Adverse possession for the win.
Boyce, the building official, noted that the west side of Ocean Ridge
Boulevard North has a stretch of about 10 vacant lots in a row. The
grass is mowed short and there are no distinguishing landmarks or lot
markers to help surveyors and builders find the right lot or catch an
Sounds like a lovely place.
Did you even read the article? Seriously no lawyers and no finger pointing. The builder took responsibility and says they’re trying to work out a settlement without involving lawyers.
you had one job mister blurb writer… ONE JOB. I’m used to this cluelessness with HuffPo and what not, but I thought boing boing was better than this.
It’s a housing development, it’s a bunch of empty lots until houses are built. The wronged party owns 18 lots… title should read: “Problems of the 1 percent”.
this should be called karma.
“Mark and Brenda Voss learned that the 5,300-square-foot vacation house they built at a cost of $680,000 ‘actually sits on the lot next to the one they own in the gated Ocean Hammock resort community’…”
What a ghastly place Florida is. I suppose, as noted upthread, people like this need places to misspend their money. Trickle down economics lives!
But lots that have been empty for over a decade at this point? Still a little sad.
And it is ugly, too.
I’d call a mulligan and start over.
Well, having lived here all my life, I have to call BS on that. It’s not all sub-divisions and disney.
You laugh, but sadly its a sure bet these two will make a HUGE profit when it’s all said and done. It’s not like they don’t have a place to live–this is one of 18 lots they own–and they’ve been renting out the place for 6 months already without knowing it was in the wrong location.
The developer has evidently put forth a fairly logical solution–just trade lots with the other owner. They’re essentially identical. But the Voss’s response was that they have “other ideas”, and to state they have a lawyer. Believe me, they’re the one’s laughing–all the way to the bank.
Sounds like the first surveying company screwed up, and then a second surveying company missed the first one’s screw up. That’s pretty impressive.
“Lots of lawyers and finger pointing”.
I think you’re coming down too hard on the copy writer for what amounts to a typo. The last line did mention that the Voss’s have an attorney. And there was some finger pointing (The developer blaming the surveying company). And, um, “Lots” were definitely involved.
So… “Lots, lawyer and finger pointing” was obviously what they meant.
They’re not really identical, though, if you look at the lot purchase price. The lot the property is on was bought in 2003 for twice the money that the homeowner paid for his lot in 2012. I’m betting, without looking at the history of the property in that area, that the lot bought in 2003 has devalued to the 2012 valuation because of the housing crash, but it’s not a guarantee.
The easy solution would be for the builder to facilitate a swap-lot and kick some dough into the equation so no one felt cheated, and he seems like that’s agreeable. The article makes the homeowner sound like he wants to sue everybody, but who knows.
Me? I’d take the swapped lot and the nice-looking house, buy a bottle of wine for my eventual neighbor, and be glad that I have a lovely looking house. But that’s me.
Does BB still maintain the “I’M DISAPPOINTED” list?
The winner is probably the people who own the lot. Very likely they end up with the lot next door plus some cash, or just cash if they want to sell.
The loser is probably the surveyors’ insurance companies, but this is why they have it.
Oh, I don’t doubt it, but they’ll also always be known for spending well over half a million dollars on a stupendously ugly beach box.
Mostly, I laughed because I’m looking into purchasing an abandoned/vacant house to rehabilitate, and that house will likely cost between $0 and $5,000.
Yep, it should be settled amicably, with the survey company’s insurance footing some reasonable amount to keep both parties happy. Since as you mention, the house is on a parcel worth more than the one they own–and they didn’t notice the difference for 6 months at least (presuming they’ve visited it) – the Voss’s should be happy just getting the ostensibly better lot. It’s the other party–the one getting the lot of lesser value–that should be compensated.
But–I’d be truly surprised if anything so reasonable transpires.
your house won’t be on the beach.