Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Termy asks fir legal advice, really ?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/21/2011 4:50:37 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		Tis true. I think I am right here, and I want confirmation. Of course this is not something stupid like how many points you get for a seat belt ticket, it's hapened to a couple people I've known over the years and it's not right. I think there is a legal remedy, maybe.

Now this is Ohio, Cleveland specifically and even if a suburb it is served by the same water department. The way it is here is that the water department really won't take collection action. They don't have to and that may have to do with state or local law.

The two people I've known who have had a problem with this had to pay a delinquent water bill left behind by the previous owner. It wasn't that the title wouldn't transfer, that went just fine, but when they called to get the water turned on they got the shock. They are not stupid people, of course they questioned this shit, but seemingly, the policy is if you do not pay the money we will not send water down your particular pipe. I can't see the law bucking that too much. Force a compny to provide a service for free. Imagine the lawsuit. It would cost you ten bucks to take a bath by the time the lawyers got done.

However, when a deed or title deed transfers, and there is a mortgage you have your stance and the bank has their's They paid for the thing and you pay them. First of all they want to know that "we" actually own it and in almost every case they insist on what is sometimes termed a guarantee(d) Title. This is provided by what's called a title insurance company. They deliver the title to escrow or who cares with their stamp of approval on it. Any liens whatsoever are disclosed by them. They do (supposedly) a conprehensive search for any encumberances. If new leins or whatever are found, they must satisfy that. They must pay. This justifies a larger profit margin because sometimes you do have to pay off. The customer pays for everything remembber ? So if they screw up they have to make that money up somehow. This can hurt their market position. (talk insurance actuaries)

Enough on that. We are talking three skins here. It's not a big thing, but sometimes people who just bought a house are low on cash.

Now, since this water bill seems to follow the pipe to the house, is that then a part of the property. It certainly is when it breaks. Therefore, any problems with the waterworks should be part of the property, at least under the conditions I have described.

That means if you buy a house, and you can't get water because some schmuck ran it up to a grand or two, and you have to pay or NOT move in........ This could jam you up. Since everything is so subject to interpretation anymore, which could be good or bad, since this concerns the basic necessities of a house, that means it is directly put upon the value of the house. If it costs two grand to get a drink of water there, that might not be the best place to be.

What would you have done if you had known that ? Now remember that Cleveland water (NORSD) rarely instigates any colection actions. So how would a title guarantee comany find it ?

But there is that ectra profit. Now just to get rambuncktious, who should be sued ? Well the first, closest, in any venue. Get the money from the title company and let them go after the others. Why sue the guy who sold you the house ? He's in Florida, maybe not even on land. Maybe but you never know.

So I think the title insurance company is liable for this. I think that subrogates the seller. But then to execute any cases across state lines is a bitch anyway.

I think the title insurance co should be held liable for this type of loss. You bought a house, you assumed the place had running water/ period. This cost should not befall the buyer, but it does and as far as I can see legally there is no way in hell to force a company to provide their producty for free. But then they are more abloe to find the prick and prosecute him somewhere else. 

If you buy a property for cash or on a loan, it doesn't matter. There has to be a guaranteed deed or someone is incredibly stupid. That company will probably charge you a grand and they got a Woman in the office who knows what she is doing and searches for bank/tax records etc. They have a database. She runs that. Why doesn't that database include critical utility bills and things like that ? Water or no water means a house is either inhabitable or not in most cities. Not that I would care, but that's me.

So, does leins against the title include unavailable services which was caused by the previous owner ? It DIRECTLY affects the value of the property, and should have been disclosed, before the sale.

You want to blow this off, think it's not important ? OK we are talking a measley three Cnotes here. What if it was several thousand ? It has happened. It's been in and on the news. The waterworks will not send water if not paid.

These people charge money, they make quite a bit of money doing this. So they should be checking that. If they charge all that money just to heck for leins and tax records, fuck them. I can do that for free right here. So can you.

Well it;s time to pay. If ONE case, too big for small claims, goes through and the buyer wins, that's just about it. These fuckers are supposed to find out if the place has ozone, or no, radon. All this shit and they can't say if you can get water there
?

That, in and of itself is misleading. Proving lack of effort on a party to a contract can negate any defense they may have when you sue them.

