real "Caddy Shack"

[JFB]

appearantly the elite didn't think little things like property tax applied to their restricted gated community
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/08/residents-of-an-exclusive-san-francisco-street-didnt-pay-their-taxes-so-someone-bought-their-street/?utm_term=.1b87411d456e



how come I hear "i'm all right" being played
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbQgaHZOFZ0

 

[LDM]

If these snobs don't pay up to the new owners, can they cut them off to access to the outside world and the common people they so disdain? Interesting. So Finkstink and Pigiosi used to live there. That figures. Elitist libtard hypocrites.

 

[Bull Barrel]

Evidently the tax bills had been sent to an attorney that no longer worked for the HOA.
But I dont buy that. The mail would have been sent to the HOA by the former attorney.

 

[JFB]

I scanned through several differnt sources, given most are to long to read AND only provide small tid bits of "good stuff". But one mentioned the couples plan was to first offer the owners to pay for access, thus keeping it restrictive, if not accepted, opening the streets to the public with paid parking spaces (apperantly the area has need for the additional parking)

 

[contender]

I'd like to see them open it up to the public,,, for free. Let the local people use it for their "fun" festivals & parties.

 

[gramps]

I'd like to see them open it up to the public,,, for free. Let the local people use it for their "fun" festivals & parties.

Yep, I understand the common areas are well landscaped. A luau would be a big hit! Charge for admission. :lol: I doubt it would be open to the public for free. This is an investment. OTOH, opening it up for free might make the HOA decide to buy it back at a substantially higher price. :mrgreen:
gramps

 

[wheelgun1958]

Work access as a toll. A monthly credit card debit or pay per entry. Their choice.

 

[Rick Courtright]

Hi,

Karma's a beach! Or so said the bumper sticker years ago...

Regarding the attorney and not getting the bills, etc.: dunno how it is in YOUR State, but in CA it's the responsibility of the property owner to obtain and pay the bill on time, regardless of whether the Tax Collector sent one out. Somebody in the HOA dropped that ball themselves. And don't even try to call and tell 'em you didn't get a bill so you're late. They can be merciless about property taxes, essentially telling the taxpayer they're doing him a favor by even sending a bill. I've gotten that earful a couple of times when calling to get duplicate bills for elderly clients who may not have gotten a bill, may have misplaced it, whatever. One call was for an 80 year old lady, and the fellow at the TC's office asked me how long she'd lived in CA. It was decades. "Well, in that case, she should know better." Yeah, and a pox be on your house, too, buddy!

Still, it seems such "misfortune" couldn't be better placed in this case! The idea of an access fee, exorbitant, of course, sounds like fun. And letting Fido loose on the "new owners'" lawn oughta be costly, too.

Rick C

 

[Jimbo357mag]

The couple that bought the street is going to have to make enough money to maintain the street and all that entails or else they might get fined. Actually a pretty good investment I would say. The homeowners could be held captive by the new 'street owners'.

 

[caryc]

The couple that bought the street is going to have to make enough money to maintain the street and all that entails or else they might get fined. Actually a pretty good investment I would say. The homeowners could be held captive by the new 'street owners'.

If they own the street, why do they have to maintain it? Or why do they have to give anyone else access to it?

Do they not have public easement laws in San Francisco? Here in southern Calif. when you buy a piece of property, you have to give easement rights to access it for the utility companies to maintain their equipment.

On one side of my five acres, there is a dirt road. My property marker actually goes out to the center of the road. But there is a public easement that takes up half of that dirt road so I can't close it off. The property on the other side of the road also has an easement that covers the other side of the road. Telephone poles and water lines also run along that easement.

People that have property further in the hills than mine also have to have a way to get to their property. This easement is open to them also. It can't be closed off in any way. I'm betting that they don't own the whole street from one curb to the other curb.

Say there is a plot of land 20 acres by 20 acres to equal 400 square acres. If you break it up into 5 acre plots, people that own 5 acres right in the center need a way to get to their property besides by helicopter.

 

[Rick Courtright]

If they own the street, why do they have to maintain it? Or why do they have to give anyone else access to it?

Do they not have public easement laws in San Francisco? Here in southern Calif. when you buy a piece of property, you have to give easement rights to access it for the utility companies to maintain their equipment.

Hi,

Cary, I think you're talking about two different kinds of easements. The first, for the utility company, probably goes back to the first telegraph line that crossed private property, if not further and is most likely pretty universal throughout the country. The second, which is part of CA real estate law, though I don't know about other States, is that you can't landlock a property owner. In other words, he has to have some kind of ground access to his land. In many cases, that means another property owner has to allow the first one to cross his property for the purpose of getting to his own.

That easement is for passage only as explained decades ago by my real estate instructor long ago. It doesn't give the "nearly landlocked" property owner any additional rights, such as parking. I'm sure there will be arguments from the homeowners based on this concept.

Ok, that part's simple enough. Then we run into another kind of easement, which allows persons passage across private property if they've been crossing it unimpeded for a certain amount of time. For example, you have a corner of your five acres that's near the school bus stop, and every day the kids cut across it on their way home. If you don't "protect" your right by posting it, fencing it off or somehow otherwise preventing the kids from passing every so often within the statutory time limit, they can claim a prescriptive easement which you are stuck with. And, much to your chagrin, you have to let them use that corner as long as they wish. Some part of that concept could also be argued by the homeowners.

I'd imagine that since the piece(s) of property involved in the OP's story involved has/have been used for so long, in so many ways, some real estate attorneys will end up having a real ball sorting this thing out, at homeowners' expense, of course! I passed the story along to my brother, who recently retired after about 35 years with the County Assessor's office, and he got a chuckle out of it. Then he went on to tell me this stuff isn't uncommon, and is usually the result of not spending one's money wisely on a good attorney in the first place. He said most of these things end up being the result of someone not dotting an "i" or crossing a "t." And then they get costly...

Rick C

 

[Jimbo357mag]

If they own the street, why do they have to maintain it? Or why do they have to give anyone else access to it?

Consider that the homeowners association owned the property before the couple bought it for taxes. Except for the actual lots that the homeowners own all the rest of the property road, sidewalk, parks etc. should belong to the couple now. They would have the responsibility to keep it up or they could get fined by the city or get sued by the homeowners which is happening right now from one of the articles. The city of course has right-a-ways all over the property for utilities.

What the couple will probably do is charge the homeowners a fee each month for their services.

 

[caryc]

OK Rick,

Here's one for you. This is a drawing of my 5 acres and the adjacent property. You can see the 4 power poles that run along the easement on my property. When I first moved there, the neighbors power lines ran from pole 3 directly to his pole number 6.

One day they decided that they were getting intersect from the three power lines that ran from 3 to pole 6. So they just came onto my property while I was at work and installed pole number 5 in the middle of my property so they could put a cross beam on it to keep the lines apart. There is no easement or road running across my property where they put pole 5.

So did they have a right to put that pole on my property? I have never contacted them about it but always wondered about it.

 

[Bull Barrel]

If they dont have an easement through your property afaik that pole shouldnt be there.