private property rights in the USA

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2011 12:19 PM GMT
    I thought this article was amazing. I have never cared for the idea that a condo board or home owners association can dictate what you can and can not do with property that you purchased- but this takes it a step further into insanity.
    http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/09/25/v-fullstory/2424320/condo-owners-rights-can-be-stripped.html
    The short version is that a bulk buyer will come in and purchase huge numbers of empty units and take complete control of the condo board. They will vote to give a trustee complete ownership rights of the building. The trustee brings in an appraiser and gives the "bulk buyer" the option to purchase the units that they do not own for the present market value. Basically, they give a corporation (oops, sorry, I forgot- corporations are people too) the right to force owners to sell their units and a predetermined price with no right of refusal and no right to negotiate.

    Now you have people who were owners (and possibly have a $300 000 mortgage) being given a fraction of that value and booted out of their condo. I suppose they could always rent from the new owner, but they no longer own what they probably still owe on and never agreed to sell.

    The article is an interesting read and makes me wonder about the loopholes that seem to have been left open in the US in regards to private property ownership and rights... It also makes me wonder how much longer people are going to accept the power that corporations seem to wield.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2011 2:52 PM GMT
    That's horrifying. I'm never going to buy a condo.

    More so that the fact that the article was written by:

    "Peter Zalewski is a principal with the Bal Harbour-based real estate consultancy Condo Vultures."

    icon_eek.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2011 3:06 PM GMT
    If you are PAYING for it, you DON'T OWN IT.

    If you have PAID IT OFF, you do own it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2011 3:14 PM GMT
    But if I'm reading this article correctly, even if you've paid off the entire mortgage, since you're part of the condo, you don't have a choice:

    OPAs the owner of more than 100 units out of a total of 115 residential units in the Jenny Tower, the bulk buyer – which obtained ownership through the purchase of a distressed loan and subsequent foreclosure auction – supported a “plan of termination” that transferred all ownership rights to a trustee empowered with complete control and “sole discretion” to operate the project.

    Under the plan, all Jenny Tower unit owners were immediately converted into “beneficiaries” who are entitled to a stake in the rental project.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2011 3:27 PM GMT
    Also in property rights news:

    http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2011/10/rick_perry_niggerhead.php

    I mean, if you can't lease land in the Great State of Texas and paint "NIGGERHEAD"on a rock in large letters visible from orbit, then the terrorists have won.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2011 5:02 PM GMT
    q1w2e3 saidBut if I'm reading this article correctly, even if you've paid off the entire mortgage, since you're part of the condo, you don't have a choice:

    OPAs the owner of more than 100 units out of a total of 115 residential units in the Jenny Tower, the bulk buyer – which obtained ownership through the purchase of a distressed loan and subsequent foreclosure auction – supported a “plan of termination” that transferred all ownership rights to a trustee empowered with complete control and “sole discretion” to operate the project.

    Under the plan, all Jenny Tower unit owners were immediately converted into “beneficiaries” who are entitled to a stake in the rental project.


    That is how I interpreted it as well. a Naturally, being a newer development most residents will still be carrying debt on the condo, but even if you managed to pay it off you would be forced to sell at a major loss.

    It also sounds like they know and expect that most "sales" will not bring enough cash to satisfy the loan.
    "In fact, the termination plan anticipates that lenders who provided loans to individual unit owners in the Jenny Tower “will receive less than the amounts necessary to fully satisfy their mortgage liens,” according to the plan recorded in Miami-Dade County.

    I can not recall off the top of my head if Florida is one of the states with laws that are hard on the owner where banks can pursue the owner for years if the full amount of the loan is not covered by the sale of the property. Either way, this article has strengthened my severe dislike of the condo "lifestyle."

    heybreaux said
    So, yes, please understand that any building with any form of fractional ownership is going to potentially run into control issues.

    Yeah, I understand that (hence my dislike of condo's to begin with.) I don't "play well with others" and don't care for some group of people telling me what I can and can not do when I am the one paying the mortgage on my residence. I have read of cases where the boards are foreclosing on their residents when they miss a few payments and there are a lot of other things that make me shake my head. However, this is forcing you to no longer be an owner. The "bulk buyers" could, in theory (I would think) convert the 100 units they own to rentals and allow the small number of owners to stay. It would suck for the owners, but at least they would get an option. Instead, the corporations have found a way to force the sale of the units at a steep discount to them in the hopes of making just a few more dollars. I just posted this because it has to be one of the worst cases of ownership rights being steamrolled by a corporation that I have seen... and it's legal.
  • masculumpedes

    Posts: 5549

    Oct 02, 2011 6:01 PM GMT
    west77 saidI thought this article was amazing. I have never cared for the idea that a condo board or home owners association can dictate what you can and can not do with property that you purchased- but this takes it a step further into insanity.


    Speaking of: There is a huge Condo Corruption probe currently underway here in Vegas. http://www.lvrj.com/news/fourth-person-pleads-guilty-in-hoa-fraud-probe-130446953.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2011 6:11 PM GMT
    movetoamend.org
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 04, 2011 7:00 AM GMT
    heybreaux said
    ... If you want full rights, and control, own it outright by yourself. If you want private property, buy it instead of a piece of a corporation. Although, then if you cannot afford taxes, the government can take it from you and sell it at fair market value in a tax sale, or if the government finds a better use for your private property, eminent domain.

    Down with the Constitution too, even though it is by the people for the people. Ownership of anything is a figment of your imagination. icon_lol.gif

    Love the way you put that. Ownership really is a figment. I hate to say it, but it isn't just condo owners who end up on the hook. I don't use the alley way at all, but all of my neighbours have garages. Enough people signed a petition that my alley is now paved and I pay a couple of hundred extra a year for the next decade or so. Even avoiding the condos and HOA's does not mean that others won't have control over you, your finances or your affairs.


    ACoeur saidmovetoamend.org

    Nice idea, but this is demanding that they not only bite the hand that feeds them, but that they completely amputate it and forgo much of the cash ehty are expecting. Still, I wish them the best.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 04, 2011 7:42 AM GMT
    Just another example of the illusion that is the "free market" these days.....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 04, 2011 7:46 AM GMT
    heeb saidAlso in property rights news:

    http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2011/10/rick_perry_niggerhead.php

    I mean, if you can't lease land in the Great State of Texas and paint "NIGGERHEAD"on a rock in large letters visible from orbit, then the terrorists have won.


    I must say its almost annoying how in the US every use of the word "nigger" is considered perjorative these days... it wasnt always like that.... next they're going to outlaw the words "fag" and "gay"...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 04, 2011 3:02 PM GMT
    I find it extraordinary that the condo documents would permit what is described in the article and, if they do, that it would be permitted by state condo laws. But what do I know, I'm not a real estate lawyer.

    GreenHopper saidI must say its almost annoying how in the US every use of the word "nigger" is considered perjorative these days... it wasnt always like that....


    I hope you're being facetious with this... at the risk of derailing the thread, the only time the n-word wasn't considered pejorative was when discrimination was legal.