Posted on 03/29/2024 11:54:59 AM PDT by nickcarraway
Yes.
Man. I’m more concerned with civil asset forfeiture.
*Squatters rights* should NEVER have been a thing to begin with.
It’s theft and theft should never be given a pass.
If you want property, buy it yourself.
It may be hard to completely get rid of it - it’s been around since the early Middle Ages. I don’t know if Congress would vote for a law.
someone moves into a home and falsely claims (often with the aid of fraudulent documents) to be the legitimate owner or tenant.Or someone falsely claims to own a property, and leases it to someone else.
In which case the tenant is just as much a victim as the owner.
BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! BLAM!
(reload)
BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! BLAM!
Now then; What squatters?
Squatters vs adverse possession. Adverse possession generally requires upkeep/improvements and a payment of property taxes. Otherwise, if I’m paying the property taxes, even if the place sits empty, it should never be up to someone else to grab.
The recent squatter epidemic is a very dangerous knock on effect of a more pernicious underlying problem of valuation. The median home price in the US is $450K. That’s insane. The people that own those homes will fight like hell to keep those values up. Those folks have a real stake in keeping inventory low. And the courts and LEOs aren’t built or equipped to handle the squatters that result.
He’s been involved in a dispute with an HOA board member over an unrelated matter, and the HOA guy has been trying to trespass across my client’s property to get to the HOA lot — just to be an intrusive @sshole.
My client’s lawyer has told him that he can file to get possession of the HOA lot under the state’s adverse possession (“squatter’s rights”) law if he has exclusive access to it for 35 years and he maintains it as if it belongs to him.
THIS is a legitimate application of a “squatter’s rights” law, in my honest opinion.
We’ll have AI and automation so many people will lose their jobs soon. Then we will have universal basic income. So in theory, we can tear down whole neighborhoods in cities like Buffalo, then we can 3D print houses. It’ll be real cheap. No reason for you to live in New York City or Austin, TX. You shouldn’t live there unless you have money.
“The Bloomberg article suggests a few reasons why these episodes might be happening more often.”
Then it totally fails to pin the problem on ultra-liberal pro-tenant laws that make it almost impossible to evict tenants backed by ultra-liberal DAs and judges.
We ran afoul of that mess 40 years ago with the first and only rental property we’ve owned. The tenant paid two rents, then quit. It took four or five months to get him legally evicted in Santa Cruz County (CA) and he utterly destroyed the place. Water and power had been shut off, but he continued to use the toilets. Knee-deep in filth and porn. Fixtures and all appurtenances on the hot tub were stolen.
Now we have to worry about going away for a couple of weeks and the bastards move in. Of course, things are different here in Idaho.
Squatter’s rights is an oxymoron.
I live in remote area, I have guns and a backhoe….and I show my neighbors where the keys for the BH are too, so that they don’t even have to wake me to help, if they don’t want to.
If you cannot immediately remove them, shooting them if necessary, then Yes.
There ARE NO SQUATTERS RIGHTS!!! Stop accepting the premise!!!
If I were to find a nice streamside site, set up camp, maybe even something more durable, can I claim squatter’s rights? Will the government let me stay on their land? How quickly can they remove me? Seems laws for private should match laws for public and vice versa.
Adverse occupancy, the correct term for “squatter”, is recognized if the property is in fact abandoned for more than a set period of time, but this is in terms of YEARS, not weeks or months. To swoop in almost with the departure of the prior resident’s moving van gives the new “occupant” virtually no rights whatsoever.
South Carolina, I believe, has some pretty lenient adverse occupancy rights, because when General Sherman was sweeping through the South on his march to the sea, the county courthouses, where all land records were kept, were burnt to the ground, and ownership could not be verified from the ashes that remained. Neighbors of a disputed property could simply move their fences, which would normally be treated as an encroachment, and without the records, the owner of the property thus attached had no recourse in the law. If the encroachment lasts for a period of several years, it is recognized as a legal boundary.
"Are 'Squatters' Rights' Out of Control?"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
There is no such thing as squatters “rights” imo, such rights just another example of desperate Democrats and RINOs dreaming up politically correct rights to effectively buy votes to stay in power.
If your state wants to give strangers access to your house, then the only constitutional option that the states have is to buy your property imo, evidenced by 5th Amendment.
The problem is that we are currently stuck with a worthless Congress that is not doing its 14th Amendment duty to make penal laws to discourage state actors from effectively abridging your 5th Amendment (5A) property protections.
In fact, it in some cases it's probably easier for citizen voters to effectively "evict" lawmaking “squatters” from the nation's capitol in November, replacing them with Trump-supporting patriots who will strengthen your 5A protections, than it is to deal with local and state lawmakers to get squatters out of your house.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.