• ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    Or just give the property the owner the house for free in exchange for not suing and cut their losses. Would probably be cheaper in the long run, especially counting legal fees.

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      First: she has a right to be made whole and it’s not her concern what the people who wronged her have to go through to do that.

      Second: she never wanted a house. She had a special vision for the space, a space that has now been damaged.

      Third: squatters have rights and she may not be able to evict them. Their rights may take precedence over hers here.

      • ansiz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Not disagreeing with any of this but it should be clear to this lady her vision was screwed the moment a developer built a bunch of cookie cutter houses all over that area. A meditation center doesn’t really work in that area any longer.

        The issue with the taxes, the lawsuit, and the squatters is exactly why I would have just taken the offer to trade properties, she has an enormous headache on her hands and bailed on the easy way out of it.

      • bluewing@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Squatters seldom have the “rights” to just take property as easily as the internet often seems to think they have. It very often takes years to assume those rights plus paying the taxes on it. And if it were so easy to do that it became such a common problem, it wouldn’t be as big a meme as it currently is.

        My question is: “Just how little are you paying attention to your personal property that you unaware of a many month’s long building process taking place on your property?” Or is the property owner that stupid and has her ass that far up her own head?

        I mean, I own several hundred acres of property, (farm land and forest), and a good chunk of it is 300 miles away. I KNOW what happens on that property. If someone tried to build anything on it without my knowledge or consent, I would know within a week of the start of the building and real hard pointed questions would be asked of the fools doing the building.

        • rektdeckard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          She doesn’t reside in the state, and the state is Hawaii (an island). We can assume she also has no social connections there, at least none near the property. Do you expect her to be telepathic?

          • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            Her daughter lives there and was the one to recommend the property. That said I don’t think you lose your rights by not checking your stuff regularly. This developer could have had that house up in a matter of months, Does not really need to be a long time.

          • bluewing@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Not telepathic, but you can hire companies to watch over your investment. And if you can afford real estate in Hawaii and live elsewhere, you can afford to hire such a company.

            • rektdeckard@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              You can. But should you be expected to? Lol. It’s an empty lot in a residential neighborhood. I think it’s fair to NOT expect people to be putting unauthorized structures on it.

              • bluewing@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                Fair or not, it happened and the actual property owner does have an obligation to know what happens on the property she owns - absent or not. So she bears some responsibility for what happened. Think about a small child falling into an abandoned well you didn’t know was there. As the owner of the property, you are expected to know of it’s presence and you are accountable for what happens with it. It’s a part of the joys of owning property.

                So if you end up owning property, understand when that if that day comes, that there are more obligations to ownership than simply making loan payments and paying your taxes.

                • rektdeckard@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  I own property.

                  I’m just saying it’s incorrect to characterize this woman as ass-headed, because it’s not a reasonable expectation to assume somebody might build on your land, or to have to spend your time and money to safeguard against that specific problem. Making sure there are no uncovered well, sure. Constant surveillance to keep out rogue construction companies? In a neighborhood? No.

                  And whether you found out in a week or several months, it’s still a huge headache. So you notice a bit earlier if you’re paying close attention. Big whoop. You’ve still got a huge hole and a house foundation on your property. The developer still broke the law, and you did NOT break the law or do anything dumb by expecting others to adhere to property law, and doing what is required of you by law.