  Detroitislove Member Username: Detroitislove Post Number: 1 Registered: 11-2006 |
Hello. I was interested in finding out what the adverse possession laws in detroit were and if squatter's have any rights in the city of Detroit. I have tried doing my own research but I am having difficulty finding any information. I think that it would be very interesting to know considering the number of abandoned houses in the city ... Giving squatters rights would almost improve its economical position in my opinion. | ||
Itsjeff Member Username: Itsjeff Post Number: 7106 Registered: 10-2003 |
Giving squatters rights would almost improve its economical position in my opinion. Based on my observations, it does not. | ||
Susanarosa Member Username: Susanarosa Post Number: 1234 Registered: 11-2003 |
Because if you enter a house illegally you're certainly the type of person who will keep up maintainance... | ||
Goat Member Username: Goat Post Number: 8971 Registered: 10-2003 |
Detroitislove, That is the most absurd thing I heard this past week. If they can't afford to eat or buy booze how in the hell would they be able to improve the city economically? If they can't pay the bills or keep the building in decent shape how does that improve the city? Think before you post...please. Btw: The reason there isn't much info about this is because it is a stupid idea. No educated (hell, even an uneducated person for that matter) person in their right mind would even consider such a thing. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 352 Registered: 04-2006 |
I don't want squatters living next to me. Squatters will use gasoline heaters or even build fires to keep the place warm. Squatters have no sense of ownership of the property, and little incentive to keep the property up. I had a family move into the old man's house next door once he died. They were there for several years. As the years went on, you would see the gas get turned off, then the water, then finally the lights. Once they were finally kicked out for not paying taxes for a few years, my water costs went down substantially (I assume that the whole family was using my spigot when I was not around). Imagine losing a huge brick home simply because they could not pay the taxes (the old man had it paid off)! They always drove nice cars, but hardly ever cut the lawn. When they were evicted my other neighbor told me I had to build a wall around my house of borax and mothball flakes to keep the roaches out (It worked!). It turns out they found that they did not bother taking the trash to the curb and just filled the basement with it. | ||
Higgs1634 Member Username: Higgs1634 Post Number: 30 Registered: 10-2005 |
Setting aside the overall silliness of the idea... Generally, in order to obtain title through adverse possession a squatter would have to occupy the property in a hostile manner (meaning no right to be there), they must occupy the property openly and be the exclusive occupier (not just sleeping there at night or hanging out there a few days a week) and they'd have to do all that continuously for 15 years. Basically they'd have to be acting as if they had a right to be there and owned the property for 15 years without interruption. That means things like cutting the grass, taking care of the house, getting your mail delivered there, paying bills...etc. Simply squatting there isn’t enough. It's extraordinarily rare for someone to be able to pull that off. (Message edited by higgs1634 on November 13, 2006) | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 623 Registered: 01-2005 |
In my experience, squatters don't possess a rake or a shovel, let alone a lawn mower. They rig up dangerous electrical connections. They pretty much make a living hauling scrap or they pick rags and they bring the stuff home and clutter up the property. They are almost all of them odd or social misfits (which came first - the oddness or the subsistance living? Who can say?)so they tend to be real packrats. This also goes for the population that Maryann Mahaffey was so interested in putting into Detroit's abandoned housing - so poor that they have no homeowner skills dating back for generation. Just a bad idea. | ||
Barnesfoto Member Username: Barnesfoto Post Number: 2722 Registered: 10-2003 |
Perhaps you are speaking of the nuisance abatement program...I almost got a house thru NA, but thought the better of it the night before I was to go sign the papers. The problem was that I had to finance all the repairs without ownership. You can do it if you have cash reserves, but then try insuring the property! One home on my old block was actually rehabbed through an NA contract though. It's better to make blighted properties widely available, cheap, to interested parties, as the Wayne County Prosecutor is doing...(and I'm writing from a former WCPO property). On one hand, I'd love to see an active Squatters movement like they have in Europe or NYC taking over slumlord properties here, but on the other, many of us have lived near actual squatters who are simply using a property for a while without any actual investment in the neighborhood, often so that they can spend what little income they have on drugs or booze. The stories above are pretty typical. | ||
Jams Member Username: Jams Post Number: 4185 Registered: 10-2003 |
Hey planner, Is the place next to you still vacant? I'll just hook up my hose to your spigot, the jumpers to your electrical, don't worry about the gas, I've got some electric heaters I can use, and I hope you have cable that I can tap into because I hate to miss my favorite shows. I promise to keep the lawn cut, just make sure you keep a full gas can in your garage next to the lawn mower. I also hope you've tuned up the snow blower, winter is almost here, but don't bother with a shovel, my back hurts if I use one. And I promise to return your paper within a day or two after it's delivered. | ||
Salvadordelmundo Member Username: Salvadordelmundo Post Number: 63 Registered: 04-2006 |
In practice, successful adverse possession claims against residential property usually involve the claimant paying taxes on the place, as though they were the sole and rightful owner. I don't know how many squatters are paying taxes on their 'residences' for years on end, but I doubt it is greater than zero. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 353 Registered: 04-2006 |
Actually a family is in there now; and they have sunk a fair amount of money into upgrades such as windows, a roof, central air. They took what could have been a pigs ear and turned it into a silk purse. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 310 Registered: 08-2006 |
In some cases if a well meaning person or family wants to move into a house and fix it up, make an it an asset to the neighborhood, understandably they may not have the money to buy the property. In this down real estate market, why would we want to stand in the way of that? Yes there would have to be results, or they would have to leave. Turning on and paying for utilities etc. | ||
Charlottepaul Member Username: Charlottepaul Post Number: 40 Registered: 10-2006 |
For example, the person to whom you are paying rent may die and there might not be any follow-up in the collection of your rent by someone else. Providing that you pay the taxes and what not, after several years the property may become yours. | ||
Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 2076 Registered: 10-2003 |
A house in North Rosedale Park had the title given to a squatter. I don't know the exact house, but after the previous owner died (who had no children) the house was willed over to some nephews and nieces who could care less about the house. So the house sat vacant for several years. Then someone quietly moved into the house and began mowing the law, trimming the hedges, doing minor repairs, etc. The lights, heat and water stayed on the whole time this mysterious person lived there. The neighbors were greatful that someone had finally moved into the vacant house and they thought nothing further of it. One of the nephews several years later realized that he was partial owner of the property. He tried to evict the mystery resident from the house but the judge stated that the other co-owners (the nephew's cousins) had to agree to join the suit as well. The cousin couldn't convince the rest of the cousin's to join the suit so he couldn't proceed with the case. The judge ruled that the mystery man could have the house under squatters rights (adverse possession) since he had maintained the house, paid the utility bills and apparently paid the taxes (I don't remember if that had been done or not). The fact that the co-owners of the property had such little financial interest in the house (many cousins with "shares" in the house resulted in only a few thousand dollars each of equity if the house were sold) and were reluctant to properly resolve the title issues in the house led the judge to rule in favor of the squatter. The squatter sold the house a few months later for a nice profit. | ||
Detroitnerd Member Username: Detroitnerd Post Number: 738 Registered: 07-2004 |
You don't see it a whole lot in Detroit, but in other cities, squatters are really organized, often young people who invest lots of money in bringing properties up to standards. As a person who has seen junkie squatters living in attics by candlelight until they burn the house down, I understand the local prejudice against squatters. But it's not like that everywhere, and some squatters can be really super-organized and engaging young people who bring real estate back from the brink. Just my 2 cents. |
