The guy seems to have done his homework at least...
http://www.khou.com/home/Stranger-mo...Texas-law.html
The guy seems to have done his homework at least...
http://www.khou.com/home/Stranger-mo...Texas-law.html
Normally adverse possession takes up to 20 years to establish in many states. If he's correct he has found quite the loophole.
Still, if he maintains the home and property and is a good neighbor, he should be considered an asset to the community. Otherwise the home will dilapidate and bring the neighborhood down.
However, if the sales price goes on the books as $16, that does damage to the surrounding values.
He does not seem much loved by his neighbors.
Sounds like they are upset because he found a way to get the house for near nothing. No trickery, no theft, just someone who found a seldom used law and took advantage of it.
How is the 30yr mortgage a blight on American society?
I agree 100% about HOA's.
Last edited by Watrdawg; 07-25-11 at 14:11.
Let's just say that if instead of owning, people rented (leased) housing. The market would be a lot more liquid and elastic. With Americans being so mobile now and the downsides of home ownership brought to light, I think we'll see more and more people renting instead of buying. Sure, if you are a teacher or some other job that is stable and you aren't going to have to move, owning might make sense. But if you are like most people having to move at the whim of employment a realtor taking 5% everywhack and the risk that a house won't sell starts to look like an anchor, not a asset.
Of course there is all the fringe talk about how most of a loan is interest and how that is criminal- ironically a view of some fringe people and Sharia law.
The Second Amendment ACKNOWLEDGES our right to own and bear arms that are in common use that can be used for lawful purposes. The arms can be restricted ONLY if subject to historical analogue from the founding era or is dangerous (unsafe) AND unusual.
It's that simple.
I can agree with most of your premise. I'm in the Mortgage buisness by the way. If you plan on or have an idea that you are going to be moving within a 3-5 year period and the area you live in does not have a decent appreciation rate the renting is a better option. Being at Bragg I am constantly asking active duty soldiers if they know for sure that they are going to be here for at least 3 years or more. The reason for that is VA loans are 100% loans. 99% of the soldiers do not put money down. There is also a VA Funding Fee that VA charges. 2.15% for first time use. So as soon as a soldier closes on his/her home when you add in closing costs, realtors commissions and the funding fee they are at least 10% in the hole. So using your premise, renting is a better option.
However, if a person is going to stay put for at least 5 years then buying is the better option. Especially if you are able to put money down. There are quite a few area's in the country that are rebounding and are starting to see small amounts of appreciation. Home prices are down, not at the bottom, but down enough that with the combination of very low rates, low home prices and a 30yr mortgage people are able to purchase and qualify for more home than they could before August of 2007. That date is when the melt down started. The 30yr loan isn't a plight on this country. It actually allows people to purchase and finanace a home a a low enough payment to make it all possible. 15yr terms can be very prohibitive and would make homeownership very difficult if not impossible to a great many people. Especially for many active duty enlisted soldiers!! An E5 with a wife, 2 kids and very modest debt can easily qualify for a $150K home here with a payment less than a comparable rental unit.
Bookmarks