A Puzzle For Those Who Could Lose Their Homes In This Crisis

[anthropositor]

Since the ability to maintain one's abode and not have it taken away  is rather central to one's good health, and especially to the health of the skin, and since we are at the outset of a Depression it is worthwhile to have some idea how to defend yourself when someone tries to steal your home and land.

A little background.  A little over eight years ago, my wife and I found ourselves without a place to live.  We stumbled over some distressed sellers with a few acres and what could euphemistically be called a dwelling for sale.  The house was a complete shambles.  I learned that there had been twelve people living there, who had left abruptly.  I did not hear the details.  I also made some phone calls and checked out the sellers. 

Opinions varied sharply, ranging from; they are crooks, to they have been in the furniture business for many years and are wealthy and well connected.  Actually, come to think of it, those two extremes in opinion are not all that far apart.

But they could not have done a normal sale with a conventional loan through FHA or Fannie Mae or Freddie Mack. No inspector would have even deemed the place fit for human habitation, let alone find it suitable for a loan.  Therefore  I had some advantages going for me. 

I have a reputation for being tough but scrupulously ethical and had been in my two previous abodes for about eight years.  So we did a land contract in which I agreed to take the place "as is" even in its' unlivable condition. 

Even with my most imaginative ideas, we were talking several thousands of dollars in necessary repairs.  On that basis, I convinced the sellers that they should finance the down payment as well.  So for three years, they were getting two monthly payments from me. 

The bathroom floor was falling through.  The tub was precarious.  The toilet was not affixed to the floor.  We re-plumbed all the bathroom fixtures, did a lot of new wiring, re-framed and installed several new windows.  This was just for starters.  Repairs have been ongoing throughout these years.

I am thoroughly convinced that the Seller was counting on the repairs driving us under so that we would default.  Two things lend support to this notion. 

After we had been there some months, the septic tank overflowed.  We could not pay the hefty charge to pump it and make our property payments too.  So we stopped letting any water go down the drains.  No showers or baths.  Dishwater was thrown in the back yard along with the water for our ablutions.  We went elsewhere if we needed to use the toilet.

But the sewage in the front yard not only did not recede, it increased.  Very puzzling.  We struggled with this terrible problem for over a month.  The sellers were living right across the driveway from us.  They were only forty yards further away from our septic tank than we were.  So, while they were not affected as much as we were, it was pretty intolerable. 

Finally the seller suggested that he get the tank pumped and pay for it "as a favor to me."  Well of course I went for it.  Then, while it was being pumped, someone in his household, one of the children said within my hearing, not knowing it was a secret, that their stuff was  coming into my tank too, one of several facts that had never been disclosed to me.  They had left me twisting in the wind for more than a month.  But now that I knew about it, they were forced to install their own tank and leach lines.

About a year later our water heater went kaput.  It was plumbed in copper pipe which had to be destroyed to get the tank out.  Seller said he had one of the same size stored out behind the furniture store which I could have.  We plumbed it into place, only to find that it did not work.  So labor on the job was effectively doubled.  I went out and bought my own water heater.

I could name another half dozen major harassments, but this gives the general idea.  Suffice it to say, we became considerably more distant, but we still smiled and waved, trying to keep some semblance of peace.  In a few more years, the Sellers and their children moved out, being replaced by the patriarch of the furniture store and his wife and mother, along with, periodically, several other visiting residents.

Meanwhile, I had learned by other means that they were borrowing large amounts of money on acreage which included ours, and that this was the most probable reason that they had not registered the sale with the county assessor.  I had anticipated they would do this when the original contract was signed.  Of course this was unethical, but probably did not rise to the level of fraud, because they had not changed the ownership of record, and they were clandestinely paying the property taxes, keeping them current for their own purposes.  It is important to understand that according to our contract, I was responsible for all property taxes from the first day of the contract, but since the sale had never been reported to the assessor, there was no way I could get a bill.  Another important point is that I had only purchased two acres of a larger parcel on which the tax was assessed.  In any case,  I knew the lender in these loans they were getting was a bank, but had no idea which one. 

