36 ms·
If you are cited for code violations, then you sell the property to your brother before the deadline to comply, and claim compliance is no longer your problem,
by gwillen 15y ago
If you are cited for code violations, then you sell the property to your brother before the deadline to comply, and claim compliance is no longer your problem, that's fraud. This kind of analysis can be used to show a pattern of that kind of fraud.
- spiffytech 15y agoIs the problem that I sold the property before complying, or that I sold it to my brother? What makes selling to my brother any different from selling to a stranger? [supposing we live in different households with independent assets]
- zacharycohn 15y agoThere was a whole group of people who were doing this constantly. So all the properties stayed within the same group. Normally, you could sell the property to a stranger... but then you wouldn't be able to benefit from it anymore. This way it "stays in the family."
- wtvanhest 15y agoThis seems unlikely due to the taxes and paperwork expense of transferring property even with no brokerage fees. I really don't see how the social network proves wrong doing. I'm actually worried that an overzealous prosecutor and advocacy group prosecuted people who were not guilty. Obviously I don't know all the details so maybe they should be convicted, but they weren't provided, so it is hard for me to evaluate.
- maxerickson 15y agoIt seems likely that the prosecutor was able to document that the finances didn't make sense without the participation of 'Heather' and great deals from 'Moe'.
- Zigurd 15y agoSham transactions are a common part of financial crimes. Ownership didn't change in fact, just on paper. Linking all the owners together in one family showed that the transactions had no material effect on where the rent and equity money was going.
- luser001 15y ago> This seems unlikely due to the taxes and paperwork expense of transferring property even with no brokerage fees. AFAIK, the one-time govt. fees to record a property transfer is relatively small. This in the US. http://www.arjanihomes.com/custom-tax_guide.htm-CONTENT_TAX_GUIDE http://www.arjanihomes.com/custom-tax_guide.htm-CONTENT_TAX_... says ~$3k for a 1M house. What sort of numbers did you have in mind?
- maxerickson 15y agoI'm not a lawyer and I haven't done anything more than read the article, but I suspect the problem is that a group of associated people did it 3 times.
- brown9-2 15y agoIt seems as if the true owner of the property wasn't changing, but just the name of the nominal owner on the paper. Control stayed with the same group.
- encoderer 15y agoIt's about rens mea. The clear intent to defraud. Selling to your brother in good faith is fine. This circumstance is clearly not good faith.
- anigbrowl 15y agoMens rea, please! Rens mea suggests that it's all about my kidneys (renes). Admittedly, an English prosecutor might allege that the defendant was taking the piss :-)
- Czarnian 15y agoThey didn't really get into to much detail, but what usually happens with these situations is that all of the LLCs are just funneling the proceeds into the same bank accounts, no matter whose name is on the LLC paperwork. In this case, it appeared that the patriarch's bank accounts were the ultimate destination for the money regardless of which LLC owned a building at any given time. The twist on this case was that the mastermind was also in a position to facilitate better terms for each subsequent sale.
- rdtsc 15y agoI think that is exactly what they'll have to prove, as I am not sure if there is a law that says you can't sell something to your brother.