#disputed property

[litigation-property]

Why do people fight for property?

ಹಣ ಮತ್ತು ಸಂಪತ್ತು ಜನರನ್ನು ಆಮಿಷಕ್ಕೆ ಒಳಪಡಿಸುವ ದೊಡ್ಡ ಆಮಿಷವಾಗಿದೆ, ಪ್ರತಿಯೊಬ್ಬರೂ ಶ್ರೀಮಂತರಾಗಲು ಬಯಸುತ್ತಾರೆ ಅಥವಾ ಅವರಿಗೆ ಬೇಕಾದುದನ್ನು ಖರೀದಿಸುವ ಮೊತ್ತವನ್ನು ಗಳಿಸಲು ಬಯಸುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಜನರು ಸುಲಭವಾಗಿ ಮತ್ತು ಸಂಪತ್ತಿನ ಪರಿಮಳವನ್ನು ಒಮ್ಮೆ ರುಚಿ ನೋಡುತ್ತಾರೆ, ದುರಾಸೆಯು ಸಹೋದರ ಸಹೋದರಿಯರ ನಡುವೆ ಬಿರುಕು ಮತ್ತು ಆಸ್ತಿ ವಿವಾದಗಳನ್ನು ಸೃಷ್ಟಿಸುತ್ತದೆ.

[alwaysbewoke]

[fullyfazed]

Some older sketches of Hick

[nordfjording]

once when i lived in the south of norway i ended up in a discussion with friends from the southeast (relatively flat area) because their idea of a 'bad road' was a winding road so when i complained about roads in the west being bad they thought i meant there were a lot of turns. and i had to tell them about when someone in my home town owned a shire horse that caused municipal govt a lot of trouble because when the horse walked on public roads the asphalt would crack and crumble bc the ground was too soft to support the weight.

so yknow. we live in different contexts i guess.

[notarieslondon]

Trusted Notary Public Services for Contracts, Wills, and More

Need documents notarized? Our Notary Public services provide fast, reliable, and professional notarization for affidavits, contracts, wills, and more. We ensure accuracy and confidentiality, making the process simple and stress-free.

[buzzblend]

Widow loses life savings after ‘firetrap’ developer fails to repay €150k loan

A controversial developer who asked to borrow the life savings of an 81-year-old widow has failed to repay the money after half a decade of broken promises.

In 2017, the widow gave €160,000 in cash to developer Paddy Byrne, who built the Millfield Manor estate in Co. Kildare where six houses burnt to the ground in under 30 minutes in 2015.

The cash was for a penthouse apartment in Dublin she planned to move into.

The development was built by Victoria Homes, a company that was established by Mr Byrne’s sister Joan just before Mr Byrne was precluded from acting as a company director in Ireland for five years.

After viewing plans for the €630,000 property, in a development called Greygates in Mount Merrion, the pensioner withdrew the cash from her bank and gave it to Mr Byrne.

Some €10,000 of this was a deposit, with the remaining €150,000 provided on the advice of a third party who was known to Mr Byrne and the widow, who said the cash would secure a good price.

According to a handwritten receipt, signed by Mr Byrne, the money was provided on May 29, 2017.

But in November 2017 the widow, a retired primary school teacher, found a more suitable home and asked for her money back.

Mr Byrne agreed to this, saying he would have no problem selling the penthouse and promptly refunded the €10,000 deposit.

However, he asked that the remaining €150,000 be treated as a 14-month loan and promised to pay a 10% annual interest rate.

This effectively turned the widow into an unwitting creditor of Victoria Homes.

According to a handwritten agreement, signed by Mr Byrne, the loan was to be ‘paid back from the sales proceeds’ of the penthouse at his Greygates development.

More than half a decade later, the loan remains unpaid – even after the widow made a criminal complaint to gardaí and took legal action to secure a judgement.

As it is a civil matter, the Garda investigation faltered. And because various other unpaid creditors had previously secured judgements against Victoria Homes, the widow is now unlikely to get her savings back. During the Celtic Tiger years, Paddy Byrne was renowned for his €2.4m Sikorsky helicopter and sponsorship of the Irish National Hunt festival.

But in 2011 his then-firm, Barrack Homes, went bust and Mr Byrne declared bankruptcy in Britain with debts of €100m.

He was banned from acting as a UK director for 10 years in 2012.

This ban was scheduled to end in 2022 – and ran the full course – but it only applied in the UK and Wales.

According to the UK insolvency register today, Mr Byrne’s discharge from UK bankruptcy is ‘suspended indefinitely’ until the fulfilment of conditions made in a 2012 court order.

Separately, in Ireland, he was also restricted from acting as a director for a period of five years – which ended in January 2018.

Mr Byrne is also known for building the Millfield Manor estate in Newbridge, Co. Kildare, where half a dozen houses were razed to the ground within 30 minutes in 2015.

A report into the blaze found ‘major and life-threatening serious shortfalls and discrepancies and deviations from the minimum requirements of the national mandatory building regulations’ at Mr Byrne’s development.

Today, having exited bankruptcy, Mr Byrne is best known as the figurehead behind Victoria Homes and associated businesses, which was set up by his sister and her husband in December 2012, while he was bankrupt.

Mr Byrne was not a director or owner of Victoria Homes during the period of his bankruptcy. But, in 2017, Mr Byrne’s sister and her husband stepped back from Victoria Homes, transferring their shares to an offshore entity in Belize city called Victoria Holdings.

In November 2022, the main lenders to Victoria Homes – the Lotus Development Group – forced the firm into receivership for the second time.

In 2020, Lotus had forced a previous short-lived receivership before agreeing a deal that saw Victoria Homes begin trading normally once more.

Today, Mr Byrne appears to have left Victoria Homes behind and seems to be focusing on a new firm instead.

Set up in the summer of 2020, Branach Developments is entirely owned by Mr Byrne and is not encumbered by any bank debt or mortgages as Victoria Homes was.

According to the latest filed accounts, for the year ended 2021, Branach Developments held ‘tangible assets’ of €210,000 and ‘stocks’ of €600,000.

The accounts also show that, in 2021, Mr Byrne provided the company with an interest-free loan of €1,024,438.

Just last week Mr Byrne’s new firm was one of the winners at the National Property Awards sponsored by the Business Post and Deloitte, among others.

At the award ceremony, Branach Developments took home the prize for best sustainability initiative of the year.

However, Mr Byrne, who shuns publicity and is rarely photographed, does not appear to have attended the ceremony and the award was accepted by a colleague.

This week the Irish Mail on Sunday sent queries to Mr Byrne via his mobile phone, his email at Victoria Homes and his email at Branach Developments, without response.

Queries to his solicitor and the separate accountancy firms representing Victoria Homes and Branach Developments also went unanswered as did calls to the numbers on the websites of these firms.

Mr Byrne also previously declined to respond to questions from the MoS relating to the establishment of Victoria Homes during the period of his bankruptcy.

At the time, Mr Byrne appeared to be living at Ballinrahin House, close to Rathangan on the border of Offaly and Kildare.

The home is a luxury build on 26 acres of stud-railed paddocks with six stables and a 1.3km tree-lined avenue behind electric gates.

The property was on sale for €2.8m in 2009, but land registry records confirm that, in November 2014, it was sold to Victoria Homes for a knockdown price of €484,000.

Ownership of Ballinrahin House was transferred offshore to Victoria Holdings in Belize on April 10, 2018, just weeks before Mr Byrne was due to repay the €150,000 back to the widow.

[eretzyisrael]

“Few places in Jerusalem speak of the larger conflict being waged over the city more than the apartment of 68-year-old Nora Ghaith-Sub Laban,” avers the Associated Press’ Isabel DeBre today (“As a lengthy legal battle ends, a Palestinian family braces for eviction from Jerusalem home“).

Whether or not that is true, what is plainly apparent is that the Associated Press’ repeated failure to accurately cover the Sub Laban story speaks of a larger problem plaguing media coverage of Israeli-Palestinian affairs.

In 2015, the leading news service depicted the Sub Laban’s real estate saga as a story of Israeli dispossession and displacement of Palestinians. “They (Israelis) are trying to uproot us from Jerusalem, they are stealing the houses, the trees and the stones of the city,” AP’s Karin Laub and Mohammed Daraghmeh quoted Nora Sub Laban at the time.

Initially, the 2015 article did not contain a single word about the family’s failure to return to the rented home following lengthy renovations completed in 2001, an absence which jeopardized their status as “protected tenants.” Only after CAMERA contacted editors did AP add a paragraph about the court’s critical finding that the family did not reside in the home for years after 2001, which was the determining factor in the court’s ruling against the Sub Labans’ claim.

At the time, research by CAMERA’s Gideon Shaviv revealed:

The magistrate court (34656-11-10) in a decision upheld by the district court (28083-12-14) found that the family had not returned to the apartment in 2001. According to the court from 2001-2010 (when the property was transferred to the trust) the family did not live in the apartment. From 2010 until 2014, they had only “pretended” to live in the apartment. This decision was based on the following evidence: Additionally, a private investigator testified that he had interviewed neighbors and none of them knew the Sub-Labans. The court found in 2014 that the Sub-Labans have been living with their extended family in another apartment for 30 years, since 1984. The article references the period of 1984 to 2001, stating “Throughout this period, the family rented an apartment elsewhere in the city.” But it does not mention that the family continued to live elsewhere for more than a dozen additional years.

A significant CAMERA-prompted 2016 New York Times editor’s note addressing, in part, the Sub Laban case, stated:

In response to 2015 communication from CAMERA, AP added the following information, buried deep in the 22nd and 23rd paragraphs:

Last year, a magistrate court approved the eviction order. The court’s decision was based on a finding that the apartment had remained empty between 2001 and 2010, saying there was little to no use of water or electricity during that time. The family says the ruling relied heavily on settler testimony, and that it lived in the building throughout the period. Sub-Laban said the home was empty at times because he and his siblings went to university in Jordan and their parents would come to visit, but that otherwise the house was in constant use and the family paid rent. He said there were problems with utilities and that they sometimes had to rely on a neighbor to get water.

Yet even this moderate improvement ignores the fact that the court’s finding about the empty apartment applied not only from 2001 to 2010, but also to the period of 2010 to 2014, when the family was found to have fraudulently staged their residence. The family’s response that the court “relied heavily on settler testimony” does not address the fact that they failed to bring any witnesses to testify on their behalf.

Fast forward to today’s coverage, which completely ignores even the incomplete information about the court’s findings regarding the more limited 2001 to 2010 absence. Signaling deteriorating coverage, DeBre now maintains: “As Muslims of the same Muslim Quarter apartment for seven decades, Nora’s family gained the status of protected tenants, putting Israeli law on their side.”

Ignoring the already underreported absence of 2001 to 2010 which AP belatedly cited in 2015, today AP now notes only trips abroad in 2019, stating: 

Most recently, the Kollel Galicia endowment argued in 2019 that Nora’s absence form her house that year could clear the way for their eviction. Nor said the house was empty at times in 2019 because she was hospitalized with a back injury and later recovered in the houses of her adult children, whom Israeli authorities had previously expelled from the Old City apartment.

In a separate reprise of AP’s substantive shortcomings in 2015 coverage, DeBre’s article errs:

“It’s Jewish property and they want it back,” [Arieh King] said. “The (Ghaith-Sub Labans) don’t have any right to this property.” There is no equivalent right in Israel for hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who fled or were forced from their homes during the war surrounding Israel’s establishment to return to lost properties.

First, DeBre is falsely invoking the Israeli Property Law. Since the Sub Labans did not own the property in question, even by their own admission, the Israeli Property Law, which is relevant only in cases of ownership, is completely irrelevant to the Sub Labans’ case.

Second, the claim about disparity in reclaiming property rights is completely disingenuous. Jews who, in 1948, lost their land now under Palestinian control equally have no right to return to their lost properties. For instance, as CAMERA’s colleague Alex Safian has noted, the Dheisheh refugee camp is built on Jewish-owned land and the original Jewish owners have no hope of returning to their lost property.

Moreover, if AP is interested in probing disparity in property rights, it should examine how Palestinian Arabs who lost land in Israel’s establishment in 1948 are entitled to compensation, while no such consideration was ever extended to the 850,000 Jews who fled or were forced out of Arab lands, leaving behind all of their property, businesses and assets.

[ultravioart]

It's also kind of funny that Hater seems to have a type for "Green skin, pink eyes, tall, shoulder pads, sharp ears, etc..." considering Peepers and the watchdogs are basically just... pink eyes. Red technically, but with the pink/purple skin it may elicit enough "cute!" vibes that Hater hired them purely on aesthetics of "this looks totally cool and kawaii to have as minions" lmao It also just occurred to me than since the ol' red eyes are technically red heads, Hater probably doesn't mind orange hair (though he seems to have a preference for blondes). and I can just imagine Peepers slightly freaking out about that since Wander is Orange furred... with a mighty green hat... and Wander adores hater... and Wander is TALLER than Peepers..... lol.... someone is scared of being replaced.

[miichaelbelll]

What is considering litigation?

Considering litigation refers to the process of evaluating the possibility of pursuing a legal claim or lawsuit. This may involve reviewing the facts and circumstances of a case, researching the relevant laws and regulations, consulting with legal experts, and determining whether the potential benefits of filing a lawsuit outweigh the costs and risks involved. The term "considering litigation" implies that a decision has not yet been made and the parties involved are still in the process of evaluating their options.

What kind of cases can be resolved using considering litigation?

Nearly any legal dispute or conflict can be resolved through litigation, but the decision to pursue a lawsuit depends on various factors such as the strength of the case, the likelihood of success, and the costs and benefits involved. Some common types of cases that can be resolved through litigation include:

Contract disputes

Personal injury claims

Employment discrimination cases

Intellectual property disputes

Consumer protection cases

Product liability claims

Real estate disputes

Business disputes

It's worth noting that while litigation can be a way to resolve many types of legal disputes, it is not always the best solution. Alternative dispute resolution methods, such as mediation or arbitration, may be more cost-effective and less time-consuming in some cases.

Which is the right court for me?

The right court for you depends on the specific facts and circumstances of your case. In general, there are several factors that determine which court has jurisdiction over a case, including:

The type of case: Different courts have jurisdiction over different types of cases, such as criminal cases, civil cases, or bankruptcy cases.

The location of the parties involved: A court typically has jurisdiction over a case if the defendant resides or does business in the court's geographic area.

The amount of money at issue: Some courts have jurisdiction over cases involving certain amounts of money, such as small claims court or district court.

It is recommended to consult with an attorney or a legal expert to determine the right court for your case. They can help you understand the legal process, evaluate your options, and make informed decisions about how to proceed.

Who can approach a British Court?

In Britain, the courts are open to anyone who has a legal right to bring a claim or take part in a legal dispute. This includes individuals, companies, organizations, and government entities.

To approach a British court, a person or entity must have standing, which means they have a sufficient interest in the case and are directly affected by the outcome. In some cases, a person may be required to first exhaust other means of resolution, such as mediation or arbitration, before they can bring a case to court.

It's worth noting that the specific rules and procedures for accessing the British court system may vary depending on the type of case and the court in question. In some instances, legal representation may be necessary, especially in complex cases. Seeking the advice of a legal expert can help you understand your rights and obligations and ensure that you follow the correct procedure for approaching the court.

What is the considering litigation process?

The "considering litigation" process refers to the process of evaluating whether to initiate a lawsuit. This process involves reviewing the facts and circumstances of the case, researching the applicable laws, determining the likelihood of success, assessing the costs and risks involved, and deciding whether it is in the best interest of the party to pursue legal action. The process may involve consulting with legal counsel, conducting investigations, and negotiating with the other party in an attempt to resolve the matter without going to court.

[draculasstrawhat]

No, no, no! He was employed the whole time.

Technically, I think he was a partner.

oh that gap in my resume is cuz i was out killing people

[murvinnriservices]

Expert NRI Legal Advisory Services in India

Murvin NRI Services provides expert legal advisory services in India, ensuring seamless solutions for property disputes, documentation, and legal compliance.

[champstorymedia]

Expert Advice: Navigating the Legal System with Ease

Introduction: Navigating the legal system can be a daunting task for many individuals. From understanding complex laws to meeting deadlines and gathering evidence, there are numerous challenges that can arise. However, with expert advice and guidance, navigating the legal system can become much easier. In this article, we will provide you with valuable insights and tips on how to navigate the…

[gottlieblawfirm]

Best Property Asset Division Lawyers - Gottlieb Family Law

With our considerable family law experience, we can help you develop innovative solutions for your property asset disputes to protect your rights and interests. For more information contact Gottlieb Family Law located in the Greater Toronto Area, call us.

[because-im-freaking-greed]

OP's boss thinks they're paying OP to narc, but the fact is that OP is on the clock warning people they've already been caught and giving them the chance to not have to deal with a real cop.

Yall gotta stop stealing. Not for any specific objective moral reason but because you fucking suck at it