Contractor builds house on wrong property

[Racerbvd]

Originally Posted by stealthn

Jack it up and get it the f*ck off my property or I demolish it and charge you a clean up fee.

Seems straight forward

But doesn't replace the vegetation that was restored or the additional money the property owner had to pay in taxes as a result of the uninvited "improvement" which would definitely increase the stress.

[911 Rod]

She needs to be paid for all the hassle of this.

[stealthn]

Results:



Get it off my f'n property

[WPOZZZ]

The local news version. https://www.kitv.com/news/court-orders-deconstruction-of-big-island-house-built-on-wrong-lot/article_06d31c9c-330d-11ef-8801-43abe879d471.html

[masraum]

Excellent!

[stealthn]

So the builder loses the house, has to pay for a demolition crew the court chooses, and will then have to pay damages for disturbing the property….seems about right

[RobFrost]

Originally Posted by stealthn

So the builder loses the house, has to pay for a demolition crew the court chooses, and will then have to pay damages for disturbing the property….seems about right

A developer with any sense would have tried to befriend the lady and work out a solution that keeps everyone happy instead of making an enemy. Their hand may however have been forced by insurers.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

[WPOZZZ]

What I don't get is why the contractor has to pay for the demo. They were hired by the developer to build the house. Developer didn't want to pay for a survey, so they built where they figured was the property. Shouldn't the developer absorb the demo costs because he didn't do a survey?

[jhynesrockmtn]

We had an issue in our neighborhood that just got resolved after about 6 years. A developer bought an old crap house, tore it down and started site prep and laid a foundation for a new one. He didn't get a survey and his site prep undermined the next door neighbors driveway. She sued and stopped the project. A survey was done proving his work crossed over the property line. The lot sat in limbo until very recently. She won her suit and as part of the settlement was able to buy the lot. She is turning it into part of her yard.

[RobFrost]

Originally Posted by WPOZZZ

What I don't get is why the contractor has to pay for the demo. They were hired by the developer to build the house. Developer didn't want to pay for a survey, so they built where they figured was the property. Shouldn't the developer absorb the demo costs because he didn't do a survey?

It would probably depend upon the contract between developer and contractor. They are the ones who performed the act so they're the complainant's first port of call. Initially, she would only have their word that some developer contracted them to do it. It's on them to satisfy themselves the developer has the authority to have that property constructed upon.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

[Danimal16]

Originally Posted by WPOZZZ

What I don't get is why the contractor has to pay for the demo. They were hired by the developer to build the house. Developer didn't want to pay for a survey, so they built where they figured was the property. Shouldn't the developer absorb the demo costs because he didn't do a survey?

What contractor would, in their right mind, EVER start construction without confirmation of the site. No survey, verify map. What about discrepancies in off-site hook ups? Where did the contractor set his initial on-site control to take off from a known point. What about the offsite hookups for power and possibly water and sewer. Drainage??? How can the contractor not see which is not the correct lot. Nope, the Contractor is on the hook, so is the engineer that stamped those drawings.

[Danimal16]

Originally Posted by RobFrost

It would probably depend upon the contract between developer and contractor. They are the ones who performed the act so they're the complainant's first port of call. Initially, she would only have their word that some developer contracted them to do it. It's on them to satisfy themselves the developer has the authority to have that property constructed upon.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

I can guarantee you one thing, the contractor's insurance and surety are talking and they are not happy. If it were me that is the first stop, insurance claim.

[911 Rod]

It must have been a calamity of errors with the contractor.
I can't imagine how unorganized the build must have been.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by RobFrost

A developer with any sense would have tried to befriend the lady and work out a solution that keeps everyone happy instead of making an enemy. Their hand may however have been forced by insurers.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

I thought they tried, but I have to say, it would be VERY hard to nicely make me buy a house on my own property that I didn't want.

"We built a house on your property, and screwed up your vision of/for the property in the process. We'll sell you the house at a discount!"

"Hell no, you won't. I don't want the house, and now I'm unhappy because you've screwed up my property."

I don't see any way that they could "make me whole" after something like that unless the solution was to purchase my property plus a bunch of money. Ie, if the property was worth $200k sans house and was to me "the perfect property", then making me buy a house that screwed up my property, or even giving me a house would still be problem. If the property with the house was then worth $500k, then they'd probably need to give me somewhere north of $300k to begin to make me whole (because the odds of me finding another "perfect" property are very slim).

[flipper35]

What he said. If I bought wooded acreage for hunting and someone developed it, I would insist it be put back the way it was.

[RobFrost]

Originally Posted by masraum

I thought they tried, but I have to say, it would be VERY hard to nicely make me buy a house on my own property that I didn't want.



"We built a house on your property, and screwed up your vision of/for the property in the process. We'll sell you the house at a discount!"



"Hell no, you won't. I don't want the house, and now I'm unhappy because you've screwed up my property."



I don't see any way that they could "make me whole" after something like that unless the solution was to purchase my property plus a bunch of money. Ie, if the property was worth $200k sans house and was to me "the perfect property", then making me buy a house that screwed up my property, or even giving me a house would still be problem. If the property with the house was then worth $500k, then they'd probably need to give me somewhere north of $300k to begin to make me whole (because the odds of me finding another "perfect" property are very slim).

I think my opening gambit would be to take her out to lunch to talk over what we can do to make it good.

A great outcome would be if you could buy her a better vacant plot of land in lieu, and keep the plot. Be she's only going for that if you come at her apologetic, explain what a disaster it is for you too, and manage to elicit some empathy.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

[RobFrost]

Originally Posted by flipper35

What he said. If I bought wooded acreage for hunting and someone developed it, I would insist it be put back the way it was.

What if it was somebody's nice grandma and she made an honest mistake and pointed the contractors at the wrong plot and had bankrupted herself by doing so?

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

[Alan A]

Originally Posted by RobFrost

What if it was somebody's nice grandma and she made an honest mistake and pointed the contractors at the wrong plot and had bankrupted herself by doing so?

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Not my grandma is the correct answer…

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by alan a

not my grandma is the correct answer…

lol

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by RobFrost

What if it was somebody's nice grandma and she made an honest mistake and pointed the contractors at the wrong plot and had bankrupted herself by doing so?

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk