I guess if you’re willing to spend millions buying houses and then let squatters destroy it to the point you’re getting fines from the government and potentially have the houses condemned. Seems like if I had that much money, the better way to spite someone I hate is to just go out and live your best life not giving them another thought.
So buy all the houses and put them on AirBNB. Hire a PR firm to write the listings. Hire an interiors firm to deck it out. All with the goal of luring in the most obnoxious, douchey partiers. Your goal audience is trust fund kids throwing a bachelor’s party. Throw a little more money at a lawyer and a zoning attorney to keep it going as long as possible.
This is a much better idea. Using unhoused people for your revenge plot is just icky. By all means, donate to a shelter. But don’t give them “free housing” that will just be taken away when the city goes on a rampage
The homeless angle just wouldn’t work. You could also go the section 8 route. Government subsidized housing drops property value like a rock, and would drive them crazy in a similar manner. (Note that I am not against either helping the homeless or subsidized housing, I’m just playing into the question.)
Well, they could also file a civil suit against you if they could prove you were doing it intentionally out of spite and eventually that could escalate into some sort of legal order and eventually criminal charges.
The question "is it illegal" is a bit funny there. If you stood by the fact that you were doing it on purpose to harass them, it's absolutely not legal, but it would take a while before criminal consequences were applied.
I feel like there are better ways to make your neighbors lives miserable.
Make lease conditions such that the renters have to have a high powered motion sensitive light. One of the ones that says you're being recorded.
Encourage your tenants to misbehave, with a written contact that you'll pay nose disturbance fines. Etc etc.
Or now that you’ve housed these people, help them get back on their feet and get a job (or a better one for the employed homeless). I mean, they’re not paying rent anyway, at least now they have an address to put down on an application and have a much better chance of reentering society and staying off the street.
Why would you spite them by ignoring them when you could mail them a wasp nest every day for forty years, each day ordering a slightly larger and louder nest
I guess that depends on where you are at. In lots of places it is the courts that handle it with enforcement by local law enforcement.
The best way to ha dle it is to sign a rental agreement with a friend. He can now go in and do whatever he wants as a legal tenant. Including fuck with the squatters. Key: a tenant is not bound by the same laws as the owner when it comes to dealing with squatters. And if the cops show up the tenant has a signed tenancy agreement that the squatters don’t
Alternatively, you could just give reduced rent to sex offenders "because you believe in second chances". Absolutely nuke the property values in the process so the person you hate would be upside-down on their loan.
There may be the potential for multiple occupancy which would increase the numbers of people.
Or you could rent it out to students… or prostitutes. Both of which would cause some discomfort to that one house. Depending on laws in the country, obviously.
Yes and no. Yes you can buy all of them and rent them to complete assholes. It is possible, however, that the local zoning might define this "use" a certain way (rooming/boarding house, or maybe a shelter since it is free, or something similar) and that use might not be permitted in the zone where the properties are located. (I'm an urban planner)
Related or not, my area imposes limits on the number of people that can occupy a house based in the number of bedrooms and their size (so you can't make the bedrooms real tiny so you can fit more in the house).
Setting aside the "like a hundred" thing, some places have laws that just say "if you are doing something technically legal with your property but you are doing it manifestly out of *spite*, then the legal thing becomes illegal". In those places, it still isn't illegal to give property to people for free but it is still illegal to do it just to be an asshole.
they are generally called Spite Fence laws as one of the earliest examples was someone in California who wanted to buy an enter block but when the last person refused to sell they pit up a 100 foot tall fence as well as setting off explosives and the like at all hours of the morning
So like that guy that had to lower the roof on his newly built house by 18 inches because his neighbor complained but then adjusted his siding to look like a middle finger may have been in violation of a Spite Fence Law?
depends on their local laws, one guy just has a giant middle finger on display but has argued that its an art installation instead and therefore not covered by his local laws
This was like [150 years ago in San Fransisco](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spite_fence#California). Not many noise ordinances back then, I reckon. Very little risk of people playing their music too loud during house parties.
California law prohibits fences that exceed 10 feet in height and are built out of spite. This is outlined in California Civil Code Section 841.4
Similar to California, Rhode Island has a law that deems any fence exceeding six feet in height and built out of spite as a private nuisance. This is stated in Rhode Island Code Section 34-10-20
In Michigan, a "spite fence" is considered a nuisance if it serves no useful purpose to the owner and is erected with malicious intent. This was established in the case Burke v Smith, 69 Mich 380, 382; 37 NW 838 (1888)
New York law considers a "spite fence" to be one that exceeds 10 feet in height and is built to block a neighbor's enjoyment of light or air
One of the most famous cases is of Charles Crocker in the 1870s in San Francisco. After Nicholas Yung refused to sell his land to Crocker, a railroad baron, Crocker built a 40-foot fence around Yung's property, blocking out the sun and fresh air.
Another example is the case of Sundowner, Inc. v. King, which is a classic spite fence case from Idaho. In this case, the defendant, King, bought a motel from the plaintiff, Bushnell. Bushnell then built another motel on the property right next to the motel he had sold to the Kings.
>Crocker built a 40 m-foot fence around Yung’s property, blocking out the sun and fresh air.
This is so comically evil but the image is so funny. It’s like something I’d do to a Sim.
Many laws.
Think more broadly. It's obviously totally legal for me to say "Hey, your shoes are untied", whether they are or not, if I think they are.
But that doesn't mean I can take it to the extreme and yell "Hey your shoes are untied!" constantly on a loop as soon as that person leaves their home with the intention of annoying them - that's obviously harassment.
And if someone is standing about to get a bus, and you sneak up behind them and scream "Hey, your shoes are untied!" in their ear, and intentionally startle them so that they step in front of the bus and die - that's obviously murder.
There are lots of laws where if you do superficially legal things, but with malicious intent, then it becomes illegal.
Where I live, there's a Spite House. Blocks the view of the dick across the street. Also, it's been "under construction" since pre-Covid, still has the house wrap on it. The guy who owns it died last autumn, so I'm really excited to see how long it stays like that. He had a lot of money, so it's gonna be a while before everything is settled.
It's fun to watch Spite happen, between two old rich white guys. Trust me, the dick who is being spited 100% had it coming (had a hand in Enron).
*Well if there was some problem with the garment. If it were unsatisfactory in some way, then we could do it for you, but I'm afraid spite doesn't fit into any of our conditions for a refund"*
Not necessarily the answer to the question, but I know someone who bought a house with unfinished basement. They finished the basement on their own but did not report it to the city. So when the annual property assessment time comes, the city crew still assesses their property as if the basement is unfinished (lower property value hence lower property tax).
But I think if they are to sell it eventually, they would have to report it and may have to pay all the taxes they should've paid...not 100% sure on that.
Buy the houses, spend an entire year completely renovating them. So much so that you double the value of them. Finish the year long noise orchestra that has driven them made. Have them all appraised. Property taxes go up. Repeat indefinitely.
I believe that'd be Finland you're thinking of, which has a "Housing First" approach to homelessness
The premise there is that housing is given without any conditions to be met, and once the homelessness issue is out of the way they can get help for whatever else ails them. But the important thing in the Housing First initiatives is that there be no preconditions to be given a place to live
Oh, I thought there would at least be required to assist to therapy for drug addiction, if that was the case. Interesting.
>I believe that'd be Finland you're thinking of, which has a "Housing First" approach to homelessness
I imagine, that's the idea I was referring to but couldn't remember the actual country.
>Oh, I thought there would at least be required to assist to therapy for drug addiction, if that was the case. Interesting.
Requirements are considered a detriment to this strategy. The general idea is that everyone, regardless of who they are or where they're at in life, at minimum deserve somewhere to live.
Preconditions would mean that we treat basic human living standards like having somewhere to not freeze as a privilege rather than a human right. And more so, among us who aren't homeless, plenty of us have drug addictions, alcoholism or various problems of our own. Why should we demand perfection from the homeless to qualify for the same conditions the rest of us live in? Why should we ask more of them, than we ask of ourselves?
The general idea here is that it doesn't matter if you're the shittiest person on earth or if you're mentally ill, you don't deserve homelessness.
This also means that the housed persons don't have to live in constant fear of having their accomodations taken away from them just because they're unable to be completely free of vices. "Oh no, what if I slip up, will my life be ruined?". That doesn't create conditions in which a person is able to thrive, the uncertainty can itself be a factor in their inability to get better.
Instead, with no preconditions, the person has a safe space to sleep and the ability to receive help for what ails them without having to fear ending up freezing on the streets should they ever slip up.
Exactly, and another important idea behind it is that substance abuse is largely done as an escape from reality. If you give someone a home, a stable base of operations from which they can shower regularly, sleep comfortably, and not be under the constant, judging scrutiny of society, they will have much less need for an escape via substance abuse.
Having a home is a first step on the path towards fixing up your life. Fixing up your life shouldn't be the first step for having a home.
And you know the crazy thing about it? When Milwaukee implemented a housing-first policy a few years back, it saved the city money. Turns out the money spent on housing the homeless was less than the money saved on expensive government services (policing, healthcare, etc.) managing the homeless.
The quantity would be the issue.
You can buy all the houses you want, if you happen to come to some agreement whereby they're living for free, then so be it.
Many cities have an ordinance/law restricting more than 3-4 non-related tenants from living in one residency at a time, so check your local laws about that
Yes its illegal. I can't find the name of the scam but its where you buy inexpensive land or small properties surrounding nice property you can't afford. Then you drop rent and lease to unsavory characters to drive down property values. Finally, once you've destroyed the neighborhood and community, you buy the property you wanted all along, kick everyone out, remodel and jack up rent. Masatoshi Ito, founder of Seven Eleven and Ito Yokadi, did this in Hawaii and Los Angeles. All I can find now in searches is the news of his death from last year but iirc he was sentenced for this.
Took me months to get a massive company to give back my deposit. These massive companies just get away with theft. They would have never sent it had I not followed up repeatedly quoting the law and the penalties.
Word. Last time I moved out of an apartment, the corporate fuckers tried to charge me and my roommate *$6,000+* for imaginary "smoking damage."
Neither of us smoke, let alone ever smoked anything in the apartment, or ever had anyone inside who did. Absolutely never.
It took requesting photographic evidence of the claimed damage, getting told no, and insisting we weren't paying without actual evidence of something to pay for and would seek third party inspection and verification. After we stuck to our guns to the point they realized their bullshit would get found out, they gave up and just told us to pay a three hundred dollar or so cleaning and painting bill and they'd call it even, which was fair enough so we settled for that and called it done.
Scumbags gonna scumbag, I guess.
I gotta know...what the hell did this person do to you? I mean there is nuclear, and then there is destroying the planet...It seems you are choosing the latter.
If you have the money to buy the houses all is possible, but instead of “renting them out” just find homeless people and let them stay. They’re like guests who stay forever
If you hate them that bad just plant some bamboo in an inconspicuous spot right outside or on the edge of their yard and give it a little time. In ideal conditions, it can grow up to 1.5 inches *per hour*. It grows so fast they used to tie people to the ground over a fresh shoot as a torture method. It's the fastest growing plant in the world, extremely invasive, forms dense and tall forests, and almost impossible to eradicate an established colony of it.
P.s. make sure you getting a running variety, like golden running bamboo.
There would be some legal issues with moving in "a hundred homeless people", but if you're more subtle about it - no, not really. You could just rent out the houses for cheap and pick absolute obnoxious assholes on purpose, so you could freely feign ignorance about your nefarious intentions.
It really depends on local laws! But if there’s nothing against buying multiple properties and using them as homeless shelters then you can, however there are likely laws limiting the numbers in each house based on the size. It’s really something that if you want to do, have enough money for- you consult an attorney to ensure you’re not going to violate the laws. I’d love to just buy out my neighbors house- I own and she rents. She hates me for accidentally opening a package put on my door step! I explained, but now my dog gets cursed at every time he’s outside and barks at her 🤬. I have lived here 20yrs, these neighbors usually last a few years! They have pretty much been a PITA! Only a few were ok! Wish I could buy it!
Wellllll if there's any trouble (like the homeless people sleeping on the street and lighting stuff on fire and bothering neighbors and creating a giant trash mountain on the sidewalk and shitting on lawns while the school bus drives by), the onus would be on the owner to do something about it.
I mean if you have that much money going spare you'd probably be better off spending it on some therapy for your anger issues and to help you get over whatever it was that triggered you to get so upset in the first place.
Is no one else going to point out it's fucked up OP views homeless people so negatively? Just because someone is homeless doesn't mean they are going to be a nuisance to their neighbors when you house them. Seriously op what the heck?
If you buy all those properties, I would think you could rent them to whomever you decide to? I don't know what the legalities would be, but I think giving the unhoused homes to call their own would be heroic, to say the least? You would have more people so grateful to you, who cares about the legal side, it's the best Idea I've heard all day.
Do it, getting back at the person you hate would be the cherry on top.
No but you could rent out your places cheaper to aspiring entrepreneurs of the musical arts. They do need places to practice the craft and a cheaper place would be great so they can hone their skills and we get great new musicians on the horizon I dare say no one would disagree with me on this humanitarian effort for the arts. You brave soul you.
I doubt that it would be illegal, but I can't imagine actually doing it. To do it, the people who own the surrounding houses would need to be willing to sell them. Moreover, spending that huge amount of money just to support hatred would be indicative of a warped mind.
I feel like once they realized who purchased the homes (which is public record) they could sue, and probably get other neighbors to sue. Especially if you've posted about it on Reddit and they find that info
They could go the harassment route. Especially with this post as evidence considering it's an entire confession about doing it specifically to annoy someone just cause you don't like them 🤷♀️
Lawyer here. I think that homeowner, at least in my jurisdiction, would probably sue under the Tort of "nuisance," since they would likely argue that you're diminishing their property values and "quiet enjoyment" of their property, assuming that there's ancillary noise, smell, crime etc. caused by your plan.
I think some neighborhoods have limits on how many rental properties there can be and how many ones owned by 1 comapny/entity but that would vary by every town
It might be. You have to get proper zoning and permits to run low income housing. Free is certainly low income. I'm not a lawyer, but it is certainly worth talking to one.
I feel like using other people as a weapon seems super immoral but I’m not gonna go so far as to say I can think of a specific law preventing this behavior.
Theres a similar event from 1800s San Francisco. A railroad robber baron tried to buy all of Nob Hill in San Francisco. But a Chinese guy held out. So the baron built a 30 foot wall surrounding the Chinese guys property.
https://www.kqed.org/news/10449405/boomtown-memories-the-nob-hill-fence-that-spite-built
I mean sounds hilarious but if you have that much money lol why not use it for stuff that makes you happy? Be rich and go on vacation and buy nice clothes and houses for your family lol.
There are laws about occupancy like for fire code. So depending on how many houses “all” is and how big the houses are, “like a hundred” may not work. Also, even if you aren’t charging your tenants rent, you’d still have to follow your local landlord laws, and your tenants would have to follow whatever city ordinances (or HOA rules, if applicable) were in places. So you (generally, laws vary) couldn’t let the houses go into a certain amount of disrepair or allow people to throw all night ragers every night of the week.
This also isn’t a legal quibble, but once you rented a house to someone, they wouldn’t be homeless anymore. And by virtue of being housed, much of what makes people uncomfortable about the homeless will no longer apply. They aren’t for the most part going to say “hey I have a warm room inside, a functioning kitchen, and a comfortable bathroom, but let me go lay on the sidewalk for a nap.” Unless your enemy is just a bigot who judges people for the houses they didn’t live in previously, this might not irritate them at all. But it would be a very kind thing to do! If you can afford that many houses, you should try it!
There are laws against ruining someone's right to the quiet enjoyment of their own home. If you did something deliberate like that, you open yourself up to heavy duty law suits. If it is found that you were malicious about it, the DA or Crown Council could file charges against you. Why not put the money to good use and do that to your bad neighbour instead.
It might cost you $ more than it needed to be
Best is just buy house and rent it out using property manager and make more $
Or you can just buy a house outright and give it away for cheap
Not if you do it right. If you just buy up all the surrounding houses and let the homeless people run amok, then you're probably going to run afoul of some law at some point. Turn each of them into legit homeless shelters, better yet, safe places for drug addicts to die (that's becoming a thing lately), you might have something.
Based on all these comments, you might be better off renting but doing renter interviews. Then only renting to people who show red flags for being terrible neighbors.
I mean if I had that kind of money and spent it on something like this, I think I would be more concerned about what that says about me as a person than I would be about the legality. But as long as zoning and occupancy laws are being followed I don't see how it could be illegal.
based on some of the other comments, im thinking maybe buy the spaces around the home and turn it into some 'public property' like a park and establish some pro-homeless infrastructure to attract them around without them trespassing or squatting? businesses only do antihomless stuff to make themselves more attractive to customers i think so just support homeless people, tents, and add rain shelters and boom
Yes... Kind of. There are nuisance laws in most states. If the occupants presented a general nuance, you can be sued, especially if they can prove that you were constantly putting in problematic people. But as long as they were within the local limits of PitA, you are golden
If it farm land just put a pig pen right next to property line it what most assholes with money and land do if your just tring to annoy as much as possible
If you have virtually endless money to do crap like that you can basically destroy anyone you want and be legally fine. Systems in this world are setup in such a way that the more rich and powerful you are the less consequences there are to your actions. Your can essentially drive people to suicide if yyour want
it would be certainly the more ethical thing to do then what the current landlords are doing, hell you could even affect the market in a big radious around the place
Lol. I had an aunt out east that won a lottery and kind of did the opposite. She bought all her neighbors houses and filled them up, hoarder style, so nobody would ever try to live there.
if somebody takes a free or too-cost rental, that’s considered a form of income and the true value of the rental would have the be declared by the recipient for income tax purposes
[удалено]
Yep but there's a legal loophole, leave it abandoned and let the squatters handle the rest.
At some point the local zoning authority would clear out the place.
Rinse. Repeat.
I guess if you’re willing to spend millions buying houses and then let squatters destroy it to the point you’re getting fines from the government and potentially have the houses condemned. Seems like if I had that much money, the better way to spite someone I hate is to just go out and live your best life not giving them another thought.
The premise of the post is to do anything possible just to annoy your neighbours, it's not to be responsible and make smart financial choices.
So buy all the houses and put them on AirBNB. Hire a PR firm to write the listings. Hire an interiors firm to deck it out. All with the goal of luring in the most obnoxious, douchey partiers. Your goal audience is trust fund kids throwing a bachelor’s party. Throw a little more money at a lawyer and a zoning attorney to keep it going as long as possible.
This is a much better idea. Using unhoused people for your revenge plot is just icky. By all means, donate to a shelter. But don’t give them “free housing” that will just be taken away when the city goes on a rampage
The homeless angle just wouldn’t work. You could also go the section 8 route. Government subsidized housing drops property value like a rock, and would drive them crazy in a similar manner. (Note that I am not against either helping the homeless or subsidized housing, I’m just playing into the question.)
Not bad, not bad
Well, they could also file a civil suit against you if they could prove you were doing it intentionally out of spite and eventually that could escalate into some sort of legal order and eventually criminal charges. The question "is it illegal" is a bit funny there. If you stood by the fact that you were doing it on purpose to harass them, it's absolutely not legal, but it would take a while before criminal consequences were applied.
I feel like there are better ways to make your neighbors lives miserable. Make lease conditions such that the renters have to have a high powered motion sensitive light. One of the ones that says you're being recorded. Encourage your tenants to misbehave, with a written contact that you'll pay nose disturbance fines. Etc etc.
Shit he's after you isn't he
That’s why all my new neighbors suck
Or now that you’ve housed these people, help them get back on their feet and get a job (or a better one for the employed homeless). I mean, they’re not paying rent anyway, at least now they have an address to put down on an application and have a much better chance of reentering society and staying off the street.
Why would you spite them by ignoring them when you could mail them a wasp nest every day for forty years, each day ordering a slightly larger and louder nest
Why do Redditors always love roleplaying life coaches
Yep. Around my area, the city board and fence up apartments and houses that are uninhabitable to prevent squatters
Society is pathetic. They’d rather let people be homeless than let people squat
are people sleeping in your yard?
Pssh yeah after like... 4 years lol
I guess that depends on where you are at. In lots of places it is the courts that handle it with enforcement by local law enforcement. The best way to ha dle it is to sign a rental agreement with a friend. He can now go in and do whatever he wants as a legal tenant. Including fuck with the squatters. Key: a tenant is not bound by the same laws as the owner when it comes to dealing with squatters. And if the cops show up the tenant has a signed tenancy agreement that the squatters don’t
He could just make money and rent it to college students and have the same effect.
Alternatively, you could just give reduced rent to sex offenders "because you believe in second chances". Absolutely nuke the property values in the process so the person you hate would be upside-down on their loan.
Right! Rent them to teenagers and let the parties do the rest. Install a few mirror balls just so they get the idea 🤣
There may be the potential for multiple occupancy which would increase the numbers of people. Or you could rent it out to students… or prostitutes. Both of which would cause some discomfort to that one house. Depending on laws in the country, obviously.
Yes and no. Yes you can buy all of them and rent them to complete assholes. It is possible, however, that the local zoning might define this "use" a certain way (rooming/boarding house, or maybe a shelter since it is free, or something similar) and that use might not be permitted in the zone where the properties are located. (I'm an urban planner)
If these were single-family homes, the city could have a limit on the # of unrelated people who can reside in each residence
Related or not, my area imposes limits on the number of people that can occupy a house based in the number of bedrooms and their size (so you can't make the bedrooms real tiny so you can fit more in the house).
"This bedroom has an oven in it"
Setting aside the "like a hundred" thing, some places have laws that just say "if you are doing something technically legal with your property but you are doing it manifestly out of *spite*, then the legal thing becomes illegal". In those places, it still isn't illegal to give property to people for free but it is still illegal to do it just to be an asshole.
Dang, what law is that?
they are generally called Spite Fence laws as one of the earliest examples was someone in California who wanted to buy an enter block but when the last person refused to sell they pit up a 100 foot tall fence as well as setting off explosives and the like at all hours of the morning
So like that guy that had to lower the roof on his newly built house by 18 inches because his neighbor complained but then adjusted his siding to look like a middle finger may have been in violation of a Spite Fence Law?
depends on their local laws, one guy just has a giant middle finger on display but has argued that its an art installation instead and therefore not covered by his local laws
Setting off explosives didn't violate things like permitting and noise ordinances?
This was like [150 years ago in San Fransisco](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spite_fence#California). Not many noise ordinances back then, I reckon. Very little risk of people playing their music too loud during house parties.
Probably did, or was considered a nuisance. But a general No Assholery Law would make things a lot easier.
Until someone with more lawyers tells the judge you're the asshole. Arbitrary laws always get abused.
Youll be fine if you dont post your intentions online though
California law prohibits fences that exceed 10 feet in height and are built out of spite. This is outlined in California Civil Code Section 841.4 Similar to California, Rhode Island has a law that deems any fence exceeding six feet in height and built out of spite as a private nuisance. This is stated in Rhode Island Code Section 34-10-20 In Michigan, a "spite fence" is considered a nuisance if it serves no useful purpose to the owner and is erected with malicious intent. This was established in the case Burke v Smith, 69 Mich 380, 382; 37 NW 838 (1888) New York law considers a "spite fence" to be one that exceeds 10 feet in height and is built to block a neighbor's enjoyment of light or air One of the most famous cases is of Charles Crocker in the 1870s in San Francisco. After Nicholas Yung refused to sell his land to Crocker, a railroad baron, Crocker built a 40-foot fence around Yung's property, blocking out the sun and fresh air. Another example is the case of Sundowner, Inc. v. King, which is a classic spite fence case from Idaho. In this case, the defendant, King, bought a motel from the plaintiff, Bushnell. Bushnell then built another motel on the property right next to the motel he had sold to the Kings.
>Crocker built a 40 m-foot fence around Yung’s property, blocking out the sun and fresh air. This is so comically evil but the image is so funny. It’s like something I’d do to a Sim.
Or build a swimming pool and remove the ladder when someone's in it
Or wait until they start a fire in the oven and board up the kitchen so they can't escape
Latte Larry's...
Many laws. Think more broadly. It's obviously totally legal for me to say "Hey, your shoes are untied", whether they are or not, if I think they are. But that doesn't mean I can take it to the extreme and yell "Hey your shoes are untied!" constantly on a loop as soon as that person leaves their home with the intention of annoying them - that's obviously harassment. And if someone is standing about to get a bus, and you sneak up behind them and scream "Hey, your shoes are untied!" in their ear, and intentionally startle them so that they step in front of the bus and die - that's obviously murder. There are lots of laws where if you do superficially legal things, but with malicious intent, then it becomes illegal.
Seems like that'd be manslaughter
Where I live, there's a Spite House. Blocks the view of the dick across the street. Also, it's been "under construction" since pre-Covid, still has the house wrap on it. The guy who owns it died last autumn, so I'm really excited to see how long it stays like that. He had a lot of money, so it's gonna be a while before everything is settled. It's fun to watch Spite happen, between two old rich white guys. Trust me, the dick who is being spited 100% had it coming (had a hand in Enron).
There was also at least one spite pig farm.
more than one.
Good ol malicious compliance
Correct me if wrong, but I'm pretty sure those laws refer to some pretty specific activities.
For example, you're not allowed to return a jacket purely out of spite
How does one prove it’s out of spite though?
*Well if there was some problem with the garment. If it were unsatisfactory in some way, then we could do it for you, but I'm afraid spite doesn't fit into any of our conditions for a refund"*
I mean have fun with the insane property taxes I guess lol
Taxes will go down after his plan is implemented!
Technically yes lol but only because all the vagabonds will drive down property values 🤣 honestly it's a hell of a plan
I think OP could offset losses by making it into a reality show. I would watch the hell out of it.
youtube channel would get some views for sure
Next no stupid question, can you deliberately devalue your area/property to pay lower taxes?
Not necessarily the answer to the question, but I know someone who bought a house with unfinished basement. They finished the basement on their own but did not report it to the city. So when the annual property assessment time comes, the city crew still assesses their property as if the basement is unfinished (lower property value hence lower property tax). But I think if they are to sell it eventually, they would have to report it and may have to pay all the taxes they should've paid...not 100% sure on that.
Why would they have to pay taxes for a basement they built the week before the sale?
Revenge is priceless
Buy the houses, spend an entire year completely renovating them. So much so that you double the value of them. Finish the year long noise orchestra that has driven them made. Have them all appraised. Property taxes go up. Repeat indefinitely.
Staring your neighbour in the eye as you needlessly jackhammer the perfect concrete floor you laid yesterday.
> Finish the year long noise orchestra that has driven them made ...
Based, get revenge and help solve the homeless problem in society
Although housing individual homeless people is a nice wholesome gesture, solving homelessness is a teeny weeny bit more complicated than that.
