Article may cause a stir, so to avoid a flame war here is the last line in the article.
She was not formally charged for living in the space, police said
Dammit I wanted to see pictures of the space
Why? Are you in the market?
Aren’t we all?
Keurig should get her an Apartment for a year just for the PR they would gain.
Seems like Family Fare should do that, it’s good PR for the entire chain. They did donate $10k to a local shelter though.
deleted by creator
According to the article she was told about the available assistance in that area and refused. Didn’t say why.
Contractors really had to report it? Seems like she was living there without disturbing anything /one
Let’s not blame the contractors for a societal problem.
That and there’s the whole liability issue if something happens and it’s found out they were completely aware someone was living there.
Right, if the contractors looked the other way, I would support that, but I also understand why they didn’t or couldn’t. I would also bet that the roof sign lady, who didn’t have any visible means to climb onto the roof while living there for a year, probably had a number of reasonable people look the other way.
What is appalling is that the working poor cannot afford housing. What is sad is that our society could provide for everyone, but we choose not to. Because profit above all.
It’s free real estate
I bet the landowner was furious they hadn’t got an opportunity to charge rent. It even came with a kitchen and study!
That’s $1,500/mo easy!
Removed by mod
“In capitalist America, they make you sleep in neon signs if you can’t afford a house.”
There’s got to be thousands of signs like that around the country. So, housing crisis solved?
Life, uh, finds a way…
How can they just kick her out? Don’t they have to go through an eviction process? Does she not have squatters’ rights?
I had to look this up. What a strange idea, but apparently it is a thing.
https://learn.eforms.com/real-estate/squatters-rights/#how-to-claim-squatters-rights
I knew about adverse possession but a squatter was just trespassing until that kicked in. Apparently I have to get them written notice and 30 days to get gone in my state.
I wonder why it doesn’t decrease the number of rental home vacancies? Odd.
It’s from the days when records were a lot harder to track down and someone could just die or disappear. After a certain amount of time the state just has to just call it or else the land’s ownership is locked up forever. That’s why the term of adverse possession is generally lower in the Western “frontier” states than the Eastern states, it was a lot more perilous to stake a claim there and there was a lot of turnover, with poor records. People have successfully adversely possessed abandoned houses in places like Vegas though, and more power to them.
It should be noted that trashing a house, setting fires, shitting in the corner, and inviting 30 of your friends to join you isn’t the way this is done. You have to “openly and notoriously” occupy the property, which basically means presenting yourself as the owner. So you live there, keep the place up, and most importantly pay the property taxes. Basically present yourself in such a way that everyone thinks you are the owner.
She was trespassing.
Squatters’ rights doesn’t really exist in the US like it does in Europe/the UK.
I saw whole families living like this in Manila.
Very cool
