Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on March 01, 2024, 04:25:37 PM
-
These squatter stories always irritate me, because in Ben's world <TM>, they get one chance to pay for the damages they caused and then leave. If they don't, you simply shoot them and that's that. I'm not even doing hyperbole. I would have no qualms killing someone who took over my home and refused to leave. Tough *expletive deleted*it for you.
With this one, I simply don't understand the law here. This is New York. I will bet real money that their real estate and escrow laws are at least as stringent as California's, where the home seller can get into all kinds of legal trouble if they fail to disclose a host of issues on the like fifty pages you have to fill out when you sell a property. So I don't get how this squatter can claim "a previous agreement with the former owners". If it wasn't stated in the escrow forms, or discovered in the title search, then the former owners and/or title company should have the liability here, and the squatter should have zero rights. At the very least, the former owners would have to take the house back.
Anyway, this guy needs to be shot.
https://twitchy.com/amy-curtis/2024/03/01/queens-squatter-nyp-n2393454
-
I'll go with you and help.
-
After shooting them can we drag their crap into the street and burn it. Just wait until those illegals being housed in private homes learn they are rooted after 30 days, in some places.
bob
-
That's why horses and cattle are branded and they have official State Brand Inspectors so you can be sure you're hanging the right person.
"Is the house insured?" he asked meaningfully. I understand there are many fire hazards associated with that group of people.
Terry, 230RN
-
We have this in St. Louis:
https://youtu.be/Ol2_jBmiDsA?si=tj7syZxypTZNnAxy
The gentrified neighbors are rapidly become "conservative."
-
We have this in St. Louis:
https://youtu.be/Ol2_jBmiDsA?si=tj7syZxypTZNnAxy
The gentrified neighbors are rapidly become "conservative."
That is just nasty. I would have to do my civic/neighborly duty and put some road flares out at night so people don't run into their home. ;)
bob
-
Be a shame the next time it snowed a snow plow went just a little too far to the right.
-
How about an oscillating lawn sprinkler that runs for multiple hours, soaking everything? >:D
-
We have this in St. Louis:
https://youtu.be/Ol2_jBmiDsA?si=tj7syZxypTZNnAxy
The gentrified neighbors are rapidly become "conservative."
I'm seeing more and more holes in the mantle of nobility the Libcoms are so proud of. We, as a nation, are cutting off our own balls. The Leftists are "steering" us. Pun intended.\
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse2.explicit.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.xvTau4LS_ydcHFXNOK-kowHaFj%26pid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=b7d9e402dac662c8ed0f5b0ab9f6bc2c936d78a689cf79a5f9e41309cd46a6f0&ipo=images)
Terry, 230RN
-
I actually tried to run down some organization to deal with 'em after they burned a garage near my house (cookfire again, squatting...).
They do NOT like anything having to do with christians. Nope on the red cross.
And it does not seem like there are any Islamic groups/charities... At least none who care about their type. The city social workers? They are over their head on this one. They can talk crackhead ghetto banger, but this couple is not even in their ballpark...
-
I don't see why ANYONE coming home to find strangers in their home would regard them as anything other than home invaders.
-
We have this in St. Louis:
https://youtu.be/Ol2_jBmiDsA?si=tj7syZxypTZNnAxy
The gentrified neighbors are rapidly become "conservative."
Sudanese immigrants? Deport their asses.
-
Sudanese immigrants? Deport their asses.
Biden will get right on that
-
We have this in St. Louis:
https://youtu.be/Ol2_jBmiDsA?si=tj7syZxypTZNnAxy
The gentrified neighbors are rapidly become "conservative."
That is some third world, open sewers, *expletive deleted*it right there. And they've been doing it for YEARS?
It seems like there are plenty of non-lethal ways the neighborhood could have urged them to move on by now. It's not like they are likely to call the police on you. Some paintball guns with pepperballs through the openings in the tarps come to mind.
-
That is some third world, open sewers, *expletive deleted*it right there. And they've been doing it for YEARS?
It seems like there are plenty of non-lethal ways the neighborhood could have urged them to move on by now. It's not like they are likely to call the police on you. Some paintball guns with pepperballs through the openings in the tarps come to mind.
From the vibe I'm getting from Bogie, it sounds like that neighborhood is full of kumbaya hippies, so I'm thinking that's not an option they're considering. In a normal neighborhood, I can think of all kinds of "oops" stuff you could do that looks accidental but would be completely annoying to the squatters. Especially if done every day.
-
From the vibe I'm getting from Bogie, it sounds like that neighborhood is full of kumbaya hippies
Let them live with what they voted for
-
From the vibe I'm getting from Bogie, it sounds like that neighborhood is full of kumbaya hippies, so I'm thinking that's not an option they're considering. In a normal neighborhood, I can think of all kinds of "oops" stuff you could do that looks accidental but would be completely annoying to the squatters. Especially if done every day.
Daily "accidents" are "evidence." I'm not clear on how you mean this. And I can see how unsuccessful "under-the-table" attempts can only increase one's pain, rage, and frustration.
Terry, 230RN
-
Daily "accidents" are "evidence."
Then you just make sure once is enough >:D
-
Daily "accidents" are "evidence." I'm not clear on how you mean this. And I can see how unsuccessful "under-the-table" attempts can only increase one's pain, rage, and frustration.
Terry, 230RN
Evidence to whom? of what? That the neighborhood wants them to leave? That's not a secret.
Capsaicin being introduced to their tarps between midnight and 0400 frequently is probably illegal, but short of setting up game cams or a stakeout pretty hard to find evidence of a specific person doing it, if the homeless even call the cops. It's also probably nicer than what would happen in my town, which would be men with guns (and maybe uniforms) dragging them out, and destroying their shanty and meagar possessions while pointing them at the more "approved" areas to squat.
Even skipping the blocked sidewalks, and general shantytown look, there's no reason for anyone in the US to put up with an open sewer, and the disease it spreads. Shitting in a storm drain and letting rainwater carry it throuout the system is unacceptacle.
-
Evidence to whom? of what? That the neighborhood wants them to leave? That's not a secret.
Capsaicin being introduced to their tarps between midnight and 0400 frequently is probably illegal, but short of setting up game cams or a stakeout pretty hard to find evidence of a specific person doing it, if the homeless even call the cops. It's also probably nicer than what would happen in my town, which would be men with guns (and maybe uniforms) dragging them out, and destroying their shanty and meagar possessions while pointing them at the more "approved" areas to squat.
Even skipping the blocked sidewalks, and general shantytown look, there's no reason for anyone in the US to put up with an open sewer, and the disease it spreads. Shitting in a storm drain and letting rainwater carry it throuout the system is unacceptacle.
Whew. Sorry, I usually have personal ethical qualms about clandestine revenge-like tactics. "Probably illegal," indeed.
I mean evidence for them and against (unkown, ha!) you or the (unkown, ha!) neighbors in any counter-claim or harassment issue.
While it could be said that since they are in some kind of violation themselves, they therefore have no standing in a dispute. But the law (and popular opinion) seems to have changed into favoring "whoever has the loudest megaphone and is most downtrodden." Just seems that way. And I'm not necessarily talking about legally-defined evidence.
Just get some weepywimpy one-sided MSM reporter to interview them and see how that turns out after you and he neighbors have harasssed them daily frequently... and probably illegally.
"This is Miranda Veracruz de la Jolla Cardinal at the living space of this poor family of six, hoping the harassers of this downtrodden family of six with four little children and one who was almost blinded by the tear gas, are found out and given the justice they deserve, signing off."
I really don't know what you're arguing about, dogmush, especially since forum rules prohibit recommending (whatever that means) anything illegal.
Yeah, I know the riposte techniques...
You don't mean revenge...
You don't mean "illegal"...
You're not recommending...
:rofl:
-
Nope I definitely mean illegal. I said it in my previous post.
I'm arguing that in a case of such an enormous, years long lapse in the responsibilities that that neighborhood delegated to their local government, it is no longer immoral to fix the problem yourself, while still illegal.
I do take issue with claiming I am advocating revenge, as I am not. The purpose is to get those folks to either live like in such a way as they aren't a health hazard and infringing on property and rights of others, or move on and be shitbags elsewhere. That's not revenge, that's solving a clear problem.
I also was pointing out that in this particular case I think it's highly unlikely the couple in question is going to go to the police, or hire a lawyer for an harrassment claim, so that the problem solving, while illegal, is pretty low risk and could be done in a way that is unlikely to damage anyone.
I'm not sure why, or even how, one has ethical qualms about a neighborhood solving this problem after, again YEARS, of the local .Gov failing to do so. If you don't like my idea of rendering their shanty unlivable so they choose to move on, how would you handle the problem? Go hands on and beat them? Kidnap them and drop them in another state? Burn the shanty to the ground, or run through it with a vehicle? What's you legal and ethical solution to the open sewer in the stormwater system?
Can't say "Wait for the authorities", because that clearly isn't working.
-
As I said before, they should be deported. If they want to live in such squalor they can do so back in the turd-world country they came from. It's normal and acceptable there, not here.
-
. . . if the homeless even call the cops . . .
They may - there's a good chance they have free Obama phones. Or maybe it's now free Biden or free Mayorkas phones?
In any case, it's just a matter of time before some people might do something . . .
-
As I said before, they should be deported. If they want to live in such squalor they can do so back in the turd-world country they came from. It's normal and acceptable there, not here.
So your plan is wait for the authorities to do something.
Let's see how long that takes. We're 4 years and counting according to that news story.
What happens if the authorities do show up, and they have immigrated legally? Deport anyway? That's illegal. [Clutches pearls] =D
-
Back to the squatter in the OP
He's now reached reached feet first into a slow wood chipper level.
A serial squatter who hijacked a couple's $2 million New York City home has been trying to bleed them dry financially with massive utility bills and costly repairs, according to the homeowners.
Joseph and Susana Landa, both 68, are currently embroiled in a months-long eviction struggle with Brett Flores, 32.
They claim that Flores has been running up huge bills and even caused a sewage flood at the property, which they bought to live in with their disabled son.
The couple told Fox News, Flores had flooded the backyard by allowing a cesspool to get clogged on the property, which resulted in them being forced to rip up a porch and much of the property's landscaping.
And apparently he's a serial squatter
The couple say they were also shown evidence that Flores ‘had done this [squatting] before’ at homes in Ohio and California.
According to their lawyer Anthony Mordente, Flores told the couple he would only leave the property once he was paid in excess $100,000.
Serial squatter who hijacked millionaire NYC couple's $2M mansion tries to bleed them financially by blasting through their utilities and causing a vile sewage flood (before demanding $100,000 to leave)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13149569/squatter-Long-Island-couples-2-million-dream-home.html
WTF is this allowed to happen?
-
While reading that twitter thread I noticed this gem:
There are consultants who now get rid of squatters. Give the consultant a lease also and then the consultant moves in with the squatter and make things very uncomfortable for the squatter.
That usually gets the squatter out voluntarily quickly. The consultant gets their fee and owner gets their place back.
On one hand it's depressing there's enough of a market that that service exists, on the other, I kinda wonder what it costs and how to find such a consultant, just in case.
-
So your plan is wait for the authorities to do something.
Let's see how long that takes. We're 4 years and counting according to that news story.
What happens if the authorities do show up, and they have immigrated legally? Deport anyway? That's illegal. [Clutches pearls] =D
Deportation involves authorities not previously involved.
-
Deportation involves authorities not previously involved.
Valid point. Although those authorities don't seem super interested in actually deporting anyone right now. Maybe next Jan, if St. Louis is lucky.
-
Deportation involves authorities not previously involved.
Deportation involves another set of authorities who would rather turn a blind eye and kick the can down the road while providing lip service to those that need to hear something is being done.
bob
-
Back to the NY squatter in the story:
Does he ever leave the house? I guess it would be prudent to check with a NY attorney first, but my thought would be to wait until he's absent -- enter the house, change the locks, lock the doors, and camp inside. When he returns and tries to enter -- call the cops and report him from trying to break into YOUR home. Have all the documents proving your ownership (or copies thereof) handy to show Officer Friendly when he shows up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhz5r1JKwjs
-
My neighborhood is mostly fairly privileged folks... They order doordash and have the untouchables deliver it. They have ZERO clue about what to do about an "aggressive person" problem, other than call the police, and our police now know that if they get called, they're gonna show up after the excrement has contacted the air handler, in order to have significantly less personal liability. The mostly peaceful protests pounded that home.
My neighbors do NOT like hearing the words "mostly peaceful protests."
Gigglesnort.
-
Another:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB_hjqZQ1UY
-
Another:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB_hjqZQ1UY
Violation of probation.
Possibly go to jail for two years. Which solves the homeless problem. :rofl:
bob
-
This story makes me wonder if there are "squatter attorneys" who get paid by some dumbass commie NGO or by Soros. These squatters hired a lawyer, but the case quickly fell apart and they dropped their lawsuit against the rightful homeowner. Who is paying the attorney fees and court costs?
I know that ambulance chasers will take a case pro bono in hopes of a big payout, so if they lose a case, it's just a short term loss until the next insurance settlement . Yet here, there is no payout (or at least not a big one), so I have to assume some "squatter's rights" organization is providing the attorney or paying the fees.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/shake-shack-squatters-lawsuit-against-lawful-homeowners-discontinued-owner-wants-justice
-
I don't think there's any reason to think these squaters, who stole a million dollar duplex, and furnished it with mattresses, electronics, and a massage table among other things, don't have the money to hire a lawyer.
-
This story makes me wonder if there are "squatter attorneys" who get paid by some dumbass commie NGO or by Soros. These squatters hired a lawyer, but the case quickly fell apart and they dropped their lawsuit against the rightful homeowner. Who is paying the attorney fees and court costs?
I know that ambulance chasers will take a case pro bono in hopes of a big payout, so if they lose a case, it's just a short term loss until the next insurance settlement . Yet here, there is no payout (or at least not a big one), so I have to assume some "squatter's rights" organization is providing the attorney or paying the fees.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/shake-shack-squatters-lawsuit-against-lawful-homeowners-discontinued-owner-wants-justice
Probably something like that going on. They'll claim to be helping the unhoused, or housing equity, or something.
-
Filling a hole in the market
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QI6iRxaNagM
=D [popcorn]
-
What baffles me is why there haven't been any cases of squatters being shot by the owners.
-
What baffles me is why there haven't been any cases of squatters being shot by the owners.
Most homeowners know how that will go for them since in many states the law is on the side of the squatter. They may get rid of the squatter but then spend the rest of their lives in prison.
-
Most homeowners know how that will go for them since in many states the law is on the side of the squatter. They may get rid of the squatter but then spend the rest of their lives in prison.
That's quite true - but NOT ALL states consider home invaders and burglars to have squatter's rights. I can understand - note, I said understand, not support - states that won't let you summarily eject (let alone shoot) actual renters who stop paying rent per an agreement they signed with the actual owner, but siding with people who break in and won't leave, or have forged documents . . . :facepalm:
-
What baffles me is why there haven't been any cases of squatters being shot by the owners.
I have no experience with this sort of thing, but I imagine that if the home owners do it right, we would never hear about it.
-
That's quite true - but NOT ALL states consider home invaders and burglars to have squatter's rights. I can understand - note, I said understand, not support - states that won't let you summarily eject (let alone shoot) actual renters who stop paying rent per an agreement they signed with the actual owner, but siding with people who break in and won't leave, or have forged documents . . . :facepalm:
A lot of these tools are sophisticated enough that it's not immediately obvious to the police that they broke in, or that the documents are forged. Which is why they kick it over to the civil court side for an eviction.
I would be interested in if any of these PD's are following up on squatters that lose their civil case for fraud, burglary, or whatnot.
-
A lot of these tools are sophisticated enough that it's not immediately obvious to the police that they broke in, or that the documents are forged. Which is why they kick it over to the civil court side for an eviction.
I would be interested in if any of these PD's are following up on squatters that lose their civil case for fraud, burglary, or whatnot.
Does anyone know if New York counties have property tax information available online? Meaning, can they look up the name of the current registered owner? At the very least, the court should be able to look that up and determine the rightful owner really fast. Sounds like New York and other states have some crazy laws that a squatter can take advantage of.
-
A lot of these tools are sophisticated enough that it's not immediately obvious to the police that they broke in, or that the documents are forged. Which is why they kick it over to the civil court side for an eviction.
Yeah, it seems like a lot of these are the squatters claiming that they went through a rental company that turns out to be fake and have a lease from them, and that's when many cities give the squatters the benefit of the doubt. I'm sure that in some of those instances, the squatters were legitimately taken for a ride, though I'm going to guess that the percentage is small.
Even when that's the case, I'm not sure why the actual owner of the property has to take the hit. If someone buys stolen property and the cops track it down, they take the property from the buyer and return it to the owner. The buyer is out of luck - buyer beware. Somehow with housing, it's reversed and the owner is the one out of luck.
-
Because renter protection laws were written when it was mostly shady landlords doing shady *expletive deleted*it.
I don't agree with them all, but having had a shady landlord back in the day I can understand why we don't just allow them to show up, kick bad renters out, and change the locks. You would get (and did have) the real estate version of Buy Here, Pay here car dealers or Title loans.
Unfortunately, that protection also leaves the door open for the abuses from the other side we are talking about here.
Ideally, there'd be some hearing *very* early in the eviction process where you can claim that this is NOT a landlord-tenant dispute, but a case of squatting, and if it's found that there never existed a legit rental agreement at that hearing, the civil case stops, it kicks back to criminal proceedings, and arrest warrants are issued. That would require some liability on stupid, but legit renters to make sure they have copies of leases to provide the courts, but nothing's perfect.
Government being what it is, I suspect you will see their answer is there needs to be more government, probably in the form of an state or county office of lease approvals, that is required to review and approve all leases, and you can't rent real estate without registering it with the .gov. There will, of course, be a small fee to cover administration expenses of the new office. [barf]
-
My Mom's house sat vacant for a couple of weeks between the time I put it on the market and when it finally closed.
I was worried, not that someone was going to cop a squat in the place, but that someone was going to break in and start stripping out the copper and bronze pipes and the electrical wiring, if not the cast iron radiators and the Victorian-era woodwork.
-
That's quite true - but NOT ALL states consider home invaders and burglars to have squatter's rights. I can understand - note, I said understand, not support - states that won't let you summarily eject (let alone shoot) actual renters who stop paying rent per an agreement they signed with the actual owner, but siding with people who break in and won't leave, or have forged documents . . . :facepalm:
It's the forged documents part that gets sticky. What with the sea of bogus rental listings, dealing with renters signing lease agreements in good faith only to later find they've been duped gets complicated. Unfortunately, it also makes them a harmed party, often one with no recourse and/or alternate housing. Ultimately, they have no right to be in the property, sure, but laws, courts, and law enforcement have to dance delicately in that respect lest the victimization be compounded.
People who move in with the intent to defraud? No. Boot them. Now. Would be nice if owners had some kind "Not for rent" registry, a preemptive Kiss My ass to anyone with nefarious intent. Unsure how something like this would be administered, though.
Brad
-
If a court takes a squatter's forged rental, lease, or sale agreement seriously, doesn't the court have to take a forged pardon for shooting the home invader or burglar seriously as well?
-
If a court takes a squatter's forged rental, lease, or sale agreement seriously, doesn't the court have to take a forged pardon for shooting the home invader or burglar seriously as well?
How do you know it's forged and the landlord didn't just change their mind?
For that matter, what about the millions of people that are renting month to month without a lease? Not smart, but it shouldn't mean the landlords can just throw them out on the street. And I say that as a Landlord. I would NEVER let someone move in without a lease to protect us both, but there's plenty of people that do, on both sides of the rent relationship, decide to forgo that paperwork. Tenant protection laws exist because people were actually getting victimized in living memory.
-
Because renter protection laws were written when it was mostly shady landlords doing shady *expletive deleted*it.
I don't agree with them all, but having had a shady landlord back in the day I can understand why we don't just allow them to show up, kick bad renters out, and change the locks. You would get (and did have) the real estate version of Buy Here, Pay here car dealers or Title loans.
Unfortunately, that protection also leaves the door open for the abuses from the other side we are talking about here.
Ideally, there'd be some hearing *very* early in the eviction process where you can claim that this is NOT a landlord-tenant dispute, but a case of squatting, and if it's found that there never existed a legit rental agreement at that hearing, the civil case stops, it kicks back to criminal proceedings, and arrest warrants are issued. That would require some liability on stupid, but legit renters to make sure they have copies of leases to provide the courts, but nothing's perfect.
Government being what it is, I suspect you will see their answer is there needs to be more government, probably in the form of an state or county office of lease approvals, that is required to review and approve all leases, and you can't rent real estate without registering it with the .gov. There will, of course, be a small fee to cover administration expenses of the new office. [barf]
I was thinking about some system to register lease agreements also. And yes, the fees would likely get too large and the local govts would likely try to pile inspection or safety requirements on the landlords.
Texas has a standard rent/lease agreement form that just about everyone uses (that was the case when I rented apartments 20 years ago). I don't know if that helps this situation or not.
-
i also think that this problem is more geographically constrained than the mess of internet videos makes it appear. I know in FL, it's pretty hard to evict a tenant, but it's also more difficult to establish "residency" then the stories we are reading about here seem to claim. A couple pieces of mail and a doordash receipt ain't gonna cut it.
Perhaps NY and CA and a couple other places have swung a little too far towards the "help the poor innocent tenant against the rich old landlord" in their laws and need to dial it back a bit without going all the way to allowing 24 hr notice evictions.
Has anyone looked at how prevalent these situations are, and if they are clustered in certain states, I wonder?
-
i also think that this problem is more geographically constrained than the mess of internet videos makes it appear. I know in FL, it's pretty hard to evict a tenant, but it's also more difficult to establish "residency" then the stories we are reading about here seem to claim. A couple pieces of mail and a doordash receipt ain't gonna cut it.
Perhaps NY and CA and a couple other places have swung a little too far towards the "help the poor innocent tenant against the rich old landlord" in their laws and need to dial it back a bit without going all the way to allowing 24 hr notice evictions.
Has anyone looked at how prevalent these situations are, and if they are clustered in certain states, I wonder?
Seems like 99% of the stories I hear about are California or New York. I have noticed that trend. I just assumed other states had laws that were not so easily manipulated.
-
Perhaps NY and CA and a couple other places have swung a little too far towards the "help the poor innocent tenant against the rich old landlord" in their laws and need to dial it back a bit without going all the way to allowing 24 hr notice evictions.
It's certainly why I got out of landlording in California. The laws were becoming ridiculously one-sided even back when I was living there. The big corporations could thread the legal needle with their attorneys, but it was getting to the point that individual landlords could get wiped out with one bad tenant.
-
"but it was getting to the point that individual landlords could get wiped out with one bad tenant."
Thats because you slumlords were making everyone else look bad! You should be ashamed of yourself!
Friends of mine have invested quite heavily in rental properties over the years. They have probably a dozen, split between houses and multi-unit apartment buildings.
For the most part he's been lucky, but there's simply no way in hell that I would ever enter into that kind of market in a direct owner fashion as he has.
-
Apparently the UK has squatter problems too.
https://www.foxnews.com/world/gordon-ramsays-uk-pub-taken-brazen-squatters-threaten-legal-action-evicted