Mudslide - Who do I sue :)

[herschen]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

I've got an interesting fact-pattern here, so I wanted to throw it out to the community, so I can get some feedback. I haven't sued anyone--and probably won't--but I do want to know my legal rights and if there is anyone that should bear responsibility.

Here's the situation: I just bought a property in a flood zone. Around two years ago, a huge rainstorm caused a mudslide that took out the neighbor's home. Due to the location of the home (which is right in the path of any subsequent mudslide) the County permanently condemned the property. The owner is alive and well and lives somewhere else. This mudslide has caused the fence between the properties to sag towards my house. The lender won't foreclose on the property because the moment they do that, they will have to clean up the property. We were thinking about buying the property to add land to my property, but it would mean that we would have to spend at least $60,000 to remove all the debris.

Here's the speculative information: We think the neighbors are trying to buy the property through short-sale, but we're not sure. We also have heard that the owner of the property is suing her insurance company.

Here's my dilemma: I was initially planning to sue the owner for the damage to my property, get a default judgment and then attach that judgment as a lien on the property. Then I would foreclose on the property and either one of three things would happen: 1) the lender would be forced to foreclose on the property and thus be forced to clean it up, 2) the lender would throw in the towel and give me the property, 3) the lender might have a short-sale offer on the table and would then request that I rescind my foreclosure and they would pay me for the cost of repairing the fence.

However, I ran into a problem. This is a natural disaster; therefore any damage to my property wasn't caused by the lender, the owner or any other person. It was caused by God. And you cannot sue God. If I had owned the property at the time of the incident, I may have been able to sue the insurance company for not covering the damages (whether I would win or not is another question).

Therefore, I think the best solution is to sue the lender, insurance company, County and the owner with a nuisance complaint, as the property is a blight on the neighborhood and lowers the value of the surrounding properties. I could still attach the judgment as a lien on the property. My concern is that the "deep pockets" is the lender, not the homeowner. If I get a judgment against the homeowner, I probably will not get anything. The lender can simply state that they are releasing their lien and are "giving" the property to the homeowner and thus wipe their hands clean.

Please let me know if the previous assessment is accurate and if there is anything else I should be aware of.

 

[CurrentlyUndone]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

I've got an interesting fact-pattern here, so I wanted to throw it out to the community, so I can get some feedback. I haven't sued anyone--and probably won't--but I do want to know my legal rights and if there is anyone that should bear responsibility.

Here's the situation: I just bought a property in a flood zone. Around two years ago, a huge rainstorm caused a mudslide that took out the neighbor's home. Due to the location of the home (which is right in the path of any subsequent mudslide) the County permanently condemned the property. The owner is alive and well and lives somewhere else. This mudslide has caused the fence between the properties to sag towards my house. The lender won't foreclose on the property because the moment they do that, they will have to clean up the property. We were thinking about buying the property to add land to my property, but it would mean that we would have to spend at least $60,000 to remove all the debris.

Here's the speculative information: We think the neighbors are trying to buy the property through short-sale, but we're not sure. We also have heard that the owner of the property is suing her insurance company.

Here's my dilemma: I was initially planning to sue the owner for the damage to my property, get a default judgment and then attach that judgment as a lien on the property. Then I would foreclose on the property and either one of three things would happen: 1) the lender would be forced to foreclose on the property and thus be forced to clean it up, 2) the lender would throw in the towel and give me the property, 3) the lender might have a short-sale offer on the table and would then request that I rescind my foreclosure and they would pay me for the cost of repairing the fence.

However, I ran into a problem. This is a natural disaster; therefore any damage to my property wasn't caused by the lender, the owner or any other person. It was caused by God. And you cannot sue God. If I had owned the property at the time of the incident, I may have been able to sue the insurance company for not covering the damages (whether I would win or not is another question).

Therefore, I think the best solution is to sue the lender, insurance company, County and the owner with a nuisance complaint, as the property is a blight on the neighborhood and lowers the value of the surrounding properties. I could still attach the judgment as a lien on the property. My concern is that the "deep pockets" is the lender, not the homeowner. If I get a judgment against the homeowner, I probably will not get anything. The lender can simply state that they are releasing their lien and are "giving" the property to the homeowner and thus wipe their hands clean.

Please let me know if the previous assessment is accurate and if there is anything else I should be aware of.

 

[nextwife]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

I've got an interesting fact-pattern here, so I wanted to throw it out to the community, so I can get some feedback. I haven't sued anyone--and probably won't--but I do want to know my legal rights and if there is anyone that should bear responsibility.

Here's the situation: I just bought a property in a flood zone. Around two years ago, a huge rainstorm caused a mudslide that took out the neighbor's home. Due to the location of the home (which is right in the path of any subsequent mudslide) the County permanently condemned the property. The owner is alive and well and lives somewhere else. This mudslide has caused the fence between the properties to sag towards my house. The lender won't foreclose on the property because the moment they do that, they will have to clean up the property. We were thinking about buying the property to add land to my property, but it would mean that we would have to spend at least $60,000 to remove all the debris.

Here's the speculative information: We think the neighbors are trying to buy the property through short-sale, but we're not sure. We also have heard that the owner of the property is suing her insurance company.

Here's my dilemma: I was initially planning to sue the owner for the damage to my property, get a default judgment and then attach that judgment as a lien on the property. Then I would foreclose on the property and either one of three things would happen: 1) the lender would be forced to foreclose on the property and thus be forced to clean it up, 2) the lender would throw in the towel and give me the property, 3) the lender might have a short-sale offer on the table and would then request that I rescind my foreclosure and they would pay me for the cost of repairing the fence.

However, I ran into a problem. This is a natural disaster; therefore any damage to my property wasn't caused by the lender, the owner or any other person. It was caused by God. And you cannot sue God. If I had owned the property at the time of the incident, I may have been able to sue the insurance company for not covering the damages (whether I would win or not is another question).

Therefore, I think the best solution is to sue the lender, insurance company, County and the owner with a nuisance complaint, as the property is a blight on the neighborhood and lowers the value of the surrounding properties. I could still attach the judgment as a lien on the property. My concern is that the "deep pockets" is the lender, not the homeowner. If I get a judgment against the homeowner, I probably will not get anything. The lender can simply state that they are releasing their lien and are "giving" the property to the homeowner and thus wipe their hands clean.

Please let me know if the previous assessment is accurate and if there is anything else I should be aware of.

HOW is the lienholder, also a damaged, party in any way liable for water and debris sliding TOWARD a FLOOD plain?

 

[FlyingRon]

The lender isn't going to foreclose because they have no interest in doing so. Not only would they have to clean up the property but it wouldn't exactly be something they could resell.

You can always sue to get the lien, but the lien isn't going to accomplish any of the things you are asking. First off you're not going to foreclose on it. Second, you're in line behind everybody else to get paid. Seeing how this property appears to be worth less than the senior liens, you'll get nothing.

It might discourage the other neighbors from bidding on the property though (or allowing it to be sold without you recovering your money).

 

[nextwife]

Have you talked to your OWN insurance company about making a claim for damages to YOUR property, then THEY go after neighbor's insurance? Seems like a lot less work.

 

[cbg]

Seems to me that the only one you have anything like a valid lawsuit against is the One responsible for the mud-slide; and He is judgement-proof.

 

[tranquility]

Here's my dilemma: I was initially planning to sue the owner for the damage to my property, get a default judgment and then attach that judgment as a lien on the property. Then I would foreclose on the property and either one of three things would happen: 1) the lender would be forced to foreclose on the property and thus be forced to clean it up, 2) the lender would throw in the towel and give me the property, 3) the lender might have a short-sale offer on the table and would then request that I rescind my foreclosure and they would pay me for the cost of repairing the fence.

Nope. You have no lawsuit against anyone. Filing frivolous lawsuits in the hope of a default judgment might work at first, but at some point someone is going to look and you will get sanctions against you. Also, you need to review what happens when a junior lienholder forecloses on the lien. None of the real options involve any benefit to the junior position until the first is paid off. Guess who gets to come up with the money if the first isn't paid off?

 

[HomeGuru]

OP, you have a dream and scheme and it will not work.
Try something else.

 

[herschen]

Nope, not going to try anything else

I'm not very trigger happy when it comes to law suits, so I'm not going to come up with another "scheme." It did appear to me that no one is actually responsible for the damage to the property (and I do not want to have somebody counter-sue me for malicious prosecution).

Please explain to me what happens when a junior lien attempts to foreclose on a property? I work in loan modifications and have seen 2nd liens foreclose on a property even when there was no equity to substantiate the foreclosure. The 1st lien ended up having to foreclose. This assessment seems inaccurate. From what I'm hearing here, the 2nd lien that forecloses in that situation would just end up clouding the title, right?

Also, theoretically, what happens in 3 years when the County forecloses on the property due to unpaid taxes? Assume that no one purchases the property and so the property becomes property of the government. Would they clean up the property? If they didn't clean up the property is there any action I--or the neighbors--could take against them?

 

[nextwife]

I'm not very trigger happy when it comes to law suits, so I'm not going to come up with another "scheme." It did appear to me that no one is actually responsible for the damage to the property (and I do not want to have somebody counter-sue me for malicious prosecution).

Please explain to me what happens when a junior lien attempts to foreclose on a property? I work in loan modifications and have seen 2nd liens foreclose on a property even when there was no equity to substantiate the foreclosure. The 1st lien ended up having to foreclose. This assessment seems inaccurate. From what I'm hearing here, the 2nd lien that forecloses in that situation would just end up clouding the title, right?

Also, theoretically, what happens in 3 years when the County forecloses on the property due to unpaid taxes? Assume that no one purchases the property and so the property becomes property of the government. Would they clean up the property? If they didn't clean up the property is there any action I--or the neighbors--could take against them?

I work at a bank. If we foreclose from second position, we pay off the SR lienholder.