Support NeoGAF

[ReBurn]

I hope he gets to keep it. I guess the neighbors would be happier with the house just the house falling down and going uncared for. It's really none of their business how much he pays for it anyway.

Only wealthy white people are allowed to exploit the law for personal gain.

God this is such a stupid statement.

 

[teruterubozu]

I hope he gets to keep it. I guess the neighbors would be happier with the house just the house falling down and going uncared for. It's really none of their business how much he pays for it anyway.

Well, that's not entirely true. The dude just tanked the neighborhood's value.

 

[Rewrite]

Love those bitter tears from the neighbors.

 

[IsayFever]

Those neighbors are either jealous or are just plain assholes

 

[ReBurn]

Well, that's not entirely true. The dude just tanked the neighborhood's value.

Yeah, I know that the property values just dropped. And that's probably what upsets them the most.

 

[The Super Bob]

Unbelievable how jealous and hating those neighbors and some people in this thread are. Guy did his homework and got lucky, good for him.

This. See also, kid having sex with babysitter.

Male sitter girl kid : Chop off his sack

Female sitter, boy kid. : Kid got game !!

That GAF guy is such a crazy person...oh wait.

 

[Bleepey]

Well, that's not entirely true. The dude just tanked the neighborhood's value.

It's cos he's black right!

 

[dark10x]

Heh, I'd be jealous too, but I'd also have to give him a big congrats for it. He found a loophole and took advantage of it. If it were so simple you'd have people fighting over it, but he did his homework and it paid off.

 

[C.Dark.DN]

The problem is the News team was misleading and made people think his scenario would only take 3 years and have a good chance to work in his favor. It'll take 10.

A person that realized they were wrong is being condescending to his peers (including a forum mod) for being fooled by the News team:

That's not how adverse possession works.

I like all the people acting like it's some novel proposition that no one's ever heard of. Adverse Possession is taught in every law school since time immemorial to first year students, and the concept itself dates back to feudal times.

Sorry, many of us didn't go to law school, own property, or live in Texas.

 

[JGS]

Sooo despite his protests to the contrary, he's a squatter. Shocked at all the ones championing this. It seemed like there was a bit more outrage when the same thing occured in other places.

It's odd that the first thing coming to mind is racism. I get why neighbors would be upset with a homeless man living next to them black or white. It doesn't matter what the neighbors think but I totally get why they're upset.

I'm sure he will be a topic of conversation at the next HOA. Speaking of which, they should be able to swoop in and do something too. If he remains the same person he is when he took possession of the house, he won't last long after official ownership. That's still a few years away though.

I wonder if he's actually homeless/jobless. The report conveniently left out personal information about him. I also don't understand why the owners have to payoff the debt if the bank still has to sue. I also wonder if you can eventually do adverse possession on your own home.

 

[Bboy AJ]

There's no way this guy is getting this house. Thank goodness Angry Grimace is here to set things straight. Color of title and actually satisfying the year requirement of adverse possession are two different things. No way three years does it.

LOL at Izayoi arguing with Grimace (law GAF) about how adverse possession works. Your source is a poorly researched news broadcast and all of a sudden you're an expert and Grimace is salty.

 

[JGS]

There's no way this guy is getting this house. Thank goodness Angry Grimace is here to set things straight. Color of title and actually satisfying the year requirement of adverse possession are two different things. No way three years does it.

LOL at GAFers arguing with law GAF about how adverse possession works. Your source is a poorly researched news broadcast...

Good

 

[Wellington]

Subscribing so i can watch video when I get home.

 

[CrocMother]

There is no way this guy actually lives in this house without water or electricity...

 

[Like the hat?]

Good on the buyer. I wish I could do something like that

 

[TheMan]

Does he have to pay off the mortgage when the house is officially his?

 

[spiderman123]

Not sure about confused but Angry Grimace is right. I enjoyed the story and hope the guy gets it but unfortunately that would not be the case.

The law of adverse possession is based on notice. The legitimacy of an adverse possession claim is established when circumstances are such that it is visible to others – i.e., others are or should be on notice - that the possessor is asserting a claim of right to the property which is actual, open, notorious, exclusive, hostile, continuous, and uninterrupted for the applicable statutory period – referred to in the CPRC as statutes of limitation. Note that the burden here is on the owner. Once an owner discovers the presence of a potential adverse possessor or is otherwise put on notice of an adverse possession claim, he must act to defeat the adverse possessor’s claim within the period prescribed by one of three statutes of limitation:

Sec. 16.024 - The Three-Year Statute
A person [i.e., the original owner] must bring suit to recover real property held by another in peaceable and adverse possession under title or color title not later than three years after the day the cause of action accrues.

Under this section, the possessor must have title (i.e., a deed as part of a regular chain of title) or “color of title,” which refers to a claim of title that has some reasonable basis but for some legitimate reason does not fit within the usual chain of title. So, the possessor must be able to produce some conveyance/title paperwork to support his claim if he is to assert adverse possession.

Sec. 16.025 - The Five-Year Statute
(a) A person [i.e., the original owner] must bring suit not later than five years after the day the cause of action accrues to recover real property held in peaceable and adverse possession by another who:

(1) cultivates, uses, or enjoys the property;
(2) pays applicable taxes on the property; and
(3) claims the property under a duly registered deed.

(b) This section does not apply to a claim based on a forged deed or a deed executed under a forged power of attorney.

Under this five-year statute, some sort of deed of record is still required.

Sec. 16.026 - The Ten-Year Statute (Nicknamed the “Bare Possession Statute”)
(a) A person must bring suit not later than 10 years after the day the cause of action accrues to recover real property held in peaceable and adverse possession by another who cultivates, uses, or enjoys the property.

(b) Without a title instrument, peaceable and adverse possession is limited in this section to 160 acres, including improvements, unless the number of acres actually enclosed exceeds 160. If the number of enclosed acres exceeds 160 acres, peaceable and adverse possession extends to the real property actually enclosed.

(c) Peaceable possession of real property held under a duly registered deed or other memorandum of title that fixes the boundaries of the possessor’s claim extends to the boundaries specified in the instrument.

The ten-year statute is the “catch all.” A deed or other memorandum of title is not necessary so long as the elements of adverse possession are met – however, such documentation may be useful to establish the boundaries of the claimed tract. Otherwise the key to determining boundaries is what area is fenced in as a “designed enclosure” - not just a “casual fence.” Rhodes v. Cahill, 802 S.W.2d 643,646 (Tex. 1990).

Two other sections, Sec.16.027 and Sec.16.028, are less commonly used. The first provides a 25 year statute of limitation “regardless of whether the person is or has been under a legal disability.” The second allows a 25 year statute based on a title instrument, even if that instrument is void on its face or in fact.

Statutes of limitation do not include any periods of disability on the part of the original owner (e.g., he was under 18 years old, of unsound mind, or serving in the armed forces in time of war).

Statutes of limitation may be “tacked” or combined by various successive possessor of the property so long as there exists “privity of estate” (a direct legal connection) between these persons.

What sort of action should the owner take to defeat a claim of adverse possession? The most obvious course of action is to evict the interloper if that can be accomplished peaceably. If not, or if the adverse claimant asserts a title claim, then the owner’s remedy is litigation – what is called a “trespass to try title” action requesting a declaratory judgment.
Litigation by the Adverse Possessor

Alternatively, an adverse possessor may be the one to file suit to establish his claim. To do so, he must prove (a) a visible appropriation and possession of the land, sufficient to give notice to the record title holder that is (2) peaceable, (3) under a claim of right hostile to the title holder’s claim, and (4) that continues for the duration specified in the applicable statute. What is a “visible appropriation?” The possessor must “visibly appropriate the property as to give notice to any other person that they claim a right to the property.” Perkins v. McGehee, 133 S.W.3d 291, 292 (Tex.App. - Forth Worth 2004, no pet.).

Finally, Sec. 16.034 provides that the prevailing in a suit for possession of real property may receive an award of costs and reasonable attorney’s fees.
Creative Approaches: The Affidavit of Adverse Possession

What should an adverse possessor do who believes that one of the above statutes of limitation allows him to claim ownership? The first and best option is to file suit for a declaratory judgment in district court. However, if a lawsuit is not a feasible or affordable option, it may be useful to consider filing an affidavit (an “Affidavit of Adverse Possession”) in the real property records which contains specific wording that asserts and justifies a claim of adverse possession. At the very least, such an affidavit acts as a marker in time to begin putting all others on notice of an adverse possession claim, thereby providing a fixed point for commencement of the applicable statute of limitations.

As part of this process, it is advisable to research the title to the subject property to determine if there are known owners who can be located. Title companies will issue a relatively inexpensive title report, or an online service such as TitleSearch.com can be used. If there are record owners that can be located, one might be better advised to contact them and attempt to make a deal that preserves the existing chain of title.

 

[talisayNon]

Only wealthy white people are allowed to exploit the law for personal gain.

.

 

[C.Dark.DN]

Sooo despite his protests to the contrary, he's a squatter. Shocked at all the ones championing this. It seemed like there was a bit more outrage when the same thing occured in other places.

There's been threads about squatting. From what I remember enter the house and stay there without any paperwork and the owners spend time actively trying to get them out. It sometimes can take a while putting the owners through hell.

The News Story painted a different picture. The owners long gone. Them and the bank not attempting to do a thing for 3 years. Turns out it'll be 10 now.

 

[Heart Attack]

Thank you Angry Grimace for giving me an insight in how Adverse Possession laws work. One of the things i love about neogaf is that i learn by reading others posts. I agree with your point of view that hes taking advantage of others misfortunes, and even though its a great story, and we all love to cheer for the underdog, its just not right.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Yes. You do realize how someone came to own ANY property ever in the world, right?

No, the moon cannot be owned. Under international law, land is essentially classed as one of four types; sovereign territory of a state, res nullius (unowned land), res communis (jointly managed international land), and common heritage of mankind.

Since the Outer Space Treaty 1967, the moon is classed as "common heritage of mankind" property per international law.

Traditionally internationally, territory acquisition occurred through conquest but this has been illegal since apparently something big happened in the 20th century I can't quite remember the details but something about a big war or something?

Since then, ownership of property internationally has been demonstrated by possession and governance. The Island of Palmas case is interesting here--Spain gave the Phillippines to the US, the US showed up on the Island of Palmas, a Dutch flag was flying and Dutch people were living there. The US argued that Spain owned the island and thus they had the legal right to give it to the US, the court disagreed finding that the Dutch owned the island by virtue of having occupied it. This was sort of adverse possession; the court's ruling basically found that Spain would have owned the island had they occupied it, but since they didn't their "title" to the island was bogus.

The analogy is dumb, though, because this is a domestic property under the jurisdiction of Texas state property law, which clearly allows for adverse possession. Adverse possession ensures that properties do not sit rotting and decaying. Virtually all jurisdictions have a law allowing for squatter's rights, adverse possession, homesteading, or in some cases easement laws allowing for the use of the land without being able to claim ownership.

I think philosophically the world would be a better place if people focused less on anger at people who "scam the system". It is better to work on building a good world for yourself, your family, and friends, and enshrining systems that allow people to work hard and have a good chance at success than it is to waste significant effort making sure others don't get success that "they don't deserve". It's weird to be more worried about other people having something they don't deserve than worrying about people not having something that they do deserve.

 

[spiderman123]

O lord Stump, ^^ you actually took up that, "moon could be own" case.

 

[C.Dark.DN]

Stumpokapow, how far down do people own? You eventually pop out on the other side of the world...

 

[Kentpaul]

Those neighbors are either jealous or are just plain assholes

Its clear from the video that they are both.

also bitter and uptight, not easy going ect..

Not the kind of people i would keep company with that's for sure.

 

[ReBurn]

It's cos he's black right!

And the fact that if the house sells for $16 it will surely be used in every fair market valuation of all the surrounding homes. If you want to think about it practically. And if you do you realize that there's no way that this sticks.

 

[spiderman123]

Its clear from the video that they are both.

also bitter and uptight, not easy going ect..

Not the kind of people i would keep company with that's for sure.

I agree but I am hesitant to say it's racially motivated.

 

[Odrion]

The real underdog story is Angry Grimace trying to get through to those nitwits.

 

[TheMan]

To play devil's advocate:

1. We don't know the whole story. This guy could be a real asshole. Maybe he throws really loud parties that annoy the neighbors and then tells them to fuck off when they ask if he can keep it down.

2. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that this guy doesn't have very much money. How is he gonna afford to keep the property in good shape? Landscaping alone is pretty expensive. If he is unable to do this, his neighbors will suffer as their property value decreases along with his.

