City Demolished Teacher's Home, says previous owner was notified
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 мар 2023
- 'There is no house. Nothing is there,' Nagaraj said. 'And no one is telling me who is accountable. No one informed me of anything. That's all I know. Now I have a deed.
Don't forget to subscribe to our channel.
Follow us for more great content!
Facebook: abc13.co/2HbTdO3
Twitter: abc13.co/2HzMssV
Instagram: abc13.co/2Hawi9U
Just give her all her money back. It's really that simple.
She owns the land….the land is still there…she owns the freehold…put a Portakabin on it ,live in it while you spend $56k building a luxury des res…
@@griswald7156reverse the sale
@@khysor1832 no get the 56k returned then build with that….
@@griswald7156 is that neighborhood zoned for prefabricated dwellings? I doubt it.
@@eckankar7756 i doubt it also..
Why would the city auction off a house that has a demolition order on it? They should posted any liens and orders on it while putting it up for sale to the public. They need to give her the money back.
After she pays for the demolition they'll think about it.
The city didn't auction the house. The county did because the previous owner couldn't pay back taxes.
The house was likely demolished due to the condition of the house. It likely would have fallen down on its own.
In a previous photo it looked like it had been abandoned.
@@dps6198 city, county whatever they should not put that property up for sale with a demo order on it. They should have demolished it then sell the land so people know what they are getting. They are selling it to cover the taxes. It's like they did it on purpose to get more money for it.
they post all that you as the buyer have to do all your homework and not just jump on something because of the price.
I wonder how we the people can help put fire up their bums
Here's the problem. The city tore down the house but the county sold it. The two didn't communicate and each should repay her.
Once she closed on the home and paid for it, iyt is no longer about refunding her money. The building must be replaced. That means the owner of the property should get bids on replacing the structure, the permits, the labor, etc. She needs to hire an attorney to represent her.
@@chrispnw2547 I am sure she will be getting calls from lawyers with it being on the news...
@@chrispnw2547 EXACTLY! (Actually, I think they should have to go back and find all the bits and pieces of what they tore down and replace it just as it was, regardless of cost, but this is close enough!)
How is city separated from the county? And why was it demolished?
@@siewheilou399 You do know that city government and county government are two separate governments right? Your city government is solely for your city, your county government is for the entire county you live in. I live in town A you live in town B but they're both in the same county. We have different city governments but the same county government. I hope that clarifies things for you.
So the city waited two years to demolish the house until someone bought it and then quickly had it torn down while the woman was waiting for her deed. It doesn't get any more wrong than that!
They needed to wait for someone to charge for the demo...
The city owes her a house. No excuses
@Ron M open yours too, if you even have any money.
nope that it dose not
@@tc539 Yes, the city most definitely is accountable for this. Do your research and stop making comments that you clearly know NOTHING about.
@@varigair1553 nope that they are not
@@tc539 who is accountable?
At a tax sale she bought it…
Whoever did the tax sale should’ve said that the home is slated for demolition. Nobody would’ve paid $57,000 for a small plot of land!
The entities that be that dropped the ball on this need to make this right for this woman! This is ridiculous!
The lawyer who signed off on sale is in big dodo as is the old owner
This is the norm in government where the left hand don't know what the right hand is doing.
No way! 57k could get you a half acre, maybe more depending on where it is. Much more than this tiny plot.
57k can get you 60 acres in Oklahoma On a river bed
@@dersturmerofjewery6038 Where I live 57k will get you the backyard shed
If she has legal documents showing she bought the house, she is the owner. She bid it on an auction authorized by the city. The city needs to refund her money. Someone at the county messed up big time and should be held responsible.
no, it's a tax auction. Professional house flippers KNOW to research the property prior to the auction with the city's development office for for lines, court orders and the demolition order would have been obvious. She's stupid. She's an amateur and did not do one bit of homework prior to the auction, that's why the professional house flippers didn't bid against her for this. She's a teacher and barely speaks 1st grade English. This woman is totally unprepared.
@@eckankar7756 I guess you didn't hear the lady say that she did her research. So it's her fault that the city still had the property posted on an auction that's ran by the city?
@@lamara8497 Obviously she did NOT 'do her research." I own multiple properties and do through checks prior to any purchase. I've never bought through tax auctions but this documentation for the demolition would be on city or county records. She simply failed to do her homework, no wonder she won so cheaply, professional house flippers did look and saw the demolition order. She's naive and jumped in to a deal solely for the price.
Like the old saying goes if it sounds too good to be true it probably is this deal just came with your house being raised to the ground and I’d even your foundation being left behind this was 100% her fault you always do your freaking homework you go and check city state county records make sure there is nothing outstanding there’s no orders there’s no issues that would’ve been caught if she actually did her homework correctly
@@jeremyolson3837 why does everyone keep saying "do your homework". I swore I heard the lady said she did her research in the interview. It's only so much "research" you can do. How about the city just screwed up. The state only deals with state issued properties, this was the city and their auction website... I believe everyone commenting is only saying it's her fault because she an accent so therefore she's some kind of a dummy....
She needs to get a lawyer sue the homeowner, city,and county ,they all knew this house was being demolish. This theft at its worse .
The county was the homeowner.
The county sold the house, the county is responsible.
the buyer is responsible. clearly none of you have ever purchased a home before.
@eric how is the buyer responsible? She didn't put the house on the bidding list nor did she know it was going to be demolished, otherwise she woul not have purchased it .🙄
@@charmaine9920 legally its not the city's responsibility to make sure the buyer does their due diligence. normally its the real estate agent and the bank making sure the buyer knows what they are purchasing. this is why there are inspections, title searches and a walk through before the closing. in this case its up to the buyer to do these things with a tax lien county sale of property that is a cash sale. think of it as buying a used car sold "as is" from a shady car lot. once money exchanges hands and the paperwork signed... thats it, that car is yours for better or worse.
Vendors not disclosing such vital encumberances during real estate transactions is criminal where I live.
Where I live, before you can take ownership of a house, you must show proof of Insurance.
You must not live in America, anything rich people do is "legal", our laws are completely fabricated so the common court can steal from the common slave.
Yeah, but it's ok for the Government to do it.
Sort of like stealing.
If we do it, it's called theft.
If the Government does it, it's called "Civil Asset Forfeiture". (If you don't know what Civil Asset Forfeiture is, look it up. Very disturbing!
Being that she is a foreign immigrant the people who sold her the house most likely knew what was going to happen to it and just opted to take advantage of her??
@@onrr1726
I doubt that.
She simply gave the winning bid. That's why she got the house.
I think the problem was the city government was so massive and bureaucratic, that whoever held the auction was never notified by whoever signed off on the demolition of the house.
Simply a failuure to communicate.
You have a deed to a house in your name that was torn down with no notice sent to you. Funny thing about deeds, they are guaranteed clean and clear before transfer. This means someone at the city allowed the demolition of a house with a new owner who had not been served any notice. That's getting into federal and constitutional criminal territory.
See you're assuming intergovernmental communication. What if the city just simply didn't know there was a new owner? You know like they're claiming.
@@MamaMOB You are right about the city not doing wrong. The thing is, the doesnt absolve the county that failed to deliver, at the time of closing, what was purchased. She couldnt work on the house until closing because thats the very moment it legally becomes hers and all the liabilities transfer. The house was demolished between the auction (which is not the closing) and the closing (which is not the auction) which means the seller (county) failed to deliver the purchased item. The incident was a terrible mistake if they return her money, and outright fraud if they dont.
I'm saying that the county is selling a property within city limits and somewhere between those two entities there is due diligence that was not done. Not only for the county potentially not being aware that the house was scheduled for demolition 2 years prior to the sale but also because the deed is supposed to be guaranteed clear with the obvious exception of the tax lien against it. My issue here is that two government entities now leave a citizen in limbo while they hold her money and either use it or draw interest on it and she is left with less than what she contracted to purchase. If she now holds the deed, the simple outcome is that the city destroyed her home without notifying her and they need to sort out with the county whether they are going to build her a house on her now vacant lot of buy it back. Furthermore, I would want to see what the market value is on the lot. If it happens to exceed the original cost of the purchase, then she should be paid market price for the lot and they pick up the fees. Mistakes happen, they are also usually expensive.
@@MamaMOB...How does a city not know how to look at the deed?
@@MamaMOB just because you are ret@rd3d doesn't everyone else is. The city confiscated the property and put it in auction so yes, they know it has a new owner.
Three months after our first story aired, the county reimbursed Nagaraj her $61,000 .