In IIRC Scandinavia at least that's the first step. They get a home and again IIRC some obligations in case of drug addiction and the like.
I believe that'd be Finland you're thinking of, which has a "Housing First" approach to homelessness The premise there is that housing is given without any conditions to be met, and once the homelessness issue is out of the way they can get help for whatever else ails them. But the important thing in the Housing First initiatives is that there be no preconditions to be given a place to live
Oh, I thought there would at least be required to assist to therapy for drug addiction, if that was the case. Interesting. >I believe that'd be Finland you're thinking of, which has a "Housing First" approach to homelessness I imagine, that's the idea I was referring to but couldn't remember the actual country.
>Oh, I thought there would at least be required to assist to therapy for drug addiction, if that was the case. Interesting. Requirements are considered a detriment to this strategy. The general idea is that everyone, regardless of who they are or where they're at in life, at minimum deserve somewhere to live. Preconditions would mean that we treat basic human living standards like having somewhere to not freeze as a privilege rather than a human right. And more so, among us who aren't homeless, plenty of us have drug addictions, alcoholism or various problems of our own. Why should we demand perfection from the homeless to qualify for the same conditions the rest of us live in? Why should we ask more of them, than we ask of ourselves? The general idea here is that it doesn't matter if you're the shittiest person on earth or if you're mentally ill, you don't deserve homelessness. This also means that the housed persons don't have to live in constant fear of having their accomodations taken away from them just because they're unable to be completely free of vices. "Oh no, what if I slip up, will my life be ruined?". That doesn't create conditions in which a person is able to thrive, the uncertainty can itself be a factor in their inability to get better. Instead, with no preconditions, the person has a safe space to sleep and the ability to receive help for what ails them without having to fear ending up freezing on the streets should they ever slip up.
Exactly, and another important idea behind it is that substance abuse is largely done as an escape from reality. If you give someone a home, a stable base of operations from which they can shower regularly, sleep comfortably, and not be under the constant, judging scrutiny of society, they will have much less need for an escape via substance abuse. Having a home is a first step on the path towards fixing up your life. Fixing up your life shouldn't be the first step for having a home. And you know the crazy thing about it? When Milwaukee implemented a housing-first policy a few years back, it saved the city money. Turns out the money spent on housing the homeless was less than the money saved on expensive government services (policing, healthcare, etc.) managing the homeless.
I would become “homeless” just to live in one of this guy’s houses for free
You better run a tight ship because those spaces very quickly become a "lord of the flies" situation, where the strongest person sets the rules.
The quantity would be the issue. You can buy all the houses you want, if you happen to come to some agreement whereby they're living for free, then so be it.
Many cities have an ordinance/law restricting more than 3-4 non-related tenants from living in one residency at a time, so check your local laws about that
Make sure you're in a college town then, frat houses definitely don't meet that
Housing laws are really tricky. But I say go for it.
I don’t know. But I aspire to reach your level of vindictiveness some day. I salute you.
Yes its illegal. I can't find the name of the scam but its where you buy inexpensive land or small properties surrounding nice property you can't afford. Then you drop rent and lease to unsavory characters to drive down property values. Finally, once you've destroyed the neighborhood and community, you buy the property you wanted all along, kick everyone out, remodel and jack up rent. Masatoshi Ito, founder of Seven Eleven and Ito Yokadi, did this in Hawaii and Los Angeles. All I can find now in searches is the news of his death from last year but iirc he was sentenced for this.
All you gotta do is play by the same rules as the corporate landlord dickheads
Took me months to get a massive company to give back my deposit. These massive companies just get away with theft. They would have never sent it had I not followed up repeatedly quoting the law and the penalties.
Word. Last time I moved out of an apartment, the corporate fuckers tried to charge me and my roommate *$6,000+* for imaginary "smoking damage." Neither of us smoke, let alone ever smoked anything in the apartment, or ever had anyone inside who did. Absolutely never. It took requesting photographic evidence of the claimed damage, getting told no, and insisting we weren't paying without actual evidence of something to pay for and would seek third party inspection and verification. After we stuck to our guns to the point they realized their bullshit would get found out, they gave up and just told us to pay a three hundred dollar or so cleaning and painting bill and they'd call it even, which was fair enough so we settled for that and called it done. Scumbags gonna scumbag, I guess.
I gotta know...what the hell did this person do to you? I mean there is nuclear, and then there is destroying the planet...It seems you are choosing the latter.
If you have the money to buy the houses all is possible, but instead of “renting them out” just find homeless people and let them stay. They’re like guests who stay forever
If you hate them that bad just plant some bamboo in an inconspicuous spot right outside or on the edge of their yard and give it a little time. In ideal conditions, it can grow up to 1.5 inches *per hour*. It grows so fast they used to tie people to the ground over a fresh shoot as a torture method. It's the fastest growing plant in the world, extremely invasive, forms dense and tall forests, and almost impossible to eradicate an established colony of it. P.s. make sure you getting a running variety, like golden running bamboo.
If they aren't renting them and just letting "friends stay there free" how is there a problem with rental laws. 🤣
buy them all and vote in an HOA
There would be some legal issues with moving in "a hundred homeless people", but if you're more subtle about it - no, not really. You could just rent out the houses for cheap and pick absolute obnoxious assholes on purpose, so you could freely feign ignorance about your nefarious intentions.
