Built on Wrong Property 37

[TigerGuy]

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/hawaii-property-owner-left-stunned-095700264.html

This seemed more like a failure than a pub discussion. Developer and builder construct home on the wrong property and sue property owner to give up ownership.

Isn't this why we hire qualified surveyors and designers? To make sure things are done correctly, I would never dream of just thinking, "yep, this looks like the property."

 

[cranky108]

Gee how would permitting go? Well you did not have a permit to build on this property.

 

[1503-44]

Like 90 something % of Oklohoma. If it's a native Hawaiian landowner, probably not going to go well for them. But no. The owner is from out of state, California. So, that isn't a good thing for her. She has also refused to trade for an equal property next door, so that might be a sign of being unreasonable, under the circumstances. And ... The county did approve the build. It will be awhile before this comes to an end.


--Einstein gave the same test to students every year. When asked why he would do something like that, "Because the answers had changed."

 

[cranky108]

Are you trying to say Oklahoma?, or some place name in Hawaiian? What is 90%? Homes built on the wrong property?

 

[TigerGuy]

I've heard of this happening before, but I'm not sure on what the legal precedents are. I think the property owner should sue for trespass and destruction of private property, at a minimum. Force the developer and builder to remove the house, and restore the property to its original condition.

Why should the property owner be forced to trade for a different lot? That is the lot they purchased, because that is the lot they want.

 

[JStephen]

Steve Lehto had a good video on this, check Youtube.

 

[IRstuff]

Saw the Lehto video before this. The claims of the developer are beyond plausible

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1_A_3hKI-g&t=1s

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[1503-44]

Right. Super SNAFU. Landowner rights or not, sometimes you just have to find the best way to solve a total FU and get on with life. Persuing lawsuits are not the best way to a happy life. She's going to lose a years sorting it out. And her land will no longer be sacred after wallowing in this kind of bad karma sh!t anyway. Only the lawyers win.

Really a $25,000 lot of 1 acre in Hawaii has got to be a total dump anyway. That won't even buy 2500 square feet here, and if it did, you really, really wouldn't want it. You'd have to spend a couple 100k cleaning it up. Sacred land??? I think we only have half the story.

--Einstein gave the same test to students every year. When asked why he would do something like that, "Because the answers had changed."

 

[pmover]

if there was a construction loan, the financial institution is liable. a construction loan should not be issued without the proposed survey/plot plan showing ownership. the financial institution, developer, construction company, etc. (all parties) should have obtained a proposed survey, plot plan, of property showing ownership.

the alternative property, while a "solution", clearly is not acceptable.

location is Hawaii, so state laws apply.

clearly, incompetence is abundant in this case.

 

[EdStainless]

$25k for an acre in Hawaii is reasonable if there is no road/water/power.
There is a lot of mountainous land that is very expensive to develop.
But was this negligence, incompetence, or malicious.
Did the builder choose where he did because it was nicer?

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, consulting work welcomed

 

[phamENG]

The article mentions that a "real estate broker mistakenly sold the land"...which makes it sound like maybe there was a surveyor to map it out, but nobody ever did the research into the deed.

 

[1503-44]

Wow, that's cheap. It's like 20x that here. 0.5MM/acre, no view of mountains or ocean.

--Einstein gave the same test to students every year. When asked why he would do something like that, "Because the answers had changed."

 

[3DDave]

Keaau Development Partnership’s attorney Peter S.R. Olson claimed the firm offered Reynolds a parcel of land of equal size, location and value in exchange for her land, or to sell the house to her at a discount, but she rejected the offer.

“I don't know what she's complaining about. Her property is appreciated by $450,000. And she's the victim in this?”

Yeah - she's also now on the hook for the property taxes on a house she didn't want or have to take out a loan to pay for a house she didn't want.

I wonder what course in law school so many lawyers take that teaches them to say stupid things.

Find a company to lift the house and move it to the correct property and then pay this woman to have the trees replaced.

 

[SWComposites]

maybe she should just move into the house and refuse to leave or pay for anything.

 

[TugboatEng]

Her bills are obviously being sent to the address already. Isn't that all that is needed for proof of residency?

 

[1503-44]

The judge will find that a reasonable and fair offer was made and refused without overpowering reason. She's, or maybe her daughter, or both, are a nutt case. Take the trade. Dismissed.

--Einstein gave the same test to students every year. When asked why he would do something like that, "Because the answers had changed."

 

[3DDave]

No official mail is being sent to that address as her address of record is in California.

USPS will not deliver to abandoned homes so even junk mail is not going to be delivered there.

 

[3DDave]

The argument then is that no one owns property; anyone can come along, make an improvement, and then offer what they consider a fair swap and displace the not-really-an-owner. Take the trade or the legal system will be used to bankrupt you.

They could have offered to buy the land, but this amounts to extortion to get a parcel they would not have been able to have otherwise.

 

[hokie66]

She may be a nut case, but nut cases have rights too. The unused building has been vandalized by squatters, and was not to her liking anyway. The court should make her whole, but defining that is difficult. A judge does face difficult decisions.

 

[1503-44]

3x the value of the land (like 150k) and paying her taxes.is probably a more than fair settlement, but she's holding out for the 500k value.

Property rights are not written in gold. Even for nut cases. I can probably build a pipeline right through the middle of your house.

--Einstein gave the same test to students every year. When asked why he would do something like that, "Because the answers had changed."