Glad to hear justice was served!
So she got her money back but what about the opportunity to have her housr in a nuce place compensation for time too is in order.
Needs to pay to rebuild her a new house
@@eileenmcdonald1599 : She got her money back, and presumably the state now owns the land. She was made whole. If she got anything more it would be a theft of taxpayer funds.
@@mel2000wow, I didn't know that. Thank you for for explaining why she couldn't get more.
If I were her, I wouldn't be looking for a refund... I'd be demanding a new house. A tiny place like that shouldn't cost much to build (especially compared to how much she might be able to win in a lawsuit). They need to admit their mistake, cut their losses, and replace her house.
Not to mention that a new-build often has to meet a different code to a renovation, and clearly they even took out the foundations so that's even more cost.
It may be a tiny home but the market value in my Kansas neighborhood with homes like that is around $175.000.
What does Kansas have to do with this issue.
This city needs to rebuild her house for free. This is absolutely ridiculous.
Yes to this. It's the most obvious solution. Also give her a rental until her home is built.
She's a teacher in Texas second class at best and Hispanic to boot yell to loud you might end up in jail
there are major clues in this story that shows the buyer is at fault. this first time home buyer failed to do their due diligence - buyer beware.
@@ericmartin2470 It's acknowledged that she was not informed about the demolition order. If it had been her complaining about cracks in the foundations or the roof needing replacement the buyer beware would be understandable, but she purchased a serviceable home in need of repair and it was torn down after she had paid for it. There was no way for her to be aware of a hidden order that even those auctioning it were unaware of.
@@theyaden no, the home was condemned by the county years before. if this person had done their due diligence all of this would have been avoided. this is the reason why the bank makes you jump through all of their hoops before giving out a loan. this person learned an expensive lesson.
They need to refund her money asap.
Plus interest
Make it punitive damage.
@@tc539 why would the city sell it to her if the city knew the house was up for destruction
@@tc539 she wasn't the owner when the city required the owner to rebuild the home.
@@Joe-by8jh in Texas?!🙄
Not a lawyer, that said the house was sold at a sheriff’s auction and the order for destruction should have been made available during the title search. Failing that the sale would comprise fraud if a private seller hadn’t made the order available. Therefore the county should be held accountable.
Excellent coverage!!! This story expresses how a citizen can be overwhelmed by the City, where they live.
Just when you think the world can’t get any weirder.
Worse* the word you were looking for was worse or communist* under the guise of "liberalism".
It’s not weird
It’s quite common.
@@lukesutton4135 she didn't ask you all that.
On a youtube channel (that covers legal matters stuff-up) there's another video re a wrong house being demolished.
In another video re house referred to as the Spite house, in Alameda California. It's only 10 feet wide, as the city built a short road through part of his land, with no house at the time (compulsory acquisition of the bit of land, I'm guessing). Reason for very short road was a neighbor wanted an access to his house and got the city to agree it was necessary. Think neighbour couldn't drive to next to, or into his property.
So the Spite House owner built a 10 feet wide house, which was to edge of the land but he also built it two story, and long. So the neighbour (who wanted the road, & who wouldn't cooperate in anyway with spite house owner) lost some view out of his house, and some sunlight for part of the day
@@lukesutton4135 *more wierd
I’m sure she’ll have her choice of lawyers now. I bet her phone is ringing nonstop with attorneys wanting to represent her. Best of luck
good.
I think she’ll get her money back, less lawyer fees. 75k , minus fees won’t leave much. I don’t have much faith that she’ll get anything more as an immigrant in Texas.
Illegal for attorneys to solicit thus.
Whoever sold her this home knew exactly what they were doing and we’re happy to mess her over and I feel like this seems criminal not only civil.
It was the County who sold her the home. The report was very clear about that.
City sold it in auction. As stated in the report
The city was required to file the demolition order with the county recorder when it was issued two years ago. Once filed it would become a permanent part of the parcel record and attached to the deed. The county, who put the property up for tax sale, would have to provide such information to all prospective bidders. A title search would have also turned up the demolition order if the city had properly filed it. Most states also require that the owner of record, in this case the county, be provided with a letter of intent to demolish by the city 30 days prior to the demolition. All this points to the fact that the city did not perform as required. Granted that the county is required to provide the purchaser what they bought, but the fact remains the city acted illegally. Going to be one heck of a mess when it gets to court - unless the county and city can make the purchaser whole.
