but to me it's a slippery slope issue. Can't find them at the moment, but I remember a couple months ago a spate of articles about 'squatters' essentially stealing houses from people who leave to go to the store in Britain, and the court picking the side of the squatters; ultimately, if we allow this sort of thing to happen, that's where it goes.
I do agree there should be some sort of process for legally acquiring abandoned property, but I don't really know if this is the way to go for that. - 7/19/11, 5:06 PM
-
-
I live in Texas. Here's what needs to happen. Neighbors/Necktie Party/End of Story/+Teachable Moment
You allow some "smart f*ck" to game the system and the next thing you know the house next door goes Section 8. A $300K house in that Dallas burb is a pretty nice place and 99.999% of the homeowners had to work their asses off to get there. I guarantee you, if I were his neighbor I'd f**k up his world. Ok, f*c* it. I feel better now. - 7/19/11, 7:31 PM
-
- This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
- 7/19/11, 7:35 PM
- Kristophr said...
-
I-RIGHT-I
Do keep it legal. Rodge doesn't need federal or state attention for a blog post.
If you want to literally go to war with the .gov, do it on yer own blog.
Just sayin'. - 7/20/11, 2:06 PM