> Hmmmm. Now it's not illegal for Mexicans to move into your home and
> call it their own -- the logical next step to invading our country and
> claiming there's nothing illegal about it.
> Colo. Family Tries to Regain Home From Occupiers
> Dayna Donovan was in for a surprise when she learned two strangers had
> been living in her Littleton, Colo., home for eight months. They still
> haven't moved out despite a judge's ruling they had to be out by the
> weekend.
> On Thursday, a judge in Arapahoe County ruled that Veronica
> Fernandez-Beleta and Jose Rafael Leyva-Caraveo, the two people who were
> living in the home, had to move out by Saturday morning. But as of
> Monday evening, Donovan, 43, said the two were still there.
> Her husband, Troy, 45, filed for a forced eviction with the Arapahoe
> County Sheriff's office on Monday morning, and the actual eviction could
> take place anywhere from two to four weeks from the date of filing.
> "With any luck, the occupants will just move out and not damage the
> home," Dayna Donovan said. "I would rather not have to incur any more
> expenses and also risk them trying to accuse us of damaging or stealing
> any of their belongings during the eviction."
> In the meantime, the Donovans and their two young daughters are staying
> in the basement of a relative's house in Greeley, about 65 miles away.
> They say they can't afford an attorney and have struggled to come up
> with $500 in court filing fees and gas for driving to the clerk's office
> throughout the legal process.
> It all started last August when the Donovans moved to Indiana with their
> two children. Both were unemployed at the time and two months behind on
> their mortgage payments. They decided to relocate because Troy had a
> temporary job with a race team. Donovan said she left their home of more
> than 13 years locked and ready for the cold Colorado winter.
> Fernandez-Beleta and Levya-Caraveo could not be reached for comment.
> Their attorney, Douglas Romero, of the Colorado Christian Defense
> Counsel, declined to comment on their behalf.
> In March, Donovan said she had a "premonition" something was wrong with
> the home. She and her husband called a neighbor and learned someone had
> been living there since the winter.
> When the couple called the police to check up on the home, the two
> occupiers showed paperwork from the Arapahoe County Clerk and Recorder
> with an affidavit of "adverse possession," their names and the Donovan's
> address written on it. The two said they bought the home from a real
> estate agent for $5,000.
> "I am sad and confused and distressed," Fernandez-Beleta told Denver
> station CBS4 in Spanish.
> The law of adverse possession varies from state to state. In Colorado,
> adverse possessors who stake their claim to a piece of land for 18 years
> without dispute may be able to become owners of it, according to Willis
> Carpenter, a real estate attorney in Denver who is not involved in the case.
> Since the recession, reports of squatters staking their claim to a
> foreclosed or abandoned home flooded headlines, and instructional guides
> popped up online about how to file paperwork for adverse possessions.
> Carpenter said the police won't usually get involved because it's a
> civil, not a criminal matter. However, Donovan and her husband were
> ordered to stay 100 yards away from their home after Fernandez-Beleta
> and Levya-Caraveo requested temporary restraining orders. The orders
> were issued on July 3.
> Carpenter said the real estate agent who sold the home for $5,000
> defrauded the buyers.
> (Who is the real estate agent? I'll bet they have a Spanish surname and
> the media doesn't want you to know that.)
> "Anybody that told Fernandez-Beleta and Levya-Caraveo they could have
> that home for $5,000 by adverse possession, that's obviously fraud," he
> said.
> The minimum amount of time for an adverse possessor to have legal
> ownership of a home can be shortened to seven years, if the occupier has
> a deed to the property and has been paying property taxes.
> Most states have at least a five-year requirement for adverse
> possession, said Carpenter.
> "Many states require 20 years or somewhere in between," Carpenter said,
> adding that most people use the law to claim a strip of land or a field,
> say, in dispute with a neighbor.
> "It sounds like none of this comes close to that," Geoffrey Anderson, a
> real estate attorney in Denver not involved in the case, said of the
> people occupying the Donovan's home.
> Donovan said she suspects a real estate agent targeted her home because
> it was briefly on the market last year.
> On Monday, she applied for legal help from Colorado Legal Services.
> Donovan starts a temporary job near her home in Littleton next week and
> said she hopes she can move back into her home by then to cut commute
> time and costs. She and her husband have struggled to find jobs in the
> small town where they are staying temporarily. They are also dealing
> with their mortgage company, because they are about $20,000 behind on
> their house payments, the last of which was made in June 2011.
> "People who are even on an extended vacation need to be aware of this
> situation because once someone illegally occupies your home, you can't
> just have the cops arrest them," because they need to be caught in the
> act of breaking in and entering, Donovan said.
> "It's just been a nightmare," she said. "We just want to get settled and
> try to get on with our life."
"A good illegal alien is a dead illegal alien". No crime, no filth, no
decay, no
anchor brats. Deport them all.
walt tonne <tonnewalt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hmmmm. Now it's not illegal for Mexicans to move into your home and
>> call it their own -- the logical next step to invading our country and
>> claiming there's nothing illegal about it.
>> Colo. Family Tries to Regain Home From Occupiers
>> Carpenter said the police won't usually get involved because it's a
>> civil, not a criminal matter. However, Donovan and her husband were
>> ordered to stay 100 yards away from their home after Fernandez-Beleta
>> and Levya-Caraveo requested temporary restraining orders. The orders
>> were issued on July 3.
>> "People who are even on an extended vacation need to be aware of this
>> situation because once someone illegally occupies your home, you can't
>> just have the cops arrest them," because they need to be caught in the
>> act of breaking in and entering, Donovan said.
This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
So you go to work and come home in the afternoon to find someone sitting on
your sofa, eating your food and watching your TV, but you can't have him
arrested or even kicked out of your home because you didn't happen to catch
him in the actual act of breaking through the door or window? I guess if
it's nighttime and you sleep through the initial break-in and oly wake up
in time to find someone lurking in your home, you just have o hand over
your home to the burglar and go get a lawyer because it's now a civil
matter? Idiotic.
"BTR1701" <address...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> walt tonne <tonnewalt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hmmmm. Now it's not illegal for Mexicans to move into your home and
>>> call it their own -- the logical next step to invading our country and
>>> claiming there's nothing illegal about it.
>>> Colo. Family Tries to Regain Home From Occupiers
>>> Carpenter said the police won't usually get involved because it's a
>>> civil, not a criminal matter. However, Donovan and her husband were
>>> ordered to stay 100 yards away from their home after Fernandez-Beleta
>>> and Levya-Caraveo requested temporary restraining orders. The orders
>>> were issued on July 3.
>>> "People who are even on an extended vacation need to be aware of this
>>> situation because once someone illegally occupies your home, you can't
>>> just have the cops arrest them," because they need to be caught in the
>>> act of breaking in and entering, Donovan said.
> This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
Note that it isn't a comment coming from a legal scholar, but a confused homeless person.
> So you go to work and come home in the afternoon to find someone sitting > on
> your sofa, eating your food and watching your TV, but you can't have him
> arrested or even kicked out of your home because you didn't happen to > catch
> him in the actual act of breaking through the door or window? I guess if
> it's nighttime and you sleep through the initial break-in and oly wake up
> in time to find someone lurking in your home, you just have o hand over
> your home to the burglar and go get a lawyer because it's now a civil
> matter? Idiotic.
The scenario is ridiculous on both sides. On one side you have some scam artists that moved into a house they don't own (and yes, I think it likely that they were in cahoots with the 'real estate agent' that 'sold' them the house). If you buy something from someone that didn't own it, you should have very little right to maintain possession and that extends to this 'adverse possession' scenario since the property had not been abandoned for decades...or at all since a homeowner abandoning a property actually means that ownership reverts back to the bank, not any random 'adverse possessor'. Meanwhile, the 'real home owners' haven't made any payment on this property in a long time (year), have no equity, and are only in theory going to try and make some payment in the future (based upon a soon to come part time job?). They shouldn't have much more claim to it property at this point than these 'squatters'. The *real owner* of the property is the bank and the bank should be working actively to remove both sets of 'squatters' from their property.
BTR1701 <address...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> walt tonne <tonnewalt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hmmmm. Now it's not illegal for Mexicans to move into your home and
> >> call it their own -- the logical next step to invading our country and
> >> claiming there's nothing illegal about it.
> >> Colo. Family Tries to Regain Home From Occupiers
> >> Carpenter said the police won't usually get involved because it's a
> >> civil, not a criminal matter. However, Donovan and her husband were
> >> ordered to stay 100 yards away from their home after Fernandez-Beleta
> >> and Levya-Caraveo requested temporary restraining orders. The orders
> >> were issued on July 3.