There is alot more to this later case, I'll get into that later. In this one the realtor recommended every other party to the deal, basically handled the whole thing. And this was the Womn's sister. The realtor ALWAYS works for the seller. How always is always ?

At this point, I think I should find their original documents, they're all numbered. Actually if I was better online I prbably have enough info to find out. But the question is, should the title guarantee company be held liable ? ( or can it ? ) I don't think there was any chicanery on the realtor's part, being her sister. But osmetimes people are fooled.

Comments ?

T^T
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/21/2011 5:48:21 PM   
littlewonder


Posts: 15659
Status: offline 		I'm in the process of closing on my house here in PA. When they did a title search on my house they checked to see if there are any liens, taxes or utilities owed. If there are then as the seller, I cannot sell the house until those are satisfied. A clear title cannot be given until then. This is why they do a title search before closing. Now if something slips by the search then the new owners are now responsible for those items. They attach to the title.



(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/21/2011 9:07:22 PM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		They cut the water off fast here.   Faster then electric, gas, phone,

(in reply to littlewonder)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/21/2011 11:24:08 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		"I cannot sell the house until those are satisfied."

Yes that is what I thought. If there is say a three hundred buck water bill that would at the very least come out of your check when you sell the place. But somehow this slips by around here. Actually we have had other problems with the waterworks. Not me personally, but in quite a few cases of which I have heard.

If the guatrantee(d) title co lists it as an encumberance, it gets paid out of the escrow, you would think. I think alot of people have cause of action against Chicago Title et al. They just don't know it. What they are told is one thing, but what does the contract say ? People get fucked every day because they do not know things. Like if you're 24 and buying your first house, don't know a few lawyers and shit, what happens ? Well 99% of the time you just pay the money and STFU. After bitching and everything, but you still pay or hook your garden hose up to the neighbors'. Legal or not, try that when you just moved in. Ain't happenin'.

T^T

(in reply to littlewonder)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/21/2011 11:27:09 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		"They cut the water off fast here. "

Not here apparently. Overbilling happens all the time. They WILL cut you off but not for a couple hundred bucks. Whether you really owe them or not (and in some cases it is a billing error) you either pay or dry you stay. That's it. That is prer house, not per person.

That is what makes me think that it should legally fall on the title ins co. Isn't that what they're there for ?

T^T

(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/21/2011 11:31:11 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline 		Term. It doesn't fall to the title ins company. Utilities is a personal debt, not a secured debt. A secured debt would be one they could foreclose over. They can't foreclose over you not paying your water bill. They can just withhold service.

I would check with them again and this time ask what agency they answer to. Here, the water dept is city owned and your friendly neighborhood councilman might be able to help. Seems REALLY sleazy to me but some of the little pvt utilities around here try to do the same thing. They answer to elected "Utility Commissioners" Those guys are usually suckasses and if they think you'll campaign against them next time aorund, they might quietly help you.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/22/2011 12:20:52 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		The debt is secured by the habitability of the dwelling, at least in part. That is the crux of my argument. I don't think it's ever been argued before, and I don't know about other venues. But that's the way it is here. They operate here, therefore their service should reflect the needs of their customers. Here.

I think I could make a pretty fucking good argument here, in court. Somewhere in the paperwork there is the word "any".

I understand that it has not yet been done, but strange things happen in court all the time. I don't think this is any stranger.

I umderstand what you say, But hey, if I can exploit the system for the common people I would absolutely love to. This can go into implied warranties and shit. And I will say this much, doing this for the common people ? I am a common people, economically. I know I am as common as a seven dollar bill and as kinky as a fifty mile garden hose draped over Chicago, but still common. Just uncommonly common.

If they charge you three hundred bucks and don't tell you you have to pay three hundred bucks, don't you think you should at least get your money back ?

And, they talk of privatization here and there, well it's here. It was always private. The city does own and operate CPP, a power plant that usually never generates but could. The buy power from PASNY and resell it and the rate is pretty good. I use it myself. But if I owe them money the debt follows me. Pay up or no juice. Now the waterworks is also technically a part of the city, well actually county. They check for taxes right ?

But the water bill follows the house, not the owner.

T^T

< Message edited by Termyn8or -- 5/22/2011 12:29:55 AM >

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/24/2011 12:53:27 PM   
SternSkipper


Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline 		DO YOU actually have this problem? Or is it the 'two people" you know?


(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/24/2011 12:57:47 PM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		...the water bill here is due the 24th.  If you had not paid it by the 1st- then they shut it off.  Therefore you can only get into arrears of $71,  for that month- + $71 the month they shut it off.  Really- with in days they cut it here. 

(in reply to SternSkipper)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/24/2011 1:47:17 PM   
Arpig


Posts: 9930
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: Increasingly further from reality
Status: offline 		Ummm...maybe....call a lwayer?

I mean seriously Termy? Asking a bunch of perverts about land title law?

_____________________________

Big man! Pig Man!
Ha Ha...Charade you are!

Why do they leave out the letter b on "Garage Sale" signs?

CM's #1 All-Time Also-Ran


(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/24/2011 6:13:41 PM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

DO YOU actually have this problem? Or is it the 'two people" you know?




No- it is not Terms place.  He lived there for a good 20 years.    The house been in his family forever.

(in reply to SternSkipper)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/24/2011 6:19:41 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		No it hasn't, only since 1989. But it is not my problem. Actually my water bill is late, but fukum.

So anyway gathering from the responses, no matter what impact a delinquent water bill may have on the property, since i was not a cognovant note, the title insurance company is not liable.

Is an illegal encroachment, without a legal easement also not a cognovant note ? This can stick it up a title company's ass. Why one and not the other ?

But then this is Ohio. We are catching up to Utah on fucked up laws.

T^T

(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/24/2011 6:53:40 PM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline 		As Hillwilliam said, utilities are unsecured. They are also attached (here in NJ) to the account holder, not the residence. Now I make no claim to know Ohio law, but think of it this way...

The electricity, i.e. power lines, outlets, etc., are part of the house. If you move you don't take those power lines with you, although through inspection, the seller does have to, to some degree, guarantee that they are in working order (depending on type of sale). If the seller had an overdue electric bill of several thousand dollars (quite possible with electric heat), the new owner isn't prevented from having the power turned on in the new owner's name because of the previous owner's failure to pay.

Same thing with cable, natural gas, propane, heating oil, even telephone lines (yes some people still have landlines). The previous owner not paying for those services doesn't prevent new owner obtaining those services.

Some utilities go towards habitability, others do not. A house without running water, heat, septic or sewer is not habitable by law. The electric company is not permitted to cut the power for overdue bills during the winter months.

So how then, can the local water company refuse service to new owners for unpaid bills of previous owner and why does the title company not find them?

It would seem to me, that the title company should be held liable, but since the past due water bill doesn't prevent clear title, it creates a type of loop hole.

The easiest solution would be for prospective buyers to do some of their own checking prior to sale, with contingencies that will void the sale. I say this, since you say that it has happened on multiple occasions. Certainly, the people telling you this Termy, could be leaving out pertinent information, but if taken on its face, with your statement it has been reported on the local news, the liklihood seems that it happened.

Title searches came to be necessary because inicidences happened where others had claims to property and the new owners lost their new purchases. Such is how most law or procedure comes into being. If I were a realtor in that area, I would find that information from my sellers before becoming the listing agent. As the buyer's agent, would do the checking with the listing agent and recommend the buyer do their own research. Buyer's look into (or should) every important detail when looking for a house. Is the house cable ready, in area with good schools, crime rate, etc. It is not uncommon for buyer's to call the electric company, gas company, oil company, etc., to get an idea of what has been spent for those services by previous owners to determine if the utilities will fall within their budget.

"Buyer Beware" does not exist in home purchases any longer. If the seller knows of problems, those problems must be disclosed. Some things, like new roof, new septic are disclosed as a selling point. Other things, like a mass murder took place in the house (first thing that came to mind), or that the basement regularly floods must be disclosed or the owner faces liability. Of course that liability exists only if the new owner can prove the seller was aware, but in the case of an unpaid water bill, the seller is of course going to know. So if a savvy buyer asks directly, "is the water bill paid and up to date?" and the seller says yes, then the new owner can go after the seller for reimbursement. I think in most cases, even if the question was not asked directly, the buyer could file suit against the seller when this happens.

Termy, if these are friends of yours, it sucks to be them. However, they are not left with no recourse, only the job of figuring out who to sue. Depending on the amount they had to put out, they look at the deepest pockets, which would of course be the title company.

