Single dad trying to reclaim home OWS took over (state, claims, children)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unlike others I don't make decisions based on headlines. I don't know much about the case to form an opinion yet.
I'm just pleasantly surprised that you guys have sympathy for people who haven't paid their mortgages in 2 years. I also thought you considered those people deadbeats, glad to hear that you don't. I even thought I heard some people say that those homeowners should be thrown in debtors prison.
I can't believe you're defending criminals, squatters, who break into a home and decide to give it to some friends of theirs.
I guess you didn't read the article. The guy paid his mortgage for two years. Just because one runs into trouble with paying their mortgage doesn't mean their house is up for grabs.
I can't believe you're defending criminals, squatters, who break into a home and decide to give it to some friends of theirs.
I guess you didn't read the article. The guy paid his mortgage for two years. Just because one runs into trouble with paying their mortgage doesn't mean their house is up for grabs.
I brought this up and Savior thought it was
He left the discussion, because we all agreed, the single-dad should have his home, not the OWS and a homeless man.
While the group that has taken over the house should be removed, the original owner seems to have abandoned the property.
"He packed up and left after foreclosure proceedings began in 2009"
If you were trying to keep your home, would you leave for a longer time then you were in the home if you were trying to keep the property?
The story stinks to high heaven of a manufactured outrage.
But it is the New York Post. And those that would say tough luck to the original home owner for making bad decisions seem to suddenly be backing him.
There are no winners here. Well, maybe the bank, but they don't seem too interested in the property either.
I'm glad you side with homeowners who haven't paid their mortgage in over 2 years. I assumed you guys viewed them as deadbeats. I guess I was under the wrong impression.
I have never read ANY of your post where you HAVE the right impression so why would this one be any different.
You don't read the articles provided then make asinine statements.
While the group that has taken over the house should be removed, the original owner seems to have abandoned the property.
"He packed up and left after foreclosure proceedings began in 2009"
If you were trying to keep your home, would you leave for a longer time then you were in the home if you were trying to keep the property?
The story stinks to high heaven of a manufactured outrage.
But it is the New York Post. And those that would say tough luck to the original home owner for making bad decisions seem to suddenly be backing him.
There are no winners here. Well, maybe the bank, but they don't seem too interested in the property either.
It looks like the borrower abadoned his property after his property's valued went from "$424,500 in 2007 to $150,000" He is also a negligent home owner as evidenced by the lack of electricity and water in the home. OWS came in and rehabed the place, putting in thousands of dollars. When the owner got wind of this he realized he wanted the building. It seems like the current family who is living there only stays sporadicallyl because the home has no running water. I do agree that it seems like there is manufactured outrage.
It looks like the borrower abadoned his property after his property's valued went from "$424,500 in 2007 to $150,000" He is also a negligent home owner as evidenced by the lack of electricity and water in the home. OWS came in and rehabed the place, putting in thousands of dollars. When the owner got wind of this he realized he wanted the building. It seems like the current family who is living there only stays sporadicallyl because the home has no running water. I do agree that it seems like there is manufactured outrage.
It looks like the borrower abadoned his property after his property's valued went from "$424,500 in 2007 to $150,000" He is also a negligent home owner as evidenced by the lack of electricity and water in the home. OWS came in and rehabed the place, putting in thousands of dollars. When the owner got wind of this he realized he wanted the building. It seems like the current family who is living there only stays sporadicallyl because the home has no running water. I do agree that it seems like there is manufactured outrage.
it doesnt matter. the OWS movement STOLE the property from the rightful owner, the bank. in fact the bank has even said that the property still belongs to the guy who bought the property, even though they had started foreclosure proceedings.
the OWS is squatting on the property, and ILLEGALLY giving it to some homeless people. if the OWS would have done it right, that is buy the property from the owner or the bank, i would have no problem with what they are doing, as it would then be OWS property.
it doesnt matter. the OWS movement STOLE the property from the rightful owner, the bank. in fact the bank has even said that the property still belongs to the guy who bought the property, even though they had started foreclosure proceedings.
the OWS is squatting on the property, and ILLEGALLY giving it to some homeless people. if the OWS would have done it right, that is buy the property from the owner or the bank, i would have no problem with what they are doing, as it would then be OWS property.
I agree with the person I responded too, here is what he said
Quote:
Originally Posted by plannine
While the group that has taken over the house should be removed, the original owner seems to have abandoned the property.
The story stinks to high heaven of a manufactured outrage. .
The squatters should be removed. In the end the guy will abandon this property again and many of the defenders will not care one bit. Just because I feel sorry for the family who lives in a home with no water or electricity doesn't mean I don't recognize what they are doing is illegal. I've been a landord who has had to evict tenants, doesn't mean I don't feel bad for some of them, but in the end business is business. It's possible to be a business person with some feelings and empathy. As a responsible landlord I have no sympathy for negligent home owners, their actions contribute to crime and lower property values.
It looks like the borrower abadoned his property after his property's valued went from "$424,500 in 2007 to $150,000" He is also a negligent home owner as evidenced by the lack of electricity and water in the home. OWS came in and rehabed the place, putting in thousands of dollars. When the owner got wind of this he realized he wanted the building. It seems like the current family who is living there only stays sporadicallyl because the home has no running water. I do agree that it seems like there is manufactured outrage.
We have a business where we rehad properties like this. The difference is we buy them first and pay the utilities. I would be willing to bet what ever has been done with this house it is half a&&ed work. No reputable person with half a brain would participate in this. A house cannot be fixed up correctly by just anyone and I don't believe someone with the skills and knowledge would take the risk and do it. The OWS has only one goal and that is to cause chaos and they don't care who gets hurt.
Manufactured outrage, yes it is. If they have thousands of dollars why not find a rental for this family and pay the rent? They would have running water. Guess why? It isn't as though this family is going to be allowed to stay there. And before anyone starts saying adverse possession, forget about it, it doesn't apply.
So you have no regard for private property rights?
And you're in favor of insurance fraud?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogdad
Quote:
Originally Posted by shiftymh
I don't see a more perfect situation to burn your own house down for the insurance money.
HA!!! I was going to post the guy should have burned it down as soon as the OWS took it over.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
