Big Island house built on wrong lot faces additional obstacle

The case of a house built on the wrong lot is set to return to court this week on Hawaii Island. Multiple parties are being sued by the owner of the lot where the house was supposed to be built. The contractor is being sued. The county is being sued. The owner of the lot, who one day learned a house suddenly was erected on her lot, is also being sued.

[@Happycamper808]

“Each accuse the other of Not making a reasonable offer” bruh you straight up trespassed and vandalized her property.

[@SmallSpoonBrigade]

Yes, they can both accuse each other of whatever they want, but objectively the owner of the land is in the right here. She doesn't have to switch lots to cover them. Real estate is a rarity in the sense that two pieces of property are never completely the same and she has every right to refuse a switch if in her eyes the other property isn't as good.

[@maxwebster7572]

@@SmallSpoonBrigade The property lined up with the stars and her horoscope numbers.

[@mattfarahsmillionmilelexus]

@@maxwebster7572 A bit cosmic, but her choice nonetheless. Unless, that is, the original owner materializes and kicks everyone off what is legally still their property.

[@xenadu02]

Hawaii only gives one year to redeem a tax deed so that's done with at this point. The property is fully hers now. Even if that weren't true and the delinquent former owner did redeem the deed... they'd be in the same position of either getting a free house or requiring the developer to tear it down.

[@robertscheu9771]

you forgot that they actively refused to get a surveyor to confirm they have the right lot beofre even beginning their vandalism

[@alphonsoboutondo9004]

She made a reasonable offer. Get the house off her lot. Move it, tear it down, whatever, just restore the land to the original condition.

[@SmallSpoonBrigade]

Yes, considering that she didn't have a contract with the developer and wasn't even in talks with them to build a house there, the reasonable offer was for them to undo what they did.

[@jeffjones5591]

@@SmallSpoonBrigade and the lot is not even legally hers. The original owners can swoop in and claim the land if they pay the back taxes. She tried to scoop in on someone's land by buying from a land auction, now she is getting that karma.

[@SmallSpoonBrigade]

@@jeffjones5591 No, they potentially can reclaim it, but there's no guarantee they will within the time frame. There's no karma here, it's a developer doing something incredibly stupid and trying to get out of it. The property is currently hers, as in she holds the deed to it. It's sad that so many people are blaming her for something that's not her fault.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

​@@jeffjones5591 the journo made some confusing statements, but the property is legally hers. It's too late for the original owners to pay the taxes and redeem the property, it's already been sold at a tax auction.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

@@SmallSpoonBrigade the developer is arguing that she's benefiting from unjust enrichment. If you get something of value by accident then the courts could find that you owe money for that thing. The chick wants the house, but the only way she can get it is to insist that she wants the home torn down and the lot in original condition because then she can't be accused of trying to benefit from unjust enrichment. If the developer thinks the court is going to order him to pay to demo the house and rehab the property, he'll get his attorney to offer to just give the house to the lady in a settlement so he doesn't have to pay to remove it. Then she has a free house. The chick is saying she can't accept any other lot because of her astrological sign has som relationship to the current lot, but that's bullshit. She bought the lot because it was dirt cheap at a tax auction. She made up the atrology bullshit and won't accept another lot because she desperately wants that house.

[@danthompson6067]

The reasonable course of action here is the builder restores the land to how he found it. The land owner did nothing wrong and has no obligation to help out the builder.

[@stanmuneoka8117]

Sue the builder to remove the home, it was illegally built on her land. At no time is she responsible for paying any of the building costs or taxes

[@Ahki_Ethan]

Why do you think they’re in court

[@steveurbach3093]

But she owes the State for Property Taxes on the value of the house as in most States. Her property, must be her Tax Bill. Free money, so the State has no incentive to stop that source.

[@patrickday4206]

​@@steveurbach3093 not if the permits are invalid and it was done illegally

[@ebf1003]

The developer is John K Mendonca from Mililani Hawaii. They need to be named and shamed!

[@neilkurzman4907]

Suing cost money

[@Langhorstiness]

Pour new foundation on the correct lot. Move the house. Demolish the old foundation. Why is this even in court?!?

[@oweya342]

Very good idea why anyone else thought of it? After moving the house to the right lot, reclaim the land on her lot by removing the foundation and replanting the property

[@ripvanrevs]

EXACTLY The were moving houses all the time over 70 years ago. Can't be that difficult.

[@Bonjour-World]

I suspect that it is a slab foundation integral to the single story structure.

