I agree, I found that situation to be an example of what the city doesn't do after it has already cited a property for being unsafe. The real issue is to why L&I didn't put a lien on the property and sell it at a sheriff sale, they are owed $10K.
An absent home owner is just that. Is the argument that maybe they would've responded better if they had HD fines (if they exist) and aggravation on top of the L&I fines? Andrew Diller wrote: > I don't see how an in-force HD would change what happened to the Haefner > Hovel. > > How do you think a HD would change this outcome? > > -andy > > --On Tuesday, May 28, 2002 11:12 AM -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > How about an article closer to OUR reality? HD is a far cry from denying > > someone the right to fly the flag or what color curtains they can put in > > their windows- here's one from today's Inquirer showing the real effects > > of property neglect and lack of respect for neighbors and a city > > neighborhood. > > > > Jim Lilly > > > > Posted on Tue, May. 28, 2002 > > > > Monica Yant Kinney | A test of strength in city blight fight > > By Monica Yant Kinney > > Inquirer Columnist > > > > By this time next week, the 6200 block of Lawnton Street may be engulfed > > in enough litigation to make folks forget why they moved to lovely little > > Roxborough in the first place. > > > > > ---- > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the > list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see > <http://www.purple.com/list.html>. -- Richard Hotchkiss http://www.hotstrings-inc.com ---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
