"...Lowrie and her husband said the house down the street was in
foreclosure for more than a year and the owner walked away. Then, the
mortgage company went out of business.

Apparently, that opened the door for someone to take advantage of the
situation. But, Kenneth Robinson said he's no squatter. He said he
moved in on June 17 after months of research about a Texas law called
"adverse possession.""

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Texas-Law-Lets-Stranger-Move-Into-330000-Home-125528248.html

On Jul 15, 8:02*pm, Oren wrote:
"...Lowrie and her husband said the house down the street was in
foreclosure for more than a year and the owner walked away. Then, the
mortgage company went out of business.

Apparently, that opened the door for someone to take advantage of the
situation. But, Kenneth Robinson said he's no squatter. He said he
moved in on June 17 after months of research about a Texas law called
"adverse possession.""

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Texas-Law-Lets-Stranger-Move-Into-3300...

Sounds like a lot of BS. So far, all you have is squatter who moved
in
claiming he is in the right. When a court actually rules that he is,
then
there would be a story. I don't know the specifics of the adverse
possession
law in this case, but such laws can be found in many, if not most
states.
To actually take a property by adverse possession in the states I
have
some familiarity with a whole list of specific requirements
must be met, including that the person must possess the property as
if it were his for a hell of a long time, like 20 years. That
includes paying
the taxes for that period. It's unlikely the squatter is going to pay
taxes
on a $300K house on the chance he might get away with it.

On Jul 15, 9:17*pm, "
wrote:
On Jul 15, 8:02*pm, Oren wrote:

"...Lowrie and her husband said the house down the street was in
foreclosure for more than a year and the owner walked away. Then, the
mortgage company went out of business.

Apparently, that opened the door for someone to take advantage of the
situation. But, Kenneth Robinson said he's no squatter. He said he
moved in on June 17 after months of research about a Texas law called
"adverse possession.""

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Texas-Law-Lets-Stranger-Move-Into-3300....

Sounds like a lot of BS. *So far, all you have is squatter who moved
in
claiming he is in the right. *When a court actually rules that he is,
then
there would be a story. *I don't know the specifics of the adverse
possession
law in this case, but such laws can be found in many, if not most
states.
To actually take a property by adverse possession in the states I
have
some familiarity with a whole list of specific requirements
must be met, including that the person must possess the property as
if it were his for a hell of a long time, like 20 years. *That
includes paying
the taxes for that period. *It's unlikely the squatter is going to pay
taxes
*on a $300K house on the chance he might get away with it.

It's a sensationalist story, fer sure. Obviously there's a situation,
but there's way too much fishy stuff.

The guy "found" a key for the place? How? He had to trespass on
private property to find it if it was hidden.
There's no running water or electricity. Most squatter's laws that
I've run across in reading require one or the other for the thing to
be considered a squat. Since there's no running water or electricity
- both required by most any zoning code - the building inspector could
pull the CO and make the house an illegal habitation.
The mortgage company went out of business and just ignored the assets
on its books? Yeah, sure.

R

Oren wrote:
"...Lowrie and her husband said the house down the street was in
foreclosure for more than a year and the owner walked away. Then, the
mortgage company went out of business.

Apparently, that opened the door for someone to take advantage of the
situation. But, Kenneth Robinson said he's no squatter. He said he
moved in on June 17 after months of research about a Texas law called
"adverse possession.""

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Texas-Law-Lets-Stranger-Move-Into-330000-Home-125528248.html

At best, he's a squatter. Texas rules on adverse possession are complex and
require three, five, ten, and twenty-five years of possession before the
title is recognized on behalf of the squatter.

I can't see how the three or five-year rule would apply in this situation.
At a minimum, the squatters would have to cultivate, use, or enjoy the
property for ten continuous years. (The 25-year rule allows for the true
owner to be in the military or other exemption before protesting.)