Frustrated Owner Bulldozes Home Ahead Of Foreclosure

Started by jimmy olsen, February 23, 2010, 06:41:20 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3
User actions

jimmy olsen

February 23, 2010, 06:41:20 AM
This guy is screwed, but I bet that felt so good. :lol:

http://www.wlwt.com/news/22600154/detail.html
QuoteFrustrated Owner Bulldozes Home Ahead Of Foreclosure

Man Says Actions Intended To Send Message To Banks

POSTED: 10:42 am EST February 18, 2010
UPDATED: 6:36 pm EST February 19, 2010
MOSCOW, Ohio --
Like many people, Terry Hoskins has had troubles with his bank. But his solution to foreclosure might be unique.

Hoskins said he's been in a struggle with RiverHills Bank over his Clermont County home for nearly a decade, a struggle that was coming to an end as the bank began foreclosure proceedings on his $350,000 home.

"When I see I owe $160,000 on a home valued at $350,000, and someone decides they want to take it – no, I wasn't going to stand for that, so I took it down," Hoskins said.

View Slideshow

Hoskins said the Internal Revenue Service placed liens on his carpet store and commercial property on state Route 125 after his brother, a one-time business partner, sued him.

The bank claimed his home as collateral, Hoskins said, and went after both his residential and commercial properties.

"The average homeowner that can't afford an attorney or can fight as long as we have, they don't stand a chance," he said.

Hoskins said he'd gotten a $170,000 offer from someone to pay off the house, but the bank refused, saying they could get more from selling it in foreclosure.

Hoskins told News 5's Courtis Fuller that he issued the bank an ultimatum.

"I'll tear it down before I let you take it," Hoskins told them.

And that's exactly what Hoskins did.

Man Says Actions Intended To Send Message To Banks

The Moscow man used a bulldozer two weeks ago to level the home he'd built, and the sprawling country home is now rubble, buried under a coating of snow.

"As far as what the bank is going to get, I plan on giving them back what was on this hill exactly (as) it was," Hoskins said. "I brought it out of the ground and I plan on putting it back in the ground."

Hoskins' business in Amelia is scheduled to go up for auction on March 2, and he told Fuller he's considering leveling that building, too.

RiverHills Bank declined to comment on the situation, but Hoskins said his actions were intended to send a message.

"Well, to probably make banks think twice before they try to take someone's home, and if they are going to take it wrongly, the end result will be them tearing their house down like I did mine," Hoskins said.

Man Has No Regrets Over Bulldozing House

Hoskins said he's heard from people all over the country since his story first aired Thursday, and he said most have been supportive.

He said he sought legal counsel before tearing down his home and understands the possible consequences, but he has never doubted his decision once he made it.

"When I knew I was going to lose it, I decided to take it down," Hoskins said.

Copyright 2010 by WLWT.com.
It is far better for the truth to tear my flesh to pieces, then for my soul to wander through darkness in eternal damnation.

Jet: So what kind of woman is she? What's Julia like?
Faye: Ordinary. The kind of beautiful, dangerous ordinary that you just can't leave alone.
Jet: I see.
Faye: Like an angel from the underworld. Or a devil from Paradise.
--------------------------------------------
1 Karma Chameleon point

CountDeMoney

#1
February 23, 2010, 06:51:03 AM
Well, it's certainly more safer than going in his bank and shooting it up.  Or flying a plane into it.

Grallon

#2
February 23, 2010, 06:52:49 AM
Lots of people are trying to 'send messages' these days in the US: that guy, the man who rammed a plane in a building, all those others who decide to stop paying their credit cards, the teaparty nutcases...

We should place bets on whether or not a revolution/civil war is a'comin in America.  :P




G.
"Clearly, a civilization that feels guilty for everything it is and does will lack the energy and conviction to defend itself."

~Jean-François Revel

CountDeMoney

#3
February 23, 2010, 06:55:44 AM
The only time threats actually work is when it's with the cable company.

Naturally, I used to be on Comcast's threat list.

"If you don't get a technician out here today, I'll be down at your offices tomorrow with all my cable boxes, AND NOBODY IS GOING TO BE HAPPY AFTER THAT."

Hey, it works.

Neil

#4
February 23, 2010, 07:24:45 AM
I found the story amusing.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Caliga

#5
February 23, 2010, 07:34:02 AM
 :lol: The funny part is that he didn't actually own that house--the bank did.
0 Ed Anger Disapproval Points

Viking

#6
February 23, 2010, 07:38:59 AM
Isn't there something in American Law about being able to just walk away from their house?
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

Zanza

#7
February 23, 2010, 07:40:03 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 23, 2010, 07:38:59 AM
Isn't there something in American Law about being able to just walk away from their house?
Walking away from a house that you already paid $190,000 for is rather painful though...

Crazy_Ivan80

#8
February 23, 2010, 07:40:35 AM
Quote from: Caliga on February 23, 2010, 07:34:02 AM
:lol: The funny part is that he didn't actually own that house--the bank did.

and everything is probably still there, just rearranged.

Viking

#9
February 23, 2010, 07:41:58 AM
Quote from: Zanza on February 23, 2010, 07:40:03 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 23, 2010, 07:38:59 AM
Isn't there something in American Law about being able to just walk away from their house?
Walking away from a house that you already paid $190,000 for is rather painful though...

Well here you can, if you can't maintain your mortgage, end up still owing money after you paid $X for your house so far.
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

grumbler

#10
February 23, 2010, 07:43:01 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 23, 2010, 07:38:59 AM
Isn't there something in American Law about being able to just walk away from their house?
It is not something in American law, per se, it is in the mortgage contract.  The owner's liability for the mortgage debt is limited to the house.  If the owner gives up the house, then the bank has no further claim.  It ruin's one's credit, of course, but one's possessions, cars, and the like cannot be taken.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

grumbler

#11
February 23, 2010, 07:44:52 AM
Quote from: Caliga on February 23, 2010, 07:34:02 AM
:lol: The funny part is that he didn't actually own that house--the bank did.
He owned the house, but the bank had claim on it if he didn't pay the debt.  The bank may have been holding the title, but the house was his.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Scipio

#12
February 23, 2010, 07:45:38 AM
The guy is not telling the truth.  The IRS does not put a lien on your property because your business partner sues you.  I'll bet that he was not paying his taxes properly.  Further, if the buyer was going to pay off the entirety of the debt, the bank had no standing to object, so I bet that the $170k doesn't actually pay off what he owes the bank.  He was probably cross-collateralized on his business loans, which is stupid as hell anyway.
What I speak out of my mouth is the truth.  It burns like fire.
-Jose Canseco

There you go, giving a fuck when it ain't your turn to give a fuck.
-Every cop, The Wire

"It is always good to be known for one's Krapp."
-John Hurt

grumbler

#13
February 23, 2010, 07:46:30 AM
Quote from: Viking on February 23, 2010, 07:41:58 AM
Well here you can, if you can't maintain your mortgage, end up still owing money after you paid $X for your house so far.
You have a different form of mortgage contract.  You also have different personal bankruptcy laws.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Caliga

#14
February 23, 2010, 07:47:18 AM
Quote from: grumbler on February 23, 2010, 07:44:52 AM
He owned the house, but the bank had claim on it if he didn't pay the debt.  The bank may have been holding the title, but the house was his.
Oh, I thought the titleholder was considered the owner of record.
0 Ed Anger Disapproval Points
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3
User actions