2 illegally occupy a house and the judge gives them a restraining order against the owners?

[vontar]

WTF is wrong here.

Lets see, family moves for work, comes back and finds 2 people have moved into their home.

A judge signed a temporary restraining order against the home owners.

http://gma.yahoo.com...news-money.html

"People who are even on an extended vacation need to be aware of this situation because once someone illegally occupies your home, you can't just have the cops arrest them," because they need to be caught in the act of breaking in and entering, Donovan said.

I guess the locks have probably been changed. so I guess superglue the lock and have a friendly cop watch for occupies them to break in.

(Castle Law)

[Guest 6.8 AR]

The article went on about adverse possession. I thought that was cute. Adverse possession is extremely difficult to

perform, as it should be.

[Shug]

Remember a honest person has no rights. A dishonest person has all the rights. This country and it's laws are broken. It is not a republican or democrat thing. It is a right and wrong thing. And some judicial moron won't stand up for what is right. Granted the homeowner is not 100% without fault since they are $20,000 behind on their mortgage, But these people think that they bought a nice house in Colorado for $5000. The real estate agent that sold the house needs to be held accountable for this clusterfu#k

[vontar]

I really don't believe they believe they brought a house for 5k. In all Seriousness have any of you even known a person that has brought one even close to that in the past few years. To me that is so far from the normal it is common logic that no one should believe a price like that.

[TMF]

The only way that courts and legistators start to acknowledge stuff like this is when it ends really, really badly. Sometimes my house is vacant for a month or two at a time. If I came back to squatters with some BS paperwork there would be no going to a judge to get them out. They would be given the option to walk out or be carried out, but I wouldn't be leaving until one of those two options were satisfied.

[RichardR]

Yea if I came home from vacation to find strangers in my house there wouldnt be any sort of discussion, just a couple of muzzle flashes and a call to 911 to report the incident.

I am not required by law to ask who they are or what they are doing in my house.

[RichardR]

I really don't believe they believe they brought a house for 5k. In all Seriousness have any of you even known a person that has brought one even close to that in the past few years. To me that is so far from the normal it is common logic that no one should believe a price like that.

Especially a house with all of the previous families personal property and furnishings still inside of it.

[Murgatroy]

Yeah, I am not sure what to say, but I don't think I would be allowing the court to work it out while I lived elsewhere...

[analog_kidd]

I might just re-occupy my own home, then exercise the Castle Doctrine.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I wonder if the real estate agent is in jail, yet?

[TMF]

I wonder if the real estate agent is in jail, yet?

I don't think there was ever a real estate agent. The article implys that they started this paperwork on adverse possession before the owners even came back. I think they just squatted, did the paperwork and lied.

[gjohnsoniv]

Too bad the owners can't just walk in and literally throw them out.

[TMF]

Too bad the owners can't just walk in and literally throw them out.

Who's going to stop them? From what I read in the article it said that police won't get involved because this is a "civil issue". I interpret that to mean that it's still their house, so are the cops going to arrest them for trespassing on their own property? I tell you what, it would get "un-civil" real quick if that was the answer from law enforcement.

[Guest mcgyver210]

Even when they get possession back they are still behind 20k & counting.

[DaveTN]

Who's going to stop them? From what I read in the article it said that police won't get involved because this is a "civil issue". I interpret that to mean that it's still their house, so are the cops going to arrest them for trespassing on their own property? I tell you what, it would get "un-civil" real quick if that was the answer from law enforcement.

This is just a WAG… but they (the cops) can’t act because the occupants have legal paperwork from “Arapahoe County Clerk and Recorder with an affidavit of "adverse possessionâ€. But I’m confused also because if they are months behind in payments the mortgage company still owns the house. How do you get an “adverse possession†on a house that a mortgage company owns? And where are they in all this?

But then I don’t know what an “adverse possession†is or how it could be legal. Sounds like theft to me.

Edited July 21, 2012 by DaveTN

[DaveTN]

Looks like they are trying it here....

http://www.wsmv.com/...closed-property