This was a rather difficult position to be in.  If they went bankrupt, the bank could have first call and boot us out.  Just like the bail out, the banks get the protection, the people get to twist in the wind.

We would wind up losing tens of thousands and have very low chance of recovery if they went bust and lost everything.  Quite a quandary.  I of course, was a peace loving person, and worked very hard not to rock the boat.  And since our payments were really so nominal because of the original deal I made (monthly rental elswhere would have been higher elsewhere, but of course we would have gotten a habitable dwelling and would have been responsible for repairs and reconstruction).  In any case, I was just treading water and waiting for the right moment in time to come to grips with the problem.

Most of us are at least dimly aware that we have just entered a great Depression.  As I watched it develop, I had been mulling over what to do with these sellers, but was still procrastinating, just continuing to work on all my various projects.

On the first of this month a deputy Sheriff came out and presented me with a 10 Day Notice to Vacate our TENANCY which alleged that we had not paid our property taxes, which we were contractually responsible for from the date of the original contract.  And, as I said earlier, I had never been assessed or billed any property taxes, and therefore had not paid any.  According to the paper, the Sheriff would remove us on the eleventh if we remained on the property.
Today is/was the eleventh.  It will be midnight in a half hour.   

So I invite anyone to guess what I might have done.  I'll give you a few hints.  I did not retain council.  I did not move.  So what steps did I take to prevent this wrongful eviction?  Virtually everyone I have spoken to in the past ten days has said I absolutely needed an attorney to save the house.  In every capacity, this was the first thing out of their mouths.

I did interview one attorney for perhaps five minutes, filling him in on the main details.  At the end, I said "Minimum to maximum, what will your charges be for handling this case?" He said the minimum would be $1,500 and the maximum would be $15,000.

And he was, of course, making no guarantees or predictions that we would prevail.  But he supposed that if we were able to pay eight years of property taxes, we could probably stay on the property until the seller came up with another pretext. 

I laughed and laughed and laughed.  I was still laughing when I shook his hand and then wiped my hand off on my pants.  I laughed still more out in the parking lot as other potential marks were entering his office.  Now I can't guarantee that I will not use a lawyer for any portion of this.  But I can guarantee that it won't be him.  And I doubt very much if my legal costs will exceed a few hundred dollars. 

I also doubt very much that I will pay the taxes from day one of the contract, in spite of the fact that the contract says "buyer will pay all property taxes due now and hereafter" from the date of the contract.  Does anyone have any idea why not?  Or what I did in the past ten days to prevent the eviction that was to occur today?

In the United States today, millions of people are losing their homes on pretexts just as flimsy as these, mostly at the hands of the very same banks that participated so enthusiastically in the sub prime mortgage feeding frenzy. 

These newly homeless people are not afforded any protection by the courts.  Many of them are renters who are current on their rent, but their landlord defaulted in a loan with the bank.  But we live in a free country.  These people are free to be homeless.  Except for the vagrancy laws of course. 

No real protection whatsoever by the courts or the government.  Yet the bankers are being bailed out.  What is wrong with this picture?  Exactly how much can you trust your government or the courts?  Perhaps about as much as I can trust that lawyer I spoke to or these sellers. 

And that is why, even though I am on solid ground here, nothing is guaranteed.  I live in the deep south.  Carpetbagging and chicanery and the "good old boy network" are alive and well here.  And that is why I will take nothing for granted.  Those with the most resources always have the edge.

Once again, I invite guesses as to what to do, or what I did in the past ten days, or what I will do next.

The best answers will get a bag of Shmooo from me.  You can learn more about Shmooo in the Nutrition subsection.

 

[itchychick]

There are several points in your account, anthro, which puzzle me, at least from a legal rights perspective. 

Firstly, whose obligation is it, legally, to report a private sale to the assessor?  If indeed the obligation falls to the seller, then, as I see it, he has reneged on the original contract.  You could sue him for this breach of contract, but that wouldn't solve the immediate problem of pending eviction. 

It would seem to me that in order to secure a loan on the property, the seller would have had to produce proof of ownership to the lending bank.... if this proof was his original deed, then I would definitely agree that he obtained the loans fraudulently, as he had already sold you the property.

Did you investigate the reasons you weren't receiving property tax bills?  Given that your original contract stipulated that you would be responsible for all the taxes, it surely came to your attention that something was amiss. 

Do you have any written proof (in the form of a deed or similar) that the land legally belongs to you?

As far as what you might have done, my answer would depend on your answer to that last question.  If the only written proof of ownership is that original contract, then I would make the argument that the original seller reneged on the contract thereby nullifying it.  If you are not the recognized owner of the property, then you are not responsible for the back taxes (or any taxes).  That, however doesn't leave you in any kind of desirable position.  At that point, I would investigate what rights you may have on the property as a squatter.  Here in Canada, I think most municipalities have laws which state that an occupant of land will have some legal rights to the land after a specified duration of time.  I don't know how long that may be, or how far those rights extend, but I'm pretty sure that one cannot be summarily evicted if one falls under the parameters of squatters' rights.

[anthropositor]

There is a lot of good thinking here.  What I have is a land contract stating the terms of the sale: term. interest rate, payment figures, my obligation to carry property insurance continuously, and so on.  This is different than a trust deed which has gone through escrow and has been duly recorded. 

And of course, in a standard sale, there is assurance that the title is actually held by the seller. 

Therefore, a land contract holds greater risk.  In this case it means that if the seller were to go bankrupt after borrowing from a bank on this property as if it was still his, the bank could seize the property and boot me out.  I would have little reliable recourse.

When I initially bought the place, I already had the strong feeling that serious complications would start after three or four years.  But I wasn't risking all that much when you consider that my monthly payment, even with property insurance was as cheap or cheaper than rent.  So what I was actually putting at risk was the ongoing investment in improvements.

The sellers started more gently, in comparison, after four years, with various bait and switch schemes in which I was to get other property at more money and a longer contract.  And there were a few dirty tricks along the way, but these too were pretty easy to parry, and generally worked out all right after some effort.

I did not investigate the reason I wasn't getting the tax bills.  I knew the reason.  The transaction had not been reported.  I also knew that they could drop the hammer on me in any year they wished to, by just missing a tax payment, getting the property to go into default for a couple of months and then do an eviction.  They might have even pulled it off.

This was the year that they apparently decided to do that.  From their perspective, I was not even aware of what was happening with the taxes.  And they were correct that I wasn't paying direct attention to it every year, because they had never tried to play real hard ball with me until now.  What went wrong for them is that they telegraphed the punch and did it is such a way that I could block it.

And you are correct that, not being the registered owner, never having recieved a bill on the smaller portion of a larger tract being taxed, a correct bill could not even be calculated without a new appraisal by the assessor.

All good thoughts.  You are to be congratulated on all you have done.  But let us look at the premise:

Once again, I invite guesses as to what to do, or what I did in the past ten days, or what I will do next.

So far, what you have said does not cover what I did, what I am doing, or what I plan to do.  However, you are more than halfway there, and deserve honorable mention for something else you mentioned, although you didn't mention it by the name "Adverse Possession."  The ability to claim that you lived on, improved and maintained property as if it were your own, recieved mail there and were notoriously resident on the property without the knowledge or any objection by the true owner for a number of years, and to get the court on that basis to deed over the property to the clandestine resident.  It is an extremely interesting and little known means to claim the property of another and to do it with legal force.

This is not one of those cases, since I have entered into a legal contract and a sale is underway.  But if you continue to reason the way you have so far, you are well on your way to finding out what Shmooo tastes like, and see how it affects you when you eat it.

Remember, you don't need to figure out what I did AND what I'm doing AND what I'm going to do.  Approximately nail any of the three and you are a winner.  Good job so far.

The Shmooo is definitely going to seed as I mentioned earlier, although it is happening in an odd way that I would not have anticipated.  It seems to have skipped a step that I thought had to occur. 

I was beginning to worry that we could get an early freeze and that it could impact the harvest.  While I don't want to interfere with the seeding, I also don't want to harvest 50 square meters of Shmooo all at once.  But I doubt that the full seed production will take more than two weeks.  Then I'll have several days of intensive harvest and drying of the leaves for my winter use.   

[itchychick]

Seeing as I am the only one playing here, anthro, I will give this some more thought.  I'm afraid I'm falling short on specifics of what one could do in this situation.  I'm going to assume that the unpaid tax issue is not on the table at this point, as you are not the registered owner of the property. 

However, you are more than halfway there, and deserve honorable mention for something else you mentioned, although you didn't mention it by the name "Adverse Possession."  The ability to claim that you lived on, improved and maintained property as if it were your own, recieved mail there and were notoriously resident on the property without the knowledge or any objection by the true owner for a number of years, and to get the court on that basis to deed over the property to the clandestine resident.  It is an extremely interesting and little known means to claim the property of another and to do it with legal force.

That indeed was what I was getting at... I didn't know that this was called "Adverse Possession".

Okay, so if Adverse Possession is not an option, the question is, how to distance yourself from the seller in case the seller goes bankrupt and the bank forecloses on the property.  On the other hand, you want to ensure that even as you distance yourself from the seller, you don't put yourself in a position where you are left holding the back taxes bag.

I would make a deal with the seller.  A contractual agreement whereby the next few months of your payments to him will go directly to paying the taxes owed, and the total amount paid will be deducted from your outstanding balance owed on the property.  In return, you will not disclose to the authorities that he obtained the bank loans fraudulently. 

There would also have to be some stipulation that as soon as the taxes are paid and up to date, an official sale be recorded and ownership transfered officially to you.  That way, the bank cannot foreclose on your piece of the property in the event of a seller bankruptcy. I'm not familiar with land contracts, but I'm guessing that there is some way to acheive this?  Of course, the seller could turn around and call in the remainder of your payment, but I would be inclined to think that the threat of exposing his fraud might be sufficient to keep that possibility at bay.  Given that you have evidence that could financially ruin him, put him in jail, or both, I think you would have the upper hand in any of these negotiations...

So... to summarize, I would guess that as steps you might have already taken would include informing the authorities that you were not legally responisible for the property taxes, given that the sale was never recorded nor were you the officially recognized owner.  Second steps would be to negotiate for the immediate payment of the back taxes and subsequent transfer of the land to you by the seller in exchange for your not exposing his actions.

How'm I doing here?

[anthropositor]

I would make a deal with the seller.  I think not.  Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas.

A contractual agreement whereby the next few months of your payments to him will go directly to paying the taxes owed, and the total amount paid will be deducted from your outstanding balance owed on the property.  In return, you will not disclose to the authorities that he obtained the bank loans fraudulently.  

I would not only be lying down with the dogs, I would be leaving the option open to have their puppies, to put it delicately.  For my own gain, or in self defense, I would be agreeing to hide their nefarious activities, giving them the latitude to continue preying on other, perhaps more defenseless victims.  I doubt I would feel very good about myself if I did that. 

Of course lawyers often get their clients to make such "compromises" as that; the confidentiality so often written into settlement agreements.  That way the bad guys can put up the facade that they just settled to end the matter, and admit no actual fault in the matter.  Then they can go back to business as usual.

But in purely tactical terms, this courts disaster.  I would rather teach them a proper lesson which might give them pause when they conspire to scam someone else in a similar fashion.  They invested, in round numbers, about $1400 over the past eight years, in order to steal back many multiples of that.  I think I will just keep that money, thank you very much.  I am not, in fact holding any back taxes bag.

There would also have to be some stipulation that as soon as the taxes are paid and up to date, an official sale be recorded and ownership transfered officially to you.  That way, the bank cannot foreclose on your piece of the property in the event of a seller bankruptcy. I'm not familiar with land contracts, but I'm guessing that there is some way to achieve this?  Of course, the seller could turn around and call in the remainder of your payment, but I would be inclined to think that the threat of exposing his fraud might be sufficient to keep that possibility at bay.  Given that you have evidence that could financially ruin him, put him in jail, or both, I think you would have the upper hand in any of these negotiations...

Now here and there we have some glints of good ideas, but still it is all garbled up with defensiveness.  If they had any possibility of calling in the note in its' entirety, they would have tried that instead of evicting me.

And actually I do not have evidence that could convict them of fraud against me, although if I wanted to, I could probably total up several thousands of dollars in damages for other things, and make a case for punitive damages as well, it probably isn't worth the bother, considering the risk/reward ratio. 

The fact that they kept the property in their name wasn't a correct or ethical thing for them to do, but it wasn't a fraud against me, but against the bank that provided them with loans.  From the perspective of the court, I would have no standing to argue on behalf of a bank with which I had no dealings.


So... to summarize, I would guess that as steps you might have already taken would include informing the authorities that you were not legally responsible for the property taxes, given that the sale was never recorded nor were you the officially recognized owner.  Second steps would be to negotiate for the immediate payment of the back taxes and subsequent transfer of the land to you by the seller in exchange for your not exposing his actions.

Now, as it turns out, there are no authorities yet.  The eviction papers were issued via the Sheriff on the sellers representation only, not on the order of a judge. No court case in any of the four courts that could have been involved had been initiated.  I know that because I checked with each of the court clerks in question, and while I was at it, made sure that they became familiar with the details of two old people threatened with being put out on the streets by villainous carpetbaggers who also happened to be prominent  merchants around town. 

I also spread the word around the D.A.'s office, and the assessors office, all in the name of finding out what my options were.  And though I could see that there was some sympathy for my position, the best any of them would venture was, "You are going to need to retain an attorney to get you out of this." 

But NONE of them pointed out that the Sheriff could not actually put me out of my house without an order by the court, if I served notice that I disputed the claims.  And nobody had any comments about where said notice had to be served, or how.  Down to the last one of them, they were pimping for the town lawyers in general, rather than saying anything really helpful or worthwhile.

Okay, I'll stop now.  What do I do next?  We have almost gotten past the boring, annoying part, spreading far and wide that there was going to be a fight, and being as likeable as I could to every bureaucrat and office worker and clerk I could get to listen.  This was all excellent preparation for what I had to do next....

So after a couple of big mouthfuls of Shmooo, feeling like Popeye after downing an emergency can of spinach, what did I do next?  (Two essential things and one critically important thing).  hint, hint.

[anthropositor]

Okay, since so far. only Itchy has been making a play for the Shmooo prize, and since she has been really innovative and imaginative, I am going to throw in the first of the absolutely essential things I did.  I returned to the assessor's office to determine the actual tax liability.  No taxes were delinquent, but there was a current tax payment due of $206.  The last day to pay it was the day before my eviction was to take place.  Remember, this was the only potentially dangerous legal element contained in the eviction papers.

Now if I had been true to my previous form over the years, never having been billed or paid any taxes, from the sellers standpoint, it was highly unlikely that anyone as dumb as I had always appeared to be to them, would even think to check on the tax status.

Clearly the seller now had the intention to let the tax go unpaid and absorb a small penalty, get me out, and then go pay the tax before the bank found out that the tax had been delinquent.  I simply wrote a check for the tax on the entire larger parcel.  Now I had a paid receipt for the latest tax payment made.  And this cause of action vanishes for another whole year.

The seller had counted on me to make a mistake, instead of expecting me to have any skills at all.  As I teach in chess, never play anticipating a blunder by your opponent.  Always play as if your opponent will always make his strongest move.

Now what?  Itchy is already a whisker away from winning her Shmooo.  That does not mean that someone else can't jump in and win as well.  I never said only the best answer wins.  All good answers showing excellent logic and effort win.

[itchychick]

Well I must have completely misunderstood, anthro, because I thought (and I'll have to go back and re-read your first post) that it the Sherrif was there on a judge's orders - action initiated by the tax assessor.  I was under the impression that the eviction was the result of long standing unpaid taxes. 

What you have said above puts the situation in a completely different light.  Understanding this, I can see why you would be horrified at my suggestion of making a deal with the seller!! Yeesh.  What a slime bag.

Okay.  Hopefully now I understand the situation.... but there is one piece that I don't quite grasp.  If this whole tax game was a ploy by the seller and you have now taken that little weapon away from him, by what other means might he have any authority to try again?  Here is where my understanding of your contract falls short.  Other than paying the taxes and your monthly payments, are you under any other contractual obligation to him?

[anthropositor]

In the question, do I have the rights of a tenant or a buyer?, things are not clear cut.  They are treating me as a tenant.  So is the Sheriff.  I must counter that.  This is the time to do that.  How?

[andyb]

Is the key to all this to get the sale registered at the Land Registry (or whatever the US equivalent is)?

Can the purchaser register the purchase without the co-operation of the vendor? You say you have the contract with terms and presumably a receipt for any moneys paid? So you should be able to prove that you have a registerable interest in the land?

Please remember I'm in the Uk and we may have different procedures and remedies to you, Anthro - but this has been a fascinating thread so far.

I have to say that on first reading I thought you were an 'unregistered purchaser yet to complete' rather than a tenant - but reading through again I'm not so sure...

Best of luck whatever...

Andy

[itchychick]

That's where I'm at too, andy.  It seems that registering ownership should protect anthro against any financial ruin of the seller.  If this is not possible without the seller's consent, then it's down to predicting any other loopholes in the contract whereby the seller can make another grab at it.

[anthropositor]

The ultimate goal is to force the seller(s) to do what they should have done at the outset of the sale.  There are a variety of ways in which the sellers were able to profit by this delay, while putting me at considerable extra risk, and causing me not to be able to declare the interest paid on my taxes.

While I reminded them periodically of this need, I was also acutely aware that I could well have been caught up in a fight that could easily have been prohibitively expensive to fight, and which could easily have made it impossible to keep up the payments as required without going deeply in debt from another quadrant.  

A perfect example is the quote I got from a lawyer a week ago, giving his minimum fee of $1,500 and the maximum of $15,000 for "handling" this matter.  And he wasn't even making assurances that we would prevail.  He even thought it likely that I would be ordered to reimburse the seller for tax payments that I did not authorize them to pay on my behalf.

No.  What I needed to do was to bide my time for as long as I could, taking my additional risks and losses, until I was cornered and had no choice but to fight.  This was my only chance to prevail.

This attempted eviction was that moment.  For my wife,  it was a crisis that came out of the blue.  She had not needed to know for these past eight years that we were dealing with crooks who were conspiring to cause us to default, at a point in time when they thought it was most likely that we could not continue paying on the contract.  I saw no good reason to burden her with that knowledge, and several good reasons not to.

Just look at their timing.  They did this in the most economically calamitous time this nation has faced in eight decades.  They were so confident that I was a complete boob, (an impression that I went to considerable effort to cultivate all this time), they really thought that there was no way I could defend myself even against the eviction.

What did I do next?  This is the fun part.  It is also critically essential.

[anthropositor]

Hi Itchy,
Still putting the cart before the horse.  How I will force them to regularize the sale I will figure out later. For now, I still have to stop the eviction.  That is the critical issue.  If I don't do that, I lose it all.

[andyb]

Anthro,

re: "On the first of this month a deputy Sheriff came out and presented me with a 10 Day Notice to Vacate our TENANCY which alleged that we had not paid our property taxes, which we were contractually responsible for from the date of the original contract.  And, as I said earlier, I had never been assessed or billed any property taxes, and therefore had not paid any. "

Can I just clarify who it was that caused the Notice to Vacate to be served? Is this from the County Assessment Office? Or from the seller, or someone else?

Thinking aloud:

• Is there a Protection of Eviction Act or similar in the US?
• If so I can't see how an eviction can take place without first getting a Posession Order from a Court.
• I assume that (as in the UK) being in posession of land you are initially in a strong position in that the Plaintiff would first have to show legal entitlement to cause the action in the first place, and then have to show reasonable cause for asking for the eviction judgement,
• I presume that Judge would have to consider what the legal relationship between the parties is before making that judgement - whoever caused the Notice to Vacate is claiming it's a tenancy but you say you have a Land Contract (is this the same as a Deed of Transfer of Ownership, Anthro?).
• So, if the relationship is in dispute, the Judge would have to look at the intention of the parties when the contract (of sale or transfer?) was drawn up - was it to rent or to purchase?
• and if purchase, what was purchased - a lease or an outright transfer of ownership?
• what terms were part of that contract - have any been broken or defaulted upon?
• If they have, does the breach warrant granting of the Posession Order or is some other remedy available?

oops, gotta catch the bus to work now - but this is fascinating!

Andy

[anthropositor]

Excellent questions Andy.  From the top:

The notice served by the Sheriff emanated only from the seller(s); they perhaps paid a fee to the Sheriff for delivery.  No other agency or court was involved.  No case had been filed.

In the United States, in a rental, the laws generally favor the landlord, but some statutory delays are built in so that if the eviction order is in any sort of dispute, the tenants can stay for the duration of the dispute.  This would be an Unlawful Detainer action.  Generally, if the tenant had no good defense, if they moved out prior to losing in court, even the day before, the Unlawful Detainer portion would be dropped, but the landlord could still pursue any damages or payments in arrears civilly.

It is correct that a court order is required before a forced eviction can be carried out.

All these years of living on the land without any complaint of record from a landlord or seller does give the presumption that the resident actually has a right to be there, even without other documentary evidence.

And the remaining matters are matters of fact to be determined by the court, based on the existing documents and the testimony of the parties.

What you refer to as a Deed of Transfer of Ownership is perhaps the equivalent of a Second Trust Deed here.  A land contract provides a somewhat less firm and clearcut form of protection.  There are more likely to be ambiguities that the court needs to resolve.

The contract was clearly a purchase agreement, conferring on me many, if not all the responsibilities of an owner.  It required me to maintain property insurance for instance.  And I could not require the seller to carry out any repairs, if I could not make the case that the owner was responsible for causing the damage and/or for failing to disclose things he was required by law to disclose.

[anthropositor]

Well Itchy, since I want to proceed to the next step, and since, although I have already deemed you a winner (though I haven't previously said so), I am now playing that annoying quiz show music that says the time is running out for the answer to this portion.

Andy too came up with some very relevant questions and observations, but I don't sense that getting some Shmooo was his motivation.  So later on today, I will go on with what I did next.

It is my main theme in all my posts, that if we try, we really can take care of ourselves much better than we have been led to believe by the so-called experts, whether they be lawyers or doctors or dentists or professionals in any other field.  And in these hard times, we are well advised to stop being so dependent on experts and become more skillful in taking care of ourselves.

Preventing viral infections, super gluing my  teeth, in making the monocle to extend the use of an eye with a cataract, not having been attended by a physician for a few decades, even when dealing with a stroke or high blood pressure, the fermenting of my own beverages, the making of cheese had an extremely important impact on my life and wellbeing.  And in No-Till farming, in the development of new food crops from currently wild or little-known sources, each of these things have changed my life, and the lives of others in significant ways.

I do hope my experiences will inspire others, not to be foolhardy, but to become more capable and self-sufficient.  Had I not done these things, I probably would have failed to hang on to my home years ago, and might even be dead, rather than robustly healthy.

[Uncle Matt]

I do hope my experiences will inspire others, not to be foolhardy, but to become more capable and self-sufficient.  Had I not done these things, I probably would have failed to hang on to my home years ago, and might even be dead, rather than robustly healthy.

They have here!!

[itchychick]

Hi all,

I've been checking in on the fly today and haven't had time to post properly...

I will this evening, after piano lessons, dinner, clean-up, homework, bathtime, and bedtime but before I get to my work.  (or passing out. Whichever comes first. )

[anthropositor]

I have suspended the quiz show music...

[andyb]

I'm holding my breath for the next instalment 

[LIGA girl]

Hi Anthro

from my quick reading of this thread and my knowledge of some of the points of law here, I would say that to prove ownership of the land will be difficult and fraught with danger as the holder of the land title deeds can take out mortgages on it and from the sounds of him he probably has done so. Anyone who holds the title deed has the ownership of the land and if you never took steps to get it you would be deemed to be reckless and to deserve what you get. If you get the title deed you are also liable for any mortgages on it.

Adverse possession sounds like an excellent remedy if you have reached the time limit for your country, your possession of the land has been open and obvious and with the knowledge of the owner. Here I think it is 12 years but that varies in other countries, you may be able to get it now.

I dont know about the law relating to tenancy, I hope you dont get the short straw here Anthro

LG