5 ms·

The article conveniently hides the fact that the owner was a slumlord and the residence that the county seized was not owner-occupied and must have been in very

The article conveniently hides the fact that the owner was a slumlord and the residence that the county seized was not owner-occupied and must have been in very bad shape. If something fetches 25 kUSD at auction when Zillow tells you that equivalent properties nearby go for five time that there's a good reason. You'd think that especially other slumlords appreciate when a derelict property is seized and disposed of quickly because the traphouse next door really causes a headache. It's the county that implemented the process, someone must have voted for the fast-track process!

salehenrahman 7y ago
Still not a valid reason for seizing an entire property, selling it, and pocketing the profit. At least threaten the guy with fines if he does not fix things up.
- ToFundorNot 7y ago
  MY favorite is how they rejected a payment on the outstanding taxes. Most municipalities in Canada are required to accept payment up to, and including the moment the auction begins. If the payment comes in, the property is off the block (in most auctions, the list of properties being auctioned end up being a fraction of the list that was printed the morning of). Slumlord or not, the municipalities are clearly being malicious in their handling of the appropriations.
rolltiide 7y ago
almost like the bill of rights was set up to force us to skip these character judgements
Aloha 7y ago
Do you have citations backing that up? It's not unusual in my experience to see tax sales go for below fair market value.
riazrizvi 7y ago
Slumlord? Because he owns a property below market value?? $25k was the profit the County made in seizing his home and selling it at below market rate at auction to god knows what friend of the county. This absolutely stinks.
dredmorbius 7y ago
Reference on the slumlord claim? (A brief DDG search shows no relevant results.) And as noted by others: the fact alone would not justify confiscation of property or denial of due process. This despite my many misgivings of Reason as a generally credible narrator.
Mathnerd314 7y ago
One of the points in the article is that the county auctions aren't getting most of the property value. They're bought by speculators rather than homeowners and are sold for less than half of their assessed value. He doesn't seem like a slumlord, he says he "completely renovated" the property. (https://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/oakland-county-takes-house-for-841-property-tax-mistake https://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/oakland-county-t...) And there are 3 other owners mentioned, all of those were working on their properties too.
- HarryHirsch 7y ago
  The aim of county auctions is to get the property into the hands of someone financially healthy, someone who can actually pay for the upkeep of the property. Taxes are usually the last thing you stop paying because you know the county will seize the house, maintenance stops long before that. I once had the misfortune to rent from a landlord like this. They stopped paying for garbage removal, a few days later the heating broke. That was in a state where code enforcement actually had teeth, in a more tenant-hostile state I'd had had no recourse except moving out at shortest notice. Thankfully the roof held tight all the time I was there, there would have been no money for that kind of repairs. That landowner actually did "renovate" the property somewhat, they did tart up the kitchen a bit but did nothing about the sewage leak in the downstairs bathroom. No one should have patience for bankruptcy artists who go crying about "violence inherent to the system" when they can't make it, if they overextend themselves they need to go through the bankruptcy process. That's why you have interest as a risk premium. Too bad the fellow missed out in the gentrification windfall.
  - JAlexoid 7y ago
    Try reading how he got that $8(EIGHT DOLLAR KARL!) tax bill! Nowhere does it mention that he stopped paying taxes. You damn bootlickers just need to stop deepthroating the damn boot.
    - HarryHirsch 7y ago
      The timeline for foreclosure is right there in the article. The county can foreclose after 2 years and 1 month after the debt goes to collection. There even was a hearing to show cause, after which the owner still had two months to pay up, but they didn't do it. The fellow made a deliberate choice to hand the property back to the county, and he was probably glad to do so and get out of the rental business.
throwaway5752 7y ago
Everyone is asking you for citations (good thing) but I have very little doubt you're right. These outrage pieces frequently leave out lots of details, particularly ones that go against the agenda of the article. I suspect this part "But he made a mistake in calculating the interest owed, resulting in another underpayment of $8.41. A little more than a year later, in February 2014, Rafaeli's rental property was one of 11,000 properties put up for auction by Oakland County. It was sold for $24,500 in August of the same year—far less than what Rafaeli had paid for the property just three years earlier." is glossing over a lot of pertinent details.
cannonedhamster 7y ago
You missed something in the article. He bought a property in a depressed area. The property rose in value to where it's now over $125000. The city foreclosed on the house and sold for $25k and kept the profits above $8.41 of back taxes owed.

salehenrahman 7y ago

Still not a valid reason for seizing an entire property, selling it, and pocketing the profit. At least threaten the guy with fines if he does not fix things up.

ToFundorNot 7y ago
MY favorite is how they rejected a payment on the outstanding taxes. Most municipalities in Canada are required to accept payment up to, and including the moment the auction begins. If the payment comes in, the property is off the block (in most auctions, the list of properties being auctioned end up being a fraction of the list that was printed the morning of). Slumlord or not, the municipalities are clearly being malicious in their handling of the appropriations.

rolltiide 7y ago

almost like the bill of rights was set up to force us to skip these character judgements

Aloha 7y ago

Do you have citations backing that up? It's not unusual in my experience to see tax sales go for below fair market value.

riazrizvi 7y ago

Slumlord? Because he owns a property below market value?? $25k was the profit the County made in seizing his home and selling it at below market rate at auction to god knows what friend of the county. This absolutely stinks.

dredmorbius 7y ago

Reference on the slumlord claim? (A brief DDG search shows no relevant results.) And as noted by others: the fact alone would not justify confiscation of property or denial of due process. This despite my many misgivings of Reason as a generally credible narrator.

Mathnerd314 7y ago

One of the points in the article is that the county auctions aren't getting most of the property value. They're bought by speculators rather than homeowners and are sold for less than half of their assessed value. He doesn't seem like a slumlord, he says he "completely renovated" the property. (https://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/oakland-county-takes-house-for-841-property-tax-mistake https://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/oakland-county-t...) And there are 3 other owners mentioned, all of those were working on their properties too.

HarryHirsch 7y ago
The aim of county auctions is to get the property into the hands of someone financially healthy, someone who can actually pay for the upkeep of the property. Taxes are usually the last thing you stop paying because you know the county will seize the house, maintenance stops long before that. I once had the misfortune to rent from a landlord like this. They stopped paying for garbage removal, a few days later the heating broke. That was in a state where code enforcement actually had teeth, in a more tenant-hostile state I'd had had no recourse except moving out at shortest notice. Thankfully the roof held tight all the time I was there, there would have been no money for that kind of repairs. That landowner actually did "renovate" the property somewhat, they did tart up the kitchen a bit but did nothing about the sewage leak in the downstairs bathroom. No one should have patience for bankruptcy artists who go crying about "violence inherent to the system" when they can't make it, if they overextend themselves they need to go through the bankruptcy process. That's why you have interest as a risk premium. Too bad the fellow missed out in the gentrification windfall.
- JAlexoid 7y ago
  Try reading how he got that $8(EIGHT DOLLAR KARL!) tax bill! Nowhere does it mention that he stopped paying taxes. You damn bootlickers just need to stop deepthroating the damn boot.
  - HarryHirsch 7y ago
    The timeline for foreclosure is right there in the article. The county can foreclose after 2 years and 1 month after the debt goes to collection. There even was a hearing to show cause, after which the owner still had two months to pay up, but they didn't do it. The fellow made a deliberate choice to hand the property back to the county, and he was probably glad to do so and get out of the rental business.

throwaway5752 7y ago

Everyone is asking you for citations (good thing) but I have very little doubt you're right. These outrage pieces frequently leave out lots of details, particularly ones that go against the agenda of the article. I suspect this part "But he made a mistake in calculating the interest owed, resulting in another underpayment of $8.41. A little more than a year later, in February 2014, Rafaeli's rental property was one of 11,000 properties put up for auction by Oakland County. It was sold for $24,500 in August of the same year—far less than what Rafaeli had paid for the property just three years earlier." is glossing over a lot of pertinent details.

cannonedhamster 7y ago

You missed something in the article. He bought a property in a depressed area. The property rose in value to where it's now over $125000. The city foreclosed on the house and sold for $25k and kept the profits above $8.41 of back taxes owed.