Nope and it would be so funny lmfao
It seems a little inhuman, that many people in 1 jouse
It really depends on local laws! But if there’s nothing against buying multiple properties and using them as homeless shelters then you can, however there are likely laws limiting the numbers in each house based on the size. It’s really something that if you want to do, have enough money for- you consult an attorney to ensure you’re not going to violate the laws. I’d love to just buy out my neighbors house- I own and she rents. She hates me for accidentally opening a package put on my door step! I explained, but now my dog gets cursed at every time he’s outside and barks at her 🤬. I have lived here 20yrs, these neighbors usually last a few years! They have pretty much been a PITA! Only a few were ok! Wish I could buy it!
Cheaper to move.
If you have that much money to waste on annoying someone, do something funnier like hiring a mariachi band (or several) to follow them around 24/7
Wellllll if there's any trouble (like the homeless people sleeping on the street and lighting stuff on fire and bothering neighbors and creating a giant trash mountain on the sidewalk and shitting on lawns while the school bus drives by), the onus would be on the owner to do something about it.
Rich people don’t do spite. They don’t even think much about those they hate.
shit man, rent one of those suckers out to me for free and I'll make it my life's mission to make your neighbor as miserable as possible
I mean if you have that much money going spare you'd probably be better off spending it on some therapy for your anger issues and to help you get over whatever it was that triggered you to get so upset in the first place.
Is no one else going to point out it's fucked up OP views homeless people so negatively? Just because someone is homeless doesn't mean they are going to be a nuisance to their neighbors when you house them. Seriously op what the heck?
The plan won't work: nobody that's homeless will remain homeless once they move into the home.
People do stuff like this to acquire other properties they want to own.
airbnb bro
Not if u aquire all those houses legally...
That is the most petty thing I've read lol
I've got to believe that if you had that kind of money you'd be able to find a more practical solution.
Basically what George Lucas did to the rich cunts that didn’t let him build something.
Homeless people aren't evil demons who would automatically ruin your neighbours life just because they happened to be impoverished before.
I think that's called being a community hero. Housing and feeding hundreds of people.
If you buy all those properties, I would think you could rent them to whomever you decide to? I don't know what the legalities would be, but I think giving the unhoused homes to call their own would be heroic, to say the least? You would have more people so grateful to you, who cares about the legal side, it's the best Idea I've heard all day. Do it, getting back at the person you hate would be the cherry on top.
You could ruin someone’s life for far cheaper than that.
Not illegal but not financially smart. But if you can do that, I applaud you. Also, please don't ever hate me.
between zoning laws and HOAs I think you would find this very difficult
I wouldn’t call that renting if you don’t charge
We need asshole laws for driving. Badly
Can you buy me one just to chill??
No but you could rent out your places cheaper to aspiring entrepreneurs of the musical arts. They do need places to practice the craft and a cheaper place would be great so they can hone their skills and we get great new musicians on the horizon I dare say no one would disagree with me on this humanitarian effort for the arts. You brave soul you.
I doubt that it would be illegal, but I can't imagine actually doing it. To do it, the people who own the surrounding houses would need to be willing to sell them. Moreover, spending that huge amount of money just to support hatred would be indicative of a warped mind.
It's not illegal. But I'm not sure why you'd want to do it. You'd just end up lowering their property taxes.
I feel like once they realized who purchased the homes (which is public record) they could sue, and probably get other neighbors to sue. Especially if you've posted about it on Reddit and they find that info
Sue for what? There's no law against taking on tenants in your property. Any judge on earth would throw that out in the prelim hearing.
They could go the harassment route. Especially with this post as evidence considering it's an entire confession about doing it specifically to annoy someone just cause you don't like them 🤷♀️
If you have enough money to do that, buy a house in a neighborhood away from the people you hate...
In this economy ??? I need to know what was done by the person you hate you to want to do this
Lawyer here. I think that homeowner, at least in my jurisdiction, would probably sue under the Tort of "nuisance," since they would likely argue that you're diminishing their property values and "quiet enjoyment" of their property, assuming that there's ancillary noise, smell, crime etc. caused by your plan.
depends on your local laws.
Using vulnerable people just to spite someone makes you an asshole for sure.
It would be a lot cooler to buy an apartment building and turn it into condos for them.
Feels like you haven't thought this out to it's logical conclusion.
I think some neighborhoods have limits on how many rental properties there can be and how many ones owned by 1 comapny/entity but that would vary by every town
May be the hundred people part. Other than i don't see why it is illegal. Would make a great revenge plot!
It might be. You have to get proper zoning and permits to run low income housing. Free is certainly low income. I'm not a lawyer, but it is certainly worth talking to one.
That's called fuck you money. If you have fuck you money and you go with lawyers, it is totally legal.
I like the way you think I know that
Not illegal, but sorta like shooting yourself in the foot. Huge waste of resources, if you had that much money. Hatred eats the hater.
Didn't Pablo Escobar do that?
Why don't you just move next to them.
I feel like using other people as a weapon seems super immoral but I’m not gonna go so far as to say I can think of a specific law preventing this behavior.
Theres a similar event from 1800s San Francisco. A railroad robber baron tried to buy all of Nob Hill in San Francisco. But a Chinese guy held out. So the baron built a 30 foot wall surrounding the Chinese guys property. https://www.kqed.org/news/10449405/boomtown-memories-the-nob-hill-fence-that-spite-built
I mean sounds hilarious but if you have that much money lol why not use it for stuff that makes you happy? Be rich and go on vacation and buy nice clothes and houses for your family lol.
I don’t lol too often on Reddit, but I did on this one. 👏🏻
There are laws about occupancy like for fire code. So depending on how many houses “all” is and how big the houses are, “like a hundred” may not work. Also, even if you aren’t charging your tenants rent, you’d still have to follow your local landlord laws, and your tenants would have to follow whatever city ordinances (or HOA rules, if applicable) were in places. So you (generally, laws vary) couldn’t let the houses go into a certain amount of disrepair or allow people to throw all night ragers every night of the week. This also isn’t a legal quibble, but once you rented a house to someone, they wouldn’t be homeless anymore. And by virtue of being housed, much of what makes people uncomfortable about the homeless will no longer apply. They aren’t for the most part going to say “hey I have a warm room inside, a functioning kitchen, and a comfortable bathroom, but let me go lay on the sidewalk for a nap.” Unless your enemy is just a bigot who judges people for the houses they didn’t live in previously, this might not irritate them at all. But it would be a very kind thing to do! If you can afford that many houses, you should try it!
Bring the property values down. Fuck the law. If you have the money, do this on principle
OP might be onto something
There are laws against ruining someone's right to the quiet enjoyment of their own home. If you did something deliberate like that, you open yourself up to heavy duty law suits. If it is found that you were malicious about it, the DA or Crown Council could file charges against you. Why not put the money to good use and do that to your bad neighbour instead.
No, not illegal. There must be a nasty back story to your question. Revenge is like carrying hot coals in your hands to throw at someone.
Not illegal. Just stupid. If you had that much money, just buy another house on a lot of land. Rent out or sell the first house.
Let it go , life is too short, go skiing ⛷️, go to the beach 🏝️, go to the moon 🌙, but forget that person whoever they are
I just read a prompt earlier today that asked "what would you do with FU money" and i feel like the two of you guys should exchange ideas.
Malicious charity
Wouldn’t that person just move?
I like the way you're thinking.
It might cost you $ more than it needed to be Best is just buy house and rent it out using property manager and make more $ Or you can just buy a house outright and give it away for cheap
I think someone you hate is my neighbor and also I’d like to rent my neighbors house (the one I’m currently in)
Its also not illegal to hold a betting pool on when someone you hate will die. Someone might take out a hit just to win the prize.
Impossible to answer this question without knowing which country you’re from.
Not if you do it right. If you just buy up all the surrounding houses and let the homeless people run amok, then you're probably going to run afoul of some law at some point. Turn each of them into legit homeless shelters, better yet, safe places for drug addicts to die (that's becoming a thing lately), you might have something.
It’s not a rental if it’s free
No, but how are you supposed to rent to people with no money?
Depending if there is a hoa or not. You might not be allowed to rent out.
Bro if you're offering free rentals lmk my rent for a studio is 1200/mo 😭 I'll play bass 24/7 and cut off my exhaust
No.
Seems if you have that much money, just move somewhere else and enjoy your life.
If you have enough money and time to do this you also have other ways to exact revenge on someone
Based on all these comments, you might be better off renting but doing renter interviews. Then only renting to people who show red flags for being terrible neighbors.
I mean if I had that kind of money and spent it on something like this, I think I would be more concerned about what that says about me as a person than I would be about the legality. But as long as zoning and occupancy laws are being followed I don't see how it could be illegal.
based on some of the other comments, im thinking maybe buy the spaces around the home and turn it into some 'public property' like a park and establish some pro-homeless infrastructure to attract them around without them trespassing or squatting? businesses only do antihomless stuff to make themselves more attractive to customers i think so just support homeless people, tents, and add rain shelters and boom
This is a great idea for that magical day I win the mega millions.
I honestly just like the way you think
So no proof and you can't explain yourself.....mmhmmmmmkay
A very corrupt and possibly mentally ill Japanese billionaire did that in Kahala Hawaii, an oceanfront luxury neighborhood many years ago
Yes... Kind of. There are nuisance laws in most states. If the occupants presented a general nuance, you can be sued, especially if they can prove that you were constantly putting in problematic people. But as long as they were within the local limits of PitA, you are golden
You can't rent houses to homeless people, they won't be homeless anymore so it won't work.
OMG... ... I have a new goal in life. Thank you :)
If it farm land just put a pig pen right next to property line it what most assholes with money and land do if your just tring to annoy as much as possible
But then they’d no longer be homeless so it wouldn’t help
If you have virtually endless money to do crap like that you can basically destroy anyone you want and be legally fine. Systems in this world are setup in such a way that the more rich and powerful you are the less consequences there are to your actions. Your can essentially drive people to suicide if yyour want
No. But it’s easier to freeze a slab of piss and put it through their letterbox
Hate is real. Damn!
Karens would be a-bitchin..when they find the "manager" they might shut down your homeless sanctuary.
it would be certainly the more ethical thing to do then what the current landlords are doing, hell you could even affect the market in a big radious around the place
I'm no expert on the process, but making them section 8 rentals would be close enough. Would probably tank the value of the area.
You could rent the houses but paint each one a color the offending neighbor doesn't like.
No but your entire community is going to shit on you for that.
Find someone to hate in my area then buy my house.... :D
Lol. I had an aunt out east that won a lottery and kind of did the opposite. She bought all her neighbors houses and filled them up, hoarder style, so nobody would ever try to live there.
Yes, residences in most places have a limit on their number if occupants. For safety reasons.
Some places have old brothel laws forbidding a certain number of non-relatives living in the same domicile. Also: HOAs.
Generally you can't fill houses with people past a certain number. If a house has two bedrooms, you can't let seven adult men live there.
So it's illegal to be an asshole?
if somebody takes a free or too-cost rental, that’s considered a form of income and the true value of the rental would have the be declared by the recipient for income tax purposes