> >> "People who are even on an extended vacation need to be aware of this
> >> situation because once someone illegally occupies your home, you can't
> >> just have the cops arrest them," because they need to be caught in the
> >> act of breaking in and entering, Donovan said.
> This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
> So you go to work and come home in the afternoon to find someone sitting on
> your sofa, eating your food and watching your TV, but you can't have him
> arrested or even kicked out of your home because you didn't happen to catch
> him in the actual act of breaking through the door or window? I guess if
> it's nighttime and you sleep through the initial break-in and oly wake up
> in time to find someone lurking in your home, you just have o hand over
> your home to the burglar and go get a lawyer because it's now a civil
> matter? Idiotic.
True story of life in Scottsdale: Friend of mine (also neighbor) had noticed stuff was getting moved around for awhile but we couldn't figure out how or why. One day she sent her assistant to her house during the day to pick something up. Assistant comes back and says "did you know your friend Bill is in your house?" (No, she didn't). She goes over and it turns out that Bill is homeless and, having procured a key, living in her house during the day and going someplace else at night and ... had no intention of stopping. She calls the cops. Cops show up and Bill says "oh, no, I live here, she's just mad at me" Cops go next door and the neighbors say "oh, sure, that guy has been there for weeks" so the cops come back and yell at her for crying burglar over a domestic dispute and just LEAVE HERE THERE WITH THE INTRUDER. So she changed the locks and I'd go by and make sure he wasn't there periodically while she was at work.
Weeks later he calls and says he has some stuff of hers he wants to return and she says 'come on over' (I hit the roof) and he - I swear - shows up at her door completely decked out in her clothes ...
-- "Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
"anim8rFSK" <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> True story of life in Scottsdale: Friend of mine (also neighbor) had
> noticed stuff was getting moved around for awhile but we couldn't figure
> out how or why. One day she sent her assistant to her house during the
> day to pick something up. Assistant comes back and says "did you know
> your friend Bill is in your house?" (No, she didn't). She goes over and
> it turns out that Bill is homeless and, having procured a key, living in
> her house during the day and going someplace else at night and ... had
> no intention of stopping. She calls the cops. Cops show up and Bill
> says "oh, no, I live here, she's just mad at me" Cops go next door and
> the neighbors say "oh, sure, that guy has been there for weeks" so the
> cops come back and yell at her for crying burglar over a domestic
> dispute and just LEAVE HERE THERE WITH THE INTRUDER. So she changed the
> locks and I'd go by and make sure he wasn't there periodically while she
> was at work.
> Weeks later he calls and says he has some stuff of hers he wants to
> return and she says 'come on over' (I hit the roof) and he - I swear -
> shows up at her door completely decked out in her clothes ...
This would make a good pilot episode for a situation comedy. Now just add in a couple of kids and a weird grandpa that all like the new guy (and think he would make a great new husband for her) and you have a hit TV series.
> > >> Hmmmm. Now it's not illegal for Mexicans to move into your home and
> > >> call it their own -- the logical next step to invading our country and
> > >> claiming there's nothing illegal about it.
> > >> Colo. Family Tries to Regain Home From Occupiers
> > >> Carpenter said the police won't usually get involved because it's a
> > >> civil, not a criminal matter. However, Donovan and her husband were
> > >> ordered to stay 100 yards away from their home after Fernandez-Beleta
> > >> and Levya-Caraveo requested temporary restraining orders. The orders
> > >> were issued on July 3.
> > >> "People who are even on an extended vacation need to be aware of this
> > >> situation because once someone illegally occupies your home, you can't
> > >> just have the cops arrest them," because they need to be caught in the
> > >> act of breaking in and entering, Donovan said.
> > This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
> > So you go to work and come home in the afternoon to find someone sitting on
> > your sofa, eating your food and watching your TV, but you can't have him
> > arrested or even kicked out of your home because you didn't happen to catch
> > him in the actual act of breaking through the door or window? I guess if
> > it's nighttime and you sleep through the initial break-in and only wake up
> > in time to find someone lurking in your home, you just have to hand over
> > your home to the burglar and go get a lawyer because it's now a civil
> > matter? Idiotic.
> True story of life in Scottsdale: Friend of mine (also neighbor) had > noticed stuff was getting moved around for awhile but we couldn't figure > out how or why. One day she sent her assistant to her house during the > day to pick something up. Assistant comes back and says "did you know > your friend Bill is in your house?" (No, she didn't). She goes over and > it turns out that Bill is homeless and, having procured a key, living in > her house during the day and going someplace else at night and ... had > no intention of stopping. She calls the cops. Cops show up and Bill > says "oh, no, I live here, she's just mad at me" Cops go next door and > the neighbors say "oh, sure, that guy has been there for weeks" so the > cops come back and yell at her for crying burglar over a domestic > dispute and just LEAVE HERE THERE WITH THE INTRUDER.
Sounds like the department narrowly dodged a huge bullet there.
> > > >> Hmmmm. Now it's not illegal for Mexicans to move into your home and
> > > >> call it their own -- the logical next step to invading our country and
> > > >> claiming there's nothing illegal about it.
> > > >> Colo. Family Tries to Regain Home From Occupiers
> > > >> Carpenter said the police won't usually get involved because it's a
> > > >> civil, not a criminal matter. However, Donovan and her husband were
> > > >> ordered to stay 100 yards away from their home after Fernandez-Beleta
> > > >> and Levya-Caraveo requested temporary restraining orders. The orders
> > > >> were issued on July 3.
> > > >> "People who are even on an extended vacation need to be aware of this
> > > >> situation because once someone illegally occupies your home, you can't
> > > >> just have the cops arrest them," because they need to be caught in the
> > > >> act of breaking in and entering, Donovan said.
> > > This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
> > > So you go to work and come home in the afternoon to find someone sitting > > > on
> > > your sofa, eating your food and watching your TV, but you can't have him
> > > arrested or even kicked out of your home because you didn't happen to > > > catch
> > > him in the actual act of breaking through the door or window? I guess if
> > > it's nighttime and you sleep through the initial break-in and only wake > > > up
> > > in time to find someone lurking in your home, you just have to hand over
> > > your home to the burglar and go get a lawyer because it's now a civil
> > > matter? Idiotic.
> > True story of life in Scottsdale: Friend of mine (also neighbor) had > > noticed stuff was getting moved around for awhile but we couldn't figure > > out how or why. One day she sent her assistant to her house during the > > day to pick something up. Assistant comes back and says "did you know > > your friend Bill is in your house?" (No, she didn't). She goes over and > > it turns out that Bill is homeless and, having procured a key, living in > > her house during the day and going someplace else at night and ... had > > no intention of stopping. She calls the cops. Cops show up and Bill > > says "oh, no, I live here, she's just mad at me" Cops go next door and > > the neighbors say "oh, sure, that guy has been there for weeks" so the > > cops come back and yell at her for crying burglar over a domestic > > dispute and just LEAVE HERE THERE WITH THE INTRUDER.
> Sounds like the department narrowly dodged a huge bullet there.
Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the guy HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops routinely just leave them both in place?
-- "Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
In article <anim8rfsk-033D17.23220118072...@news.easynews.com>,
anim8rFSK <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the guy > HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops > routinely just leave them both in place?
No, they don't -- or, rather, good cops don't. If the story is true,
these guys just blew the whole thing off. Bad, bad, bad, no matter
what.
>> Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the guy >> HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops >> routinely just leave them both in place?
>No, they don't -- or, rather, good cops don't. If the story is true,
>these guys just blew the whole thing off. Bad, bad, bad, no matter
>what.
With the Stand Your Ground laws the occupiers are lucky they weren't
shot by the real home owners. They may have some document from a
phoney real estate agent but they should have known something was up
when they saw everything still in the house including clothes and
possibly even a vehicle or two.
>>> Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the guy
>>> HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops
>>> routinely just leave them both in place?
>>No, they don't -- or, rather, good cops don't. If the story is true,
>>these guys just blew the whole thing off. Bad, bad, bad, no matter
>>what.
> With the Stand Your Ground laws the occupiers are lucky they weren't
> shot by the real home owners. They may have some document from a
> phoney real estate agent but they should have known something was up
> when they saw everything still in the house including clothes and
> possibly even a vehicle or two.
