do you support squatter's rights to occupy vacant homes?

[Obi Drunkenobe]

I was in New Orleans after Katrina. They had something called urban homesteading. If you fixed the abandoned house the city would give you the property. Seemed like a good idea at the time.

[newcastlefan]

I was in New Orleans after Katrina. They had something called urban homesteading. If you fixed the abandoned house the city would give you the property. Seemed like a good idea at the time.

but that's when the property has been recovered by the state, usually for back taxes. it's basically fast-tracking someone picking up the property at auction and turning it into a performing asset again. the state gains restored tax revenue and the people get to start right in on the house without the expense, time and paperwork of the auction.

[Czech]

i've been swayed by the opinion of a few,

considering that the home owner remains responsible for the squatters and the likelihood they could be fucking around, it may be a unfair advantage for society. if a home is vacant and a responsible squatter contacts the owner and offers to 'house sit' will be a different issue, of course.

[MatthewT]

but if the owner of the house then swears out a warrant of theft, the cops should be able to go into the house and drag you out to be charged and arraigned. then you no longer need to be evicted.

nope. no breaking and entering means permission to enter; permission to enter and domicile is the right to possession; that possession has to be terminated legally through a broken court system that could take at least three or four months to get heard.

CA is broke for a reason.

[MatthewT]

I was in New Orleans after Katrina. They had something called urban homesteading. If you fixed the abandoned house the city would give you the property. Seemed like a good idea at the time.

homesteading was a huge part of settling the West; it was only land though. you could just mark off a plot and it was yours, as long as you lived there for like 5 years.

[newcastlefan]

nope. no breaking and entering means permission to enter; permission to enter and domicile is the right to possession; that possession has to be terminated legally through a broken court system that could take at least three or four months to get heard.

CA is broke for a reason.

that only means they would not be convicted. they would still be out of the house long enough to be arraigned, which is long enough to lose possession of the house.

[2Manboobs]

your thoughts? ..

They should be thrown into a pit & buried alive

[Obi Drunkenobe]

homesteading was a huge part of settling the West; it was only land though. you could just mark off a plot and it was yours, as long as you lived there for like 5 years.

I just remember that was the tern they used for it.. I didn't have that strong of a desire to relocate to a sketchy New Orleans neighborhood though. It would have been easy to pilfer all the building materials I would have needed to fix up one of those houses. I was working 14 to 16 hour days when I was down there though, so there was no way I could have done it. A free house only costing me labor at the time was tempting though.

[MatthewT]

I just remember that was the tern they used for it.. I didn't have that strong of a desire to relocate to a sketchy New Orleans neighborhood though. It would have been easy to pilfer all the building materials I would have needed to fix up one of those houses. I was working 14 to 16 hour days when I was down there though, so there was no way I could have done it. A free house only costing me labor at the time was tempting though.

yeah, i think the right move was to pass

[Babs]

Bet you'd feel differently if it was your home.

This.

[newcastlefan]

it puts the real owners in a very strange and unpleasant position: most mortgages require that the home be insured, but most insurance requires that the home be occupied at all time. with squatters the owners are still responsible for the property. if they let the insurance lapse they risk their mortgage and equity. if they keep the insurance in force they risk being sued by the squatters for any physical damages they may suffer while on the property.

[newcastlefan]

btw, i wonder if some states that uphold the castle common law statutes have less squatter problems. if the paying owner were to come into the house, i would think that they would be within their rights to kill the squatters for criminal trespass as long as they are both inside the threshold.

[Ridic Too]

i'm surprised the owners didn't just charge him with grand theft. the cops could have just gone in and arrested him.

The bank owns it. Unless someone sitting in an office who has probably never even seen the house called the cops then the guy had every right to be there under the averse possession law in Florida.

[acagirl98]

but that's when the property has been recovered by the state, usually for back taxes. it's basically fast-tracking someone picking up the property at auction and turning it into a performing asset again. the state gains restored tax revenue and the people get to start right in on the house without the expense, time and paperwork of the auction.

city/state owned, it makes sense.

The bank owns it. Unless someone sitting in an office who has probably never even seen the house called the cops then the guy had every right to be there under the averse possession law in Florida.

you never stated that in your original post.

If it was a mortgagee situation where there were no payments made then it's abondonment.





if the owner is making payments and taxes are paid they regardless of wherther they are around if someone enters it should be a crime.

[FlaFlaFlunkie]

The bank owns it. Unless someone sitting in an office who has probably never even seen the house called the cops then the guy had every right to be there under the averse possession law in Florida.

i'm lazy. what's this "averse possession law" about which you speak?