4 ms·
Seems like a great case to get that law struck down at least getting the seizure reversed/compensated. Seizing an entire home and pocketing all proceeds of sale
by rtkwe 7y ago
Seems like a great case to get that law struck down at least getting the seizure reversed/compensated. Seizing an entire home and pocketing all proceeds of sale over tiny debt seems like a perfect case for the seizure being unreasonable.
- pg_is_a_butt 7y agoIf they allowed everyone to underpay property tax by $8.41, it would add up to far more than the proceeds on the single sale.
- wolco 7y agoMost places have the opposite where the city would get the 8.00 and the owner get the remaining amount. Which would mean the city wouldn't bother.
- JAlexoid 7y agoThe city, county or any other government institution is not supposed to profit off this kind of affairs at all. Government must be funded by taxes and taxes alone, all excess collections must be returned to taxpayers unconditionally. Civil asset forfeiture and this kind of laws just make racketeers out of government officials. And yeah - $8 isn't a good reason for seizing someone's house, when they can easily get a small claims court to summarily get that $8.
- JackFr 7y agoA bank foreclosing on a mortgage is only entitled only to the value of the money owed. Those laws are structured specifically to avoid the perverse incentive created by being able to receive $60,000 on an $8.00 debt.
- Retric 7y agoIn this case not being worth their time is a good thing. They can always asses interest and penalties until it’s worth their time prepossessing a home. But, when someone is making a good faith effort it’s crazy to escalate this far.