The owners had moved out (abandoned) the house, so I doubt they left many personal items behind. That being said, people that stop paying mortgage/rent often leave a surprising amount of stuff behind so it isn't that rare to have to shovel out the last tenants garbage before moving in..
>>>> Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the guy
>>>> HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops
>>>> routinely just leave them both in place?
>>>No, they don't -- or, rather, good cops don't. If the story is true,
>>>these guys just blew the whole thing off. Bad, bad, bad, no matter
>>>what.
>> With the Stand Your Ground laws the occupiers are lucky they weren't
>> shot by the real home owners. They may have some document from a
>> phoney real estate agent but they should have known something was up
>> when they saw everything still in the house including clothes and
>> possibly even a vehicle or two.
>The owners had moved out (abandoned) the house, so I doubt they left many >personal items behind. That being said, people that stop paying >mortgage/rent often leave a surprising amount of stuff behind so it isn't >that rare to have to shovel out the last tenants garbage before moving in..
They had moved out? I thought they had just gone on vacation?
In article <190720120845252140%bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid>,
Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
> In article <anim8rfsk-033D17.23220118072...@news.easynews.com>,
> anim8rFSK <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> > Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the guy > > HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops > > routinely just leave them both in place?
> No, they don't -- or, rather, good cops don't. If the story is true,
> these guys just blew the whole thing off. Bad, bad, bad, no matter
> what.
I should note that usually the Scottsdale cops are a pleasure to deal with.
-- "Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
> >> Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the guy > >> HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops > >> routinely just leave them both in place?
> >No, they don't -- or, rather, good cops don't. If the story is true,
> >these guys just blew the whole thing off. Bad, bad, bad, no matter
> >what.
> With the Stand Your Ground laws the occupiers are lucky they weren't
> shot by the real home owners. They may have some document from a
> phoney real estate agent but they should have known something was up
> when they saw everything still in the house including clothes and
> possibly even a vehicle or two.
They should have known something was up that they 'bought' a house for $5k.
-- "Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
>>>>> Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the >>>>> guy
>>>>> HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops
>>>>> routinely just leave them both in place?
>>>>No, they don't -- or, rather, good cops don't. If the story is true,
>>>>these guys just blew the whole thing off. Bad, bad, bad, no matter
>>>>what.
>>> With the Stand Your Ground laws the occupiers are lucky they weren't
>>> shot by the real home owners. They may have some document from a
>>> phoney real estate agent but they should have known something was up
>>> when they saw everything still in the house including clothes and
>>> possibly even a vehicle or two.
>>The owners had moved out (abandoned) the house, so I doubt they left many
>>personal items behind. That being said, people that stop paying
>>mortgage/rent often leave a surprising amount of stuff behind so it isn't
>>that rare to have to shovel out the last tenants garbage before moving >>in..
> They had moved out? I thought they had just gone on vacation?
From the news article I read the owners had stopped paying the mortgage. After 2 months they moved out (out of state) because they needed someone to live off of while trying to get back on their feet (guy got a temp/parttime job with an auto race team). Four or five months later they called a neighbor and found out someone was living in their home. At that point, they got annoyed because if someone is able to live in the home for free it should be them, right? Unfortunately, the whackadoo religious whatnots in the home know how to work the system so they actually managed to get restraining orders against the home owners. Police are calling the whole thing a civil matter, so they won't arrest anyone. The home owners now have an eviction notice against the squatters, but the squatters still haven't moved out. Apparently the sheriff's office will do something to forcibly remove them in the next month. The squatters 'bought the home' (scam) under the guidelines of 'adverse possession' which requires a person to live in a home (or on land) for 18 years without complaint before actual ownership transfers. Clearly, they have no standing and should be booted off the property.
> In article <3j4g08ldacgsgutf3s73543qn18rh19...@4ax.com>,
> shawn <nanoflo...@gNOTmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 08:45:25 -0400, Professor Bubba
>> <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
>>> In article <anim8rfsk-033D17.23220118072...@news.easynews.com>,
>>> anim8rFSK <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the guy
>>>> HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops
>>>> routinely just leave them both in place?
>>> No, they don't -- or, rather, good cops don't. If the story is true,
>>> these guys just blew the whole thing off. Bad, bad, bad, no matter
>>> what.
>> With the Stand Your Ground laws the occupiers are lucky they weren't
>> shot by the real home owners. They may have some document from a
>> phoney real estate agent but they should have known something was up
>> when they saw everything still in the house including clothes and
>> possibly even a vehicle or two.
