This is a good use of the law. A man claims a $330k Texas house for $16.

[TheBigotBasher]

http://www.ksla.com/story/15090178/man-claims-house-for-16-as-neighbors-accuse-him-of-squatting

Using a little known Texan law known as adverse possession.

The home was in foreclosure for more than a year, then the mortgage company went bust.

That allowed Kenneth Robinson to claim the property, using an online form he printed out and filed he claimed ownership of the property at the Denton County Courthouse for a cost of $16.

Robinson has set up camp in the living room, which now affords him exclusive negotiating rights with the original owner. If the owner wants him out, the owner would have to pay off his massive mortgage debt. The now bust bank would also have to file a complicated lawsuit. If this unlikely chain of events does not happen, after 3 years the house becomes his. He gets the full title.

[mtnester]

1. In Ohio, There are stringent rules to adverse possession

7 years, hostile, etc etc

I do not think this qualifies as anything more as an eviction issue, but, then, I have leanred long ago never to underestimate anything.

[dipsydoodle]

2. Is that all it is for squatters rights in Texas

3 years ?

Notwithstanding his camp : he might find that to claim full rights he needs to maintain the property fully for said period.

I recall somebody doing this with railway siding up the road to me here in the UK back in the '70s. He claimed squatters rights for having cultivated the land for 12 years whatever, built two houses on the land , sold them as well as his own house and moved away.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

7. There is more to it as discussed on similar threads

[joshcryer]

12. In the US it is anywhere between 2 years and a few decades, depending on the state.

Unfortunately there was a big deal about a local judicial official here using adverse possession to "steal" some hipster used land up in Boulder, so one of the Representatives, to get elected, vowed to close the loophole. Now it's basically non-existent in this state.

[FBaggins]

3. He doesn't stand a chance if challenged.

Under the three-year statute he must have title to the property or "color of title"... which means that he must have some reasonable basis for his claim of ownership.

Trespass and possession aren't the same thing.

And no... the bank doesn't need to file a "complicated lawsuit". The fact that it's "bust" doesn't mean that it doesn't exist any long (or some other bank inherit the asset). A simple affadavit (similar to the one that cost him $16) is sufficient. Giving him notice as well makes it criminal tresspass and allows the cops to be involved.

[naaman fletcher]

6. sounds to me like..

the basis of his claim is that he has physical possession, but more importantly that nobody else has any claim to the house whatsoever.

So, to the extant that you say he is tresspassing, i think his response would be "who am I tresspassing against, this is abandoned property".

Obviously, the answer to these is in the details, and the article does not provide enough information.

[joshcryer]

10. Yep, there are thousands of homes and property sitting in limbo like this.

Hell, in AZ you could squat for two years and own some property. Yes, turn the lights on, turn on the electricity, there's nothing stopping you from doing it.

Adverse possession, one of the last remaining true property rights that exists (though Colorado recently got rid of it).

[joshcryer]

9. That's what adverse possession is, if the foreclosure entity went bust, then the title is in limbo.

At the bare minimum the primary investors in the property have to come together to get the title, but oops, it's probably tied up in with a CDO with thousands of investors.

[FBaggins]

13. Not really.

Adverse possession isn't really a game by which someone without any legal interest obtains a property for free. It's a means to handle real property disputes that arise from competing legitimate claims to a property.

The statute he's operating under requires that he have "color of title"... which means some reason to believe that the property is really his. "Finders keepers" does not satisfy that standard.

A more appropriate example might be if a survey was done improperly when my home was built and it encroaches on my neighbor's land. The prior owner built a fence on that neighbor's property (thinking that it was his own) and I purchase the property assuming that the fence is on my property. I've maintained the fence for years and my cows feed on that land. When the survey error is discovered years later I might have a claim to the land anyway because while I don't actually hold title to it, I have "color of title" because I have a legitimate reason to believe that I own it.

This guy has no such claim.

The five-year statute requires that he have an actual recorded deed (which he obviously won't have) and that property taxes have been paid by him.


The error in his (and your) logic is that a legal entity "going bust" has no impact on the ownership of property. A bankrupt company can still own assets (which their creditors will have a claim on). The title doesn't go "into limbo".

[joshcryer]

19. You do have a point about color of title, however many states have "right of possession."

I'm not sure about Texas, mind you, but you can just take property if you possess it openly and notoriously for a period of time, I know this is true in at least two states and I've consulted a lawyer about it (I would like to buy some land but if I could get away with expropriating some rich land owners land then that'd be just as well).

[FBaggins]

20. It can be true in Texas too... but it takes ten years, not three.

And there's no chance that the home is going to go ten years without a legal owner kicking him out. Nor much chance that he can live their that long without power/water/etc.

[snooper2]

4. HA HA HA HA HA HA fucking greatness

:rofl:

And the uptight pricks down the street sound like they are boiling over with anger :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


I should go over and drop off a case for him :)

[provis99]

5. I wonder,

If Robinson goes out to the corner store for a pack of cigarettes, and comes back and finds another squatter, does he lose possession of "his" house?:rofl:

[tammywammy]

8. He has no electricity or water.

It's been over 100 degrees here for over two weeks. I wonder about the health conditions of the home. What is he doing with his urine & feces?

[joshcryer]

11. Which is odd, because he can have the water and electricity turned on.

He may not have the money to pay for the deposit though and because it's a post-mortgage bust $300k house (probably a million dollar house before it went bust) he probably couldn't afford the bill anyway.

[FBaggins]

14. No... he probably can't.

Most utilities require either proof of ownership or a lease agreement and the landlord's permission to turn on the service.

A $16 form claiming that you'll own it some day isn't going to hack it.

[A HERETIC I AM]

15. If he can get a bucket of water from the neighbors....

he can flush the toilet easily.

[FBaggins]

16. Indications are that the neighbors aren't his biggest fans.

and, of course, the lack of working toilets wouldn't be the only health issue in a home without utilities.

[A HERETIC I AM]

17. Well, if by "working toilet" you mean that it doesn't have water running to it...

still doesn't mean it can't be flushed.

I don't mean to tell you something you already know, but a gallon or two of bottled water for that matter can be used to flush almost any toilet by simply dumping it into the bowl.

[FBaggins]

18. I agree... but there's still more to it than that.

So maybe he can carry in enough water to flush a toilet (maybe there's a stream nearby). But that doesn't make the water safe to drink... and doesn't mean that there's enough potable water in the home for hygene and keeping the home clean. There are food safety issues of course (no refrigeration). Smoke alarms don't work (for long) without power.

And in the summer heat... a number of things in a modern home start to decay without air conditioning.

[Courtesy Flush]

21. Wouldn't the city foreclose for unpaid taxes before the 3 years is up? nt