top Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Frustrated Owner Bulldozes Home Ahead Of Foreclosure

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Frustrated Owner Bulldozes Home Ahead Of Foreclosure

    February 20, 2010

    MOSCOW, Ohio -- Like many people, Terry Hoskins has had troubles with his bank. But his solution to foreclosure might be unique. Hoskins said he's been in a struggle with RiverHills Bank over his Clermont County home for nearly a decade, a struggle that was coming to an end as the bank began foreclosure proceedings on his $350,000 home.

    "When I see I owe $160,000 on a home valued at $350,000, and someone decides they want to take it – no, I wasn't going to stand for that, so I took it down," Hoskins said.

    Hoskins said the Internal Revenue Service placed liens on his carpet store and commercial property on state Route 125 after his brother, a one-time business partner, sued him.

    The bank claimed his home as collateral, Hoskins said, and went after both his residential and commercial properties.

    "The average homeowner that can't afford an attorney or can fight as long as we have, they don't stand a chance," he said.

    Hoskins said he'd gotten a $170,000 offer from someone to pay off the house, but the bank refused, saying they could get more from selling it in foreclosure.

    Hoskins told News 5's Courtis Fuller that he issued the bank an ultimatum. "I'll tear it down before I let you take it," Hoskins told them. And that's exactly what Hoskins did.

    The Moscow man used a bulldozer two weeks ago to level the home he'd built, and the sprawling country home is now rubble, buried under a coating of snow.

    "As far as what the bank is going to get, I plan on giving them back what was on this hill exactly (as) it was," Hoskins said. "I brought it out of the ground and I plan on putting it back in the ground."

    Hoskins' business in Amelia is scheduled to go up for auction on March 2, and he told Fuller he's considering leveling that building, too.

    RiverHills Bank declined to comment on the situation, but Hoskins said his actions were intended to send a message.

    "Well, to probably make banks think twice before they try to take someone's home, and if they are going to take it wrongly, the end result will be them tearing their house down like I did mine," Hoskins said.

    Hoskins said he's heard from people all over the country since his story first aired Thursday, and he said most have been supportive.

    He said he sought legal counsel before tearing down his home and understands the possible consequences, but he has never doubted his decision once he made it.

    "When I knew I was going to lose it, I decided to take it down," Hoskins said.

    http://www.wlwt.com/news/22600154/detail.html
    Case Closed > 2/08/2010

    #2
    Wow... Just wow... I'm curious what is going to happen to him. Criminal charges maybe?
    I am an attorney, but I am just not your attorney.
    As such, any statement is not intended to create an attorney/client relationship.

    Comment


      #3
      Awesome.
      Once you lose everything you're free to do anything.
      Filed 10/06/2009
      341 11/12/2009
      Discharged 1/15/2010

      Comment


        #4
        It's a non-consensual lien, so I'm wondering if there is any criminal part of what he did.
        Chapter 7 (No Asset/Non-Consumer) Filed (Pro Se) 7/08 (converted from Chapter 13 - 2/10)
        Status: (Auto) Discharged and Closed! 5/10
        Visit My BKForum Blog: justbroke's Blog

        Any advice provided is not legal advice, but simply the musings of a fellow bankrupt.

        Comment


          #5
          It will be interesting to see how it plays out. He did say he considered the possible consequences so I guess he's prepared for the worst case scenario.
          Case Closed > 2/08/2010

          Comment


            #6
            It will be interesting to watch. I can imagine all sorts of ramifications, potential problems he may not have thought out.

            Homeowners insurance will certainly not cover any of this, and they might attempt some kind of action against him. Whomever holds the notes for his home and his land--if he doesn't own it free and clear--probably has some kind of grounds for actions against this person for destruction of property. What about the local laws and ordinances of where this address is? Potentially the Codes Enforcement and Property Appraiser's office can get in the act.

            This type of frustration is understandable, though the solution is extreme.
            "To go bravely forward is to invite a miracle."

            "Worry is the darkroom where negatives are formed."

            Comment


              #7
              They are taking his home and his income. What does he have to lose? The Deed in his hand, he owns that house 100%. Now being collateral in the mortgage, as long as he pays the mortgage he cannot be sued for the destruction. I don't think he intends to do this though. Now, he IS surrendering the house and the house is still there, on the ground. Codes? I don't know. If he is zoned Agriculture, he can do about anything. Even burn with a burn permit. Removal of farm buildings or even houses is permitted. We took down an old barn that was falling down. Permit? Why would I pay to take down my own barn?

              Again, there is much to say about "principle". I admire the guy.

              Personal note, in all my trouble with my adversary that caused us to bk, I considered that if he got a Judgment, my paid for car would be the only item he could levy. I would Publicly burn it to stop that from happening. So, I am sure this has crossed many peoples minds. Could be a great protest against unfair mortgage practices. Good for this guy. 'Hub
              If I knew it all, would I be here?? Hang in there = Retained attorney 8-06, Filed 12-28-07, Discharge 8-13-08, Finally CLOSED 11-3-09, 3-31-10 AP Dismissed, Informed by incompetent lawyer of CLOSED status, October 14, 2010.

              Comment


                #8
                Hoskins said he'd gotten a $170,000 offer from someone to pay off the house, but the bank refused, saying they could get more from selling it in foreclosure.
                This is what pits me off about these banks and their greed. Much of our defaults and bk's are caused by greedy banks raising CC credit and lowering limits, then charging over limit penalties. Does not make sense to me. 'Hub
                If I knew it all, would I be here?? Hang in there = Retained attorney 8-06, Filed 12-28-07, Discharge 8-13-08, Finally CLOSED 11-3-09, 3-31-10 AP Dismissed, Informed by incompetent lawyer of CLOSED status, October 14, 2010.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Not really sure what criminal consequences there would be?

                  Comment


                    #10
                    I inferred from the article that he had owned his home outright. That the Bank put a lien on it -- non-consensual -- when problems started happening with his business because he had business debt at the Bank.

                    I don't see how he is any trouble. What he did do, though, is perhaps put himself in a position where he will owe hundreds of thousands of dollars of (potentitally) non-dischargeable debt... but that's about it.
                    Chapter 7 (No Asset/Non-Consumer) Filed (Pro Se) 7/08 (converted from Chapter 13 - 2/10)
                    Status: (Auto) Discharged and Closed! 5/10
                    Visit My BKForum Blog: justbroke's Blog

                    Any advice provided is not legal advice, but simply the musings of a fellow bankrupt.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Interesting scenario.
                      Lien value 160,000
                      Home offer 170,000

                      Bank refuses, saying it's worth more?? Then I'm assuming there was a mortgage or another lien on the property making the 170k a short sale, otherwise why would the bank have any issue with the sale?
                      filed chapter 13..confirmed...converted to chapter 7...DISCHARGED!

                      Comment


                        #12
                        There is absolutely no criminal aspect to this. Property and money dispute, clearly within the realms of civil law.
                        Filed Chapter 7 08/06/09, unsecured debt of $109,000
                        341 Meeting 09/09/09
                        Discharged 11/12/09
                        Closed 12/14/09

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I predict that acts of frustration/desperation will be more common in the coming year, as more and more homeowners are stownwalled by their banks who are loud (from a PR standpoint) about having "programs to help" but actually can't do it. In my own area, we have had two fires that burned homes to the ground. Arson charges have been filed against both homeowners. Each of them were severely underwater in their mortgages.

                          I used to joke about "just light a match" when my financial problemsdue to sever loss of income snowballed and were compounded by a home that's worth $150,000 less than I owe on it and nearly 40%less than what I paid for it. Not any more. If anything happened to it, nobody would ever believe it was an accident!

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Ironically the "greater good" might come from a permanent reduction of supply in housing.

                            The mayor of Detroit has proposed shrinking the city and relocating people from distressed neighborhoods to be closer together in order to better provide core services over a smaller area.
                            filed chapter 13..confirmed...converted to chapter 7...DISCHARGED!

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Now supposed if he'd burnt the house down.. different story... because the Fire Marshal wiould create a new criminal charge? (Destruction of one's own property which might affect other public land?)..

                              Comment

                              bottom Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X