The developer needs to put the lot back exactly as they found it. Maybe the victim ends up owing the developer's company. If that's the case, so be it. Give the developer a hard deadline to fix things.
@@bobroberts2371 that part confuses me. She bought it in a tax auction, presumably the previous owner defaulted on taxes and the lot was taken by the government?? That's certainly more of a title than the contractor had. It was said elsewhere that the contractor attempted to buy the lot and the current owner refused to sell, which makes the contractor completely liable for restoring the lot. They knew they couldn't have it, but stole it anyway.
The developer has made offers beyond the value of the lot and she keeps rejecting them. They're both crappy lots on a crappy street. She could find a far superior lot nearby in trade and come out on top. But she keeps rejecting reasonable offers. That's why the judge is asking to settle.
It’s what they have been doing to kanaka since 1893 as all the lands are patented under the Hawaiian kingdom. We are reclaiming them so anyone on it might want to try negotiating a lease but it’s up questioning.
@@skysurfer5cva "restoring" the landscape is impossible since the trees were native o'hia--some of the slowest growing trees on the planet, and not readily available as a nursery sapling. Beyond that, the vegetation was invasive non-native weeds, the same as every other untended lot in HPP. Also, there's a chop shop/drug house a few lots away on same side of the street. If she gets some unique spiritual vibe at this dime-a-dozen one acre lot, good for her. But it's a creepy street with tons of theft and there are so many other places in the sub development that other people would consider far better suited for the women's retreat she said she intends to build. Hands down. She deserves a fair settlement. But continuing to move the goalposts will leave her nothing to show in the end, and makes me question all her spiritual vibe talk.
Settle, LMAO 😂 It’s called theft by conversion. Settling only opens the door for other developers to accidentally build on someone else’s property hoping for the same outcome.
@@Calinotch06exactly wrong.... She doesn't have clear title... There is a tax lien on the property that she scooped up for a paltry 22, 000... They offered to settle for 160k... I would satisfy the lien with the real owner and tell her to get lost
@@larry-kp9sp As I understand it she paid off the tax lien, and the state says she is the assumed owner but doesn't guarantee that nobody else may have a valid claim on the property. Myself I wouldn't have touched that deal with a 20 foot pole. But as of today with nobody bringing any other claims forward she is the owner of the property. I believe the former owners that had the tax lien lost any claim they had when the state seized and sold the property. But there could be someone else with a valid claim. I don't know if that's at all likely in this instance.
The builder did this to intentionally claim the lot and you could never convince me otherwise. The lady who owns the property should keep her rights to it
That's not what happened. The developer of course is responsible, but it was the contractor who built on the wrong lot. Her lot is exactly like the one adjacent that belongs to the developer, where the house was supposed to go. There is zero motivation for the developer to create this mess intentionally. It was ineptitude, not design. They're both pretty crappy lots on a crappy street.
How about the Judge grow some balls and ask the owner of the property when she wants. That’s not her fault. It’s all up to her period. Weak Justice system here in Hawaii.
Why is everyone badmouthing the judge. He/she is trying to end the stalemate. But we all know the majority of the blame lies with the developer who didn't do things properly.
At this point I think the Judge needs to recuse himself and pass it on to a Judge that has some balls to tell the developer to remove the house and restore her land. The developer trespassed on the property, clear cut it and built a house. I think it was done intentionally. I also think the developer should pay for all her legal fees.
@@bobroberts2371It was in another news story earlier in the week. It also stated there was not a survey done on the land to ensure they were building on the correct parcel. It really does sound fishy.
@@missyvinson6220 Do you really think that a builder is going to risk the loss of a $ 300,000 house on the wrong lot in order to get a piece of property when there are many of the same lots for sale?
@@bobroberts2371 I dont know, people have done crazier things than that and got away with it. Look at all the comments on here saying she should settle. Most people would settle. I would settle, but at the end of the day, she should have her property the way she wants it. Because of her beliefs, the other properties don't work. No one should be forced to give in to something like this.
@@chasetonga you have obviously never been out on a job based on a contract. Numbers gets misplaced, papers gets turned upside down. It happens all the time
Accountability falls on the developer. So tired of construction companies having work change orders, exceeding budgets, etc. Man up and pay for your mistake.
Anyone wanna be a successful business owner, be a contractor on the big island. No such thing as change order or bids. Every job becomes cost plus, therefore contractors never lose money because mistakes or labor. Homeowners get stuck with it all even tho it means they won't be able to afford financing. Messed up right
My brother in law owns a construction company. He was installing a sewer drain for a city using micro boring, basically a tiny tunnel digger. He submitted change orders and was paid for the fact that he encountered ROCKS while he was tunneling... Gee, whodathunk you'd find rocks underground? $400k overrun on a $1.2 million job...
The issue wasn't the construction company. The developer had bought 12 plots of land and hired a construction company to build houses on those lots. There are almost 10,000 lots all almost the same, sandwiched in together. One of the lots the construction company was told to build on was the wrong lot. However the county approved all the permits and passed the inspections for that wrong lot. The construction company didn't do anything wrong. After the construction was finished, a real estate agent sold the house on the wrong lot to a new owner. As they too were completely unaware.
This is a great example of why the American judicial system sucks. This case should never have been filed and has been dragging on for months requiring the owner to pay legal fees simply to get back what is rightfully her property. A judge could have resolved this in one day, ordering that the house be torn down and the property restored. Ridiculous.
The property owner should settle for nothing less than the house being removed, the property being returned to it's original condition, all legal fees paid and punitive damages of $50 million for their frivolous lawsuit. The judge should then be removed from the bench and have their law license revoked.
The only acceptable solution here is to return the land to its original state, and pay the woman for loss of use, loss of value, and legal fees. The developer borked it, and they can unbork it.
The land can not be put back to it's original state. The building process changed the structure of the soil, demolishing it will further change soil structure plus there will be some debris left, the native flora was bulldozed and other problem flora is taking over.
@@selmaalva9031 she bought the property in a tax auction, and that doesn't give her title? Regardless, it's substantially more title than the developer who has stolen the lot from her.
No she's just retarded like most women are.she will do what's she's told with an envelope passed under the table . Hawaii is a corruption machine always has been always will be.
Feel bad for her? She got the lot for pennies on the dollar from a tax sale. They offered her $100,000. Sounds like she is a greedy woman. I hope the judge gives her less
@@courtneesdad what she paid for the land or how she bought it is irrelevant , the developer made a HUGE mistake and they now need to fix it , remove the house , restore her property as much as possible and pay her compensation for the aggravation , stress , anxiety , time etc and lawyers fees . The way developers are allowed to operate , rip people off , go way over budget and time , build faulty houses on faulty land etc and get away with it is absolutely criminal literally and appalling . smdh
@courtneesdad she didn't buy the lot for money reasons. She doesn't want money, she wants that house off her property and she wants the trees restored. they are trying to get her to sell her land to them by building on her property by accident and then pressuring her to sell. That's just wrong and if they let the developer get away with it then developers will start accidently building houses on everyone's property and forcing them to sell the land. And Hawaii is very expensive, $100k is not enough
So the precedent this sets is that a developer can just start building on your land without your permission or having sold it to them, then when you find out, they can sue you to force you to sell the land to them … Make that make sense … Sometimes I wish these scenarios happen to judges and politicians so they can experience the nightmare this woman is going through.
@@LonnieBrewer-dd4wi Wouldn't the real dispute be between her and the previous owner due to the tax lien and title issues? The developer has no teeth in the game because they have no tax lien or title to even do anything on that lot.
What is with judge ?? Is he not competent?? Didn't he go to law school ?? He needs to be removed. He is not competent , this is a straightforward case. Removed his Bar license!!
The developer cur corners by deciding not to have the land surveyed prior to construction. It is 100% the fault of the developer. A settlement for USD1.5M in favour of the land owner should have been imposed by the judge.
I looked up HI law: the right of redemption period ends 1 year after the auction. As such she is now the clear owner. At the same time, if the previous owner wanted the property back the cost is the auction price plus 1% per month thru the redemption period.
So why wouldn’t the court force the builders to tear down the house, and pay the property owner for the damages done to said property? Cause that’s what makes sense, not any of this settling bs. This judge is wrong for this case, they need to get him removed immediately. The property owner is the victim.
"So why wouldn’t the court force the builders to tear down the house, and pay the property owner for the damages done to said property? " Because swapping lots would equitably resolve the dispute but she refuses to do that because she is being unreasonable and trying to game the system to benefit from unlawful enrichment
The developer should be forced to return the lot to the state that it was in before the developer screwed up and pay the woman every single penny that she’s spent dealing with this. Including her travel costs, legal fees, and time away from work.
He shouldn't only be forced to do that if there isn't a more equitable, reasonable solution, and there is. The chick won't take it because she wants the house and she's made a completely assinine lie up that she has to defend in court now.
That won't solve the problem. That will further degregate the soil structure, there will be remaining demolition rubble, the native plants have already been bulldozed and problem fauna has taken over. They cannot give her back her pristine lot.
@@Bonjour-World Not so easy. Those o'hia trees are some of the slowest growing trees on the planet and you can't just pick them up at Home Depot. They can be replanted of course, but they will not grow to size for decades. There weren't that many of them and then rest of the lot was/is what we here call 'trash trees' and other invasive non-native vegetation. There's nothing that special about the lot, and in fact it's quite close to a chop shop and and dealers. There are so many much better options in other parts of the subdivision that she'd do well to demand purchase of in trade for her ruined run of the mill lot. Seriously. That's a seedy part of the neighborhood, and the title to her land is a mess which is why the developer also sued the former owners. She should find a waterfront lot and bail on fighting the developer on this. Let him deal with the can of worms that a new house on a lot with a disputed title is!
There is only one agreement which matters here, and that is whatever the owner of the property wants in regards to the builder removing the illegally built house and replacing all of the vegetation removed by the developer. This situation is the developer's fault 100% and it is the developer who has 100% responsibility to fix his mistake.
the developer has a responsibility to remedy the damages he caused, which came to the cost of the lot- 70k. It's unreasonable to ask him to pay 350k when she could be made whole by swapping lots but she won't do it because she is being unreasonable and is trying to game the courts to get away with unlawful enrichment.
@@jimbeam-ru1my , The developer caused much more than $70,000.00 dollars worth of damage by not checking all relevant records and discovering who really owned this piece of land. It is not even remotely possible for the property owner to be guilty of any form of unlawful enrichment here, unless the developer has lots of political connections in order to influence the courts to decide in such a manner or in any other way to favor this unscrupulous developer. This is a way bigger problem than the real victim forcing the unscrupulous developer to make her whole. It is the developer who made the mistake due to his unscrupulous, criminally negligent behavior. Now the developer has the sole responsibility to revert the property back to its original state, no matter the cost. This is not an honest mistake. This developer stole this piece of land and counted on the victim being a pushover and the courts rolling over. Now that none of this happened the developer is playing victim. This developer is not a victim but in fact is a criminal perpetrator and should be punished as such.
She searched for this property and, relevant or not, it was a lot that alligned with her and her children's birthdays. A lot of Asian people take those things VERY seriously. She said she doesn't want a "different" lot, and I don't blame her. Let the developer take the loss and move on. She shouldn't have to deal with THEIR MISTAKE.
They need to remove the house and restore it to original state. They fucked up and built in the wrong property, that is not the property owners problem.
This case is so messed up because of a failure of HI law. The “developer” would normally be on the hook because that company hired the contractor to build the home. If the contractor is legitimate there should be a bond associated with the contractor’s license which should cover mistakes like this. Tax lien sale: Each state is different but if it conducts a sale for taxes owed on properties those properties that reach a judicial foreclosure should result in a clear title/deed. BEWARE OF TAX LIEN AUCTIONS WHERE THIS ISN’T THE CASE! This property owner is not at fault for the bunging acts of a developer, contractor, and the government. But I doubt the courts have the intestinal fortitude to solve this problem. I suspect the developer has relationship(s) with interested parties.
The settlement would be to return the property to the condition it was in prior to the developer f___ing up. Then cover all expenses that the owner incurred plus any court costs. Then compensate her for her stress and trouble. If it was my property, the house would have been gone the day the developer started the fight.
Reporters forgot to mention the Fact that the developers & builders FAILED to do a survey before the work started!!! INCOMPETENT MISTAKES LIKE THIS ARE WHY SURVEYS ARE DONE.
They also failed to mention that they had asked her to sell the lot to them before they even started building and she refused, and then they went ahead and built the house anyway.
@@jeraldbottcher1588 , SERIOUSLY???!!! If that's true there is no reason the judge should be dragging this on__get that house off her property and restore what was removed! 😣😣😣😣😣
Why should she have to settle for anything? She isn't the one who screwed up and built a house at the wrong location. This one should be entirely on the company to make right.
Apparently this developer is suing this lady, the builder, the architect, the previous owner who lost it for the taxes owed, and the county for issuing the permits. The builder claims the developers did not want to pay to hire surveyors. The judge should decide the case keeping in mind how absurd it is to sue the previous owner the architect and the county which most likely issued the permits for the correct lot. This case should be between the developer and the builder to determine who's paying the demolish the house and replant the trees then rebuild on the correct lot.
Wait, how could land that was auctioned off be reclaimed by the original owner? That’s just as crazy as building on the wrong lot and wanting the lady to settle.
I believe it refers to an estate law, which allows a period of time for heirs to be notified if property was sold at auction for taxes, to allow them a chance to reclaim their loved one’s estate. But as another commenter posted elsewhere, the timeframe is one year in Hawaii. Don’t quote me on any of that though. 😅
2:16 Here in Washington a tax auction clears the title of all encumbrances. Litter could be defined as anything left on another's property without their permission. The house is 'litter'. We know who put it there and they should be responsible for the removal. Man up and admit the mistake. And now you owe her travel expenses and legal fees also.
Apparently in Hawaii the previous owner has the right to buy back the auctioned property within a year of the auction. That year has passed, so the new owner should have clear title.
Not only should the land owner not pay a cent - the builder screwed up and should pay the entire fee. Then the land owner should sue both parties. What an idiot builder - he is done
There is really no way the victim in this case can be made whole. There is a beautiful stretch of woods on our property that my wife played in as a child 70 years ago. She grew up alongside some of those trees. If somebody came in and clearcut that land, it could never be made right.
I have to agree with the comments. The woman that owns the lot did no wrong, and should not be compelled by the legal system to bow to the developer that is actually in the wrong.
Aren't developers required to have a property surveyed before any construction can start? I'm guessing that didn't happen here. How do you build on the wrong lot?
I think they should tear down the house and give the property to the woman, oh and pay all her legal fees and rent for the time the house was on her property.
But the property owner seemed to want a different house/building. Although if they want to pay her a settlement AND she keeps the house, that might be worth considering.
Maybe somebody should look into and see if there is a connection between the judge and the developer... I'm guessing there is... Small island everybody probably knows everybody to some degree.
I thought I read in a previous report that this company had done this before. Am I wrong? If they have, why are they still doing it and getting away with it?
This is a no brainer. The builder is wrong. If she want the house remover, they are obligated to do so. If she wants the land restored to how it was, they would have to make it so. She shouldn't have to "settle" for anything but what she wants. judge is probablt a dem and getting pressure from "the party" to side with a big political donor. city also is to blame, they didn't ensure that the house was being built on the correct lot in the first place. The builder should go after them.
Not sure how a city ensures a builder goes on the correct land. They can show the builder all the maps in the world, but if the builder still goes to the wrong place...
@@LonnieBrewer-dd4wi Exactly. I took offence to that statement as they said "judge is probablit a dem". So this person is assuming political motive to side with a donor. Kind of a far stretch to reach. He could also be republican and we all know how totally upright all of them are, don't we. I don't doubt something either shady or lazy is going on with this judge though.
I don’t believe it was a mistake. Not even an honest mistake. Too many rules and regulations to jump through the loops. Move the house or tear it down. Her property until it isn’t.
Nope the way to settle is for the demolition crew to come in and take down the house and restore the lot to it's original condition. Then they pay for all her legal fees and destruction of property fees.
Since she does not have a clear title to the property and the former owner could lay claim to it in the future, it would be wise to take the money and buy a lot with a clean title.
If the lot is important to her then make them remove it. I am unsure why that is such a hard concept to understand. Any developer that isn't smart enough to make sure he is building on land he owns or is allowed to shouldn't be in the business.
Post Private Property and No Trespassing. Arrest anyone that attempts to access your Private Property. Crystal Clear by Law. Good luck with the Oathless and Lawless Public Servants.
Don't builders have to get permits in HI? How did that work ? Seems to me the application process for the permit would have worked as a check and the builder would not have been able to build there. What went wrong? Can builders not move a house in HAWAII like they do in the continental USA? Seems to me that would have been the best FIRST solution instead of trying to bully the land owner to accept a different lot! She chose that lot for very very intimate reasons. She should not be bullied into surrendering what she bought in good faith. SOmething makes me wonder if the builder had some sort of deal with the original owner? That went sideways and the original owner died right? Was there any deception on the part of the builder to get permits? Or did the builder think he could pull a fast one and because of the other lots the lady from CA would just be expected to take what the builder offered? The builders damaged the lot so the owner of the lot has suffered three times - 1the take over and damage by a builder of her property, 2- being bullied and not given proper monetarily damages for what the builder did 3-the travel expense to go to HI to appear in court! And there is also pain and suffering/stress that has got to be enormous. Didn't the builder have insurance, bonded? That house is GREY - to me that is all it would take to make me think of it as UGLY. Every story seems to slanted toward this builder/developer. WHY?
Developer "I have a nice place just up the road, is what Im offering." Her "I had a nice vacant lot. I also have a cousin who is learning to use an excavator and D750 who needs a place to practice...if you get what I am offering."
It’s her land. They have no right to lay claim because they made a mistake building their house. That’s not her problem. That is her land and she has a right to tell them to leave. ,
She has no title, so legally her ownership of the land is ambiguous. Besides, the more prudent thing to do would be to go in there by force and seize it… just like Kamehameha.
@@AlwaysPeacefulMaDeuce i’m just so angry at all the stuff that’s been happening in Hawaii already Hawaii is my Homeland my ancestry goes way back. to where I could own land if I wanted to, but the waiting list is too long.
@@AMERICANSANGELme hate to break it to you, but DHHL only leases land for 99y years or lifetime, which ever comes first. The original lease holder is allowed to pass the lease to their biological offspring but they still must contain no less than 25% “Hawaiian”. You may be allowed to live on the land for life, and even your child, but your grand children, forget it. DHHL gets caught doing terrible things with the land they’re trusted already. Nothing tells me it will change course unless we, as kanaka, decide to make it happen by force (like Kamehameha).
The idea that a previous owner could claim the lot after a tax auction is ridiculous. When you buy a property at a government tax sale it should (and does everywhere else) come with a clean title.
