Yep. The homeowners would be better off forming a coalition and letting him decide between 1) a fair price for all the land and 2) not one damn cent from any of them. I suspect, faced with the prospect of not recouping anything, he's sell them the property at a more reasonable price.
451 posted on 5/14/02 9:19 AM Pacific by NittanyLion [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 441 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
I had a couple of "neighbors" suggest what I could and could not do with my property, this was after I re-established the legal boundries that they had inadvertantly borrowed 50 feet or so of to plant a hedge row. They owned one acre parcels.
Guess what? When I suggested that A) They either keep to there own land or b) Learn to live with a 1,000 Hog farm in there back yard they decided to become civilized.
I think he's free to sell at whatever price he chooses, or not at all. My point is, these homeowners would be better served to form a coalition and negotiate with him than to try to employ the force of government. He is free to turn their offer down or accept it, but faced with the prospect of NO ONE buying the land, he may become more amenable to their offer.