Whew, I knew vacation lots were expensive. Never dreamed somebody would pay 355k for an empty lot. :eek: That’s way, way, too rich for me. I’ve looked into buying a lot at a popular lake an hours drive away and freaked out at the 50k prices. Its very popular for water skiing and fishing.
This is legally fascinating. Who ***does ***own the house?
If I build a birdfeeder on my neighbor’s front yard, and it’s never removed, is it his because “Whatever’s on my land is mine?” But if a neighbor throws a baseball into my backyard by accident, it doesn’t become my baseball.
Some friends and I were going to rent a house together. On move in day, the manager calls up and says there’s been continued issues with the sewer connection, and we can’t move in. We end up across the street. The management company went out of business, yadda yadda yadda. A few years later I’m talking to someone at a networking event, and he mentions living on that street (I’d since moved). “Oh, which house?” Well, he had bought that sewer problem house in a tax sale. The sewer had still not been connected, so he goes down to City Hall to get things sorted out. Turns out the house next to was connected to their connection - because both houses were built on the same lot - and he now owned BOTH HOUSES! The other house was unowned, so he had the lot split, and made a nice little profit.
I’ve heard of boundary disputes where somebody’s garage or shed encroached over the line. They had to cut a piece off or tear down the structure.
I’m not sure who owns a house built on the wrong lot. It seems like the material used would be the builder’s property. I’m not entirely sure.
A lot of valuable material in that house could be salvaged and reused. The pre-hung doors and windows can easily be reused. Sinks, tubs, faucets, cabinets, stairs can all be reused. Some of the lumber.
Ultimately the homeowners have to purchase that land. Even if they pay a premium price for it. Or they could negotiate the sale of the house to the land owner at a marked down price.
It’s a screwed up mess. I imagine the surveyors will get sued too.
I think I’d swap for another lot. . . they might have a nicer/larger/more expensive lot they would trade for, since they apparently like the lot they built on, a whole lot.
Ummm… Be an adult and negotiate? So I guess ‘other’.
No need to rip down a perfectly good house. Yep, I would hope to come out on top a bit. Maybe a bit more than a bit depending on how much I liked the lot. But shit happens.
Cash in, at least to the extent that I’m compensated for the annoyance. I’m assuming I wanted that lot for some reason, so now I’ve taken on an enormous liability from having someone else’s house on my property. I’m going to be shelling out bucks to accountants and lawyers before this is all over, so I’ll negotiate, but I’m not going to take a loss even indirectly from some else’s screw up.
Home builders and land owners all move in to the house together, and settle in for the inevitable hilarious sitcom hijinks.
This is exactly what I was thinking. Assuming I had no use for the lot and wasn’t planning on doing anything with it in the future AND the FMV was more than I paid for it, I’d milk them for something higher than that. I’d work under the assumption that they’d be willing to pay the premium to just make this mistake go away quietly.
I’m not talking about doubling the property value, but just enough extra that it’s worth my while. Figure, $4k-$10K is probably about what it would cost to get lawyers roped into this, so assuming we could do this without lawyers and keep it out of the courts, I think that’s fair. Also, they should be getting their money back from whoever they “bought” the lot from to begin with. Assuming that was the builder (that they gave the $680,000 to) they might even be able to ask them to foot the extra cash to fix this.
Honestly, I think it’s reasonable.
Also, for those of you who are asking for another property in the subdivision…if you’re not planning to build on it yourself, instead of looking for the nicest one, you might consider looking for one right in the middle so the builder will buy it back from you soon. If it’s on the end it might just sit there unused.
My attitude is heavily influenced by the fact that they are investors and that the house is intended as a vacation rental, not for them to live in themselves. I don’t like investors like that, they make neighborhoods that are unpleasant to live in.
So I would give them a choice: pay double the market value of the lot; or swap for two of their other vacant lots of my choice; or move the house and restore the land to its original condition.
If it were an ordinary family who had had the bad luck to hire multiple incompetent contractors, I probably would just swap for the other lot if it were of comparable value.
eta: I didn’t look at the house before I posted; that is one budd tugly pretentious monstrosity. Make it triple the value or three other lots of my choosing.
I don’t see the problem here: per the article the surveyor made an error; the surveyor will have professional indemnity insurance so both sides claim off that.
The problem with that is, if you push too hard, they’re going to call their insurance company and you’re going to get Fair Market Value, period. The lawyers are going to say that it was an honest mistake, maybe they’ll give you a few extra bucks for your trouble. If you wanted to play hardball, I think your best bet would be to find a friend in the industry (builder, architect etc) and have some backdated plans drawn up so it looks like you were getting ready to do something with the site and, oh geez, now you have to start all over, and you’re going to need to get reimbursed for all these (backdated) bills too.
But to tell a judge that you have a $20,000 property and you want $60k for it because someone built on it (and you didn’t even know it was happening so it wasn’t harming you), you’ll have to making a mighty strong case for that. My idea for just asking for a few thousand more than FMV is that they’ll hopefully just hand it over without bringing in lawyers or the insurance company.
Any random house, or that… thing specifically?
A random house, since those people own so much property there I’m sure we could come to an arrangement.
The ‘house’ that was actually built? Burn it to the ground. Salt the earth it sat upon. Scrape off the earth that was salted and send it to a landfill. Hire practitioners of every faith (or lack thereof) I can find to come and consecrate/exorcise/purify the property. Make a public service announcement with a man wearing traditional architect garb looking upon a subdivision filled with horrific McMansions while shedding a single tear. Then send a bill for all of that to all of the people involved in building that thing and let them fight it out.
This is the surveyor/title company’s fuck up. They have have insurance for exactly these kinds of fuck ups, and said insurance will pay me at least 1,000% of the value of the property.
I’m curious to know why you believe that.
Damn it, I can’t remember important things, but I remember an episode of the Dennis the Menace TV show (probably 50 f’ing years ago) wherein Dennis rotated a street sign, and contractors dug a pool in the wrong backyard.
Why?? I don’t understand why this has anything to do with the homeowners at all. They didn’t make a mistake. They paid a company to build a house on their property. That company built a house on the wrong property. That company still owes them a house. What happens between that company and that lot owner should have nothing to do with the the person who paid for a house to be built.
It’s not the responsibility of the homeowner and the lot owner to fix the mistake of the home builders. The home builders need to fulfill their contract and build a house on the lot they were paid to build. Then they can try to work something else out with the owners of the lot where they built the house.
Why does everyone seem to think this is a problem for the homeowner and lot owner to work out? What am I missing? The homebuilder has two problems to solve. Neither the homebuyer or lot owner have any problems to fix.
A whole lot, huh? That reminds me of something…
HAMMER You know what a lot is?
CHICO Yeah, its-a too much.
HAMMER I-I don’t mean a whole lot, just a little lot with nothing on it.
CHICO Any time you gotta too much, you gotta whole lot. Look, I explain it to you. Sometimes you no got enough, it’s too much, you gotta whole lot. Sometimes you got a little bit. You no think it’s enough, somebody else maybe think it’s-a too much, it’s-a whole lot too. Now, it’s-a whole lot, it’s-a too much, it’s-a too much, it’s-a whole lot – same thing.
HAMMER The next time I see you, remind me not to talk to you, will ya?
The 1000% part is absurd, but it’s reasonable to expect that ultimately, after the lawsuits are finished, that the surveyor’s insurance would be paying the lion’s share of any damages.
I think the thing is, if someone builds a house on your lot illegally, I’m pretty sure that it’s your house at that point- you can either keep it and give them the finger, or you can require them to remove it at their expense. In this sense, there’s no difference between a rickety bum shack and a million dollar home.
Of course, the home builders are probably going to claim some sort of adverse possession because the land owners ignored the whole thing long enough for a freaking house to be built in the wrong place.