It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Family returns home from visiting dying relative to find stranger has moved into their house, change

page: 3
27
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 12:25 PM
link   
The news story, the post, and the thread are a bit short on facts. Every state has Quiet Title statutes and also Adverse Possession laws. In most states, adverse possession requires somewhere between 7 to 10 years open, notorious, and hostile possession of the property. Does not sound like this guy has been in possession for very long if the family was only gone to visit a dying relative. A temporary absence is not an abandonment of the property. That's where the story is short on facts. The police are not doing their job. Neither is the lawyer who represents the homeowners. They should have had this guy forcibly removed by the sheriff per court order within a very short period of time. The article suggests that the squatter has a lawyer. I'd like to know who his dimwit lawyer is.




posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   

dubiousone
The news story, the post, and the thread are a bit short on facts. I'd like to know who his dimwit lawyer is.



I agree the story is very short on facts.

If this actually got to court the ball was dropped on so many levels beforehand.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Unity_99
To me this is being done by someone sanctioned by PTB and black ops to make sovereign movements look bad.

You don't need any crazy news to make the “sovereign movement” look bad, it makes itself look bad all on its own. Its all pseudo internet law, none of it stands up one iota in court, there is TONS of case law against it, and all the folks who try it eventually end up either in prison or mental institutions.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
I'd say if it's a provocateur that's it's being done to get rid of squatting laws, which are a last bastion of hope against banks doing what this man did.

But more than likely it's not a provocateur, just some *snip* nutjob causing chaos in people's lives.
edit on 2-12-2013 by Asktheanimals because: vulgarity removed



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Komodo
Personally...I think you might be right..

How would he know they aren't home? He, or a group/gang of spies would have to know when they actually did leave, what their routine was etc...




Unity_99
To me this is being done by someone sanctioned by PTB and black ops to make sovereign movements look bad.

In any case, I would have some big mean people remove him and slap him with an enormous law suit for all the things missing. He'd be in jail in the end.


mail hold at the post office?

does he have access to that info?

thieves have used this method before. Have a contact in the USPS, it is beyond simple.

And why I never will do mail hold.. learned that as a little mail clerk for my military unit after injured and rehabbing.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 02:18 PM
link   

trueblue53
reply to post by Komodo
 

GET YOUR GUN LICENSE OUT,,CLEAN THE GUN AND GO GET IT BACK




Why a license? Do we need permission to take back our property?

Do it anyway.

Peace



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Well, if that have been me, I'd assume a home invasion was in progress; I'd break down the (my) door, and kill the s. o. b. In SC, we have the castle rule here...you're in my house uninvited, you're going to get ventilated. You come home to a robbery in progress in your home, you can use deadly force.

Problem solved.
edit on 2-12-2013 by jjsdietfitness because: forgot a sentence...



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Tylerdurden1
 


Man, don't use caulk. Silicone has literally no holding power, it's a sealant.

If you want to mess with his day, get the large tube of PL premium 8X, a large caulking gun, do all the doors and windows on the ground floor. He will literally have to break the door out of the frame to open it.

Caulk, whether polyurethane or silicone is not very strong, and even if it held the door shut a good 18mm olfa will cut that right out. PL, you literally have to take a chisel too, and even then good luck.

It will glue glass, porcelain, ceramic, wood, cement, brick, all metal, it eats most plastics and foam, It's wicked stuff.

That or get one of those pro grade insulating spray foam tanks, if you lay it on thicker than six inches it self immolates though, and it can't be put out until it burns itself out...

There's a good one... Empty the 15Litre tank in his car and walk away, it will catch fire and burn to the concrete.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by dubiousone
 





. A temporary absence is not an abandonment of the property.


Even a long term absence should not matter. As long as a person holds the title to the house and property, and is paying property taxes - its not abandoned.

We have a house that we haven't been to in 2 years. We've heard that a couple of people in the area have referred to it as "abandoned", yet we're still paying the mortgage, taxes, insurance, and even keeping it heated in the winter.
We keep in touch with the neighbours to keep an eye on it.

There's no law that says you can't own a house and leave it empty.

If someone was to try to take it by moving in, I'm sure the mortgage holder and our lawyer would have something to say about that.


(post by jctcle removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Here seems to be the glitch. It happened this past week here. Basically, the person moved in, produced paperwork looking legit...said they 'aint gettin out.

Police were called. When Police arrived...they told the legal homeowner they could do nothing as ...legal or not, right or wrong, forged or whatever....they could make no determination to have the offending squatters move, because they produced paperwork.

As such...the Police informed the 2 parties that therefore...with paperwork involved...it was a matter for a judge and the courts. The squatter stays until then....legally.

Another here was a woman returning home after being overseas for some months. Finding a woman had moved into the house and made substantial repairs like a new roof, kitchen remodeling etc. She was not leaving stating she fixed it up and wasnt going anywhere. Because of the repairs and a questionable deed...the owner must co-habitate in the same house until the court date with the squatter.

This is just a couple ways these thieves are getting away with this. Until a court determines ownership...the real owners cannot do anything-legal or otherwise without fear of being thrown in jail themselves...because according to authorities...it is a legal issue for the courts...and Law Enforcement can do nothing to make them move.

And neither can the legal homeowners......



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 04:43 PM
link   

RickyD
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Yes and I have as well...but since when do people like that (he sure don't look like a hippy/grunge kid/homeless squatter) try to take 11 homes? All the people I've seen like that would just go for the one so they had somewhere to stay. I can not see any other way this could be except this is propaganda to make a movement they feel is threatening be viewed under a bad light. Obviously the movement threatens them because the dhs already considers them terrorists.


