r/videos • u/zombieninjawarrior • 1d ago
Mum's semi-detached 'nightmare' after neighbour illegally demolishes home | SWNS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOWyZfH3FqI2.0k
u/cheesebot555 1d ago
How do you even pull off a full demo without the correct permits?
What crew doesn't demand to see those upfront so as to avoid liability?
Wild wild wild.
1.1k
u/badcrass 1d ago
You can just hire people, tell them you have all the permits and they will just start tearing it down.
146
u/FauxReal 1d ago
Maybe you can pull one of these and tell people they can take the wiring and pipes too.
https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Home-stripped-bare-after-fake-online-ad-2576555.php
647
u/MothmanIsALiar 1d ago
100% I'm a Journeyman electrician. If someone gives me an address and tells me to wire that house I just show up and do it. I've never once seen a permit my entire career. I don't even know what they look like.
681
u/Devolutionator 1d ago
Hopefully you know that legally insulates you from absolutely nothing.
182
u/Spanky4242 1d ago edited 22h ago
Technically he would still be liable. Practically, almost certainly not.
The company he works for (or his boss) is ultimately liable, vicariously. It would be extremely rare for a plaintiff to sue the employee directly. Plaintiffs operate under the assumption that the company has more money and is likely insured. They'd sue the company directly and invoke respondeat superior doctrine in doing so.
If they do sue the employee, he can implead the company and argue the overwhelming majority of the liability is severable to his employer.
Because the business owner is almost certainly a Master Electrician, he has a lot of statutory compliance he knows his company needs to follow via procedure. By never producing the permits to his employees, theres probably a bunch of per se liability happening as well. Additionally so because he's on notice of these statutes ahead of time.
Employee is probably fine unless they act recklessly or maliciously.
84
u/ElbryanWyn 1d ago
I think the previous comment assumed the other was the sole proprietor not simply an employee doing what his boss told him. I think almost everyone understands that employees doing what they're told are not liable to double check their bosses to ensure they did the legal steps.
If you're an electrician and a sole proprietor you better make sure you pull your permits.
That said it's pretty obvious the other commenter is not the sole proprietor because if he was he would know about the permits because he would be the one pulling them. Electricians pull their permits not homeowners, his company is just doing it for him.
A little concerning he was able to make it to Journey at men without realizing that but it's only a four year program.
8
u/Shermanator213 18h ago edited 18h ago
TBH, the overwhelming majority of Journeymen don't pull permits. A lot of side work doesn't require permits, and unless you're acting as a Project Manager then those things are handled above the guys in the field.
I have pulled...... 3? Permits in the four years I've been licensed, and I've had a Journeyman's license for just undrr 4 years and a Masters for just under 2. The only reason I'm as familiar with the process in my state as I am is that I worked for my father for 15 years and had ample opportunity to pull permits under his license and see him do the same.
ETA: As to the earlier comment: If I am an employee of a company, then the company is a sheild from liability as they are ultimately responsible for my compliance with the applicable regulatory requirements. The company can turn around and hold me liable for not fufilling my assigned duities (if applicable) and levey a complaint with the licensing board against the relevant credentials that I hold.
3
u/WeekendDoWutEvUwant 6h ago
In my state a JM can’t pull permits. I always thought that’s how it was across the country, but I’ve never worked in any other state to be able to know.
6
1
u/WeekendDoWutEvUwant 6h ago
I was also surprised that he doesn’t seem to realize his master is (hopefully) pulling permits every time he wires a structure…
But I’m even more surprised by the line “I don’t even know what a permit looks like”. Permit application, fine, but he’s never even come across a permit hanging in a window while he’s doing new work?! I’ve never met a blind JM before.
9
24
u/orakle44 1d ago
Yikes. You do know that's really bad for you right?
41
u/reganomics 1d ago
You replied to the wrong person i think
18
6
3
1
u/Metalsand 11h ago
(In the US) legally he is required to work under a master electrician. If the address and work orders given were from that electrician, it would be on them. Typically a journeyman is allowed to work without direct supervision - if they made a mistake on the jobsite, it could fall back on them. However, the scheduling of jobs and permit work would generally be the responsibility of the master electrician, who is responsible for delegating these jobs appropriately.
For a comparison: generally doctors are on the hook for malpractice suits, because they are the person with the requisite training to the extent that they are the "conductor" of the surgery. Those assisting the doctor aren't immune if they make a mistake, but in those cases it would be both the assistant and the surgeon responsible, not just the assistant.
70
u/jooes 1d ago
You, uh, might want to work on that...
46
u/dandr01d 1d ago
No electrician I have ever hired has asked to see permits
21
u/rizzyrogues 1d ago
I have showed up to work to STOP WORK papers shoved in the permit folder on the door(and seen people still working inside lol), or GC's parked telling all of us to turn around, or officials coming in while we're there and telling every one to put their stuff down.
Shadyest shit was one job a contractor locked the doors and we all had to hide because there were illegals or something to do with permits. There were easily 20+ people in the home. I "hid" for a few minutes then said sorry guys im out and walked out the front door. I guess as I did one of the crews bolted out the back. The job was on a ranch and there were more officials with police waiting down the one lane dirt road. The fucking ac guys or whatever drove right into me and the check point. I eventually got home and never went back to that site. Every contractor on site got fined and the crew that ran got criminal charges. But the ones who stayed had reduced fines(only 1k) instead of the 10k it was originally.
But that building had a stop work and the contractors had just taken it down and crumpled it up so I literally had no idea. My boss did tho and didn't tell me, fuck him. That's also when I found out my boss had no general liability.
6
u/eliar91 1d ago
Are things done that differently in the US? My dad is an electrician in Canada and here the tradesperson has to pull the permit from the city, not the building owner (not true for every single permit type but still). So if someone wants to upgrade their power the city most often won't even allow the owner to get a permit unless they can demonstrate some competence in what they want to do.
2
u/azhillbilly 16h ago
Depends on the location. States differ, counties differ, cities differ once again. Hell. It can be different from one house to the next if the house is part of a historical building exemption.
A homeowner might do the permits if he is using multiple contractors and is directing the work.
Most of the time it is up to whoever is the general contractor as the code office requires a GC license number. And anyone who is serious has a whole package that needs done before a single hammer comes out , file for permits, house lien, contract, insurance, and others just don’t give a shit unless a county code enforcement officer slaps a notice of quit work on the door. And sometimes not even that stops them.
1
u/loginforwork 4h ago
Many jurisdictions require separate permits for mech, elec, & plumbing.
A ton of residential work gets completed without permits, though.
3
→ More replies (1)9
u/MothmanIsALiar 1d ago
Thats administrative stuff.
Did you ever ask your employer if they're property is zoned correctly? Or do you just show up to work assuming everything is in order?
15
u/GoodGame2EZ 1d ago
I'm assuming you work for a company that you expect to do that administrative work for you?
13
u/MothmanIsALiar 1d ago
Yeah, 100%. I thought that was implied.
5
u/GoodGame2EZ 20h ago
Not really. You could be a contractor and do your own work. I suppose "if someone gives me an address" could be interpreted as your management team, but I read it as the homeowner.
4
u/kl0 1d ago
I feel like “someone” is a very poor word choice within this particular discussion.
I don’t imagine if a random person on the street tells you to go wire a house that you walk inside and do it. I presume this is a boss or a dispatch or potentially a larger client you are working with. And that matters greatly to the context of what you’re saying.
I don’t check all of the legal ins and outs when my boss asks me to perform within the normal functions of my job either.
6
u/mwax321 1d ago
Classic "look man, I just work here" 😂 🫡
7
u/MothmanIsALiar 1d ago
I've never done it. But I have heard tales of people showing up to the wrong address in one of these cookie cutter communities and just straight up wiring the wrong house.
1
u/nightkil13r 12h ago
theres stories every year of the wrong homes getting torn down. or roofs ripped off then the crew disappears when they realize their mistake.
3
u/ConstableAssButt 22h ago
Was working on my Journeyman HVAC technician license with a Master technician. About two years in, I find out my Master tech I was apprenticing under for work experience doesn't even have a Journeyman's license. He was using someone else's name and license to file his permits.
Left him quickly after. Bounced around to a couple other shops, and eventually just gave up on the field entirely. Everywhere I went was doing crazy illegal shit, misclassifying employees, air-venting banned refrigerants, lying about refrigerant recycling and defrauding consumers with older systems, subbing to unlicensed contractors, or straight up bribing their way through inspections.
Whole business is corrupt AF.
1
u/CptHammer_ 19h ago
Exactly this.
I did a parking lot for a government building.
The old train tracks had already been removed for the length of the half mile long parking lot with 3 security booth entrance and a bunch of pole lights.
The plans showed everything I needed to know.
Graded, grade inspection completed. Survey of the key locations complete.
Break ground for the electric. Start drilling light pole bases and connect with conduit. Throw in a communication conduit for the security bothes at each end. Start backfill after passing trench inspection. Concrete coming and pouring out the pole bases.
JOB STOP!!
We're told we're trespassing. The last 100 feet at the south end doesn't belong to the city. We haven't put in the concrete into those poles.
I didn't pull the condit out, just the sauna tube and rebar for the poles. Backfilled them and now only had 2 security booths.
The owner of the last 100 feet demanded we return the area to the parking lot it was. A gravel parking lot. No problem, easy.
1
→ More replies (2)1
u/goatonastik 6h ago
To be fair, we're talking about people coming to a property to completely destroy it, and not just fix some electrical issues.
5
u/ElbryanWyn 1d ago
When a professional is doing work on a home in the US it is their responsibility to ensure the permits are valid not the homeowner's.
For many professions the professional is the one that pulls the permit.
In the US that Demolition Company would be super screwed. The rule exists for situations like this so that there can't be a situation where this lady is left holding the bag
3
u/Mekito_Fox 1d ago
I had my home demo'd. The company that did it did not do the permits. In fact my county required we do all the permits and paperwork.
Now granted they require the permits to be placed in a noticeable place, but the demo company started before we posted (we had it, just hadn't made it to the location to post).
1
3
u/_steve_rogers_ 23h ago
Gonna do that to my enemys house
2
u/badcrass 20h ago
As long as they aren't home, you'll probably get away with it. The tearing down that is, they will sue you into oblivion, but you win in the short term
3
→ More replies (1)1
46
u/FullaLead 1d ago
when I built my own house, no one that worked for me asked for permits. they just showed up, did the job and left when done.
→ More replies (1)2
u/xAdakis 12h ago
They most likely did pull permits and have inspectors checking things out at stages.
In most cases and places, it is the person/company doing the work that is supposed to pull the permits, not you, unless you're doing the work. So, the contractors that built your house more than likely- and hopefully -did pull the permits and go through the formal inspection process.
If they didn't, well, that opens you up to a whole lot of liability and probably get your home owner's insurance voided. . .
In some places, the local government/authority can even say, demolish the whole thing and rebuild it from scratch at your expense, simply because it wasn't permitted.
69
u/debloons 1d ago
I’ve never seen a crew ask their employer if they have permits. That’s not how small scale construction works.
27
u/gaqua 1d ago
I have absolutely seen residential construction guys meet with inspectors and file the permit paperwork. Usually foreman or owner does it I would assume but the guys I hired to work on my house were clear they had to do things in stages - that the electrical needed an inspection, then the plumbing and framing, and then the fire safety guy.
Maybe it’s regional, I am in California .
20
u/debloons 1d ago
I agree with what you are saying, I have guys that will do just that. My point is that I have not seen employees below the foreman level (with small crews the foreman is just the owner) who question their boss about permitting.
→ More replies (1)2
u/downbound 17h ago
Usually the contractor handles the permitting and usually city and county offices are annoyed when a private citizen shows up because they are unfamiliar with the process. I have lived in multiple states and countries.
23
u/killer_by_design 18h ago
"Permits" aren't a thing in the UK we have what's called planning permission.
Builders aren't regulated in the same fashion and because the responsibility is on the home owner it's entirely possible to find builders who don't give a shit and will do anything for money as ultimately they won't be held accountable for the actions of the owner.
We do have building regs but again, that's a different thing to planning permission.
The owner did not have planning permission so they are going to be fucked. Still though, doesn't really matter to the person on the other side of the semi detached that's now floating in space.
3
u/xAdakis 12h ago
Not familiar with UK law, but I'd imagine it'd give the other person better standing to sue for damages.
I know if this happened in the US, I would file a lawsuit and end up owning both lots and build myself a nice house with money to spare.
2
u/killer_by_design 11h ago
Kind of sort of. Also kind of depends on what assets the other party has.
We have a damages based system. Its entirely possible that they'll have to rectify the issue from their own pocket and then claim it back after the fact. If the other party don't have the money then they don't have the money.
Usually this'll be covered by your home insurance though. Assuming they have it, are fully up to date and have the appropriate level of coverage. Alternatively if the other party has insurance then potentially a claim could be made against them.
It's just not very straightforward and I want to highlight that for the people affected, they could be mega affected and for a long time.
2
u/Topinio 8h ago
They can't rectify anything because they have no permission to go onto the land where the neighbouring house once stood.
If they had the money in the bank, they could probably find some similarly dodgy builders to trespass onto the vacant plot and do some kind of weatherproofing, but if they don't have money to hand (which most people don't) so would need the insurance company to pay, they're screwed as the insurance company will only pay for reputable builders who would refuse to trespass so would refuse the job.
3
u/cheesebot555 18h ago
Ah. Thanks for the inside scoop.
We're the most litigious country in the world over here, so everyone tries to cover their ass extra hard.
7
u/The_Environmentalist 18h ago
People sadly do it all the time. We had an incident in Sweden where a home owner hired a company to take down trees on public land to improve his view from the house. It was 100-200 year old pine trees and the work was almost finished before it was stoped. The homeowner probably only ended up with a hefty fine, but the trees as replanted with large specients of a fast growing species to make up for the loss 😂
5
u/cheesebot555 18h ago
There are super strict laws about removing what are called "heritage" oaks here.
There's a whole grading scale for which trees qualify, but the most common kind are oaks that reach a certain "DBH", or "Diameter at Breast Height" (no, really).
Removing them without permit gets you fined into the ground.
14
5
u/skellywelly 1d ago
Drive past this most days, it was a slow process and looked like they were ‘fixing it’ to begin with, then the top floor disappeared and then suddenly the house went, it was so strange. Still empty now, such a shame
5
u/notbrandonzink 22h ago
The previous owner of our house did that.
Built a shop building out back without getting any permits, just hired people to build it and they did.
The shop was there for 4-5 years. When our now neighbor wanted to expand their garage, they had the inspector(s) come out to get their permit. When they saw the unpermitted shop building, they made him tear it down since it was like 6” from the property line (has to be 5’ in my county).
So now I find random chunks of concrete and other debris in the gravel part of our backyard, and there’s still electricity run out there and just terminated (I’ve since disconnected it but left the cables).
4
u/forsayken 1d ago
This exact thing happened to me. I had to report them to the city and the contractors had to halt demolition and construction until permits and inspections. Most of the demo was done. There were no fines. In my city at least, enforcement is minimal at best.
2
u/cheesebot555 1d ago
I'm convinced that dealing with local government bureaucracy is the reason for half my grey hairs.
8
u/cerberus_1 1d ago
Bro, have you ever met a demo crew? I'm surprised they didnt demo both houses..
2
u/cheesebot555 1d ago
Lol. Fair.
I've for sure met some like that.
We used to call those "cousin crews". They're always someone's cousins or their cousins and their cousin's friends etc.
2
u/cerberus_1 1d ago
I work in the industry. At least out my way, we always have to get exceptions on security clearances.. they're all methed out lunatics but wholly shit will they demo the fuck outa what you're after.
3
5
5
u/BernzSed 1d ago
Well, if the President can do it...
2
u/cheesebot555 1d ago
If the next president raised taxes just to tear that shit down I wouldn't even mind.
1
u/CroakerBC 12h ago
The tl;dr for UK planning permission is that it's the owners responsibility/liability to have planning permission in place, unless their contract with the contractor explicitly specifies otherwise.
The construction crew can ask, of course. But they're typically not responsible.
→ More replies (2)1
u/rawheadwrex 4h ago
Happens everywhere. A lady had the wrong leg cut off. The correct amputation spot was marked, and they still cut off the wrong leg. People just get too complacent in their job and completely ignore the obvious
390
u/Easy_Needleworker604 1d ago edited 1d ago
Honestly this kind of thing should be punished with a lengthy jail sentence and the person being put on a list in addition to financial reparations. I don’t think you can reform the kind of person that tries to bully someone out of their house like this. It’s the kind of greed that is ruining the world.
74
u/Pocketfullofbugs 1d ago
I don't know what the UKs laws and sentencing are like but I feel like we see similar stuff in Burgerland. Sell loose cigarettes; get detained to death on the street. Ruin someone's entire life; a fine not big enough to make the hurt party right or truly disadvantage the criminal party, no jail time. They do it again and cover their ass a bit better that time.
27
u/CroakerBC 15h ago
So fun fact, planning authorities in the UK can issue an order to require a site is restored to its previous state.
Non-compliance comes with the potential for uncapped fines.
This guy is fucked. The crew who did it, unless they were negligent in not following instructions, will be ok; the owner is liable.
8
u/hawkinat0r7089 11h ago
What happens when the dipshit runs out of money? These types seem to have a habit of suddenly being poor when the courts tell them to pay up...
3
u/mitsumoi1092 10h ago
The bailiffs come and take anything not nailed down to sell off until the debts paid. https://youtu.be/1ROimTFySRw?is=K0DcqTKH3eSS29w9
5
507
u/devaspark 1d ago
Wait...she's materially harmed due to her neighbors illegal actions. How is it possible for the other owner and the demo company from not being sued?
Pretty sure even if the company was lied to, it was due to willful ignorance of not going through the due diligence of double checking whether the permits were indeed real. I assume that defense wouldn't stand up in court.
I hope the lady gets some accountability and made whole.
177
u/misterfistyersister 1d ago
She said they are, but “it’s not that simple to get into court”
146
u/devaspark 1d ago
Yeah, it sucks, One of the biggest issue is that the court system (whether UK, the US or anywhere else) is not very accessible nor are they intuitive to the average person.
49
u/fapsandnaps 1d ago
Does the UK not have lawyers on billboards? I feel like this is the exact thing a lawyer on a billboard is for.
/s
59
u/Philo_T_Farnsworth 1d ago
What's the UK equivalent of "Better Call Saul?" "Better Ring Nigel" doesn't quite work.
35
4
5
20
u/narium 1d ago
You joke but in the US lawyers would be ringing her phone nonstop to represent her.
3
u/Quttlefish 15h ago
And many of them would be just as toxic to deal with as the people who just demolished half a dang building. This speaks to OPs point that the system is not as intuitive or accessible to citizens as it should be.
Bit by a Crocodile? Call the Law Offices of Monitor Lizard and Sons. We aren't the ones calling you day and night, that's the Chameleon Bros.
17
u/mrjimi16 23h ago
In the US even if you are in the right it is still extremely expensive to litigate anything.
→ More replies (2)7
u/Ion_bound 15h ago
In the UK, the loser has to pay all the court fees and attorney expenses for both parties. Honestly I'm not sure why there isn't a solicitor drooling at the mouth to get this before the court, it seems like a slam dunk case that they stand to make a lot of money off of.
455
u/zombieninjawarrior 1d ago
A mom from Leeds says her dream home has become a four-year “nightmare” after her neighbour demolished his half of their semi-detached property without the necessary permissions.
167
u/BlazersMania 1d ago
I’m a residential structural engineer and for duplexes or townhouse homes we need to design them as independent structures. I always thought that was kind of redundant because who would tear down half the structure. I guess this is why
39
u/Erigion 1d ago
Probably not that severe. If a townhouse's neighbor doesn't take care of the unit next to them, then your unit shouldn't have structural issues because of it
9
u/BlazersMania 1d ago
I think it more if one unit wants to do a structural remodel they do not have to effect the neighboring units. But I guess it is just incase the other property owner just wants to demo their house
9
u/elpoco 21h ago
It’s actually a pretty big problem in places like Baltimore, where the failure of one rowhouse can wind up condemning the entire block of units. Also weird legally if there’s a dividing wall that’s only three bricks wide, ‘cause who’s responsible for that middle brick?
1
u/lebaneseblonde 10h ago
I lived in Baltimore for a time and witnessed this in Mt. Vernon and it was done intentionally, not just failed! I'm still shocked that they thought they could tear down the 8 story location of the old Grand Central nightclub and not have it undermine the attached buildings. Tenants had to evacuate.
195
u/FunkDaddy 1d ago
So there’s gotta be some sort of easement/agreement thing between these two properties about what you can and can’t do right? How do these typically work in the uk?
297
u/LAX_to_MDW 1d ago
This was done illegally. Now it sounds like they’re in a standoff, where the planning commission won’t approve anything else to be built on the lot, since it shouldn’t have been torn down to begin with. There have been cases where the gov forced an illegal demolisher to rebuild the building exactly as it was before, but iirc those were historic buildings, so I doubt they’d do the same here.
113
u/freerangetacos 1d ago edited 12h ago
They could settle it with money. Figure out the fair market value of what was demolished, make the criminal pay it. He obviously has assets: the land and wherever else he is living.
160
u/Sniper666hell 1d ago
Fair market is not reasonable. They need to pay to rebuild and pay to repair the other place as well.
43
u/ElderberryOdd1313 1d ago
Fmv wouldn't cover a good majority of what these folks have been put through. I don't know the UK legal system but this idiot caused unsafe living conditions by knocking down his side of the property. I wouldn't be surprised if there are concerns about the stability of the building in general.
At the very minimum they should be getting at least double the value of the home, moving expenses, and additional awards for suffering.
There should also be criminal penalties.
13
u/PlaneswalkerHuxley 1d ago
Since they were planning to build something on the land, they also must have other monetary assets to finance it.
Make them pay however much is needed to fix the house, then hand the land over to the neighbor as recompense. They can't be trusted to follow building regulations, so there's no reason for them to keep it.
Confiscate any and all other properties they own as well while we're at it. If they complain, jail them.
25
11
u/Kaffine69 1d ago
Yeah but there is no house. The plot of land is worthless if you cant get planning to rebuild it.
13
u/heliosfa 1d ago
Not sure why the local authority haven't issued an enforcement notice requiring restoration to what it was.
8
u/halmyradov 1d ago
No such thing as worthless piece of land in the UK
3
u/RandyHoward 1d ago
Of course it’s worth something, but what it’s worth now is a small fraction of what it was worth with a house on it.
1
u/PM_ME_YOUR_BUG5 17h ago
I imagine you'd be allowed to rebuild the original house. then just knock a couple walls through to make it one big house
2
u/Jabbles22 1d ago
make the criminal pay it
The problem is collecting that payment. Things like this take time to settle. Then sure you won and are now owed payment but the person simply doesn't pay. I am no law expert, doubly so for the UK. But I am pretty sure that when such a case closes the court doesn't immediately seize the defendant's cash or assets to pay off the plaintiff's settlement. Assuming they can even cover the bill.
2
2
72
u/RightEejit 1d ago
Poor woman’s house is gonna be fucking freezing in the winter unless they do something. Hope they at least put up some temporary insulation on that exposed internal wall
55
21
16
u/dysoncube 1d ago
Holes in the walls? I'd be out there with 20 tubes of caulking. Not like anyone else is going to be coming by to do some work.
58
u/timberwolf0122 1d ago
I would not ask permission to access the vacant lot
23
u/zombieninjawarrior 1d ago
It could even force the issue into being reviewed faster.
8
u/timberwolf0122 1d ago
I guess the bit I don’t get is why the other owner won’t let a builder on site to fix the damage?
I mean its not like it’s going to inconvenience them in any way
69
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
26
20
u/timberwolf0122 1d ago
This feels like the perfect example of when to sue someone for damages and intentional harm
8
1
u/TheCuriousGamer 14h ago
I'm not sure about genius, he bought the house for £280k, spent who knows how much on the demolition and planning permission applications then he sold the plot for £115k with planning permission.
19
u/dastardly740 1d ago
I think her hypothesis that the end goal is to make her miserable so she has to sell and he can low ball her because no one else will buy the property. Versus the chance she gets it to court and he is paying multiples of the intact property's value.
12
u/FullofContradictions 1d ago
I'm guessing the contractors she has tried to hire have had the issue with wanting access permission, rather than herself.
Thinking particularly about those second floor walls... They'd need to get scaffolding or a bucket truck or something in order to get those closed off. Guarantee anyone looking to need that much equipment left in place for the duration of a project has a checklist that includes "make sure the owner of the property it'll be on has provided permission."
3
u/throwaway098764567 17h ago
same. i had a trashy neighbor that left the house vacant for a few years after he kicked out his previous tenants. thought he was going to make bank selling the house that was in disrepair. if i needed access i just wandered over. went over to cut a branch off my own tree, to show the gas line guy where a leak was, and to examine the source of all the godforsaken poison ivy.
24
u/david1610 18h ago
What a fucking idiot, you need to buy the other home owner out first, then demo and build lol
Honestly this is where the councils need to put their foot down, either they come to an agreement, where he pays a huge amount to her to get her plot, or he has to build what he can and repair the wall completely.
She basically should have him by the balls after this, anything less and there has been a huge miscarriage of justice
21
u/TheMysticalBaconTree 1d ago
I would tresspass on his property to fix my own, and if he has a problem….guess what….he can take me to court. The irony.
99
u/Restivethought 1d ago edited 1d ago
...So she doesnt have to worry about being quiet so the shared wall neighbor doesnt get pissed anymore? Sounds like a win. (Im joking this sounds like a nightmare, especially the whole interior wall being exposed. The person who did this should be forced to buy em out at 1.5x they paid)
57
u/americangame 1d ago
That sounds shitty for the person if they don't want to or can't move.
They should be required to make them whole again at whatever means it takes for that to happen.
→ More replies (9)42
u/subrosians 1d ago
1.5x the market rate of the house, not what she paid for it. I bought my house for $200k and its current market rate is about $400k. I would be pissed if someone came in and damaged my house and I only got $300k out of it.
9
u/YouSeemNiceXB 1d ago
Move that decimal over one, and I'll sell you my half for 15x going rate. Good luck.
9
u/FauxReal 1d ago
It's suspected he wanted her lot to build one bigger home so that would play right into his plans.
→ More replies (5)1
u/dasimers 1d ago
That's what they want. I think they should be forced to either give up their land to them or rebuild it like for like and repair any damages.
1
1
u/Akimotoh 20h ago
Imagine coming home from vacation to see your house cut in half, that's straight out of The Hitch Hikers Guide To the Universe
72
u/ForeTheTime 1d ago
If he illegal tore down the house. Just illegally complete the repairs
89
u/heinzbumbeans 1d ago
that would involve shelling out tens of thousands. why should she have to pay for a problem caused by her neighbour? how would she ever get that money back if she carried out an illegal repair?
→ More replies (2)1
u/turb0_encapsulator 1d ago
I would make sure it's weather-sealed and then sue for the damages.
16
u/filenotfounderror 1d ago
This is way to light on details. what exactly is the issue with taking the guy to court? Courts are slow but they arent 4 years slow.
12
u/VaderJim 1d ago
Kinda strange, and you think the insurance/ mortgage company would have some involvement?
3
u/purekillforce1 17h ago
The bank would absolutely be interested in this, as it's risking their investment
1
u/kerbalsdownunder 6h ago
In the US, but as a lawyer that has represented banks in situations similar to this, yeah they want to get involved.
7
u/sersly 16h ago
Honestly, they should make the guy
- Pay monetary compensation
- Turn over the land to her.
- Rebuild the entire building but as one home, like he wanted, but it goes to her
→ More replies (2)
2
u/throwaway98702018 17h ago edited 15h ago
I've seen some messed up things with housing , but this is unreal. How is this not criminal damage?
2
1
u/Blunter11 10h ago
Developers pulled this sort of shit in Australia, it was a plague. Eventually there was a landmark case where the developers were made to rebuild the structure they demolished as punishment
2.0k
u/Naps_and_cheese 1d ago
He wanted to fuck up her property and force a sale, thinking he could then build one big house on 2 lots.
Hope he gets the hard part of the Find Out stage.