2 ms·

That's actually an interesting angle. I'm sure you weren't being entirely serious, but let's go there. I obviously can't be personally present a significant por

That's actually an interesting angle. I'm sure you weren't being entirely serious, but let's go there. I obviously can't be personally present a significant portion of the time, so my first thought it is to leave a substantial amount of personal property there, say, an RV. What stops them from having the vehicle towed such that it's my expense to retrieve it, or simply assuming ownership of the "abandoned" RV and pocketing the proceeds? It's undeveloped land, so I suppose I could start planting vegetables on it. But as another commenter said, I'd bet they simply send henchman to destroy my work.

jacquesm 9y ago
It was definitely tongue in cheek, the point was that it is land, they can't move it and defending their claim to the land visibly requires them to break cover. Henchmen have higher ups. In many places if you squat on a place long enough it becomes yours.
- michaelt 9y ago
  defending their claim to the land visibly requires them to break cover. I realise you're talking to TallGuyShort about HOAs, but when it comes to anonymously owned property in London (presumably including 221b Baker Street) things can be structured to avoid this. What you do is have the building directly owned/managed by (something equivalent to) a Real Estate Investment Trust [1], then have 100% of the shares of that REIT owned by a company in BVI/Panama/Cayman Islands, where that company doesn't have to disclose its shareholders. Or if you have to disclose beneficial owners with more than 25% of shares, have 5 anonymous companies own 20% each, and claim you just don't know if those anonymous companies have the same ultimate owner. Thus, the REIT exists to defend their claim to the land, collect rent, manage and maintain the property - just nobody knows who owns the REIT. Nobody wants to eliminate the property-owned-and-managed-by-a-company-owned-by-other-companies structure, as it's how pension funds/retail investors invest in property. So it's a tough question how to regulate this properly. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REIT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REIT
  - spoonie 9y ago
    How does KYC (know your customer) AML (anti-money laundering) law not apply here? Shouldn’t the REIT/employees of the REIT need to know who is paying them? I’m not suggesting that we do away with the REIT + corps structure, but just require them to obey AML laws.
coryrc 9y ago
Dump trash in it. Solves a problem for you and sometimes governments enforce cleanliness.
- mschuster91 9y ago
  > and sometimes governments enforce cleanliness. Which can also lead to you being charged for unlawful dumping of trash, and if there happens to be a battery or other toxic/dangerous stuff in the trash, that can increase the fines.

jacquesm 9y ago

It was definitely tongue in cheek, the point was that it is land, they can't move it and defending their claim to the land visibly requires them to break cover. Henchmen have higher ups. In many places if you squat on a place long enough it becomes yours.

michaelt 9y ago
defending their claim to the land visibly requires them to break cover. I realise you're talking to TallGuyShort about HOAs, but when it comes to anonymously owned property in London (presumably including 221b Baker Street) things can be structured to avoid this. What you do is have the building directly owned/managed by (something equivalent to) a Real Estate Investment Trust [1], then have 100% of the shares of that REIT owned by a company in BVI/Panama/Cayman Islands, where that company doesn't have to disclose its shareholders. Or if you have to disclose beneficial owners with more than 25% of shares, have 5 anonymous companies own 20% each, and claim you just don't know if those anonymous companies have the same ultimate owner. Thus, the REIT exists to defend their claim to the land, collect rent, manage and maintain the property - just nobody knows who owns the REIT. Nobody wants to eliminate the property-owned-and-managed-by-a-company-owned-by-other-companies structure, as it's how pension funds/retail investors invest in property. So it's a tough question how to regulate this properly. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REIT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REIT
- spoonie 9y ago
  How does KYC (know your customer) AML (anti-money laundering) law not apply here? Shouldn’t the REIT/employees of the REIT need to know who is paying them? I’m not suggesting that we do away with the REIT + corps structure, but just require them to obey AML laws.

coryrc 9y ago

Dump trash in it. Solves a problem for you and sometimes governments enforce cleanliness.

mschuster91 9y ago
> and sometimes governments enforce cleanliness. Which can also lead to you being charged for unlawful dumping of trash, and if there happens to be a battery or other toxic/dangerous stuff in the trash, that can increase the fines.