[@petera5560]

@@ripvanrevs You guys don't have a clue, slab foundations aren't normally moved, it's diffcult and expensive, your thinking about pier and beam or basement type houses.

[@Langhorstiness]

@@Bonjour-World It's a good guess but I doubt it. Houses in Hawaii are typically built raised way off the ground with wooden posts and a sort of crawlspace under a wooden floor. Ones like the one in the video are typically concrete slab on grade and then wood framed above. Puna is on the rainy side so there is no way it has a wooden main floor - it's just sitting on the slab. All they have to do is open up the interior bottoms of the walls and unbolt the anchor bolts holding the sill plate on the slab. House movers do this all the time.

[@alan8887]

Compromise? Why would the woman have to compromise? The house was built on her land illegally. The house needs to be removed and the land reclaimed.

[@vietcongbuondanbannuocphan1791]

They were trying to steal the woman land, then claim she is unreasonable..

[@yolyprog2561]

Exactly

[@King_TuTT]

I'd keep the house. it's brand new. lot just went from $20k value to $320K in value with that house.

[@wendys6438]

​@@King_TuTT she doesn't want that house. She doesn't want to pay the property taxes on that house.

[@willdejong7763]

She doesn't "have" to compromise, but she might "want" to reconsider. If the previous owner of the land shows up with $20k they can pay her back and retake the property, new house and all. On the other hand, if she compromises then she gets the other land free and clear, with the title, and no one can take it away from her.

[@808ecobeast7]

She wants her lot, what is so hard? The developer is bonded and has insurance, what is so hard? The developer messed up, take responsibility, what's so hard?

[@mikethespike7579]

What's so hard? The human weakness of pride and inability to accept having made a mistake.

[@alexsolo4085]

Pride. The worst of the seven deadly sins

[@ebf1003]

The developer suing her is John K Mendonca from Mililani Hawaii. Name and shame!

[@ThumbdownMan]

There is one man in charge: the developer is a narcissist.

[@timobrien2586]

His bond most likely will only cover a fraction of the cost to make this woman whole again, and the insurance company is no doubt helping the developer fight the woman's claim. Lawyers always win in these cases.

[@chazman4461]

They built this house on this lot purposely knowing it did not belong to the contractor or owner of the new house. This day and age, iit is not hard to look up and find ownership of the lots. That is why the contractor sued the actual lot owner. They were trying to bully them out of their lot. This is stealing property. This is a criminal issue. Not a civil issue. The contractor and whoever else conspired in this need to go to prison. This was not an "oops".

[@someguy7993]

The police will not touch this with a twenty foot pole. This is a civil matter. I know, I buy real estate from tax auctions and resell it, and I have been through a similar situation.

[@chansoopark9953]

Why does this woman have to go through this stress? She just wants her land as it was. Just take the house down as she wish.

[@thaimassage23]

Arson?

[@janofb]

Karma - the original owner of the lot is going to pay the back taxes and take her lot away from her. In fact, if I was the developer, I'd fund it for them.

[@paullentz1972]

@@janofb WTF are you talking about? She has owned that lot of land for a few years now. It is HER land! Some DOUCHE developer cant just JACK UP your land from you.

[@rynait]

@@janofb I do not think that is how forfeiture real estate auction works. once property is sold, new owner pays off the tax (difference of bid and remainder tax owed). I suspect the problem; [tax defaulted] property is "acquired in earnest" and divided by developer into lots (this woman bought one of the lots). This means tax lien is not removed until ENTIRE lots are sold, and tax debt recouped. This means former owner can still pay off the tax and retake entire property with all sold off lots and houses on it. I am sure bulldoze houses that developer wasted money on.

[@genespell4340]

​@@janofbif she bought it at a county auction, there can't be any back taxes. The county accepts the purchase price and applies it to the taxes owed. If there isn't enough to cover the taxes, the county writes the remaining taxes off. The developers have deep pockets and are trying to crush her. If I were rich, I would be contacting her attorneys and pay for her to sue everybody involved. The county inspectors should have known the house was on the wrong lot from the get go.

[@jaymeez]

She didn’t ask for the house. She didn’t contract for the build. It was done due to others errors and she is giving them the ability to remove the house. I wouldn’t be so nice. I would simply tell them to stay off my property and that house that they put on my property belongs to me and if they want it back I charge 100k per day to access my property. Simple as that! F Em!

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

and if you did that you would be in court being sued for unjust enrichment just like this lady is. But you would lose because your actions would have proven that you were attempting to benefit from unjust enrichment

[@stanmuneoka8117]

Lawsuit for them illegally building a house on her property is extortion and outrageous. There's no reasonable offer if it was the developers mistake.

[@neilkurzman4907]

No, it’s not outrageous that somebody wants to use the law to minimize their liability. And yes, they could offer her enough money. Almost Everyone has their price.

[@SmallSpoonBrigade]

@@neilkurzman4907 Except that they have no leg to stand on. There is no legal basis for this suit.

[@neilkurzman4907]

@@SmallSpoonBrigade Actually, the builder sued everybody not just her. And while she did nothing wrong, it may cost her a lot of money to defend her rights. And at the end, she may get her land restored, but not necessarily get her legal bills paid. It’s unfortunate for her

[@stanmuneoka8117]

Last I heard extortion is illegal right

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

"Lawsuit for them illegally building a house on her property is extortion and outrageous." Bullshit. You idiots just have no understanding of the concept of money so it doesn't even dawn on you that maybe the reason why this woman won't exchange lots is because she wants the house, not an empty lot. Houses have monetary value, you morons, and some people understand that concept even if you don't. She bought the lot because it was dirt cheap at a tax auction and has probably never even set foot on it. She's giving a completely bogus excuse that she can't trade lots because of the way the stars align with the property.

[@RITAD1]

This poor woman has been through the ringer with the developer. Take the loss and return her land! This is so wrong.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

the chick deserves it. she needs to pay something for the house she's trying to get

[@timtambornino5297]

They can move the house to a near by lot at their builders expense! they were attempting to steal a better lot. They figured they could offer a lesser lot because no one would want to spend all that time in court. They owe the lot owner for every blade of grass that was moved. I would ask for legal fees too.

[@The.Hawaiian.Kingdom]

The lot that the house was built on actually ISNT a better lot though, simply because it has a clouded title. That means if the owner EVER wants to sell it, even if she builds a home, the new buyer will have to pay in cash up front in full, because title insurance companies will not insure properties with clouded titles and lenders won’t give you a loan if a title company won’t insure it. If I were her, I would’ve taken the other lot if it had title insurance and yelled “no backsies” as soon as pen hit paper.

[@joshuahudson2170]

@@The.Hawaiian.Kingdom But you are not her. Alas for she believes in astrology.

[@The.Hawaiian.Kingdom]

@@joshuahudson2170 Is THAT why she wants to keep the lot so bad?

[@joshuahudson2170]

@@The.Hawaiian.Kingdom Either that or she really likes tropical trees. We don't know for certain.

[@lindapindabelinda3570]

Why is this even in court? The builder should’ve said oops, sorry, and removed all trace of construction ASAP.

[@jacknoe4024]

Follow the money. At this point, the builders are doing all they can to avoid eating the cost, which, unfortunately, is the only right thing they can do. They made a mistake, and they are fighting tooth and nail to not have to pay, otherwise they're out the cost of a house, plus demo costs of that house, PLUS the cost of the house being built on the correct lot. They effectively are trying to avoid paying the cost to build a house twice and demolish it. It's messed up and they need to just take the L and move on, but they won't.

[@Baebon6259]

@@jacknoe4024 it gonna cost them even more when they fight it out in court. Chances are they gonna lose since they built their stuffs on someone else property. It ain't gonna end well. They gonna eat the lawsuit cost and removal cost. That is definitely not economical to the developer.

[@superdave8248]

@@jacknoe4024 They could move the house to a new foundation. But they would still have to restore the property to its original condition. Which would include the cost of planting mature trees back on the property. And that is where the real kicker is.

[@jacknoe4024]

@@superdave8248 I hadn't even considered how much they would have to pay to restore the land. Oh yeah, those developers are screwed, haha.

[@joshuahudson2170]

The cost of replacing mature trees combined with the loss of the construction funds for the house appear to be pushing the contractor into bankruptcy.

[@cirezane]

I’ve been following this case & it’s the developer that screwed this up & the developer that is suing everyone.... they screwed up so they are suing everyone... wtf

[@mikedavison4313]

The last few seconds sums it up nicely. No matter what happens, the lawyers win.

[@Mike-zk7rh]

only winners are the lawyers

[@winniethepoohandeeyore2]

Why is this even an issue? THEY built the house on the wrong lot. THEY are responsible for removing the home, turning HER lot back to where it was.

[@BurningSmith]

This is the least they have to do. Compensation for the stress she had and the time and money she already spend on that BS should be considered aswell.

[@steveniemyer9288]

This story makes zero sense. The original owner did not pay taxes on the lot and it went to auction. The lady from California bought the lot at Auction for $20k. A developer then built a house on this lot thinking it was a different lot. Now per state law, the original owner can come back and lay claim to the lot. So who currently owns the lot?

[@johnrobertson7583]

The reporter mis-spoke several times, what you referenced included...another was the confusing way he described the offer from the house owner around the 1:00 mark...

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

your error is in expecting a journalist to know what he's talking about. The owner before the tax auction is irrelevant. The lady that bought the lot is the owner and she owns the title free and clear. The title issues arose when the developer tried to sell the home because the developer doesn't have the title to the land

[@tracyalan7201]

It seems silly like all the commenters mentioned. The woman who owns the lot is not responsible for the construction. She wasn't even aware of it. It was mentioned by the developer that the person who wanted the construction didn't want to pay for a surveyor on the boundaries. Now, I don't know how long the construction of the building took, but it seems strange that I hadn't heard if the developer ever visited the site while the builder was contracted to build it. Did the developer visit it? Who goes to build a new structure and never visits the project as it is being built? Does the developer not know his own property boundaries? Why would a builder have a surveyor verify the boundaries of the project that the developer did not want to pay for? He's contracted to build , which he did. Is it in the contract to validate boundaries that the developer wasn't paying for and didn't want? If he did so, he would be paying out of pocket. It sounds like the builder followed the developer's orders, so why is it his fault for constructing on the wrong property? Didn't the developer not want to get a surveyor or did the developer visit the site once started? Usually on undeveloped land, it needs clearence, grading and such on location of construction, was none of that reviewed by the developer? It seems it more of the developer's responsibility, as the county is not going to validate the surveyor's rights, they approve plans on the property submitted.

[@minhduong1484]

They were supposed to build on the lot next door. From what I gathered and footage, the area is mostly undeveloped so one lot is not distinguishable from another. There is much we don't know about what happened with the developer, builder, client, etc. What is clear is the lot owner had nothing to do with any of it. The fact that she's being dragged into this mess is the problem.

[@rynait]

@@minhduong1484 defaulted TAXES. see my comment on what i suspected is real problem.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

"it seems strange that I hadn't heard if the developer ever visited the site while the builder was contracted to build it. Did the developer visit it?" Maybe, but it doesn't matter. They would go to the lot the contractor was building the home and assume it was the right one. They wouldn't bring a surveyor along with them just to check on the construction. The legal principle here is the concept of unjust enrichment. If someone hands you a million dollar watch by accident when you bought a 40 dollar watch from them, then the person that sold it to you can sue you for unjust enrichment when they realize their error. Our laws say that if you receive something of value by accident then you have to compensate the person that accidentally gave it to you. The developer essentially damaged her lot so they offered her an undamaged lot in exchange, but she wants the developer to pay for the cost of building and removing the house and that cost is far higher than the value of her property. The chick just wants the house. Her reason for why she can't trade is an obvious lie.

[@minhduong1484]

@@jimbeam-ru1my The lot owner has said many times she wants the house removed. She said this to the court that she wants her lot restored to the condition before the house was there. Therefore your unjust enrichment argument is not only silly but factually untrue. Also the fact that it will cost the developer a lot of money to remove a house they built on the wrong lot is not her legal or financial responsibility. The developer wants to force her to buy a house she did not want.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

@@minhduong1484 she has said she wants the home removed because she can't admit that she wants it or the court will see that as unjust enrichment. If she keeps demanding to tear the house down the developer will eventually offer to let her keep the home if she releases him from liability so he doesn't have to pay another 70k to tear it down.

[@jeffreyc6508]

Remove the home by so and so date or it is considered abandoned, land owner gets to keep it!!

[@kpjaskie1]

She doesn't want it and it will cost her a lot of money to remove it. They need to remove it.

[@mydogjesus]

@@kpjaskie1 she wants it. she doesn't want to pay for it. (and rightly so) but trust me... she wants it.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

it can't be considered abandoned, it's on property that the developers don't have legal access to.

[@randumdude5824]

So basically any developer can “accidentally “build on the wrong property on purpose in order to claim someone’s land. It looks like the house is in fire prone area to me. Im not suggesting anyone go set it on fire.

[@everybuddy5924]

Most of Hawaii is in a fire prone area. If not from brush and trees then from Volcanoes

[@BenRias]

I'd bet money the developer KNEW the lot was incorrect but bec he really wanted that specific lot, he could force a sale by "accidentally" building there. That's why they keep pushing for the land swap.

[@johnrobertson7583]

Absolutely a valid scenario...

[@juju-xx5xn]

I wonder if there is a problem with the other lot that they keep insisting on the land swap?

[@everybuddy5924]

@@juju-xx5xn Not really, it could be that her lot has a better view and is larger size than the lot they are trying to offer her. The builder wants to do a straight trade without compensation for the less attractive and probably smaller lot. The the builder can then charge more for the lot and house.

[@doom4067]

I imagine they've done this before, but that this is the first time the lot owner didn't accept their "reasonable" offer.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

. You can't gain ownership of a lot by building on it. All you wind up with is a house you can't ever sell because the title can't be insured. This is just a residential tract in a neighborhood where all the lots are exactly the same, and he owns the lot next door. This isn't some high dollar real estate in an exclusive area. This was an obvious mistake and if you know the basics of home sales then you would know your opinion is just paranoia

[@davidhamm5626]

Move the house, and if it has a basement, dig it up...

[@appomattoxross6751]

The builders screwed up by not hiring a surveyor first. They screwed up again by building a house on the wrong lot. Now, they want someone else to take over their own mistake. Unbelievable.

[@yolyprog2561]

Exactly right

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

the lot owner is being unreasonable because she wants a free house. The developer fucked up and offered her full compensation for damaging her lot but she refused because she wants the house.

[@appomattoxross6751]

@@jimbeam-ru1my She wants it torn down.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

@@appomattoxross6751 no she doesn't. She wants the home. The ridiculous lie she's made up as the reason she can't swap lots shows her true motivations

[@appomattoxross6751]

@@jimbeam-ru1my The lot use to be non-farm and non-residential. Now she'll have to pay property tax which I don't think she's prepared to do.

[@bruceconnolly1362]

Compromise? It’s her land… bye house

[@Maximus01776]

This is what wrong and bad reporting looks like, this guy is a disgrace as a reporter

[@doom4067]

And without a single detail of what he did wrong. Good job.

[@TiredOldMann]

The house owner should pay to Move the house to the lot next door . Problemed solved .

[@yolyprog2561]

Exactly

[@everybuddy5924]

The house owner is screwed over by the developer as well

[@SanchoSanto]

This is all the developers' fault for not hiring a surveyor. Why is the judge even allowing this case to move forward.

[@doom4067]

Possibly to establish precedent against developers. I doubt this is the first time they've done it, but it's probably the first time the lot owner didn't accept their "reasonable" offer.

[@johnrobertson7583]

Reporter mis-spoke at 1:05...he said "The owner of the lot where the house was supposed to have been built...etc..." which is confusing...he should have said "The lot where the house was supposed to have been built is being offered to the owner of the lot the house is on...."

[@caelestigladii]

Building on the wrong lot never happens. That is not a mistake. It is a deliberate move to try to steal the lot.

[@jonmccormick8683]

-You would think someone somewhere would have caught this.

[@plem7210]

With the amount lawyers charge. Nobody would do this on purpose. Multiple stories of people demolishing the wrong house also.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

you can't gain ownership of land by building on it, you just lose ownership of whatever you built.

[@christopher88719]

Why?! They illegally entered her land and built on it, they should be responsible for returning the land to its prior condition. That should be it, end of discussion.

[@sh4969]

If that happened in UK the house is torn down.

[@zamis21]

SO, the owner bought the lot at Auction for 20,000. and has no clear title?? How does that happen? Where is the title company at ?

[@juju-xx5xn]

Tax sales are different. I would never buy anything in a tax sale.

[@everybuddy5924]

Even if you buy from a tax sale, there can still be a lein holder on the property. Think of a county/city as a HOA. HOA's will sell houses if you dont pay the fines they impose on you for violations of the HOA rules. But that does not clear the debt to the lender who holds the title.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

the journalist is an idiot. she has a clear title. He was just handed some info on title insurance and tried to pretend he understood what he was talking about.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

@@everybuddy5924you can check the title of an empty lot before you buy it.

[@piperdiepholz4356]

It’s not her fault the contractor was an idiot.

[@maxheadroom8097]

Rent a dozer and have a party

[@icturner23]

This case is ludicrous. You can’t just go around building houses wherever you want and then try to bully the land-owners into swapping to different plots they didn’t want.

[@grabruss]

I doubt you could build a house In Hawaii for $250/sqft. Probably more like $500/sqft

[@leiomalamasolomon7477]

Yes! Very true.

[@mrsparex]

It should be simple... The contractor made a big mistake. Tear it down, clean up the mess and apologize.

[@streakydrip8792]

Why is there a stalemate? This is clearly cut and dry, it’s her Land!! They messed up by not bringing out a surveyor and mistakenly built an entire house on someone else’s property.

[@mattmanc73]

If I owned a property and someone without my knowledge built a house on it by their own mistake and they want to argue with me about what is right they better be prepared to pay all my legal fees because I'm suing. I hope this lady comes out way ahead on this and gets every single penny of her legal bills paid for by the company who actually made the mistake.

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

I hope she's bankrupted by legal fees. the chick is a bottom feeder trying to rob the builder.

[@rtel123]

Moving a house across town is expensive, but moving it a few feet is affordable. Probably less than the lawyers fees in this court. No power lines to clear, no roads to close, etc.

[@sh0t0kan]

There's no guarantee of a clean title!? The land did not have a home on it when it was purchased.

[@bikeman1x11]

title wasnt the issue - lack of survey was

[@andrewalexander9492]

The lot was purchased in a tax auction, which is a cloud on the title. Former owners may have still have some legal claim to the parcel.

[@bikeman1x11]

@@andrewalexander9492 the owner had an empty lot so if the original owner reclaimed shed get her money back and be fine - now if the owner comes back theyll have a home on theor lot - plus how much can they owe in taxes for an empty unimproved lot- i beg borrow steal to get that property with a house

[@andrewalexander9492]

@@bikeman1x11 WHether or no she would get her money back kind of misses the point. The point is that a house, the ownership of whcih may be subject to court cases, built on a lot, the ownership of which might be subject to other court cases, for a different reason, is not as valuable as an equivalent house with a clean title, and no pending litigation.

[@bikeman1x11]

@@andrewalexander9492 of course but id say the original owner is likely out of the picture so the only question is what to do about the the house the careless contactors built omn the wrong lot- so does the woman who legitimately bought the lot at auction keep the house or should they move it or tear it down- the offer of an inferior lot isnt even in the equation.

[@mikeabney1214]

How did this even end up in court? they built the house illegally on her land. they have to make it right to her satisfaction, end of story. If that means demolishing a brand new house, then so be it.

[@gregoryjamesaustin]

It's not the lot owner's responsibility to compromise.

[@SmokinBuddha]

"The builder is entirely at fault and should be held accountable for their actions. They failed to conduct a proper survey of the property, which would have prevented them from building on the wrong land. It is my belief that the builder was aware of their mistake and intentionally attempted to claim land that did not belong to them, resulting in a dispute with the rightful owner."

[@patricksanders858]

No compromise! Thats her land. The other lot is of WAY LESS VALUE! SHE SHOULD SIMPLY RENT A BULLDOZER AND REMOVE THE HOUSE AND PAY THE FINE.

[@veerchasm1]

Who are the idiots that built a house ON THE WRONG LOT?!? If she doesn’t want the house she shouldn’t be forced to pay for it. Sounds like they tried suing her first which was dirty. They need to tear it down and restore the land

[@zebfox011]

Simple! The house had to be torn down and the contractor had to eat the loss! The property owner isn't liable at all for their mistakes!

[@daviddiehl-gy2sq]

You have 30 days to remove the house and restore the property to original condition. Or the property owner will Burn it down. Have the builder arrested for criminal trespass and distruction of private property. The crews arrested for trespass.

[@kyos8462]

She's Gunna get screwed. Big business IS what runs our country, not the government

[@peterbuckley3877]

There’s no argument in this case and the land owner shouldn’t be involved in anything apart from seeking a court order to remove the building from HER property. She doesn’t have to agree to a compromise to rectify the mistakes of others.

[@miguelperez-qk3no]

Welcome to America, what are the criminals get away with everything. I don't see any reason why a judge cannot say.. tear the house down

[@ronbeaubien]

The female owner of the land should not need to compromise at all. It is her land. End of story. The developer was completely in the wrong from the very beginning by building a house on land they didn't own. The developer should also be forced to pay any of the land owner's legal fees when all is said and done.

[@garrystubbs4891]

If she wins the case, she should make an offer for the property at 10% to 20% of the builders construction costs, so they don’t have to additionally incur the cost of demolition. In negotiating terms, it’s a big win / small win for both parties.

[@everybuddy5924]

No, cause she wants the property, otherwise she would have traded lots in the first place.

[@TheHermitHacker]

The core issue is something was done illegally on HER land. Tear the house down and clear her land as she's asked and pay her legal feeds. Take this as a lesson to do your do diligence before building someone else's land.

[@johnmca5643]

She doesn't have to compromise.

[@rollgali5292]

It bothers me how contractor built a house on wrong lot,,, I am still thinking,,,

[@Dwn2Race]

Developer and other Land owner are Scamming this Lady from CA!

[@kevinwest3689]

If I was her my chickens would be living in style.

[@Xlr8torZ28]

I work for a survey company. Stuff like this is why we will always be in business. Smart people call us to avoid situations like this.

[@BurningSmith]

let's say you got called and you told the builder to build on the wrong property, would you have to pay for all the damages that happend to her? House removal? Compensation for the builder?

[@74amodel]

Move the house it's done all the time

[@Kaniala-l7s]

she doesn't want that 'particular" style house lol, that's the real issue here. If she liked the house it would of been already been settled.

[@carolr7823]

@@Kaniala-l7s They can move the house to the next door lot.

[@drogan6]

House needs to be removed, plain and simple.

[@carolwhite6979]

Move the house to the right lot at the builders expense!

[@vlsice2024]

The value is there is none. The owner did not authorize for you to build her land.

[@DaBinChe]

That company just gonna have to take the hit. They screwed up, not the land owner. The one screwed up takes the hit.

[@karlgabrua]

Remove the home oooor!! Give the house for free. One is cheaper than the other at this point.

[@lesliefranklin1870]

So, the county auctions off property without clear title? That sounds like a recipe for another disaster. Shame on them.

[@everybuddy5924]

It was for the taxes owed to the city/county. It does not mean that the lien on the property is cleared as well. That is a separate issue.

[@mksd1236]

The fault (costs) must be on the ‘entity’ (developer) who actually built the house in the wrong place.

[@slothmarathonpromotions2470]

$20k for a lot sounds pretty nice. May have to look into some land auctions

[@Rantsack]

Developers NEVER see that they did anything wrong!

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

if they didn't know they did something wrong then they wouldn't have offered an identical lot next door.

[@Runehorn]

Not making a reasonable offer? Remove everything added and a complete restoration of the lot is the only reasonable conclusion. Or go to jail if you refuse.

[@3louminati]

Builder: We messed up! Here is 20k that you paid, same great deal you bought it for! Owner: No thanks, please remove your mistake from my property. Government: BOTH of you owe us unpaid taxes! Pay up or work it out, it’s not our problem our building permit department did not verify the details and allowed you to build. It’s like that dog that chases his tail infinitely running in circles.

[@jonmccormick8683]

Landowner is paying taxes. This lot was bought in a tax auction in 2018. There is usually 1 year after that where the ex-owner has the ability to claim/buy it back.

[@richc9359]

They screwed up. Tear down the house. Restore the property to its original undeveloped state, the best they can. The developer made an expensive mistake, suck it up and move on.

[@leonvangent1196]

So if I see a nice piece of land somewhere and I build a house on it then now the land is mine....or I compensate them with land somewhere else...

[@tammykhair]

There’s companys who knows how to move away the house from the property, that simple ,they can relocate it next door. Simple.

[@lorrieannecan]

This wasn't a mistake. You dont just build on the wrong lot. They tried to steal her land.

[@plyric]

So the state has stepped aside and said to the owner and the developer, "I'm out, you two are on your own". Basically, NEVER buy property in Hawaii because it is not government guaranteed. Got it.

[@ronbeaubien]

It is sounding more and more like the developers may have always just intended to steal the best lot in the neighborhood from the owner living in another state.

[@Singlesix6]

She won. The judge ruled that the house is to be removed.

[@sasquatchwithinternetacces2940]

Not my problem. You built a house on my property, tear it down, or leave it for me.

[@Jon.......]

Why not move the house to the lot next door (the "correct" lot)?! Also, if the State took possession of the property, it should be obligated to provide clear title prior to the auction or at most there should only be a 6 month right of rescission period for the former property owner to reclaim the property, if they are able to pay the auction winner for all of their costs plus interest and a nuisance fee. The current owner can always offer the prior owner money to sign a Quit Claim duty to negate their right of rescission period to take back the property.

[@SmallSpoonBrigade]

I've seen speculation that it's because the deasign integrates the foundation to the point where the foundation would also have to be moved, or the entire building would fall over. I don't know if that's true, but she does have the right to make them remove the building by any means necessary. They can tear it down, or they can move it is possible, but it's her lot, and nobody is disputing that or that she didn't grant permission. It's just an attempt to make the process so expensive that she gives in and pays them.

[@joehogan3691]

The leaders of this building company should be called out publicly since they want to ruin this woman and won't do right... Way to much has been made to conceal their identity... How many people have unwittingly contacted with them during this fiasco?

[@jimbeam-ru1my]

they offered to do right and she refused because she wants a free house

[@joehogan3691]

@@jimbeam-ru1my you mean the lot they wanted to trade her?

[@doom4067]

It seems pretty cut and dry that the developer owes at least two people a lot of money, and probably shouldn't have a license.

[@jeremyashford2145]

Only under very demanding circumstances would I build a house on a concrete pad. In this case, had the builders built on timber foundations they could move the building to their own lot, then they would just have to restore the bush they bulldozed.

[@waynefee1561]

If they get away with it and she is forced to except the house or the money or any deal, it means then that anybody can build on your land and get away with it. The only solution is tear down that house and trash it.

[@johnfontana7256]

The (cheap) ignorant contractor was above paying $700 for a land survey, he erred massively! Not the first house in HPP built on the wrong lot! Hawaii county loves money and equity generating greedy contractors, I wonder how he will fair?

[@oscarschmidlappen2302]

If you want to solve this problem, just give a couple of attorneys $500,000 each. They always seem to be the only winners anyway!

[@willdejong7763]

Wait, the land was purchased at a tax auction, and it is not too late for the previous owner of the land or their heirs to reestablish title? Someone, quick, find the previous owner! All they have to do is pay the old overdue taxes, reclaim the title, and they get a brand new house for free! The house doesn't need to torn down, which is a waste. The lady in CA can have her $20k back, but everyone here is going to be out their lawyers' fees.

[@MattHudsonAtx]

It's her house on her property now. Period.

[@SatoriSoul]

Have it "mysteriously" become "unsafe" and "unlivable" forcing its demolition.

[@eattherich9215]

The housebuilder has a property it cannot sell, and the owner of the land has a plot that someday may be reclaimed. However, think the developer should be made to tear the house down and clear the land.

[@terramarini6880]

Sounds like he liked her view better and thought he could do a sneaky trade situation after the fact. Easier to ask forgiveness than permission. She is not obligated to make any accommodations to anyone, this is not her fault or doing. As far as I am concerned they are obligated to do as she asks and return her property to it's original state.

[@terryrose4804]

Instead of Human squatters, the HOUSE itself is squatting on her land. Can't make this stuff up, folks.

[@badeugenecops4741]

Why isn't she suing them for putting a house she didn't authorize on her property? Why is it the other way around?

[@ericeven4090]

Because the builder sued her first. She was trying to work something out when the builder just turned around and sued her when she wouldn't give him the land. I really don't understand why this is a mess and the courts can't figure it out. It must be a Hawaii thing. Round here if you build just a small part of your house on someone else's property it's got to go and it's a quick process. The courts don't even need to get involved, the towns just deny and occupancy permit and order it to be taken down and then daily fines are placed on the structure.

[@badeugenecops4741]

@@ericeven4090 I agree. However, she could have filed a countersuit as soon as she was served. I would have. That way the cases probably would have been combined for a resolution. Everyone has the ability to file a suit, not everyone has the grounds to file. I hope the judge essentially says "Too bad, your mistake, buddy. Enjoy your new house, ma'am."

[@dandejoux2622]

I think several people wanted her property and "accidently" built a house.

[@bjeconomos1383]

Why wouldn't someone get a clear title if they buy a property from an auction ? Never heard of such nonsense. And if the construction company built a house on that property by mistake then the owner of that property got a free house and the contractor will have to build a free one where they were supposed to in the first place.

[@ImtheGhostMagnet]

There is a much simpler solution to this problem caused by the developer, they should simply move the house to the lot next door, clean the lot that they made the mistake of building a house on and call it a day….house moving is NOT a new concept and has been done for many times EVERYWHERE. Bringing a lawsuit against the legal owner and court costs have already cost the developer much more than if they had just moved the house in the first place, cleaned the lot and paid the lady a small stipend and just say Sorry, my bad!

[@kelliethommes7426]

Do NOT buy any property, real estate, automobile that doesn't have a clear title! Looks like the builder likely knew and took advantage of the situation while planning to use their greater resources to wrangle the lot away from the owner .

[@azuleslight]

she made a compromise, she didnt sue the developer like she should have.