4 ms·

Private property laws don't work like that. You can do anything with your own house as long as it is legal and you pay your taxes each year. Even not visit you

Private property laws don't work like that. You can do anything with your own house as long as it is legal and you pay your taxes each year. Even not visit your beach house for a while if you don't feel in the mood to do that or are working in a different place, or are being treated in an hospital. If he has paid the taxes, and was paying insurance, and water and electricity bills each year, the house is not marooned. The idea of my neighbors being allowed to burn my house, destroy my souvenirs, art and stuff, and use my property as a private parking and say that they can because I'm not here to stop they is returning to law-of-the-jungle. Is horrible and unaceptable. If the building would be in danger of collapse or refuse to pay taxes the government should fine him first, ask for repairs and/or notify officially its demolition if necessary.

CTOSian 5y ago
>The idea of my neighbors being allowed to burn my house... That's the case you see "red" and grab the old but trusty 12-gauge shotgun.
ricardobeat 5y ago
“Usucapio” is still part of the legal system in many countries. Someone who illegally occupies property can become the holder of property rights after a few years if they don’t get kicked out. So I’d say no, it’s usually not safe to leave a house completely unattended for years on end.
helsinkiandrew 5y ago
It's not about what is legal and right it's about what is expected. If you left $1000 dollars on top of your car in a parking lot you may have the law on your side but the money is going to disappear. The destruction came awhile after the building was burnt down - look at the photo, if you owned a hotel, would you want burnt out rubble next door? would you spend time tracking down the owner you haven't seen in 6 years or would you get a friend to knock it down, so it wasn't an eyesore for the community?
- pvaldes 5y ago
  Money in the street can't be linked to its owner. A house is regulated and is somebody's property. > The destruction came awhile after the building was burnt down If the house was burnt down, then it was an arson crime scenery. Crime scenes -must be- left, 'in its current state', until the investigation ends (or a jury allows to restore it again). Even if it takes some years. To deliberately destroy proofs of a crime is obstruction of justice, a typified crime, and justice has always priority over touristic activities.
zz865 5y ago
That is a very American POV. Most small villages around the world are very tight and the loyalty is to insiders not to the official word of law.
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  The Irish POV is that adverse possession takes 12 years and has other requirements. Being gone for 8 years is not a legal reason in Ireland to destroy someone else's property.

CTOSian 5y ago

>The idea of my neighbors being allowed to burn my house... That's the case you see "red" and grab the old but trusty 12-gauge shotgun.

ricardobeat 5y ago

“Usucapio” is still part of the legal system in many countries. Someone who illegally occupies property can become the holder of property rights after a few years if they don’t get kicked out. So I’d say no, it’s usually not safe to leave a house completely unattended for years on end.

helsinkiandrew 5y ago

It's not about what is legal and right it's about what is expected. If you left $1000 dollars on top of your car in a parking lot you may have the law on your side but the money is going to disappear. The destruction came awhile after the building was burnt down - look at the photo, if you owned a hotel, would you want burnt out rubble next door? would you spend time tracking down the owner you haven't seen in 6 years or would you get a friend to knock it down, so it wasn't an eyesore for the community?

pvaldes 5y ago
Money in the street can't be linked to its owner. A house is regulated and is somebody's property. > The destruction came awhile after the building was burnt down If the house was burnt down, then it was an arson crime scenery. Crime scenes -must be- left, 'in its current state', until the investigation ends (or a jury allows to restore it again). Even if it takes some years. To deliberately destroy proofs of a crime is obstruction of justice, a typified crime, and justice has always priority over touristic activities.

zz865 5y ago

That is a very American POV. Most small villages around the world are very tight and the loyalty is to insiders not to the official word of law.

oh_sigh 5y ago
The Irish POV is that adverse possession takes 12 years and has other requirements. Being gone for 8 years is not a legal reason in Ireland to destroy someone else's property.