Pretty messed up. I feel pretty bad for these guys.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/29/couple.buys.meth.house/index.html?hpt=C1
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/11/29/couple.buys.meth.house/index.html?hpt=C1
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
couple moves into former meth house
- Thread starter glocke12
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That really sucks! There should be some recourse for this couple, that sort of thing really should be disclosed by the seller.
Their solution seems to be working well:
Bitch about it on the internet, get lots of coverage and offers of support, and with some hard work, get it sorted out.
(Note: I would also bitch loudly about it if the same thing happened to me)
Bitch about it on the internet, get lots of coverage and offers of support, and with some hard work, get it sorted out.
(Note: I would also bitch loudly about it if the same thing happened to me)
This is the first time I've heard of such a thing...this is horrible
I hope this doesn't sound stupid, but can't they just demolish this house and rebuild a new one on the same plot? I know it'll be expensive...I am just asking
I hope this doesn't sound stupid, but can't they just demolish this house and rebuild a new one on the same plot? I know it'll be expensive...I am just asking
This is the first time I've heard of such a thing...this is horrible
I hope this doesn't sound stupid, but can't they just demolish this house and rebuild a new one on the same plot? I know it'll be expensive...I am just asking
YEs, they could, but they can't afford the $61,000 clean up fee. They certainly won't be able to afford demolition and reconstruction. That would be at least twice the clean up fee, not to mention put the new mortgage way out of their price range.
If I were them, I would go after the relator and his/her company and previous owner. There should be a way to split up the cost of the clean up that is fair for everyone involved without the need to walk away from the house.
This is the first time I've heard of such a thing...this is horrible
I hope this doesn't sound stupid, but can't they just demolish this house and rebuild a new one on the same plot? I know it'll be expensive...I am just asking
The article said the house was 108 years old. It is probably protected by some historical society (or would become so once they applied for demolition). Then they would have to spend a lot more than $61,000 fighting those people in court.
They are in the northeast, not the west coast, so I don't think 108 years qualifies as necessarily historic. This issue has nothing to do with historical preservation societies.
The original owners should have disclosed this fact and should be sued. I don't care if there is a law on the book requiring the specific disclosure of whether the house was used as a drug lab -- the house is hazardous to their health and that alone seems like a material fact that should be disclosed during the buying process.
Wouldn't a lawyer take this case for the good PR alone?
This is why there are laws. People don't always do what is in the best interest of others.