The fact it was sold in an auction, the city should have known....this sounds like the city owes her some money. That money didn't go to the previous owner of the house if it was sold in an auction. Someone in the city department dropped the ball big time!
A lot of people are saying the county should give her the money back and I agree. I bet anything that before this is over, they will send her a bill for the demo.
hopefully they will she needs to pay for her lot being cleaned up for her
@@tc539 all in, that was a CLEAN lot job. kuddos to the outfit that did it.
@@louisliu5638 true very true
You know it.
Seriously
Get a lawyer, sue those responsible for restitution of the $57000 you paid for it and an amount of additional compensation that will enable you to have a new home built on site.
She got the $61k back from them sometime around Christmas/New Year 2023/2024. Eventually. Which was what her total costs were in the first place. No compensation, nada.
The sad reality, is they won't return her calls. They'll play the just go away game.
They will try, but when lawyers get involved it's best not to ignore them, because she can take this to court (granted it would be in the same trifling county) and if they don't show she wins by default.
Yea she needs to talk legal action either way! I am sure she already in the process!
As long as she gets a lawyer she wins. She'll get the money back and her legal fees paid. Why?!?! Because she doesn't own that house....never did. The house didn't exist when she closed on it. A seller can't sell you a house that doesn't exist....thats fraud.
Can you even imagine the surreal feeling of pulling up to your new house only for it to had disappeared without a single trace?
....welll the outlines where still there 😅
Something similar, though nowhere near as costly. I booked a table at a restaurant with great reviews, and received email confirmation. We arrived, but just couldn’t locate the place. We were going up and down the street, perplexed. The address seemed to be an office supplies shop, closed for the evening. It was surreal. Eventually turned out that the restaurant closed in the pandemic, but they hadn’t cancelled their website complete with automatic booking system!
This is pure evil from some one that needs to be hold accountable 💔
How can this happen, sell a house that has an order to be Demolished,
Nobody lived there. Back taxes were owed so the county sells it. They don't communicate with the city. That's on the buyer.
When all you see is the price and nothing else, including the fine print on the T&C from the auction company.
@@MomMom4Cubs Shoud of been a list at the tax office! They should of told anyone that inquired that it's not foe sale! You'd be sued out of business or killed if you own your own business! No one would feel sorry!
@@rhuttrho88 You're right. My point was that said information should be, and most likely is, available wherever deeds are recorded, maintained, and issued. She didn't do her own contractually mandated legwork, instead believing herself entitled to services not offered by the auction company. It's called a "title search," and it costs little to print the pertinent records.
Typical government. One department has no idea what another department within their own county is doing. The city should have never turned it over to county and county should have known it was under demolition. Neither knows what the other is doing, yet one relies on the other for accurate information to sell...typical government employees and set-up.
Title Insurance should be liable.
A title search isn't going to find out that the home is on the city's demolition list. They just check property ownership and easements.
That’s right
@@eutimiochavez415 I do title work, and think the city failed miserably..
@@Raw_Roots What else do you guys search for when titles are being called for in 2023 now that the internet exists? How much time is put in to searching for stuff and why isn't stuff like this found?
@@dmpi483 and liens
As Ronald Wilson Reagan once said: 'The scariest nine words most people don't want to hear is "We're from the government and we're here to help" ' and this is a sterling example.....
Trusting the Government to help is like trusting Casey Anthony to babysit your kids!
Reagen did not have Party approved Correct Speech
@@sillyseattlecat Since it was a tax auction I don't think the original owner had any say in the matter so would not be at fault. The city seized it and was selling it off to pay taxes which means it was their duty to disclose things such as the demolition order. I'm sure it was an accident by the city rather than deliberate fraud but the city is still responsible for damages and they admit they didn't disclose the demolition to her.
@@sillyseattlecat Don't know anything beyond what's included in the video, but I wouldn't think the previous owner would be on the hook here whatsoever given that property was sold by a governing agency at a tax lien auction. Previous owner wasn't a direct party in the transaction and without any obligation in terms of disclosure. Additionally as a tax auction sale much of the weight of due-diligence in the transaction falls to the bidder/buyer. Feel sorry for the new owner regardless.
However by the looks of the house it appeared to be a candidate for tear-down, or total-rehab regardless.
I wish people would stop saying this. The government is supposed to help the people. When the government doesn't work properly the people have a right to hold the government accountable and/or change the government. It is called paying attention and voting. the fact of the matter is that private companies are no better and we have a lot less leeway to hold them accountable without incurring heavy personal legal costs. Our only remedy in those cases is the meager protections we get from our governments.
All that needs to be done for this woman is for people in the area to hold both governments accountable. We all (including myself) need to exert more control over our local governments. We get the governments we elect or fail to not elect and we allow things to deteriorate when we ignore the little things that government officials and agencies do that lead to big things like this.
The county needs to make this right, if they are the ones who auctioned the house off. Looks like they are just counting on her not to know that she can sue them for fraudulently selling a house slated to be torn down and not disclosing that the issue existed. Or maybe the city and county are just so disorganized and so completely out of touch thar neither knows what the other is doing? That defense should go over big with the judge...
No mistake- the homeowner ripped her off plain n simple!
So the county and city?
@@sarah69420sounds like it.
She bought the house from the county so it's not the previous owners fault, it's the City's and the County's and they owe this woman!
@@kiciacoldspring1621 it was still a deliberate deception!
homeowner had nothing to do with it.
So the former owner was notified -- was the former owner the state or the county? I think these tax auction properties are usually sold with no guarantees, but is it legal for the county to sell a property with a house when they themselves are aware the house will be gone by the time the new buyer receives the deed? Could this citizen really be out of luck legally?
Absolutely! The news just tanked her frivolous lawsuit anyway. They posted the photo she provided them and literally had the notification on the garage in bright green but the spray painted letters and he a lawyer with half a brain will tell her to save her money and just be thankful but she has an empty lot to build a new house on, and if she does go through with this ridiculous lawsuit, the city needs to sue her and this ridiculous fake news outlet
@@dawnhenderson2333 Oh, I didn't realize that green paper was a notice to demolish the house. The news outlet is probably working on this story in good faith; all the county needs to do is point out what you just did along with a copy of whatever notice they have for their tax auctions saying they offer no guarantees and prospective owners should do their due diligence before purchasing any property.
Counties vary, but I dont recall the notices saying anything about the house may be demolished. Usually say things like; leans, title claims, toxic dump, condition, etc. County should refund the money.
Pretty disgusting that the state benefits with the tax money. 🤮
as she should be for not doing everything she needed to do
First, they take complete control of school districts, now, they’re tearing down teacher’s homes. 🧐🤬
It was almost similar to what happened to my grandmothers trailer, we were going to buy it in a tax sale.. I had $2000 for it (Which was the taxes owed) and next thing I knew.. some guy outbid us by $500 and won the auction, he was going to fix up the trailer and rent it out then he found out it was on less than an acre (The Trailer was all he owned and not the land around it) and the water source (A well) was on my family's property so he couldn't do anything with the trailer so he pretty much took out all of the windows and doors and basically resold them.. and has been paying taxes on the land ever since... never seen him again
If an individual were the seller via realtor the seller is required to disclose things of this nature. Is the empty lot worth what she paid? Why is the county not required to disclose this very important piece of information?
Because they're the government and they write the laws and make themselves exempt.
I think they still are they just screwed up missing the order which I think will be a costly mistake where they owe toward the construction of a new home to match what the old building was worth.
Add to the fun if the original owner sues the city for the overage of how much the auction sold the house for for over the taxes owed before settlement payments to the new owner since that was the states negligence in tearing it down once the new owner acquired it.
It was a fraudulent sale.
This isn't the first time this has happened. The new owners are even sometimes charged by the city for the demolition!!!
Someone owes this lady a new house.
City needs to build her another house.
The city in which the house was located in had a demolition order on it and sent out in 2021,
The county who owned the house and sold it to her, failed to do a thorough search on it and is therefore liable for it.
Thankfully due to the Computer age there is actually less communication between departments. Its no longer "ON PAPER" sitting in front of you, it's hidden inside of the system. Hopefully She will get her money back plus damages.
Classic case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand was doing.
Texas is such a nice place to live.
So the city thinks it's going to profit by taking homes, not taking any action on them for YEARS and then, suddenly auctioning them off (just a different department of the same organization) and then... rip them down. And, keep all the money? What a joke! I'd like to see that court case.
