FORUM

Search Amazon for Preparedness Supplies:
Notifications
Clear all

Canadian Castle Laws

67 Posts
24 Users
0 Reactions
12.1 K Views
(@woodbooger)
Trusted Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 77
 

That's right Mule Skinner, that's why I leave my phone number pinned to my mailbox. That way they can just call me and place an order and I'll bring it out, kinda like a drive-thru. That way they don't risk twisting their ankle or getting a sliver and sue me for millions!



   
ReplyQuote
(@mule-skinner)
Estimable Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 215
 

Thanks best laugh in days


We live in a society of wolves ,
We can't fight back by creating more sheep


   
ReplyQuote
(@ottawa613)
Estimable Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 114
 

The Case of the Springdale Squatter Robert Carr

How to handle squatters. The situation will dictate, but this story is worth noting because, in widespread erosion of order, people will do competing things for survival.


When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fail, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.
-Edmund Burke, 1729 - 1797


   
ReplyQuote
(@ottawa613)
Estimable Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 114
 

The Case of the Springdale Squatter

This is a recent story involving an individual named Robert Carr who entered properties in Springdale, Ohio, when the lawful occupants were away. In at least one case the owners were allowing the property to go into foreclosure with their bank, but they still held the deed.

Mr. Carr allegedly changed the locks and filed with the courts for 'quiet title', meaning a claim not involving a formal transfer from previous owner.

The Ohio revised code defines quiet title as: "An action brought by a person in possession of real property against any person who claims "an interest" adverse to him for the purpose of determining such adverse interest."

That means Carr is "claiming he lives in the properties, everyone knows he lives there and he has lived there long enough to gain the legal right to own it despite having another person say they own the property." Experts differed, saying he would need to occupy a property for 21 years unopposed to claim 'squatters rights'.

I bring this up because initially it was reported that law enforcement were taking a cautious approach, seeking legal guidance before taking action. This is not unusual, because police these days are wary of over-stepping their privileges and being hauled into court. They declare it "a civil matter" and back off.

In the event of a breakdown of law and order, what would you do if someone changes the locks and moves into your property? Even in the best of times, this has happened. England has experienced this with gypsies, and there is a Detroit woman who had a squatter she could not evict.

Most people's blood boils at the thought, but circumstances like these require cooler heads. Thought number one: where do you keep your deed of title? Is it in the house? Can you produce it to a sheriff or law enforcement officer? Number two: how quickly can you get back in and retake physical possession? Time is of the essence and the sooner you can reassert your physical presence the better. If the squatter is not there, immediately break in and take it back. If the squatter is there, forcefully enter and do not leave. The police will not evict you. If you are found by the police standing outside and the squatter is inside waving legal papers, the squatter may win in the short term. If you are deep inside the dwelling (not just standing inside the entrance doorstep) your claim to possession is much stronger.


When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fail, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.
-Edmund Burke, 1729 - 1797


   
ReplyQuote
 gPRS
(@gprs)
Estimable Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 163
 

My response, if someone chose to enter and claim title to my home and property while I was away ....

Well, if it was here in "urban" Canada, I'd guess I'd have to weigh the costs of getting into a physical fight with said "claim jumpers" and tossing them out myself, or filing litigation and going to court hoping I would get my home and assets back before any real damage could be done, and if any damage was done, could I expect to recover such costs through the courts.
Personally, I'm thinking the court system here in Canada (and USA) is so F...d up that I'd prefer to deal with it immediately myself.
...
p.s. sounds like Mr. Carr is another of these so-called "Free-men" trying to take advantage of the system.
Wonder if he or others like him would enjoy some "Quiet Time" in / under the gardens of said properties?


=============================================
Is what you say worth at least a Canadian nickel now?
Cause two cents ain't worth squat anymore !
----
Self-sufficient is good. Co-efficient is better.
=============================================


   
ReplyQuote
(@ottawa613)
Estimable Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 114
 

When the Robert Carr home-occupying case is discussed in other forums, it usually leads to a lot of responses. Almost unanimously posters say they'd do harm to any squatter doing what Carr did - an understandable reaction.

The point of the Carr example is to stress that property rights will be more vulnerable than usual in a crisis, or in a gradual erosion of civility. The law, if it is there at all, may be weak at best, and against you at worst. Your home may be destroyed and your property taken before authorities sort out "a civil matter".

Examples: theft of wood, metal, generators, vehicles, food... all have happened. Reporting a license plate number to over-worked law enforcement won't get you satisfaction.

The onus is on the citizen to guard physical property and possessions and be quick to seize back anything taken.

The outcome of the Robert Carr case is that he has been arrested and charged by Ohio authorities, but not before the property owners had to engage lawyers and may be out much of their household possessions. Had they gone in and immediately re-occupied their properties, showing their deeds of title, they would have saved themselves considerable headaches.


When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fail, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.
-Edmund Burke, 1729 - 1797


   
ReplyQuote
(@woodbooger)
Trusted Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 77
 

that may depend on what kind of force you need to use to take back your property, if the cops haul your ass to jail for assaulting someone the legal troubles and potential loss of income from work might lead to your losing your property because you can't afford to pay for it. That being said if it looked like I was going to lose my rightful property I would have no problem BBQ ing the offender in my property. If I can't have it neither can you! Hope it was worth it



   
ReplyQuote
Page 5 / 5
Share: