Soldier Loses House To ex-Convict Squatters While Deployed.

The same laws that "help" the squatters are the same laws that keep you from getting kicked out to the curb if the banks make a mistake with your mortgage or you have a sick landlord.

The law is the law.

 

So, if I refuse to pay rent at my apartment complex can I just say I had some type of verbal agreement with a landlord or manager or something and then cry to the police if they throw all my stuff onto the street?

 

Yes, the landlord has to go through the same thing and get a motion. The police can't do anything.

 

Yep, quite the conundrum.

 

Yup, this was discussed recently in another thread. The laws differ from state to state, but I'd guess the process is about the same:

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=8707384&postcount=41

 

Friend left in charge was NOT a friend.

How could he even decide--no, consider renovating the house or how could the trespassers even change the locks to the house without the so-called "friend" not knowing this?

Something is awry. The "friend" is IN on it with the shady squatters. Sharkey got jumped.

I hate caketakers!

 

The soldier should have understood the risks of leaving the country for so long with his house abandoned.

 

Whoever this Lisa Pettus character is was definitely in on the whole thing. She probably struck some kind of agreement with Ortiz where he could live in the house for free as long as he doesn't mess things up and looks after the place so she doesn't have to.

 

Curious: why wasn't the wife there? She went to Hawaii with him? Why not sublet it, get a real lease with a real tenant, and make a bit of coin off of this? Leaving the house abandoned seems particularly stupid.

 

Almost fell for it.

 

I expected this thread to be worthy of the D&D. I am disappoint.

 

It's still Mr. Sharkey's ground, and he should stand it, as far as I'm concerned.

 

I don't approve of stand your ground in general but this is one situation where it can be put into good use.

 

That's BS. They broke into the house because they knew it was empty and changed the locks and claimed squatters rights. That's just crazy. There was clearly no agreement to allow those felons to live in his house. They should have been arrested for braking and entering as well as vandelism since they changed the locks. This really has nothing to do with the owner being a soldier as far as I'm concerned.

 

I think it should be the squatters responsibility to prove there is an actual verbal agreement, (witness, recording etc..). If he can't prove there is an aggreement then he needs to get his ass out.

 

Regardless of the fact this specific issue is resolved, what you are suggesting is actually what happens. If they cannot prove it, they will be removed. But there has to be a process to get to that point. Not all cases are as seemingly cut and dry as this one appeared to be, so both sides must be protected.

 

You shouldn't have to spend legal fees & time to have someone removed from your house that was never permitted to be there. As far as I'm concerned, unless the person can show the officer something showing they have a right to be there, the owner should always have initial right to the property. Protect the known rightful owner.

FWIW, cops make legal decisions based on a "he said, she said" situation on a regular basis.

 

They both still could be. Why is the property owner required to go through the legal channels and not the squatter (make him prove he had a right to be there, and then he can seek damages in civil court if unlawfully removed)?

 

maybe there was an agreement?