Bratt Member Username: Bratt
Post Number: 560 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 9:30 am: | |
Okay, so the house next door foreclosed last month. The lights and gas were cut off and there were the big locks on all of the doors. Last night I noticed that the air conditioning was going in the house. I went outside to walk around and all of the lights were on in the basement, but they made sure that all of the lights were off on the main floor. I asked the neighbors if they saw anything, and one neighbor said that they saw a young girl around 13 years old running to the side door earlier, and the police was at the side of the house having an abandoned car towed. What are the laws regarding squatters and the procedures on getting them out? |
Quozl Member Username: Quozl
Post Number: 987 Registered: 07-2005
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 10:37 am: | |
In Michigan, "adverse possession" (sometimes known as "squatter's rights") can be claimed by a person who has occupied another person's property in an "exclusive, open, adverse, continuous manner for a period of 15 years." Likewise, a "prescriptive easement" can be claimed by a person who has used another person's property in the same manner as adverse possession, except that the exclusivity element is not required. OK, what does this legalese mean? First, the 15 years: this is a statute of limitation that means that after 15 years, the legal owner cannot bring a court action to evict someone either occupying or using their land. But here is the answer to your question: In Michigan, a state law, Michigan Compiled Laws chapter 600, section 5821 (MCL 600.5821) says that the statute of limitation does not apply to the state (subsection 1) or a municipality (subsection 2) which means that the State of Michigan can evict someone squatting on their property, anytime. So, IF the land is indeed owned by the government, the neighbors can fence it for 50 years and it wouldn't make any difference they can still be evicted or ejected. Here is the Statute, MCL 600.5821:
quote:(1) Actions for the recovery of any land where the state is a party are not subject to the periods of limitations, or laches. However, a person who could have asserted claim to title by adverse possession for more than 15 years is entitled to seek any other equitable relief in an action to determine title to the land. (2) Actions brought by any municipal corporations for the recovery of the possession of any public highway, street, alley, or any other public ground are not subject to the periods of limitations. (3) The periods of limitations prescribed for personal actions apply equally to personal actions brought in the name of the people of this state, or in the name of any officer, or otherwise for the benefit of this state, subject to the exceptions contained in subsection (4). (4) Actions brought in the name of the state of Michigan, the people of the state of Michigan, or any political subdivision of the state of Michigan, or in the name of any officer or otherwise for the benefit of the state of Michigan or any political subdivision of the state of Michigan for the recovery of the cost of maintenance, care, and treatment of persons in hospitals, homes, schools, and other state institutions are not subject to the statute of limitations and may be brought at any time without limitation, the provisions of any statute notwithstanding. |
Islandman Member Username: Islandman
Post Number: 724 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 10:47 am: | |
Or:
|
Buddyinrichmond Member Username: Buddyinrichmond
Post Number: 192 Registered: 02-2004
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 11:01 am: | |
quote:So, IF the land is indeed owned by the government, the neighbors can fence it for 50 years and it wouldn't make any difference they can still be evicted or ejected. Unless the overly sympathetic council gets wind of it. |
Dougw Member Username: Dougw
Post Number: 1807 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 12:17 pm: | |
As far as getting them out, do you know if the property is still in its redemption period, or is it officially bank owned now? If it's still in the redemption period, it might be trickier to evict someone, especially if they are the original tenant/owner (understandably). Although from what you describe, I'm guessing they are newcomers. Anyhow, I would suggest calling the bank and letting them know about the problem, and at least confirm with them that no one is supposed to be in the house. After that, try calling the police or work with your neighborhood association/block club to get the police to come out. Another option is to check with the bank to see if they are still paying for electricity, and tell them to get the electricity turned off. The house will be a lot less appealing to squatters if there is no free electricity. Of course, sometimes it's not easy to get help from a bank, as we talked about here: https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/107211/105737.html |
6nois Member Username: 6nois
Post Number: 384 Registered: 11-2006
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 12:19 pm: | |
Squatters can have a positive effect. If that is the persons one source of housing they are going to protect it. Looting of materials mechanical and architectural and arson on a house with a squatter is lower than an empty house. So I would say it isn't that bad. |
Dougw Member Username: Dougw
Post Number: 1808 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 1:27 pm: | |
I guess it depends on the squatters. Hypothetically, if some squatters came in and acted like they belonged there, fixing things up a bit, mowing the lawn etc., as a neighbor I'd be happy to let them stay and I certainly wouldn't rat them out. Unfortunately with housing in Detroit as cheap as it is right now, pretty much anyone with the wherewithall to maintain a house also has the wherewithall to afford to rent or even buy their own home, often for as little as $5000, which can be done even on minimum wage. A very different situation than say, San Fransisco or a lot of other major cities. |
Abracadabra Member Username: Abracadabra
Post Number: 52 Registered: 04-2007
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 4:13 pm: | |
Islandman, they are safe squatting there. Everybody knows that the ED-209 cannot go down stairs! |
Islandman Member Username: Islandman
Post Number: 726 Registered: 08-2004
| Posted on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 4:43 pm: | |
Touche, A. Quite true. |
Bratt Member Username: Bratt
Post Number: 561 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 1:35 pm: | |
I have been watching them. Alot of traffic in and out. I think it may be a prostitution ring. |
Psip Member Username: Psip
Post Number: 1968 Registered: 04-2005
| Posted on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 1:52 pm: | |
Lights on, AC on, hmmm, maybe a maryjane farm? |
Bulletmagnet Member Username: Bulletmagnet
Post Number: 855 Registered: 01-2007
| Posted on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 2:43 pm: | |
Islandman, I love it! LOL! |
Bratt Member Username: Bratt
Post Number: 562 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Monday, July 23, 2007 - 9:56 am: | |
Well...they are gone! 4 cop cars showed up and escorted them out. It seems that they had a fake lease and everything. But when the cop asked to see her house keys, she didn't have any. The cop made sure to tell her that the house belonged to police officer....so they got their garbage bag of clothes and left. |
Trainman Member Username: Trainman
Post Number: 455 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Monday, July 23, 2007 - 9:32 pm: | |
Does anyone know? Do squatters rights apply to the Livonia SMART buses? The homeless have claimed them for over 15 years as a way to keep warm on sub zero winter nights. And now they are gone. Is it not wrong to take away the shelter of those who really do need a warm place to stay? Is taking away the SMART bus seats immoral? Please answer my question, if you are a lawyer or know the laws enough to give an intelligent answer and back it up with facts as possible. |
Trainman Member Username: Trainman
Post Number: 456 Registered: 04-2006
| Posted on Monday, July 23, 2007 - 9:40 pm: | |
The land that Wal-Mart built on in Livonia was a federally funded bus shelter and the adverse possession laws do apply but can't be proved. Thus, I changed my website to omit this. But, it is true that the Livonia city council did indeed give this land away to Wal-Mart in the name of low wages and hefty pay raises for themselves. The timing was just right to keep Detroit resident away from the new Wal-Mart which cheated the city of Detroit out of very valuable land that was used by both DDOT and SMART. This land was easily worth over a Million dollars and was just given to Wal-Mart. This is Corporate Welfare. So, please consider voting NO next August 2010 to get this land back and return it to the city of Detroit. Also, we can stop the Billion dollar new downtown Detroit freeway by voting NO. Also, the new I-75 freeway money comes from shutting down public buses to support the trucking industry thus a NO vote means to stop bus funds siphoned off for more and larger trucks serving all the Wal-Marts. These stores are almost always built in cornfields and forests but why should Wal-Mart officials care? It's big profits that count and not protecting our children's future. Wal-Mart came to Livona and destroyed a bus shelter and they know this and just look the other way. It's your right, so vote NO or YES next August 2010. Your YES vote without a fight to get the land back in Livonia means you support Wal-Mart's vision of more cars and trucks and low wages. So, enjoy your low prices that come at the cost of more people living in dumpsters and under freeway overpasses. (Message edited by Trainman on July 23, 2007) |
Dougw Member Username: Dougw
Post Number: 1813 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Monday, July 23, 2007 - 10:16 pm: | |
Shut up. |
Dougw Member Username: Dougw
Post Number: 1814 Registered: 11-2003
| Posted on Monday, July 23, 2007 - 10:20 pm: | |
Bratt-- Hey, that's not bad. Did you call the police? I guess if the house is owned by a police officer that probably helped with getting them to respond. ;) |
Bratt Member Username: Bratt
Post Number: 564 Registered: 01-2004
| Posted on Tuesday, July 24, 2007 - 10:05 am: | |
No Doug I didn't...the police officer who used to live there made a phone call. I guess it was the police looking out for one of their own. |
Trying_2_stay Member Username: Trying_2_stay
Post Number: 1 Registered: 08-2007
| Posted on Tuesday, August 07, 2007 - 5:39 pm: | |
I have a problem with squatters too. Except they have a key because the person who used to live there gave it to them. The house was taken for non payment of taxes and now the county owns it. I called them and they said they don't do anything with the house as far as keeping people out of it. To make matters worse these people have utilities on illegally. I called DTE who said that they are investigating it (for 4 mos now). If that were us not paying our bill our lights would be off now. I'm fed up! |