Kanye to The banner
1 - 20 of 98 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
40,480 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

A man has taken possession of a $300,000 house in a suburb of Dallas for just $16, and while neighbors call him a "squatter," he is apparently in the home legally thanks to an obscure Texas law.

According to a report in the Daily Mail, Kenneth Robinson found the abandoned house in the upscale surburb of Flower Mound. The house was in foreclosure -- the owner walked away, and the mortgage company went bust.

After doing some research, Robinson found a law called "adverse possession," filled out the $16 paperwork, and moved in.

The law states that if someone moves into the abandoned house, to get the house back the owner would have to pay off the mortgage, then file a lawsuit to remove the person living there.

Robinson believes the cost of doing all of that would be prohibitive, so he thinks he is there to stay. Under occupancy laws, if he remains there for three years he can ask the court for the title.

"I want to be owner of record. At this point, because I possess it, I am the owner," he told Dallas TV station WFAA. "This is not a normal process, but it is not a process that is not known. It's just not known to everybody."

Neighbors have called police to evict Robinson, but they say they can't because it is a civil matter.

"What paperwork is it and how is it legally binding if he doesn't legally own the house? He just squats there," Robinson's reluctant new neighbor Leigh Lowrie said. "If he wants the house, buy the house like everyone else had to. Get the money, buy the house."
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/money/man-squats-texas-mansion-now-its-his-16

:psyboom: is it fair or not? many ppl argue that the man should pay the actual $300000 dollar price what you think?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,002 Posts
If he was to pay $300,000, there's no one to pay it to. The original owner foreclosed, and the company who took ownership is out of businesses, therefore there is no owner, therefore no one to buy it off.

These people just don't want someone to get something for free while they had to pay for it, it really has no affect on their purchase though.

It does suck for the previous owner though. He has to pay off the existing mortgage while some guy can just come in and set up camp. Shouldn't have foreclosed if you don't want to lose your house though. Regardless of what happened after he foreclosed, he still foreclosed which means he loses his house, should have not foreclosed if he wanted to keep it.  :work:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,598 Posts
Someone needs to review laws in the US. Everything's too literal. I believe that laws should be applied accordingly based on each situation. Anyway hats off to him for using the system to his advantage. Eventhough he's going to de-value the property in that neighborhood
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,951 Posts
M/M/M said:
Someone needs to review laws in the US. Everything's too literal. I believe that laws should be applied accordingly based on each situation. Anyway hats off to him for using the system to his advantage. Eventhough he's going to de-value the property in that neighborhood
"devalue the property in the neighborhood"

what do you mean by that ??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
512 Posts
M/M/M said:
Someone needs to review laws in the US. Everything's too literal. I believe that laws should be applied accordingly based on each situation. Anyway hats off to him for using the system to his advantage. Eventhough he's going to de-value the property in that neighborhood
DeePhenom said:
"devalue the property in the neighborhood"

what do you mean by that ??
How is someone that beat the system going to "devalue the property" ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,598 Posts
DeePhenom said:
"devalue the property in the neighborhood"

what do you mean by that ??
Anything can bring down the property value in a neighborhood. I can't see any potential buyers paying full price for a home in that community after learning that someone only paid $16 for a crib down the street. I think that's partially a reason why his neighbor are bit appalled at the situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,910 Posts
M/M/M said:
Someone needs to review laws in the US. Everything's too literal. I believe that laws should be applied accordingly based on each situation. Anyway hats off to him for using the system to his advantage. Eventhough he's going to de-value the property in that neighborhood
The funny part about the whole thing was the law was first made with a racist undertone to it. Whites use it in the 60s to take over African American properties after they ran them out of town.

And one guy owning a 300,000 for 16 dollars isn't gonna bring down the property value one bit, as long as he keeps it maintained which comes down to the home owner association. Shit doesn't just go down in value because someone got it for a lower price than everyone else.
 
1 - 20 of 98 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top