I do think that you have a valid point that someone should take it to court and make an issue of it. That would be the best way to prevent it from happening to others.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/24/2011 7:01:41 PM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		water and sewer do seem to operate on different rules.... then electric and gas--   which follow the person- not the property.   As you say- a house has to have water to be habitable- in most towns.

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/25/2011 2:31:36 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		"They are also attached (here in NJ) to the account holder, not the residence. "

It's not an official lien, but here it is attached to the property because of the fact that if they don't get paid, they will not pump water into the pipe going to that house ever again.

I know what a lien is and the difference here, but the thing is because of the behavior of the waterworks, this falls on the property, and the question is not what the law says, but how it should be "interpreted". It does fall on the house here, so should the title company also search for it and stand up to their guarartee for it ? I think there's a pretty good case for this.

T^T

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/25/2011 6:48:24 AM   
SternSkipper


Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

And, they talk of privatization here and there, well it's here


This is one of the hidden gotchyas of privatization. You now just a consumer up against a common creditor in lots of cases. You often lose a great deal of recourse when some service is privatized.


(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/25/2011 7:02:30 AM   
SternSkipper


Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline
quote:

..the water bill here is due the 24th. If you had not paid it by the 1st- then they shut it off. Therefore you can only get into arrears of $71, for that month- + $71 the month they shut it off. Really- with in days they cut it here.


So they HAVE privatized the water system? WHAT A FUCKING HUGE MISTAKE... Water services is the very LAST thing you want under private control.
   I'm presuming they must've privatized because that heavy-handed enforcement is one of the first changes you notice once a service falls into private hands. After a period of time, the only entity that pays less under privatization is the goverment itself. The consumer sees higher cost over time and more frequent increases in service costs with less say in what they amount to.
   Now there's an argument you can make indicating it's what we should be fairly paying anyway, but somehow I don't see the less government guys liking that much. It's really more like you reduce the size of actual government, yet end up with less say and often poorer quality services.



(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/25/2011 7:17:35 AM   
SternSkipper


Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline 		I did title searches a LONG time ago (the early 80s(,,, and they only way title insurance could be invoked in the state I did it in is if I missed a lien or unsatisfied mortgage deed, pretty much everything else is going to be laughed off by the title company.
   I once missed a 1902 tax lien which was apparently mis-recorded in the deed and title books... The homeowner's title insurance covered the removal of the lien *Course the tax burden was so old, I suspect somebody just lobbed a call to the tax assessor and got it squared away for just the recording fees.
No idea if that helps.
   Personally, rather than fight this, I'd be tempted to get a bunch of angry neighbors and go down to the nearest park and start digging an artesian well. And when the media gathers start spinning it like you're being driven into the 1800s by a government abandoning it's pact with the people to appease a loud minority of tax fanatics. That'll give plenty of face-time talking about how draconian billing policies on the part of an ESSENTIAL government service is no way to help citizens through very rough economic times.




(in reply to SternSkipper)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/25/2011 7:52:20 AM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

..the water bill here is due the 24th. If you had not paid it by the 1st- then they shut it off. Therefore you can only get into arrears of $71, for that month- + $71 the month they shut it off. Really- with in days they cut it here.


So they HAVE privatized the water system? WHAT A FUCKING HUGE MISTAKE... Water services is the very LAST thing you want under private control.
  I'm presuming they must've privatized because that heavy-handed enforcement is one of the first changes you notice once a service falls into private hands. After a period of time, the only entity that pays less under privatization is the goverment itself. The consumer sees higher cost over time and more frequent increases in service costs with less say in what they amount to.
  Now there's an argument you can make indicating it's what we should be fairly paying anyway, but somehow I don't see the less government guys liking that much. It's really more like you reduce the size of actual government, yet end up with less say and often poorer quality services.





Nope... it is not privatized.

(in reply to SternSkipper)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? - 5/25/2011 12:15:41 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		I dunno. You make checks payable to NORSD which mean Notheast Ohio Regional Sewer District. But alot of other things look like they are public but they are not.

And the waterworks has applied for a rate increase now. It's going up 80%, phased in over two years.

I need a fucking raise.

I'll be back later, I have to take a walk for a bit. Not over this, I have to go to the store.

T^T

(in reply to pahunkboy)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Termy asks fir legal advice, really ? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.328