Yeah, you've been here long enough to know that's not how it works. If you made the claim, you have to back it up. I'm not going to do your research for you.
Regardless, I was able to access the article without any trouble and read it in its entirety before posting.
The article is a re-hash of what's in this article.
What you claimed was that he had permission from the landowner and that this changed once the 'busy-bodies' got involved.
Where is the quote attributed to the landowner as having made any such statement.
The squatter said he had permission. Yet, he also says that the site is a hunting/fishing camp and as such doesn't need to adhere to residential zoning ordinances.
The sole source of that quote in both articles comes from the squatter and no one else.
This is the same guy who claims the 'house' he's lived in for the past 27 years isn't his residence.
Yeah, you’ve been here long enough to know that’s not how it works.
***In anticipation of your snark, I posted the link and the excerpt. I detect that you are in gotta-be-petulant-no-matter-what mode.
If you made the claim, you have to back it up. I’m not going to do your research for you.
***It WAS in the article. So now it is time for you to back off.
Regardless, I was able to access the article without any trouble and read it in its entirety before posting.
***Oh, so you’re just being a jerk. Got it.
The article is a re-hash of what’s in this article.
***Kinda what I was getting at. The original article was written before it burned down.
What you claimed was that he had permission from the landowner and that this changed once the ‘busy-bodies’ got involved.
***The evidence supports that position. The family has owned the land since 1963, the guy said it was a verbal agreement and courts will acknowledge that if both sides proceed along the lines of a verbal agreement, then there was a verbal agreement.
Where is the quote attributed to the landowner as having made any such statement.
The squatter said he had permission. Yet, he also says that the site is a hunting/fishing camp and as such doesn’t need to adhere to residential zoning ordinances.
The sole source of that quote in both articles comes from the squatter and no one else.
***It was in the article. You said you read it. Perhaps the problem is in your reading comprehension capabilities.
This is the same guy who claims the ‘house’ he’s lived in for the past 27 years isn’t his residence.
***I saw the pictures, it was actually quite a nice looking ‘house’ and nice looking house. So what is your point when you say ‘house’? As far as the claim about residence, he seems to be trying to rest on the claim that it’s a hunting lodge.