 

[caffeinated]

If I were him I'd put a really huge "$300.000 LOL" sign on the lawn.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Man I can't imagine living in a house in Denton County in the summer with no electricity. Ball soup every day in his boxers.

 

[ngower]

An alum from my school tried this on land that was totally neglected for years. He renovated the shack that was on the property and after three years, when it would have been his to claim, the owner of the land made a sale of that little chunk. Huge dick move. For some reason people hate others, what happened to Americans helping out Americans?

I'm sure there's some racial undertones to the neighbors actions in this particular case.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Stumpokapow, how far down do people own? You eventually pop out on the other side of the world...

Okay, well, let me first outline this fact. International law comes from two places; treaties (documents that two or more states sign to govern behaviour) and customary international law (principles that we just recognize as part of international law even though they're not written down).

Sovereign territory includes airspace by both treaty and custom. So a country "extends up". There is no treaty defining the exact boundary between outer space (which would probably be res communis given that we have to deal with low earth orbit satellite space junk crap) and sovereign territory. Typically the boundary is drawn around 80-100km up above the earth based on the scientific boundary, although again there's no treaty. I'm not sure a court has ever taken up a case to actually establish if there is customary international law on the matter. The US draws the line at 80km (50 miles)

I am not aware of any treaty or custom that governs the center of the earth. Presumably any such thing would extend roughly to the point where you go below the crust of the earth, at which point the "land" as it were would be common heritage of mankind.

The deepest mine in the world is 4km so this is not really a problem we've had to face. I know when Bush was US president he issued a ban on deep water oil drilling in the Marianas Trench (which I guess is part of the territorial waters of Guam, or at least the EEZ? I don't have a map handy to see how far out it is) so I guess he felt they had legal jurisdiction over it that far down. Wikipedia tells me Challenger Deep is about 10km under, so I guess it goes that far. But no one challenged it and as far as I know no one was going to do it anyway.

I don't have a lot of knowledge about Pacific deep-water oil drilling, but I know that the deepest deep water drilling in the Grand Banks (in the Atlantic Ocean, here's an example oil project out there with a map to where it is) is still within 100m of the surface. I don't think the technology is there yet.

The answer is basically that there isn't an answer. There's no treaty, there's no custom, and there are no court cases. This is pretty common in many areas of international law. You just hit this patch where there's no answer. For now, given the lack of jurisprudence on the issue, I'd guess that sovereign territory goes as deep as states can effectively assert a right over. That's basically how much international law comes to be; someone does something new, someone else disagrees with them, the court decides what the relevant treaty or custom is or the states involved sign a treaty, and eventually people come to accept it.

Edit: Dascu wanted to remind me that typically a states would place limits on territory ownership within sovereign territory that'd be more stringent than international law would place on states in terms of the boundaries of international territory. He also wanted to point out that when I mentioned two sources of international law, I excluded pre-emptory norms / jus cogens. This is not because I didn't know, but rather because they don't apply here.

 

[friskykillface]

I'd be jelly and mad too if I saw that, but after getting over it, I'd give a handshake to the guy and say "you lucky bastard, drinks on you from now on".

Hope he gets to keep it but I might assume with all the national attention this might get, hmmmmm maybe not.

 

[Skiptastic]

Good for him. I bet they're pissed since it'll probably kill their property values.

This is what I was wondering about. If this has a major impact on their property values, no fucking wonder they'd be pissed off. Seriously, have any of you had parents who owned a house and watched neighbors sell off their homes on the cheap? It fucking destroys comp prices and damages your returns. I'd be pissed off too.

If it has no impact on their property values, which to be honest might be the case given that it was a foreclosure, then it's jealousy, but who can blame them? I'd probably be pissed off too that I didn't get a $300,000 for $20. Oh well...

PS. We never should have signed that Outer Space Treaty. That moon should be ours! OURS DAMMIT!

PPS. I have never heard the term "salty" used in the entirety of my life as often as I have in this thread. lol

 

[gutter_trash]

LOL at the laws but eh Robinson played by the rules.

if they want the house back, buy it back from him

 

[Esch]

Salty, probably racist neighbors. That woman's awful.

Good for him.

 

[Vanillalite]

This is what I was wondering about. If this has a major impact on their property values, no fucking wonder they'd be pissed off. Seriously, have any of you had parents who owned a house and watched neighbors sell off their homes on the cheap? It fucking destroys comp prices and damages your returns. I'd be pissed off too.

If it has no impact on their property values, which to be honest might be the case given that it was a foreclosure, then it's jealousy, but who can blame them? I'd probably be pissed off too that I didn't get a $300,000 for $20. Oh well...

PS. We never should have signed that Outer Space Treaty. That moon should be ours! OURS DAMMIT!

PPS. I have never heard the term "salty" used in the entirety of my life as often as I have in this thread. lol

Foreclosures are the worst kind as they tend to be sold for extra cheap, and most definitely effect property values.

Good for this guy getting the house for so cheap, and those people are a little too pissed off. Still shit like this WILL fuck with your property value.

 

[Enron]

Doing some checking on some forums I read with a lot of real estate types posting, this guy most assuredly broke the law ("found" the keys? Yeah right) and stands almost zero chance of actually staying in this house now that he's been outed. People apparently try to pull this shit more often than we'd think, and courts always side with the complaining party.

An alum from my school tried this on land that was totally neglected for years. He renovated the shack that was on the property and after three years, when it would have been his to claim, the owner of the land made a sale of that little chunk. Huge dick move. For some reason people hate others, what happened to Americans helping out Americans?

I'm sure there's some racial undertones to the neighbors actions in this particular case.

hahaha, fuck that guy. If I were the owner, i'd probably do the same thing. It's MY land and just because i'm "not using it" some asshole wants to go build a shack on it and try and take it away from me? F that.

 

[sikkinixx]

Good luck to the dude. If he gets the house afterall, I would blow up the certificate to like 8x11' and frame it on my lawn.

Fuck me though, those houses are huge for 300k. Here in Vancouver you can't even get a little condo for that.

 

[sixteen-bit]

like a boss

 

[Bboy AJ]

Doing some checking on some forums I read with a lot of real estate types posting, this guy most assuredly broke the law ("found" the keys? Yeah right) and stands almost zero chance of actually staying in this house now that he's been outed. People apparently try to pull this shit more often than we'd think, and courts always side with the complaining party.

This guy is clearly a POS. I don't know why GAF is championing him.

 

[wolfmat]

Who owns the moon ? Is it mine to claim if I live there for 3 years ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterrestrial_real_estate

 

[ngower]

hahaha, fuck that guy. If I were the owner, i'd probably do the same thing. It's MY land and just because i'm "not using it" some asshole wants to go build a shack on it and try and take it away from me? F that.

Well the guy that was living there turned it from a barren, neglected plot of land to a land with crops, and as I said totally renovated the property that was on it. At the very least, the owner could have made a deal with the man living there. He made the land sellable.

 

[Bboy AJ]

Well the guy that was living there turned it from a barren, neglected plot of land to a land with crops, and as I said totally renovated the property that was on it. At the very least, the owner could have made a deal with the man living there. He made the land sellable.

Whose fault is that? Could have made a deal? He used property he knows isn't his. What did he expect?

Also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laches_(equity)

 

[Skiptastic]

Foreclosures are the worst kind as they tend to be sold for extra cheap, and most definitely effect property values.

Good for this guy getting the house for so cheap, and those people are a little too pissed off. Still shit like this WILL fuck with your property value.

I meant that, given that it was a foreclosure, the property values may already have been fucked to begin with, so the impact of him getting it essentially for free (they won't put down sold for $20 filing fee) might not actually be that great. I actually kind of wonder if this would be listable on comps, since there was no purchase. I don't know, beats me as to how the entire property value process works.

 

[ReBurn]

Well the guy that was living there turned it from a barren, neglected plot of land to a land with crops, and as I said totally renovated the property that was on it. At the very least, the owner could have made a deal with the man living there. He made the land sellable.

Selling it out from under him was safer than the inevitable armed standoff I'm guessing. Did your fellow alum ever think of approaching the owner and asking if he could purchase the plot?

 

[Stet]

The woman in the video has a framed Budweiser logo poster. That's pretty much all you need to know.

 

[DrForester]

Find it hard to believe that a neighborhood like that doesn't have a HOA. Guy will be screwed if he can't pay the dues.

 

[wolfmat]

This thread taught me that property value doesn't make any sense.

 

[acksman]

Whoa that is right up the road from my work. I need to start making some side trips through those neighborhoods on the way home from work to look for foreclosure signs!