Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Delinquent tax of $30.17 leads to foreclosure of home
Teh Daily News ^ | June 07, 2002 | Shelly Strautz

Posted on 06/10/2002 12:24:25 PM PDT by Alan Chapman

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last
The county will probably end up spending thousands of dollars defending itself.
1 posted on 06/10/2002 12:24:25 PM PDT by Alan Chapman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Alan Chapman
10 bucks says it has to do with some development company trying to get the land cheap. The reason why I say this, is that when stupid things happen like this, there's usually another reason behind it. Look at what happened to those kids out there in Utah that lost their home. They lost their house, and it was stolen from them. That is what appears to be happening here.
2 posted on 06/10/2002 12:27:42 PM PDT by MadRobotArtist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alan Chapman
The county will probably end up spending thousands of dollars defending itself.

In other news, TYCO saved close to $1,000,000,000 in federal taxes over the past three years by registering as a Bahamas corporation instead of out of their headquarters on the East Coast.

But God forbid that any ordinary citizen dodge $30 of personal property tax. Off with their heads. Let them eat cake.

3 posted on 06/10/2002 12:30:57 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alan Chapman
"The payment of property taxes is a Constitutional duty."

Hahahahahahhaa!
4 posted on 06/10/2002 12:36:27 PM PDT by billybudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alan Chapman
This situation proves what was being discussed last night and today on this thread: that America did not defeat communism. That, in fact, communism has defeated America without firing a single shot.

Socialism/communism's foundational premise is that there is no private ownership of land/resources... that it all belongs to the state. People are "allowed" to use the land by the grace of the state.

So what can it be called when a man has a piece of paper saying that he is the master of a parcel of land and everything on it, but in order to continue using it the state extorts a "users' fee" out of him? Can that legitimately still be considered "private ownership"? And if not that, what else can it possibly be but socialism?

5 posted on 06/10/2002 12:37:22 PM PDT by Darth Sidious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alan Chapman
Time to "accidentally" start a house fire!
6 posted on 06/10/2002 12:38:48 PM PDT by Bommer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: all

      

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
Send PayPal direct to JimRob@psnw.com

7 posted on 06/10/2002 12:39:07 PM PDT by WIMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadRobotArtist
10 bucks says it has to do with some development company trying to get the land cheap. The reason why I say this, is that when stupid things happen like this, there's usually another reason behind it.

I agree...isn't this a piece of lakefront property?
8 posted on 06/10/2002 12:44:43 PM PDT by wheezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Alan Chapman
What state is this in? Almost all states give the property owner a year to pay off the taxes even after the property is sold in a tax sale. If that isn't the case, it would be one great state to buy property at a tax sale.
9 posted on 06/10/2002 12:54:36 PM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alan Chapman
Akens admits that he received a notification in early December, 2001, stating that he owed $271.04, due that month. He mailed payment, but it was not received by the treasurer's office until Jan. 3, 2002.

At that time an additional penalty was assessed and interest began accruing, bringing the current total to $30.17.

A Feb. 4, 2002, foreclosure hearing set the ball rolling for final foreclosure. However, Sawdy said Akens still had a 21-day redemption period in which he could have paid the final bill.

I have never, ever, in my life heard of a county being able to foreclose on a property because a penalty had not been paid, and was only about 30 days delinquent. This just doesn't make sense.

A bank can't forclose on you until 90-days of non-payment - and they own interest in the property.

In all reality, the mortgage company is probably legally responisble in this case.

10 posted on 06/10/2002 12:56:04 PM PDT by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
What state is this in? Almost all states give the property owner a year to pay off the taxes even after the property is sold in a tax sale. If that isn't the case, it would be one great state to buy property at a tax sale.

Yes, I thought there were some odd things about the tax foreclosure policy myself. A penalty that has been assessed due to a late payment results in a foreslosure within 30 days of non-payment of the penalty? Even after the actual taxes were payed?

11 posted on 06/10/2002 12:59:27 PM PDT by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Alan Chapman
"The payment of property taxes is a Constitutional duty."

There is certainly no such duty outlined in the Constitution!

IMHO, property and income taxes are an abomination. Both are simply means to an end — confiscation of personal property!

Property taxes are especially absurd when they are based on the appraised value of homes, which prevents many aging couples from living in the same home that they have owned for 30+ years because the appraised value (and their property taxes) increases annually.

The government needs to stop stealing people's property before they piss some of us off!!!

12 posted on 06/10/2002 1:01:24 PM PDT by TexRef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
Either the chronology is wrong, or the county is grossly violating the law.
13 posted on 06/10/2002 1:03:42 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Either the chronology is wrong, or the county is grossly violating the law.

It must be a very small county, too. Most counties wouldn't/couldn't even get around to foresclosure hearings, or even compile a list of delinquent taxes, for months or years! You can plain fail to pay your taxes one year, and you will just be assessed a penalty. No county I have ever heard of tries to forclose on a property within a month of non-payment. Hell, he paid his taxes, just not a penalty assessed for late payment.

14 posted on 06/10/2002 1:08:48 PM PDT by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
He needs to go into court and argue that payments to the government are made on the date mailed, not the date received. That is how people can mail their income taxes on April 15 and not several days before.
15 posted on 06/10/2002 1:20:01 PM PDT by KellyAdmirer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: All
You know what would be REALLY TOO FUNNY?

Have about a thousand people band together and meet at the foreclosure proceedings (notify the media) and buy the house and give it back to this guy. Just have the current owner stipulate to return any excess cash above the tax to those who purchased it from the county. [I believe the county must give any sale proceeds to the owner, over and above the tax and the cost of collection . . . not sure, though].

Anybody remember "Dan's bake sale" that Rush did (it started as a joke)?

16 posted on 06/10/2002 1:28:26 PM PDT by Gig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: KellyAdmirer
He needs to go into court and argue that payments to the government are made on the date mailed, not the date received. That is how people can mail their income taxes on April 15 and not several days before.

True. I would think that would setle the issue, assuming the payment was postmarked December 31 or before. Anyway, the part that baffles me is that they are foreclsoing over a late payment penalty that was only overdue for thirty days. Surely the law does not allow that.

17 posted on 06/11/2002 6:04:50 AM PDT by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: billbears; Constitution Day; 4ConservativeJustices
Check this out: "The payment of property taxes is a Constitutional duty."

We've got a real Constitutional scholar on the case!
This sounds like one of those credit card company scams where they hold your payment to make it late and then charge you the late fee.

18 posted on 06/11/2002 6:09:17 AM PDT by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alan Chapman
"The payment of property taxes is a Constitutional duty."

OK, anyone know how to find this woman's email address so we can ask her about this? Granted, one has to pay his property taxes, but to call it a constitutinal duty makes one wonder what constitution this woman has read.

19 posted on 06/11/2002 6:12:55 AM PDT by Rodney King
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner; billbears
State Rep. Patty Birkholz, R-Saugatuck, was one of the sponsors of PA-123.

Good grief.

This woman is a Republican? She must be a Jim Jeffords-style GOP'er.

20 posted on 06/11/2002 6:16:41 AM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson