Newport Coast Squatters Featured in Weekly Hugged by OC Judge

• No worries Girl! I could have walked away from this guy but it was a slow day yesterday! 

• I know my grammar would be much better if I cut and paste every world like you do with most of the fact you post, and practically claiming them as your own ideas, then again why would I, unlike you, I don’t have the time, and with or without grammatica errata. You get me point. You had to pick up on it because that is all you got against me, syntax errors. I, on the other hand I got you pegged as DOUCHE BAG, with evidence. I accused you of plagiarism, and you admitted it. I have accused you of wasting time and post multiple blogs on multiple articles and you have. The evidence to that fact you gave it to me. I clicked on the box after my name and saw the few blogs I have posted, and I m using the word few because that’s, what they are compare to yours, which lie in the hundreds. Having said this, I now extend the following sentiment.  Get a life you douche!!!

• I meant to tell you I did appreciate the info. Sorry my comment led to some ugliness. :-(

• I'm sorry I never pick on grammar on a message board but I have to do this.  What a Joke!  I(apostrophe)m sure that you did noticed (<----did noticed? two options "did notice" or "noticed") that all (insert "the") to(<---- this to) blogs I posted (<---- belongs here)  were just to point out what a bunch of douche bags you(comma) Mitch Young(comma) and 20ft Jesus(Insert "are" you need to complete your thought) . So like this...  What a Joke! I'm sure you noticed that all the blogs I posted to were just to point out what a bunch of douche bags You, Mitch Young, and 20ft Jesus are.  Got it?  Tighten it up kid! I'm gonna make you a good poster after all!

• I KNOW!!!!  I'm totally flattered!  I have a groupie its awesome! 

• What a Joke!  I m sure that you did noticed that all to blogs I posted were just to point out what a bunch of douche bags you Mitch Young and 20ft Jesus.

• Okay well I was going to copy and paste the definition of plagiarism (Which by the way given your TERRIBLE grammar and lackluster spelling and punctuation I'm pleased you spelled it correctly)  but I figured you might accuse me of plagiarizing Merriam Webster. I googled the law and copy and pasted it to help educate a person whom I have come to respect on the message boards(Fishwithoutbicycle)... Any reasonable person would be able to realize that.   You said that  "If someone cannot pay for a property the lender has rights to it, not a lazy scumbag"  Or, in the case I'm working on, where a home builder filed chapter 7 (That's liquidation, another topic for you to talk to your econ professor about) and an unsold property has been sitting vacant for three years. Who owns it then genius? ( I cant wait for your response to that)  Only two more years to go and with a little legal maneuvering through adverse possession the people of my community can own it, then we'll list it, and put the proceeds into the general fund for the HOA!  We all win.  As far as my "Alias" goes my name is in fact Jeff... I don't include my last name on purpose, According to the author of this article that makes me a sock puppet... He and I had it out recently over another article, but I actually respect his position on this one.  I said I can be a little douchey from time to time... Not worth changing my moniker over.  And in conclusion, (This one really tickles me) If you click on that little box next your name.... It takes me to all of YOUR other post on multiple articles.  Tsk tsk tsk... I think someone is being a bit hypocritical!

• Einstein said that because he most likely had eidetic memory.  If you indeed attended school, then you should know that you have committed Plagiarism, one of the most shameful things a claimed educated person could stoop to. You never gave credit to the source of your information.  You are a disgrace.  If someone cannot pay for a property the lender has rights to it, not a lazy scumbag.  You admit to be a douche, how about changing your alias, 909Jeff to Douche-bag Jeff.  I dare you!  You don’t piss me off Jeff; however I am astonished by the way you, Mitch Young and 20ft Jesus. waste your copious time, when the three of you post multiple comments on multiple articles

• It was a cut and paste job I wont deny that.. Albert Einstein said to never memorize anything you easily have reference to. (But you're going to school you probably know that) And while I credit you for being (I assume) young and idealistic... Yours isn't the first generation to go to school. Others went before you... I being one of them. So therefore I WENT to school full time (went, being past tense) "the law actually allows lazy lowlifes acquired legally property that someone else has earn and work for"  (<------ But can no longer pay for, you forgot that one important detail)  Actually, the intent of the law is to prevent abandoned property from becoming a blight in a community, while providing the current caregiver a path by which to legally posses it.  And maybe... If grocery store checkers didn't buy 500K McMansions with an interest only loan on stated income... They would have only qualified for a 200k condo and would still be able to afford their mortgage. (Ask your econ professor to explain this to you)  "and the only thing I wish for is that douche bags like you find a more productive ways to invest their time in."  Well, you can wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which one gets full first...  And self admittedly I can be a little douchey from time to time. Generally I use my doucheyness to piss off people like you.

• Save your mediocrity for the likes of you, such as Mitch Young and 20ft Jesus.  It is a fact that I have known ever since I was in grade school. On the other hand the information that you posted on your blog looks like you just cut and pasted it from another webpage.   A fact that I m allergic to, the law actually allows lazy lowlifes acquired legally property that someone else has earn and work for.  Unlike you I go to school fulltime and work, and the only thing I wish for is that douche bags like you find a more productive ways to invest their time in.                      

• I guess you're allergic to facts and wish to remain ignorant as to how squatting is in fact legal and that it could in extremely rare instances lead to ownership....  

• Get a life Jeff.

• Squatting can actually lead to the total legal possession of the housing, through what's called "adverse possession."      Sometimes, squatters get lucky and find a squat which the landlord seems to have really abandoned. Police and neighbors have been dealt with successfully and after many months the landlord still hasn't complained or been seen. In that case, squatters might start laying plans for gaining adverse possession.      California Code of Civil Procedure   321 and 325 deal with the most relevant factors of adverse possession. Generally, the law says that a claim to adverse possession can be made after five years of possession and after the adverse possessors have paid the taxes on the property.  Adverse possession has been interpreted to mean "open and notorious" possession, in the sense that the squatting has been done on a level where the squatters' presence is not hidden and the landlord could have reasonably gained knowledge of the possession. (In other words, squatters who arrive at midnight and clear out by 5 a.m. every day for five years might not meet the requirements of "open and notorious.")      Code of Civil Procedure  321 requires the property to have been "held and possessed adversely to such legal title for five years." Section 325 sets the requirement for the payment of taxes and also includes a provision that the property be "cultivated or improved" (which can be repairs, painting, etc.).      When a squatter gets into the position where adverse possession becomes a possibility, the greatest hurdle is often the payment of taxes, mainly because the landlord can pay the taxes on the 364th day of the 5th year and defeat the squatter's claim to adverse possession (which is exactly what happened at a San Francisco squat in the 1970s). If squatters begin getting a substantial length of possession under their belt, it's imperative that they begin saving up to pay the taxes in order to finalize their claim. 

• So it's ok to occupy a building that's not yours and you're not paying rent for as long as you're a WASP? I'm sorry to say I'm not the least bit surprised...

• Any idea where they are squatting, er, living now?

TotalComments: 15