06-03-2008, 04:02 PM | #1 (permalink) | |
Tilted Cat Head
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
|
Foreclosure Nation: Squatters or Pioneers?
Quote:
Here though you have someone squatting. Squatters in NYC got prime real estate now because they stayed in dank, worthless buildings during the worst of times, citing "adverse possession" which included continuous occupancy for 10 years. I'm looking at investment properties now because there are some great bargains, I definitely am sensitive to the idea that some homeless guys, druggies, prostitutes, or even teenagers looking for a place to party will be my inadvertant neighbors. I think that this seems like a great cause and reason, but I don't want it to happen next to my house.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. |
|
06-03-2008, 04:10 PM | #2 (permalink) |
Upright
Location: reykjavík, iceland
|
like it said in the article, would you like the shuttered up house next to yours to become a crack den or be squatted by ppl hard on their luck?
__________________
mother nature made the aeroplane, and the submarine sandwich, with the steady hands and dead eye of a remarkable sculptor. she shed her mountain turning training wheels, for the convenience of the moving sidewalk, that delivers the magnetic monkey children through the mouth of impossible calendar clock, into the devil's manhole cauldron. physics of a bicycle, isn't it remarkable? |
06-03-2008, 04:14 PM | #3 (permalink) |
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
This is a no brainer as far as I'm concerned. The homeless people in this equation have an opportunity to set precedent by showing the homes respect. If they do, then it will become a lot more difficult to say not to this. Personally, I would have no problems with a vacant house in my neighborhood temporarily acting as a home for someone who needs it.
|
06-03-2008, 04:15 PM | #4 (permalink) | |
Kick Ass Kunoichi
Location: Oregon
|
Quote:
I think they're doing a good thing--getting people who need housing housed. Yes, their methods are a little questionable, but I wouldn't be surprised if this caught on elsewhere, and using a home for a home is certainly an improvement over a crack den.
__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau |
|
06-03-2008, 04:17 PM | #5 (permalink) | |
Tilted Cat Head
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
|
Quote:
There are a couple buildings here in NYC that have been completely boarded up for as long as I can remember. The owners wish to keep it as such as opposed to have to put money into it to bring it up to whatever. Some of them are rather large buildings one the size of a high school, the other a smaller building maybe supports 5-6 families. If the government would like to start a program or a grassroots organization that raises funds and pays a fee to the bank who owns the property, then I'd be in agreement with it happening. What I don't see is that the bank would allow someone to live in the property for a "nominal" fee which is less than what they could get just by the write downs (I don't when it changed from write offs, but whatever...) and the property staying empty.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. |
|
06-03-2008, 05:45 PM | #6 (permalink) |
sufferable
|
Ive wondered why it is that my city doesnt contract with parking garages to provide at least a roof and walls from our winter rain and wind before I realized the big problem is liability. Who is responsible if something happens to a person on the property or if something happens to the property itself?
__________________
As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons...be cheerful; strive for happiness - Desiderata |
06-03-2008, 05:59 PM | #7 (permalink) | |
Tilted Cat Head
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
|
Quote:
City Harvest collects lots of food from many restaurants and "events" but the food needs to be kept with strict protocols because they cannot or do not want to be liable if people get sick. It's a shame sometimes because we'd have lots of food left over from video shoots on a daily basis... alot of which got thrown away.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. |
|
06-05-2008, 12:04 PM | #10 (permalink) | |
Evil Priest: The Devil Made Me Do It!
Location: Southern England
|
Quote:
Because the owners know that in time (maybe years) the price will bounce right back. Say you bought a house for $50k in the 90s. Last year it was worth $250k. That's $200 in your pocket. Bu today it's empty and you'd have to drop th price to $100k to clear it. You know that in 10 years time it'll be worth $300k. Why sell now at a "loss" of $200k investment income? Under English law, if squatters move in and stay, they get rights to rent or even OWN the place after certain durations, so keeping it vacant and policing that could well be your pension fund. You sell it cheap to help the homeless you can be sure the homeless aren't going to help you during your now unfunded retirement.
__________________
╔═════════════════════════════════════════╗
Overhead, the Albatross hangs motionless upon the air, And deep beneath the rolling waves, In labyrinths of Coral Caves, The Echo of a distant time Comes willowing across the sand; And everthing is Green and Submarine ╚═════════════════════════════════════════╝ |
|
06-05-2008, 10:19 PM | #11 (permalink) | |
Tilted Cat Head
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
|
I just looked at a home that looks like it was lived in by homeless people. For me to bring it up to move in standards it will cost me about $10,000. Without the fixing up that either the homeless or idiotic foreclosee it would be about $5,000.
Quote:
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. Last edited by Cynthetiq; 06-05-2008 at 10:20 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost |
|
06-05-2008, 10:28 PM | #12 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: Chicago
|
a house that stays empty for too long becomes a problem structurally, anyways. Like it or not, squatters living in it keep it structurally sound.
__________________
"I can normally tell how intelligent a man is by how stupid he thinks I am" - Cormac McCarthy, All The Pretty Horses |
06-06-2008, 12:17 PM | #13 (permalink) |
Liquid Diamonds
Location: Lexington, KY
|
Maybe the solution would be to have an agency that oversees "renting" the foreclosed homes at a reduced rate, available only by screening income. That way the houses have occupants but they're not considered squatters because they are paying some form of rent. Or pay it by some other means, like keeping the yard and house maintained. Basically - they shouldn't get something for nothing. It encourages apathy.. but give people a way to earn a place to call home. Then maybe all parties involved could benefit.
Maybe it's too simplistic, but could it work if inspections were carried out every so often and you had to meet certain guidelines to qualify? I certainly wouldn't want to be the neighbor of a party of squatters getting into drugs and mischief. It's bad for everyone. But a struggling, working down-on-their-luck family is another matter, I think it would be nice to give them a chance to use a vacant home.
__________________
Kim |
06-07-2008, 09:52 PM | #14 (permalink) | ||
Tilted Cat Head
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
|
Quote:
Asset Managers are very interested in getting houses off their books. Quote:
Some of the properties I looked at this past weekend in Las Vegas were far travels for people to get to locations of work, this means people will have to have a car and pay for gas. Yet another thing they cannot afford.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. Last edited by Cynthetiq; 06-07-2008 at 09:56 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost |
||
Tags |
foreclosure, nation, pioneers, squatters |
|
|