Someone with what they believe is a loophole can make untold fortunes. I can't go into details without getting a little too personal....but I know folks who have made a lot of money by taking advantage of loopholes. Not that I think they are good people...they typically are not.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 04:56 PM
link   
The guy is using a legal loophole. He finds homes in forclosure and then watches to see if the people leave them. This the time when things get loopy. The bank has not taken possesion of it and the owner appears to have abandoned it. This loophole is being also used by banks to avoid paying upkeep fees on homes. They file forclosure, the family walks away and nobody owns the house, so cities and counties are stuck with millions in spending on keeping the grass mowed and keeping homes from becoming dangerous to kids etc. I would guess these people went on their trip while their home was in forclosure and when they did since they were away for awhile most likely shut off water and power. This guy just moved on in assuming they had abandoned it and was most likely going to rent it out for a few years before the bank would finaly take possesion of it. It has happened a few times.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by soficrow
 

I was just about to post this. Glad its the very first response.

This type of squatting has ZERO to do with sovereign citizenship. I can claim to be an elephant, that doesnt make me one.

Furthermore, the article contradicts itself. First they claim that sovereign citizens obey their own laws then they tell us that this Carr character went to an establishment court to evoke an establishment law to obtain an establishment document called a "quiet title"...

This hit piece should make one thing absolutely clear, the establishment is SCARED of the real sovereign citizen movement.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Unity_99
To me this is being done by someone sanctioned by PTB and black ops to make sovereign movements look bad.

In any case, I would have some big mean people remove him and slap him with an enormous law suit for all the things missing. He'd be in jail in the end.


YOUR answer to everything is the PTB any proof of your claim NO, like most posts you make.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Komodo
 


This guy is a ringer for the Hodgetwins...and by that I mean he looks similar...I'm not saying he's related...don't get all butt hurt..

edit on 2-12-2013 by chrismarco because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   
If he can be a sovereign citizen with laws of his own, then so can the previous owners, with laws of their own. A baseball bat up side the . of the occupier would be a law that the previous owners could declare.
What's fair is fair.
Anarchy for all seems to be a right in America, not a privilege.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Imho he should play by the sovereign citizens rules. Wait till the guy gose to the grocery store break in change the locks and throw that sovereign citizen mumbo jumbo back in his face.



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 05:27 PM
link   
I suspect a movement all over the continent to try and steal homes, a smear job bullying trying to force communism or fascism mafia type fear tactics, and that these guys are black ops, fbi agents or trained by them. I already know cia types work black markets and streets alot. And try to recruit teens and kids, my friend and I stopped such involvement with her grandson and that guys chin dropped when he saw us. He had the look of being busted, and that he knew we knew.

Been researching and apparently these guys can move in, produce fakery for forms and so the police won't act, it has to take months to go before a judge instead.

And to try and fake some kind of verbal agreement they often start on repairs to make it look like they're paying some kind of repairs for rent.

Like I said, they'd be out in a flash, and the court would be viewing their criminal behavior with you in your home, them living under whatever rock they crawl under, and I'd make darn sure they didn't feel all that safe because the towns bouncers would have bounced them.

And what is creepy is its not just out of town.

My aunt in revelstoke returned home from either a short trip visiting relatives for a couple days, or shopping/banking or some other thing, and both her front door and back door wouldn't respond to the keys, and in the end, believe it was on a sunday, her son in law managed to replace the doorhandles and locks for her.

She's never gotten to the bottom of it, why it happened. How she came home a couple hours later (or a couple days) and couldn't get in. Still a mystery.

And revelstoke is a small town, not the kind of place where this kind of thing happens.

I imagine once you get the judge to evict, and have all costs awarded to them, and damage or loss of items, that chances of recovery any money from these folks is like recovery it from a stone.

But then they may end up in jail if they don't pay.




edit on 2-12-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2013 @ 05:39 PM
link   
I wish I could find articles on actual court case findings.

realestate.aol.com...

[ex[Despite a judge's ruling that a pair of squatters vacate a Colorado couple's home in two days, two weeks later they are still there, forcing the home's owners to stay put in a relative's basement.

Troy and Dayna Donovan (pictured above) had spent a few months away from their home in Littleton, Colo., and when they returned late last year they found another couple, who claimed that they bought the house, living there.

Even after a judge's ruling this couple were still there. Wonder how long it took then?



Earlier this month, the Donovans won an eight-month legal battle against the two in their home, and a judge ordered Fernandez-Beleta and Levya-Caraveo to vacate in two days....

As CBS Denver reported, Fernandez-Beleta and Levya-Caraveo have filed a "flurry of legal paperwork," and are still living in the home on Mabre Court (pictured below). First, the two took the Donovans to court after the Donovans walked into the house through an unlocked door. The home occupants said that they were afraid for their safety and they were granted a restraining order, keeping the Donovans away from their own home....

Then, Fernandez-Beleta filed for bankruptcy, canceling the entire eviction process just hours before sheriffs were scheduled to remove them from the property.

"The Sheriff's Office will not proceed with an eviction if there is a bankruptcy in question,"


So legally, unlawfully actually, they have dragged this on and on and on despite a judge's ruling.

Who pays for all of that?

What you can't pay, do they steal your house?
edit on 2-12-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
27
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join