Commisioners: A Deal’s A Deal With Stories

[aleonard]

COMMISIONERS: A DEAL’S A DEAL WITH STORIES (http://defuniakherald.com/?p=187)

By DOTTY NIST
Property owners have been directed to remove stories from two western Inlet Beach homes that were built taller than 2003 approval by the Walton County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) had specified.
At the June 10 BCC meeting, vesting was considered to allow three- and four-story homes, substantially complete on Lot 2 and Lot […]
Read full post... (http://defuniakherald.com/?p=187)

[Smiling JOe]

With the question remaining how to deal with the two substantially-complete homes, Blackshear asked Demers whether it would be viable for a story or stories to be removed from the top of the homes. Demers said it would not, since the homes are concrete. While it could possibly be done, he said, the cost would likely equal what it would take to demolish and rebuild the homes.
LaSeur said she understood that the property is currently under foreclosure.

Now what? The homes are ICF (insulated concrete form), and taking off the top two floors will not only be costly, they would likely have to redesign and rebuild the two remaining floors. If the properties are in foreclosure, do you think the lender is going to be paying a contractor to tear down the Gulf Front homes? So the County made what I think is a good decision, but in my opinion, they stopped short, by not giving a time frame for the change to be made. Now, all they have is a ruling, but without enforcement, what good is that?

[TreeFrog]

Now what? The homes are ICF (insulated concrete form), and taking off the top two floors will not only be costly, they would likely have to redesign and rebuild the two remaining floors. If the properties are in foreclosure, do you think the lender is going to be paying a contractor to tear down the Gulf Front homes? So the County made what I think is a good decision, but in my opinion, they stopped short, by not giving a time frame for the change to be made. Now, all they have is a ruling, but without enforcement, what good is that?

Care to speculate if they already figured out that would be the outcome? So, they sound like good guys without having to actually stand up to the property owners? Or am I just being a conspiracy theorist again?

[Smiling JOe]

In this case, my best guess is that they (BCC) really wanted to drive the point home that people cannot walk over the BCC. I truly think their vote was just one step short, rather than a political move. The lender's name was never mentioned and the lender is the one who will have to take it in the shorts in more ways than one, if the County does require the work to be done.

So let's say the lender takes back the properties, (I believe there are about seven lots.) and sells the homes, which were ordered to be substantially lowered. They are sold "as-is" and the buyer doesn't request a Property Disclosure Statement. OOPS! Now the new buyers are stuck with homes that have to be partially or fully leveled. What's next, after the lawsuits against the listing agent, selling agent, seller, and Board of County Commissioners?

[aleonard]

In this case, my best guess is that they (BCC) really wanted to drive the point home that people cannot walk over the BCC. I truly think their vote was just one step short, rather than a political move. The lender's name was never mentioned and the lender is the one who will have to take it in the shorts in more ways than one, if the County does require the work to be done.

So let's say the lender takes back the properties, (I believe there are about seven lots.) and sells the homes, which were ordered to be substantially lowered. They are sold "as-is" and the buyer doesn't request a Property Disclosure Statement. OOPS! Now the new buyers are stuck with homes that have to be partially or fully leveled. What's next, after the lawsuits against the listing agent, selling agent, seller, and Board of County Commissioners?
I can only harbor a guess on this. After meeting with code enforcement, we discussed what happens in foreclosed properties. They should be notified that they have violated code and I would think could not sell without disclosure of such a violation. If they did, I would think they would be held responsible, not the BCC.

[scooterbug44]

I wish they had been more proactive on getting those extra stories removed - it takes a great deal of planning and coordination to add an extra story to a house, so it was a blatant violation!

IMO far too many developers would rather pay a fine after the fact than follow the rules, so we need to set a strict precedent.

[wrobert]

I can only harbor a guess on this. After meeting with code enforcement, we discussed what happens in foreclosed properties. They should be notified that they have violated code and I would think could not sell without disclosure of such a violation. If they did, I would think they would be held responsible, not the BCC.


My guess is they will end up at the code board for us to figure out what to do. From the agenda tonight, it looks like the borrow pit stuff is heading our way. Fun for all.

[Smiling JOe]

Lawyers will suit everyone from whom they can potentially win money, including the BCC. They wouldn't likely be found guilty in this case, but I would expect them to also be sued by the buyer.

The laws are interesting regarding disclosures, especially if someone buys this property then resells it for a quick flip. If the buyer #1 never asked, and was never told about the County's ruling to remove the floors, he or she may not be liable to buyer #2 who gets screwed. (I'm not an attorney. This is just my understanding on Disclosures of Material Value.) It is also my understanding that Sellers are not required to disclose information of material value at will. A Realtor is, however, required to do so, but many sellers would never tell their Realtor in the first place. (Surprise!). That is why a buyer should always include an addendum for Property Disclosure Statements in the contract. When I list a property, I always request a Property Disclosure Statement to be completed by the seller, so that I am made aware of things which may affect a buyer's purchase decision. I have it handy so that any interested buyers can read it for themselves in include it in their contract. In many cases, if you don't ask, you don't receive. The Courts expect that buyers will perform their own due diligence, and when they don't they aren't given as much consideration, and may lose their case.

Scooter, I bet it adds even more planning to add two additional stories to a house. It wasn't mentioned in the article, but the actual height of the top of the tallest home built by this "developer," exceeds 50ft. In essence, it is a five story home, as some of the parking level is enclosed. Only two habitable floors were permitted.

[aleonard]

Lawyers will suit everyone from whom they can potentially win money, including the BCC. They wouldn't likely be found guilty in this case, but I would expect them to also be sued by the buyer.

The laws are interesting regarding disclosures, especially if someone buys this property then resells it for a quick flip. If the buyer #1 never asked, and was never told about the County's ruling to remove the floors, he or she may not be liable to buyer #2 who gets screwed. (I'm not an attorney. This is just my understanding on Disclosures of Material Value.) It is also my understanding that Sellers are not required to disclose information of material value at will. A Realtor is, however, required to do so, but many sellers would never tell their Realtor in the first place. (Surprise!). That is why a buyer should always include an addendum for Property Disclosure Statements in the contract. When I list a property, I always request a Property Disclosure Statement to be completed by the seller, so that I am made aware of things which may affect a buyer's purchase decision. I have it handy so that any interested buyers can read it for themselves in include it in their contract. In many cases, if you don't ask, you don't receive. The Courts expect that buyers will perform their own due diligence, and when they don't they aren't given as much consideration, and may lose their case.

Scooter, I bet it adds even more planning to add two additional stories to a house. It wasn't mentioned in the article, but the actual height of the top of the tallest home built by this "developer," exceeds 50ft. In essence, it is a five story home, as some of the parking level is enclosed. Only two habitable floors were permitted.

Thanks, SJ. I would have thought that if such a violation occurred, then a agent would have to disclose it due to the amt of money it would cost to fix. I guess common sense and law are strange and distant bedfellows;-)

[wrobert]

Thanks, SJ. I would have thought that if such a violation occurred, then a agent would have to disclose it due to the amt of money it would cost to fix. I guess common sense and law are strange and distant bedfellows;-)


I thought code violations were statutorily required to be disclosed even if no information was requested. Plus if an order is issued it would be recorded and a title search should find it. At least this is the way I thought the system worked.

[Smiling JOe]

What happens when the current owner/builder is foreclosed upon, and the bank takes ownership, then sells "as-is," where some person sitting in an office in Tallahassee negotiates the seller's side of the transaction, not having a clue about the County's order which was delivered to the owner of record at the time? There are things which may assist in bringing it to the attention of a future buyer, but they are not fool-proof. The County not ordering a date to complete the work, leaves an open book in many respects.

Here's a note of awareness to all. Sellers and buyers will often lie to their Realtors, so do your DD, and work with a Realtor who is well-informed of the local happenings. There are several who fit that description, here on SoWal.com. Also note that it would be nearly impossible for any Realtor to know everything about a particular property. However, he or she can make sure you, as a buyer, requests a property disclosure statement to be part of the contract, which would at least cover some basic steps for your protection.

[Yahoodie]

Isn't it a fact that any liens or judgements placed on a property would then be a cloud on the title? This would then be quickly exposed to any buyer who applies for title insurance

[Smiling JOe]

I know that liens cloud the title, but I'm uncertain how a Board of County Commissioners' ruling affects title. A Court Order would certainly affect title, but I'm not sure about something coming from the BCC.

In the mean time, with no time limits to make the change, the builder remains in violation without penalty, and no urgency to make the changes to the buildings, and the residents and property owners in that area suffer.

[wrobert]

I know that liens cloud the title, but I'm uncertain how a Board of County Commissioners' ruling affects title. A Court Order would certainly affect title, but I'm not sure about something coming from the BCC.

In the mean time, with no time limits to make the change, the builder remains in violation without penalty, and no urgency to make the changes to the buildings, and the residents and property owners in that area suffer.

I see what you are saying. There is no way just a ruling of the BCC is going to show up. If they were acting in a quasi-judicial body at the time, the attorney, I am guessing, would have to write up an order and have the chairman sign it and get it recorded to cloud the title. At least that is what I understand.


Probably need to start a new thread but I saw pictures of that Eagle's something project in inlet beach Thursday night. That is a mess.

[Andy A.]

I've got the perfect solution, though very simplistic. Tear em down and start over.

[Smiling JOe]

My guess is that is exactly what they will have to do, Andy A, not by requirement, but due to the probable high cost of engineering and redoing the entire layout.

[wrobert]

I've got the perfect solution, though very simplistic. Tear em down and start over.


Kind of sort of what I think is going to end up happening. They are being referred back to the building department for abatement. I never really understood exactly what they meant by that, other than steps can now be taken to condemn the buildings and start the process of removing them. I imagine we are going to see a lot more before this mess is over with.

[Andy A.]

My guess is that is exactly what they will have to do, Andy A, not by requirement, but due to the probable high cost of engineering and redoing the entire layout.
It is really unfortunate this situation occurred but maybe developers and contractors will learn the lesson that development orders are meant to serve a purpose and are not to be ignored. While I can feel sympathy for the property owners, it is minimal at best, since they should be aware of what is being built on their property. While wrobert is probably right on about a mess being caused, it is well past time for this county to start inforcing its building codes and ordinances regardless of the short term consequences.

[wrobert]

It is really unfortunate this situation occurred but maybe developers and contractors will learn the lesson that development orders are meant to serve a purpose and are not to be ignored. While I can feel sympathy for the property owners, it is minimal at best, since they should be aware of what is being built on their property. While wrobert is probably right on about a mess being caused, it is well past time for this county to start inforcing its building codes and ordinances regardless of the short term consequences.

During the testimony given, it came out that the whole developement was part of some sort of organized fraud scheme that orginated in Ohio. I guess the properties were all flipped and mortgaged and remortgaged and the developer then skipped out. The paperwork I saw showed the lots selling for almost a million dollars each and I understood that was before the houses were going to be added. Seems like they are all valued at around 350K now.

[Andy A.]

Really a sad situation all the way around.