> They should have known something was up that they 'bought' a house for
> $5k.
Foreclosed homes have sold for less than that recently.
> >> Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the guy > >> HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops > >> routinely just leave them both in place?
> >No, they don't -- or, rather, good cops don't. If the story is true,
> >these guys just blew the whole thing off. Bad, bad, bad, no matter
> >what.
> With the Stand Your Ground laws the occupiers are lucky they weren't
> shot by the real home owners. They may have some document from a
> phoney real estate agent but they should have known something was up
> when they saw everything still in the house including clothes and
> possibly even a vehicle or two.
Exactly. The idea that these home invaders were 'innocent buyers' is ridiculous.
> >>> Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the guy
> >>> HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops
> >>> routinely just leave them both in place?
> >>No, they don't -- or, rather, good cops don't. If the story is true,
> >>these guys just blew the whole thing off. Bad, bad, bad, no matter
> >>what.
> > With the Stand Your Ground laws the occupiers are lucky they weren't
> > shot by the real home owners. They may have some document from a
> > phoney real estate agent but they should have known something was up
> > when they saw everything still in the house including clothes and
> > possibly even a vehicle or two.
> The owners had moved out (abandoned) the house, so I doubt they left many > personal items behind. That being said, people that stop paying > mortgage/rent often leave a surprising amount of stuff behind so it isn't > that rare to have to shovel out the last tenants garbage before moving in..
I guess them's the breaks of being an illegal home invader. You don't always get the place just the way you like it.
anim8rFSK <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> In article <190720120845252140%bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid>,
> Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
> > In article <anim8rfsk-033D17.23220118072...@news.easynews.com>,
> > anim8rFSK <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> > > Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the guy > > > HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops > > > routinely just leave them both in place?
> > No, they don't -- or, rather, good cops don't. If the story is true,
> > these guys just blew the whole thing off. Bad, bad, bad, no matter
> > what.
> I should note that usually the Scottsdale cops are a pleasure to deal > with.
> >>>> Yeah. Can that actually be standard practice? I mean, suppose the guy
> >>>> HAD lived there. If one occupant calls 911 on the other, do the cops
> >>>> routinely just leave them both in place?
> >>>No, they don't -- or, rather, good cops don't. If the story is true,
> >>>these guys just blew the whole thing off. Bad, bad, bad, no matter
> >>>what.
> >> With the Stand Your Ground laws the occupiers are lucky they weren't
> >> shot by the real home owners. They may have some document from a
> >> phoney real estate agent but they should have known something was up
> >> when they saw everything still in the house including clothes and
> >> possibly even a vehicle or two.
> >The owners had moved out (abandoned) the house, so I doubt they left many > >personal items behind. That being said, people that stop paying > >mortgage/rent often leave a surprising amount of stuff behind so it isn't > >that rare to have to shovel out the last tenants garbage before moving in..
> They had moved out? I thought they had just gone on vacation?
No, they moved to another state where the father got a new job.
-- "Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
"anim8rFSK" <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> They should have known something was up that they 'bought' a house for
> $5k.
That depends on what the home/neighborhood is actually selling for. There are $5,000 homes in lots of places. In fact, I remember seeing town homes going for $5,000 in Phoenix at one time...in a neighborhood where the townhomes sold new for about $70,000. The catch, though, was that you could only buy the $5,000 homes if you were poor because the government was auctioning them off only to 'qualified buyers'. 'Qualified' in this case meaning that you had to be living below the poverty line. Basically, the government was trying to force home ownership rather than allowing investors to buy up the properties and turn them into rentals.
"anim8rFSK" <anim8r...@cox.net> wrote:
> They should have known something was up that they 'bought' a house for
> $5k.
That depends on what the home/neighborhood is actually selling for. There are $5,000 homes in lots of places. In fact, I remember seeing town homes going for $5,000 in Phoenix at one time...in a neighborhood where the townhomes sold new for about $70,000. The catch, though, was that you could only buy the $5,000 homes if you were poor because the government was auctioning them off only to 'qualified buyers'. 'Qualified' in this case meaning that you had to be living below the poverty line. Basically, the government was trying to force home ownership rather than allowing investors to buy up the properties and turn them into rentals.
