1.8 mil mistake, "innocent survey mistake" (by who? )
Good reason to get a survey done in the first place.
http://m.sacbee.com/sacramento/db_98822/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=4zWdp4fJ
This seems to be the big story of the week
Sorry, Frank, but this is the third report here about that crazy story.
This seems to be the big story of the week
Sorry, it just showed up in our local rag.
This seems to be the big story of the week
It's a very worthwhile thing to bring to the attention of this group. Thanks for your attempt. There are probably some tuning in now who haven't tuned in earlier this week.
This seems to be the big story of the week
> Sorry, it just showed up in our local rag.
Unfortunately we still don't know if an engineer ginned up bogus plans, if a Surveyor screwed up a layout, or if a builder figured he didn't need a layout survey.
A developer who mistakenly built a $1.8 million waterfront house on parkland has been ordered to remove it.
The Rhode Island Supreme Court found that the unoccupied home in Narragansett was built entirely on land owned by the Rose Nulman Park Foundation, and therefore must be removed.
The developer, Four Twenty Corp., began building the home in 2009, but it didn't discover the error until 2011 when it tried to sell the house and the prospective buyers got a survey. Robert Lamoureux, who owns the company, then contacted one of the park's trustees to try to work something out, but she told him the land was not for sale, according to Friday's opinion.
The foundation was set up to preserve the property as a park in perpetuity. A 2008 agreement among the family members says that if the trustees allow the land to be used as anything other than a public park, they must pay $1.
I think the kicker is in the third paragraph. The prospective buyer got a survey and the surveyor found the error.
Given how many lawyers must have been all over this, I'm surprised that there's no mention of the obvious estoppel argument -- the true owners had an obligation to speak up as this pricey pad was going up on their land.
There's a misinterpretation available in this particular printing of the story, whose final period is followed by a link called "more." It reveals that that final period is actually a decimal point, and that the amount payable is $1.5 million to the Presbyterian Hospital.
Cheers,
Henry
The decision is an interesting read that tells us a lot more than does the media article. Thank you, Norman.
Also, I didn't notice till now that the Developer is the "Four Twenty Corp." Maybe this whole thing is just a test run for the next Cheech & Chong movie.
> The decision is an interesting read that tells us a lot more than does the media article.
Thanks should go to Andy_J who found the link and Carl Correll who posted it in this discussion's 1st iteration.
thank you, I appreciate the citation.
Andy