I work in a similar department in Virginia. They city is required to check who owns the house before it is torn down just in case it changes hands, just like in this case. Once the property changes hands, the city has to start the demolition process all over.
They did check. 2 years ago. lol.
This ought to work out really great. A whole bureaucracy dedicated to making life miserable.
I'd file suit, HUGE fkn lawsuit...naming the City AND the County as defendants.
They’re gonna have to build a brand new house. The place the one that they ruined. Get a lawyer and sue someone.
Same thang happened to a friend of mine while he was in jail for some BS and city had to pay him for house and belongings😂
Soon they will send her a letter saying she only purchase the house. Not what it was sitting on. These days I wouldn't be surprised if that happened.
But where is the house?
@@user-hv9vn4fi4w it got demolished so it's most likely at the garbage dump by now
Absolutely unbelievable!
Sounds like the county needs to give her the money back.
nope as is
To find out what really is going on, wait about a year and see what the city does with that land. Somebody in the hierarchy of the city wanted that land for something.
The homeowner needs to file charges against the previous owner and the county for failing to disclose that there was a demolition order on the house.
Isn’t this how The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy began?
She was in trouble already when she paid $57,000 for that property.
@SPAT, NOT NOWADAYS
County was only concerned with back taxes. 💯
Sounds like Texas being Texas. Woman✅ Teacher✅ Minority✅ “WoooHooo, boys!!! We got another one!!! “
I pray she gets a new house at no further cost to Her
If ever someone needed a financial adviser, it might be this woman
and she needs to quit acting like so MANY PEOPLE do, acting like a CONSUMER. housing is not a consumer product. don't ASSUME.
$50,000 was for the lot not the house
Why?? She did her work and looked at all the info she had available. She got screwed plain and simple
@@briAbbey654 it didn't specify that. She paid for the home with the lot
This should speed up renovation!😂
It reminds me of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy when the local authorities come to tear down Arthur Dent's house.
The city did end up refunding her completely.
She bought it from the County and the County didn't know she bought it? I bet they are counting on her not being able to afford an attorney to go against them. That is downright criminal.
I think the news report said city not county tore the house down...
@@jonathanbair523 A city is usually located in a County and the county not the city is who decides the actual property values.
The contract is void. Get your money back.
There's no contract in a tax auction. Just paying for the deed.
@@maggie2sticks717 Nope, all land sale contracts are in writing signed by the parties or it's not a transfer of real property in the state of Texas.
The government sold her a house. And, then tore it down without telling her.
If you or I had done that we would be facing criminal fraud charges.
Welcome to America in Harris County.
I'm more concerned about the removal of that big, beautiful tree that was shown in the photo of the house. Seriously? WHY would anyone destroy that tree????!!
THAT is your only concern?? Pathetic.
This woman loses her home she has been saving for for years due to miscommunication between two of our government bodies. Something that could happen to you or your family or anyone… and your biggest concern is a tree?
This is what is wrong with America today.
The tree could be a risk to the house.
@@Philosific 100%
@Bri Ba thanks, I was concerned about the tree too!!!! Takes a lifetime for them to grow that big!!
She paid for a house, she didn't get the house...give her her money back. However, not that she has to go through all of this...honestly it's time to sue, this is definitely beyond emotional distress.
UPDATE: She was refunded $61,000 3 months after the story was aired.
Thank you for the status report!
Absolutely insane
A local government official needs to step in and fix this.
There’s a reason why she got his house and property for so cheap and why nobody else really wanted anything to do with it because they probably found the demolition order on file with the city and county and this lady had just done her due diligence like she claimed she did. She would’ve found that too.
Yeah, we will all hold are breath for that to happen….. 🤦
City should return the money plus interest, and lawyer fees.
Hopefully with this becoming public, she will get justice. This is absolute inadequacy.
She bought the lot/land that had a house on it… she should be able to rebuild on her lot now
No the city needs to rebuild her house it's their fault
Another Teacher being screwed by the "system". This is one time that I would donate to a GoFundMe account. I wished that I could buy her a new house.
Thanks to ABC 13 for looking into this for her- great reporting!
Three months afte this report, the city refunded owner Nagaraj her original purchase price of $61,000 (including all taxes and fees associated with the sale). While relieved to get her life savings back, she was nonetheless frustrated by the event.
""What happened to me, that cannot be changed. But I don't want someone else to go through what happened to me," Nagaraj said.
A demolition order and notice 2 years ago…….
It’s feasible the house/property could have changed ownership multiple times in two years.
The original house could have been demolished and a new one have replaced it.
They would have looked really stupid if they had demolished a new house based on an order for the previous building.
They'll keep her money as long as they can to collect any interest they can on it all while making her jump thru hopes for their failure. The absolute last thing that will happen will be her getting her money. It's being investigated will be the answer at every turn.
"the county reimbursed Nagaraj her $61,000 -- a relief for the teacher who wasn't sure if she'd ever see her life savings again." from a simple google search getting newer information.
Amazing how much simpler that is than posting comments on old videos asking for updates as if someone's reading them.
It's simple - give her her money back.
The city should pay to get it rebuilt 😂
Yeah something's wrong here... sounds like a job for a good lawyer.
The woman needs to get a lawyer who knows laws this case involves and knows what questions to ask as neither the city nor the county are going to voluntarily provide her with any helpful assistance in unwinding this mess. The county likely wasn't aware that the house was on the city's demolished list due to lack of communications between the two and thus the county likely didn't include the fact provided to potential (auction) buyers. As far as the city is concerned if it was on the demolition list so long there should have been a (condemned) notice on the building's door which would have informed the county and the buyer that the building was set for demolition. As far as the delay it getting it demolished COVID likely had something to do with the long delay.
The CITY has ALL ability to SEE the activity of sale on the property. They did this to HER on purpose! She needs to file a claim against The CITY!!! They didn't want her to have the Land and Property. This is a form of Discrimination!!! Make the City's Insurance Pay her to build a new home.
previous owner knew about the house being demolished so she needs to go after them and not the city
It was sold at a “county” auction. So I’m thinking it was seized. All in all…….😂😂😂😂😂😂
No. It was a tax sale. The owner is the City, I believe. The seller, NOT the previous owner, needed to disclose outstanding violations and such. She needs a lawyer.
@@verreal You're correct, the county sold her the house when clearly they didn't really have a house to sell. Nothing short of fraud.
@@verreal I don't think the city owns it. It was derelict. The county contacts the deed holder and if there's no reply (and this takes years!) they take the house for back taxes and they sell it. The demolition was likely because it was derelict. Who in their right mind would look at that thing and buy it in the first place? She's kinda nutty.
@@verreal tax auction properties are sold as is. It’s literally the first line of any auction in this grifters case, though she kind of sank her own frivolous lawsuit. She literally provided the proof the cities gonna need for their counter suit. Look at the picture. The news posted of the house a little closer.
Talk about house jacked
I'd knock down the doors to city hall and drag out whoever was responsible, compensation should be demanded.
This is on the county. The Tax assessor holds the title in tax lien - after the notice of forclosure is processed the county is now the owner. If they auctioned it off and didnt know and or tell her it was to be removed thats on them not her. They owe her full restitution as she purchased the home in good faith.
City violations have nothing to do with the county.
My respect for u Mrs god helps you resolve Al ur problems 🙏 ❤️
Godbless u have a sincere friend here iam always loyal faithful respectful and honest.
I'll be praying for you and all your family? ❤️
I'm speechless this is dead wrong
This is 1000% wrong. Please give this lady money back.
The city owes her the fair market value of the property which is at least 100K.
Hire a lawter NOW before the money disappears
@@vinny06299 don’t know bout them Lawters myself!!😂😂😂
When reached for comment spokesman Mr Prosser said "the plans were on display in the planning office for the last 2 years." Anyone who gets that reference deserves a thumbs up and a towel.
The county auctioned the house off without doing due diligence, that means fault is on the county and they will be on the hook legally.
Does the news ever tell us good news
Rarely. Good news doesn't sell. The worse it is the better and the longer they can go with it.
Dunno. A missing Texas girl was saved from a Carolina shed in the past day, but she was abducted first so 🤷♀️
For the original owner they are responsible for " Non disclosure" of intent, and when a title search or lien search didn't discover this issue this should be investigated too...Easy fix.
It was sold by the county at a tax auction meaning the original owner didn't pay on it so the county seized the property to recoup their owed tax money so the original owner was out of the picture. The true BS is the fact that the county and city can't properly communicate with each other, if the could they would have avoided selling a house with a pending demolition date.