Couple that paid $90k for a private street in SF is forced to give it back(businessinsider.com) |
Couple that paid $90k for a private street in SF is forced to give it back(businessinsider.com) |
(Disclaimer: I work with Tina and can vouch for her character. The character assassination and racist comments leveled against her and her husband in other forums are dismaying.)
> Overhead View: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Presidio+Terrace,+San+Fran...
> Street View: https://www.google.com/maps/@37.788234,-122.4593631,3a,75y,2...
Whether the sidewalk owners can enforce it is another matter. (See also Kosla's jackassery around denying water access.)
From a principled standpoint however, this appears to be a violation of property rights. It is highly unlikely that 'normal' people would've been able to reverse the transaction the way these residents did which makes me root for the clearly predatory real estate schemers.
There's no moral party here it's just a question of what type of society you want to live in. I'd rather have the laws apply uniformly regardless of wealth and political influence which led me to my decision.
But... I actually am a fan of the ability to reverse the transaction.
I'm absolutely sure that having people who are politically connected in the neighborhood was part of making that happen, and I'm just as sure that it would have been impossible for most people in the same situation.
But now that it has happened, people who lose their property via tax liens have something to point to in a last ditch effort to save their property. And given that these transactions are more dangerous today than they were yesterday, perhaps the prices that the auctions bring will be lower - meaning that maybe once in a while a regular joe will be able to pop in and get a deal.
How are they predatory? They purchased a parcel of land on a government-approved website through a vetted legal process and followed all the rules.
People who are out of work or live on a fixed income (i.e. more legitimate excuses for not paying your property taxes) lose their homes to tax auctions all the time.
This is more like exploiting a security hole and then claiming a moral right to your gains.
My tax bill, however, is still a bit higher then $14/year, for acres of land in the middle of a land-strapped metro area.
But, to me, it's also pretty clear that the original owners were in the right here. You shouldn't be able to lose something worth $90,000 because of a small administrative oversight without some kind of notice from the government about what is going on. The world shouldn't work that way for anyone, rich or poor.
But it does. These types of "investors" exist in all markets, and they are about the real estate equvilant of shady debt collectors.
They buy properties that have delinquent taxes and once the city sells you it there are "no backsies" - the homeowner/whomever needs to now deal with the "investors" that bought the property from under them.
It's extremely common that those who owe those back taxes had no idea - or at least they claim so. That's never a defense I've seen hold up.
The problem is that the rich aren't paying the piper this time, and then changing the way things work. They are simply saying "eh, obviously that's wrong! fix it!" while completely ignoring the thousands of people affected in exactly the same manner each year.
If you didn't receive a tax bill for your house one year. Would you just figure that you didn't owe taxes that year? Probably not, there is a minimum level of adult responsibility required to own property. Part of that is paying your taxes.
It being mailed to the wrong address is irrelevant. The HOA most likely had officers that didn't get the address changed at some point. Doesn't matter that it was 17 years ago.
Wouldn't mind seeing more of a penalty for the rich landowners, though.
The wealthy once again got a free ride from the system while working to put others in debt. This is what's broken in our system. The wealthy have the money and should have purchased the land back. Instead they used money to buy political favor. The rich probably paid more in legal expenses than just buying the land back. This is spite and exertion of power, money, and influence, plain and simple. If the rules don't apply equally to everyone, then why do they apply to anyone?
The couple didn't know what Presidio Terrace was when they bought it
Maybe it's the bitcoin effect, but when people start investing in things they don't know anything about, that sets off my alarm.
There was a process and the city followed it. Just because a group with wealth and power don't like that outcome doesn't mean it should be changed. They bought it fair and square and, to believe them because I have no reason not to, they didn't do ti with any sort of malice.
The suit against them by the homeowners seems entirely punitive and particularly harassing. Their issue is whether the city followed the process. If they are that concerned with fixing what is very obviously the screw up of an organization they fully own and run then they can pay to do so.
I have noticed that people who support the buyers tend to point out the problem with wealthy and powerful people getting special treatment. I'm against that, but it doesn't remove my distaste for making money this way.
The same result would have happened with anyone who could afford an attorney to pursue rescission of the sale.
There is always risk in investment and investing in property sight-unseen is perhaps very risky, but they felt like it was worth it to them. As the article said, sometimes you can sell off their investment for a profit. Other times, evidently, you can annoy the politically powerful.
The current status quo is "you're screwed if you are not rich and/or politically connected, but it's not a big deal if you know people" - so absolutely nothing will change.
You must make "important" people feel the same pain as the little people or they will never care enough to take any amount of action.
What would you say should have happened here? I don’t see what else you could do with this land if you bought it. If the city didn’t auction it off, then why would anyone ever pay their taxes again?
The strongest argument I've read here on HN is that if the wealthy and powerful don't experience the injustice of their own laws, they won't change them - and that less connected and wealthy residents would not have gotten a similar rescue from government.
Why I say it's not glamorous is because we have to come up with ~$100,000 in the next 10-15 years to do major pavement replacement (not resurfacing or sealcoating), because this street is not maintained by the county. For a small townhouse community that has not been properly saving for major capital expenses like this, this is not fun.
What I find weird is the concept of "the only access to your own home is someone else's private street".
What's so surprising about private roads, then?
I was referring to public side walks on the right of way not private ones.
I used to work for a title search company that contracted with counties within that state to handle tax foreclosure. In order to foreclose on property for delinquent taxes, certified mail had to be sent to the most recent known address, the delinquency had to be published in a local paper, and a notice had to be posted on the property itself. I believe this is more-or-less the norm.
Also, I've participated as a bidder in one auction where I live in FL. There was no notice posted on the property. I don't know if the other things happened.
Nope, actually it sounds like someone forgot to change their address seventeen years ago. How hard is this to take care of? Or hey, even for someone in the HOA to notice they haven't been getting a tax bill for the last 17 years.
People shouldn't forfeit their property without warning because of clerical mistakes.
OK, ok, you're asking, what should have happened, not what shouldn't have happened. I can't say it's a totally unfair question. It probably would be worth thinking this through.
But overall, I don't really feel like I need to propose a new a system for collecting minuscule delinquent property tax bills that doesn't involve selling off massively valuable property at auction to point out that this is a really bad and completely unnecessary outcome. Guess that's so obvious to me that I just don't feel inclined to engage with the question.
It’s not as if there’s a bunch of standard alternatives they could have used. Traditionally, taxation is enforced by garnishing wages, forcibly withdrawing money from accounts, seizing property, or putting people in jail. None of these were possible here except for seizing property. The only alternative I see is to just let delinquents get away with not paying taxes forever, which defeats the whole purpose of taxes.
Also, with regard to there being "no warning". Why wouldn't there be an assumption by the HOA that they owed taxes even though they weren't receiving a bill?
What do you think the penalty for littering should be? The death penalty?
Wealthy people having to pay their way out of an awkward situation caused by their own irresponsibility? I don't know the means of these people but based on where they live, it amounts to the equivalent of a speeding ticket.
Keep in mind, they aren't the only victims of their irresponsibility now. They have had to create this narrative of a bottom feeding couple trying to cheat them out of their street. It's character assassination and it's another reason not to feel sorry for them.
And besides, your idea is non sensical. We should confiscate their property knowing that they have the resources to get it back in order to induce some higher lawyer fees and a pain-in-the-ass factor as some kind of penalty increase? That's bizarre! That's not how government should work at all! It ends up being a waste of time and resources for a lot of people and, as you mention, draws in innocent 3rd parties who end up taking some of the heat.
If we actually wanted a higher penalty for richer people than there should just be a bigger fine or late fee.
YOU are the one defending special treatment. Isn't that what has happened here?! They've successfully lobbied the city to treat them differently than everyone else?
All I was saying is it's harder to feel sorry for them. If you really cared about this issue, I'm sure you could find REAL tragedies that aren't being heard by the city council every single time the city does these tax sales. Like actual families being evicted for "clerical mistakes".