Garage door legal question.

Page 3 of 3  


I totally remodeled the house I am in. If I were in your shoes can I take?:
The exterior paint trimboards roof vents lattice 4x4 posts interior paint interior lights two prehung entry doors carpet vinyl tiles ac unit furnace ductwork wiring outlets bathroom ceiling dishwasher garbage disposal drainpipes for all sinks sink fixtures ...plenty more
How is this any different than garage doors?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

THe only thing I see a problem with you taking is the bathroom ceiling and the plenty more. I don't have any of them plenty mores. Were they expensive?
On the other hand, if you have installed the rest of those items then you just screwed the pooch. They'll have to stay along with the plenty mores.
Are those plenty mores available in different colors?
Gordon Shumway
Our Constitution needs to be used less as a shield for the guilty and more as a sword for the victim.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

19.95 + p&h

Yes. White, avocado green, harvest gold and coppertone.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Avocado green! Holy shit! I do have some plenty mores.
Gordon Shumway
Our Constitution needs to be used less as a shield for the guilty and more as a sword for the victim.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Red Green wrote:

Damn, I was hoping for burnt orange.
--

dadiOH
____________________________
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

How old are you?!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not old enough to own a house apparently.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You are a genuine ass, just full of good Karma. Where does the new door go, in your new cave I hope. So put back the old one scrooge.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Anything that is fastened down is PART OF THE HOUSE - removing it is theft.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Definitely not that simple. For example, bookcases should have a safety strap or bracket that is fastened to the wall to prevent them from tipping, however they certainly would not be considered part of the house, nor would artwork fastened to the walls of the house.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Doors and windows are clearly part of the structure.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I am not sure, but I think that California is one of only a few states that do not permit lenders to get a deficiency judgment against the debtor after a foreclosure on a primary residence mortgage. If that is correct, the bank cannot come after you for the difference between what they get from the Sheriff's sale or foreclosure and the actual balance due on the mortgage.
About the garage door..., I think that would be considered part of the structure of the building, just like the walls,ceilings, floors, etc. would be. If so, the bank could probably come after you for taking the garage door, just like they could if you took a wall, ceiling, or floor. There is a technique that some investors use called "component depreciation" where they can legally depreciate non-structure items (toilets, gutters, downspouts, etc.) over a shorter term on their tax returns -- then they depreciate the rest of the structure over 27 years. But, I think garage doors may not be one of the components that can be depreciated over a shorter term than the structure itself.
Since the house is apparently upside on the mortgage, and you probably have other dischargeable debts, have you looked into just filing a Chapter 7 bankruptcy? Many (most?) bankruptcy attorneys provide a free initial consultation. You may want to do 2 or 3 such consultations before deciding what your best options are.
There is a Yahoo Group called Bankruptcy_Talk that you may want to join and post your questions there.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jay-T wrote:

