Seductivpancakes
Member
Or afford to find some legal course of action.
How much people can say the same about having the funds readily available to save their livelihoods?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Rich SF residents get a shock: Someone bought their street
- Thread starter titiklabingapat
- Start date
Or afford to find some legal course of action.
How much people can say the same about having the funds readily available to save their livelihoods?
Kayo Police
Member
Pretty much how I feel. Didnt know Gaf could be this petty.
I'm sure it has come up in the five pages but there is no way the HOA won't hire a lawyer and argue easement by prescription if the new owner tries to monetize parking or access. If this is anything but a publicity stunt the new owner should be prepared to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees for a case that looks to be almost impossible to win.
The Greek Freak
Member
Yup if I was rich enough to own a house here I'd also be rich enough to burn 100k on legal fees on principal rather than pay absurd fees.
Only the lawyers will benefit from this nonsense.
Dr.Guru of Peru
played the long game
They had no idea. Would you know if your home owners association was getting mail at some dead accountants address for 30 years? Do you really think they'd avoid paying $14 a year on purpose?
CampbellzSoup
Member
Rich people aren't rich because they think like this - their not Hollywood stars
Won't even come to that. LIkely either a) one of the people who lives there is a lawyer and will do the work pro bono on behalf of the HOA. b) the HOA will levy a special assessment against all owners for legal fees each fo the ~20 people will be forced to chip in 5-10k and they'll have 100k-200k to fight it in court.
Froyo Love
Banned
What's the HOA doing if it's not paying attention and keeping up with its requirements from the city? No one remembered to check their tax records or obligations for thirty years? I wouldn't blame the residents being mad at their HOA and whoever runs it. But none of that is on the city or the buyers.
It doesn't matter. The fault is with the HOA. If the homeowners are mad, they should be mad at whoever has been heading the HOA not with the clever investors who noticed a 20+ year old unpaid debt - which came up online! They didn't even have to go snooping through city records.
Debts like these are bought all the time. Typically though, it's usually just banks earning high interest paying off the debts get you. For instance, you can earn 18% on the debt in some places (not the 90k premium this couple paid, but the debt itself) and as the new owner of the debt you continue paying off what the owner of the property fails to pay to earn interest off of that. Usually, the owner wises up, pays off their debt plus the interest, and everything goes back to normal. But sometimes you can begin foreclosure proceedings if you've held the debt for an extended period of time (like two years).
The lesson: pay your fucking taxes and especially your utilities.
What do you think the words homeowners association mean? The residents are the HOA. They agreed to form an HOA, they elected shitty managers, the HOA (the residents as a collective) told the city where to send the bill, the HOA (the residents as a collective) got rid of the accountant and never updated the city, the HOA (the residents as a collective) didn't pay either taxes. Now the HOA (the residents as a collective) suffer the consequences of their actions.
Of course the homeowners can get an easement, the street owners can also turn the side of their street into paid public parking. The problem with playing stupid games with the guy that owns the street is that everything he does affects you every day, nothing you do affects him unless he violates the law.
They need to own the fuckup and pay the guy what he wants to buy the street back.
Sue who? The street owner that will show up to court with his title and ask for a summary judgment against the homeowners?
Sue the city? You don't think the government will fight tooth and nail to make sure there isn't a precedent that makes their tax laws toothless? You think some state judge is jumping up and down at the chance to go against centuries of precedent that allows the government to seize and sell assets for failure to pay taxes?
Marty Chinn
Member
At least one of the houses was last sold in 1969 to the owner for $96k. Just because they live there doesn't mean they've got a ton of cash at their disposal and are super rich.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
At 1k a year the couple would make their money back after three years. Those million dollar home owners can gfts.
Ha! That's now how taxes and HOA fees work.
Ha! That's now how taxes and HOA fees work.
Man..that's some shit. lol
Marty Chinn
Member
Where did I say that had anything to do with taxes and HOA fees? You can have both and live in a community that deals with both and not be super rich. I was responding to the notion that the person can automatically pay a $5000 parking fee without blinking.
Or a 10 foot speed bump every 10 feet.
High Fry Frow
Member
Whoa, that's insane!
My college band's drummer lived in one of those houses and we built a rehearsal space in his parents house.
The neighbors were not very tolerant of inoffensive mid 2000's post-punk at 2pm on a Saturday. In fact, they were some of the rudest of the wealthy old-money I'd ever experienced while growing up in the bay.
My college band's drummer lived in one of those houses and we built a rehearsal space in his parents house.
The neighbors were not very tolerant of inoffensive mid 2000's post-punk at 2pm on a Saturday. In fact, they were some of the rudest of the wealthy old-money I'd ever experienced while growing up in the bay.
Froyo Love
Banned
They own property that's worth millions. Even if you were to stretch quite considerably to say that the people who live here, in one of the highest valued real estate markets in the entire world, are going to suffer if they want to pay an exorbitant parking fee - they can sell and move.
This is without getting into things like public transportation, or parking in garages or driveways. These people don't deserve sympathy. Again, not because they've committed any moral offense, but because even if the street's new owners were to turn into insane tyrants who tried to bully and extort every resident, these residents are overwhelmingly extremely wealthy people who can take care of themselves.
Marty Chinn
Member
Most people in the Bay Area who have lived their lives here and own a house now have a house worth over a million. That doesn't make everyone in the Bay Area rich.
Also it seems kind of shitty to me for someone to look at someone who lived here all their lives and to tell them to STFU, uproot their lives and move because someone else came in and took advantage of a situation because you feel they are rich when they might not be.
I've really got to stop reading this thread, for as a moderately long time GAF poster, it's making me lose heart.
Bullying and extortion wouldn't be worth another person's concern if the targets just happen to live in houses worth decent money because they can probably sort it, despite us having no idea how cash rich they are???
I would hope I'd have empathy for another person being bullied or extorted regardless of what house price they had.
I have a house in the £175 - £200k range. How much sympathy would I be allowed if I got bullied and extorted. 75%? 67% and a hug?
TheOrangeKid007
Member
I assume those 2 know what they are doing. Going up against that many rich people with teams of lawyers who can literally destroy their lives. Looks like a risky investment.
Mohonky
Member
Pretty flashy alright, and only one entry? Defiilnitely needs a toll boothlol I know exactly where that is. Pretty ritzy
They might get away with it if it's just paying for street parking, if they put up a toll booth then the residents won't take it. It's one thing to make them pay a fee, the existence of a toll booth there would probably knock hundreds of thousands off the price of their houses, their lawyers will find a loophole and drag it through court, costing the couple as much as possible.
Froyo Love
Banned
This is not a rent-controlled apartment in SF downtown. This is a small gated neighborhood with 24-hour security and a list of famous wealthy residents. The Presidio Terrace is a wealthy enclave, and trying to act like there's some poor residents who are going to suffer a meaningful hit to the quality of their life because the street was bought is horseshit.
I'm not saying anyone needs to uproot their lives. I'm saying it's a waste of time fretting about the fates of a bunch of people with easy access to money for either a financial or legal solution to the horrific problem that they might not be able to park their car for free.
In the most far-fetched hypothetical, where the street buyers go mad with imagined power and try to bring the neighborhood to ruins, the worst that happens is that lawyers have to be hired by a collective of people who can most easily afford them and vehicle parking becomes inconvenient.
There are so many people in the Bay Area getting fucked over and suffering real harm, by housing issues, by shitty transportation infrastructure and nightmare parking fees in the city, by the rigid lack of human concern in bureaucratic systems. Most of them do not live in a gated neighborhood with millions of dollars in property assets to sort their problems out. I don't understand the person who reads this kind of story and is moved by a deep stirring of pity rather than having a chuckle at the irony.
If you want to talk about GAF culture, how about having a look back at this greater Bay Area related thread, where a fair number of people's attitude towards a family living in a garage and barely making ends meet was "Well tough shit, they should live better somewhere else, I'm sure they could somehow." I feel like that sort of thread is a better outlet for big-hearted concern than this one.
If I had the money to buy one of those houses I'd laugh in the owner's face and look somewhere else! I don't have a problem with living close to my neighbors but there's a difference between townhouses which are designed to be right next to each other and detached houses on top of each other, this looks ridiculously cramped and it isn't an attractive neighborhood at all.lol I know exactly where that is. Pretty ritzy
Aztechnology
Member
You could probably sue pretty heavily for home devaluation because of those actions though. They will likely have suits filed against them too for what they're trying. Well assuming it does cause loss of home value that is.
gutter_trash
Banned
US is so weird
KibblesBits
Member
Set up a toll booth every 5 feet of the street and allow the needy to work at the booths.
Or after seeing this picture
Set up a toll booth before every incline/entrance to the side walk.
Awful... they are ALL right on top of each other. Even beyond the circle of homes. For wealthy individuals they sure don't seem to care about distance from neighbors.
GoldenEye 007
Member
Yup. I mean, the HOA and residents are one in the same. It's their fault for not managing it correctly.
Because that is insane. In my country you can own a home with a garden. Streets and everything else is owned by the city.
BlackRainbowFT
Member
They could all get a chopper.
Clockwork
Member
Is that 1969 dollars? If so do you know how inflation works? That's like $638,000 in 2016 money (which doesn't even account for the value of the house now which is super inflated due to the area).
Heck, in 1969 the house you mention was almost 3 times the median purchase price of a house.
https://www.census.gov/const/uspricemon.pdf
Frozenprince
Banned
Pay your taxes dumb dumbs.
NervousXtian
Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
No, these are legit mansions.. not McMansions.. you don't seem to understand what that term means. This is an old neighborhood.
Land's at a premium in SF, if you are looking for tons of greenspace you can own, look elsewhere.
KibblesBits
Member
They should be scheming to take land from each other. Dig up some dirt and force neighbors to move away and buy up their homes to bulldoze!
Zoe
Member
Do you have apartments behind gates? Same thing except these are detached houses.
"They can sell and move." You do realize that you are saying they can always be upended from their home? God, some of you are absolutely heartless and bitter towards people who are wealthy.
Upended?
They didn't pay their taxes and now may have to pay for street parking. It's not exactly a huge cross to bear.
gutter_trash
Banned
Zoe
Member
Apartment complexes have streets you drive on to get to your building. They have strips of green just like what the couple bought (they didn't just buy the pavement).
It's a mansion in a city of course they are right up on their neighbors. It's an inherent compromise. It's actually pretty generous compared to the rest of SF.
Hierophant
Banned
*don't pay your taxes for literally 30 years*
"won't somebody please think of the rich people and their plight?"
greedy old fucks the lot of them like what the fuck 14 bucks a year i could afford that and i'm a broke ass student theres no excuse
"won't somebody please think of the rich people and their plight?"
greedy old fucks the lot of them like what the fuck 14 bucks a year i could afford that and i'm a broke ass student theres no excuse
We shouldn't feel sympathy for them because they can always just move is what I read. Some people are house rich and cannot afford additional expenses. It doesn't matter how rich someone is, I am going to feel bad if they feel forced to move out of their home.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked