Contract for Deed Liability

What is the name of your state? kentucky

We are involved in a litigation as Plaintiffs. The situtation in brief is that the property across the street from us was purchased on a contract for deed. The contract was entered into in early 2002, and the deed conveyed early 2004. During the time that the purchasers and the sellers were under contract, the property was a nuisance. The contract between the two stated that the purchaser promised to "not commit nuisance or waste" and to keep the property in good repair, and not to impair the value of the property. During the time that the Purchaser was under the agreement, it was allegedly a hangout with drugs,underage drinking (posted on the website as this was a business), code violations. The city notified both owners of the violations, the sellers were informed of the illegal activities by mail and by phone call. They are now the defendants along with the purchaser, as the illegal usages caused us to harm from beatings, vandalism, etc.

Their attorney claims that when he wrote the contract and spoke of nuisance, he meant monetary loss. Does any one have a take on this? Clearly the City still considered them responsible for zoning violations as they were sent notices.
Any thoughts appreciated.
T

Their attorney claims that when he wrote the contract and spoke of nuisance, he meant monetary loss.

Click to expand...

Their attorney can claim all he wants, but the strict interpretation of the contract is for a court to decide.

They are now the defendants along with the purchaser, as the illegal usages caused us to harm from beatings, vandalism, etc.

Click to expand...

And what does this have to do with the contract? Did you not call the police when the beatings and vandalism occurred?

There is more to this story and I have a strong feeling you are not asking the right questions.

You would be right in your assumption. The deed for contract and the nuisance issue is only one small portion of a very large suit that actually involves the Police. The basis for the suit is that the purchaser of the property was allegedly intentional trying to cause us personal harm and to attempt in any means to cause closure of our business. We were not technically competitors, she simply wanted to do what we do.

In the course of a year and a half, she allegedly used her property as a means to organize a youth gang of sorts to terrorize us and our customers. A couple of police officers assisted by telling us things were our own fault, to stop calling the police, failing to investigate (although they kept promising to do so), and also in going to the owners of our property (that we leased) telling them that we had drug arrests on the property, that we dealt drug, etc. All of which was false and or course I pulled police runs reports to disprove the allegation of drug arrests on our business property. When we went to the prosecutor, he told me that if we complained on this lady again, he would arrest me. Although the activity at the defendants property was out in the open and there was even photos, video tapes, and statements from people who had been there (including write ups in national magazines talking about the wild drinking parties that took place there), the police claim to know nothing about any of that and that we were making it all up.

I have so many questions, so I started with the small one.