According to this article California IS one of the few states that limits deficiency judgments.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/25/AR2009112504186.html
Excerpt 1:
"[U of Arizona law professor, Brent T.] White argues that far more of the estimated 15 million American homeowners who are underwater on their mortgages should stiff their lenders and take a hike.
"Doing so, he suggests, could save some of them hundreds of thousands of dollars that they 'have no reasonable prospect of recouping' in the years ahead. Plus the penalties are nowhere near as painful or long-lasting as they might assume.
" 'Homeowners should be walking away in droves,' according to White. 'But they aren't. And it's not because the financial costs of foreclosure outweigh the benefits.' Sure, credit scores get whacked when you walk away, he acknowledges. But as long as you stay current with other creditors, 'one can have a good credit rating again -- meaning above 660 -- within two years after a foreclosure.'
"Better yet, you can default 'strategically.' Buy all the major items you'll need for the next couple of years -- a new car, even a new house -- just before you pull the plug on your current mortgage lender.
" 'Most individuals should be able to plan in advance for a few years of limited credit,' White said, with minimal disruptions to their lifestyles."
Excerpt 2:
"The main point, [White] says, is that too often people's emotions get in the way of clear financial thinking about mortgages, turning them into what he calls 'woodheads' -- 'individuals who choose not to act in their own self-interest.' Most owners are too worried about feelings of shame and embarrassment following a foreclosure, and ignore the powerful financial reasons for going through with it, he said.
"Buttressing these emotions is a system that White labels 'the social control of the housing crisis' -- pressures and messages continually sent to consumers by the 'social control agents,' namely banks, government and the media. The mantra these agents -- all the way up to President Obama -- pound into owners' heads, White says, is that 'voluntarily defaulting on a mortgage is immoral.'
"Yet there is an inherent imbalance in the borrower-lender relationship that makes this morality message unfair to consumers: Banks set the rules during the housing boom, handing out home loans with no down payments, no income checks and inflated appraisals. Now that property values have dropped 20 to 50 percent in many areas, banks have been slow to modify troubled mortgages and reluctant to reduce principal debts.
"Only when homeowners cut through the emotional fog and default strategically in large numbers, White argues, will this inequitable situation be seriously addressed.
"How does White's 52-page manifesto go over with mortgage lenders? Predictably, not well."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Erma1ina wrote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/25/AR2009112504186.html
White is an unethical twit. Yes, banks wrote a lot of paper to people they shouldn't have, with made-up dreamworld numbers. But they didn't hold a gun to anyone's head to get them to sign. Anyone who commits to a debt they can't afford SHOULD suffer some pain if their house of cards collapses. That is how mother nature educates people who didn't pick it up in school. I don't think the banks should be off the hook either- if they write bad paper, they should have to eat part of the loss.
Yes, I know, some people suffer financial reversals through no fault of their own, and should have a way to start over. That is what bankruptcy laws are for. But people who still have jobs, but happen to notice that their McMansion is worth less than they owe on it, I have little pity for. Shouldn't have bought such an ego palace in the first place, fool. Houses lower on the food chain have held their value a lot better, and you can still sell them for something close to what you paid, in most areas. There are several 10-year-old beige subdivisions around here, maybe 1/4 built out, that haven't had any new starts in five years. But due to the CCRs requiring McMansions, they won't be built out anytime soon. At some point, the developers will walk away from the vacant lots, and they will tax-revert to the city. Maybe they will sell them to the neighbors, or make some nice unofficial pocket parks once nature plants trees in them.
-- aem sends, ranting.....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Unfortunately, this type of behavior seem to be growing.
Here in Florida, we are also being hit with a severe RE down turn, and many people cannot afford their mortgages and being foreclosed on. Many of those are people who could not afford their mortgages and probably should never have purchased a home to begin with, but there are also some who could afford their mortgage and insurances, but did not anticipate home owner association fees shooting up the roof.
I have a friend who's condo building is now at 60% vacancy, many were owners who walked away or never moved in. However they have to continue to pay for security guards, landscaping, swimming pool, elevator maintenance etc...many of those are signed contracts and must be paid, but less owners means your portion is now significantly higher, and her HOA fee is higher than her mortgage!!!
There is also a growing number of what they now called "Strategic Defaults". People who walked not because they cannot afford but simply because their house is now worth less than the amount they owed. They projected in Florida alone about 28% of the defaults are strategic. They computed that by looking at those who defaulted, how many of them are current on car payments, credit cards etc...and only defaulting on mortgages. I even saw some newspaper articles about those people who strategic defaulted needing counseling help to overcome their guilt about not paying their mortgages. This is just insane, people who walked away from their obligations and now they need counseling?
Opinion varies, but it is clear that due to the economy, the mortgage defaultors will be able to rebuild their credits much sooner than a normal bankcruptcy. Some says 2 years. It seems that because it's considered "norm and understandable", this is not as bad as the traditional bankcruptcy filing.
I have visited a few foreclosed on homes. Sellers walked away and they had to blame it on someone else except themselves, so yes, I see glass windows broken, floor tiled cracked, walls ripped, basically the realtors told me a lot of people destroyed their home before they walked as a way to "stick it to the banks". Now the banks are stuck with these properties, they cannot be sold conventionally as some of them are inhabitable so the bank asks for cash only offers since there is no way the new buyer can get a loan from another bank for it.
It's a total mess.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Steve wrote:

Why don't you sell the drywall, trim, siding, flooring, heating system, toilet and sinks, studs and anything else you can dismantle.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.