At 4:00 today the Salisbury City Council will hold a special meeting to consider a property owner’s request to waive and refund the City’s lien charges for code violations at 304 Delaware Avenue. The owner is the real estate firm operated by the family of John Cannon, which bought the property at a tax sale two years ago. Between the sale and the date when the property was deeded to their firm the City cited and corrected various violations by work that included cutting grass many times, as well as cleaning the premises of trash and boarding up the building there, for a total lien charge of $2,328.16.
The Cannons paid that charge in order to have the title transferred to them, but Mr. Cannon wants the City to repay the funds because they did not own the property when the City had that work performed. They also believe that the City should have given them notice of the violations.
Mr. Cannon’s letter to the City does not say why they did not ask the City to send code violation notices to them or why they could not tell that there were problems by simply inspecting the property. And even if they had been given notice, they would have had the cost of doing the work.
The City administration is opposed to making the refund, and the City Council should fully support Mayor Ireton in this matter.
I have seen the notices taped to the front doors of residences, signed and dated. Also, a buyer of any property needs to carefully look at what he's buying; this would include liens, zoning issues, etc.
ReplyDeleteHence the warning, "Buyer Beware!"
Oh, you've never heard that one before?
John, didnt you inherit enough money?
ReplyDeleteSomebody has to clean up this mess. As is, the city maintained the property and the Canon group materially benefited from the services. If they feel that they should not pay, they need to sue the former property owner.
ReplyDeleteLike Comegys said in a work session, they have plenty of money. Let them pay the fines and any other monies owed the city.
ReplyDeleteWhy is this being held at 4pm?
ReplyDeleteI am sure if Pam Oland was involved in this, nothing was done properly she makes it up as she goes. She seems to think she can do what ever she wants and Mr. Pick the man that he isn't backs her up!!! whats up with that? And by the way it dosen't matter how much money Mr. Cannon has its about proper proceedings, I'm sure the City Finance office and the City Housing office both knew who the owners of this tax sale were. They do crap like this all the time. way to go Oland.
ReplyDeleteWhat's right is right and what's wrong is wrong. If the city didn't notify the Cannons about the violations, the Cannons couldn't have corrected them. The city was wrong to cite Cannon and owes him money. It is irrelevant how "rich" Mr. Cannon is...this is about something that was done decietfully and is shameful.
ReplyDeleteK. Groves
It is not supposed to be about who has the money to pay. Mr. Cannon I am sure has the resources to maintain the lawn far at a much lower cost than the city and has a point if he was unaware of the liens at the tax sale.
ReplyDeleteAs to receiving a copy of notices from the city I have not been afforded that courtesy even as the registered contact for an out of the area property owner. Yes I have made the request several times in person and via telephone.
The city appears to only do the work if they are going to get paid in a timely manor. Doubt me? Go look at the weeds/grass in the sidewalks in the Church St or Camden area.
Go Jim!
ReplyDeleteThough no fan of John Cannon, this case seems pretty straightforward. The lien on the property was made against the deed still held by someone else. The deed IS the legal representation of who it is that owns the property. Money can change hands before that, but it takes the paperwork to make it legal. The deed was still in the name of now-previous owner at the time lien was made.
ReplyDeleteWhile the Cannons purchased the propery knowing it was/had been in need of maintenance, they have no requirement to maintain until they actually own it. The city's case should be with the previous owner, who essentially abandoned the property. Looks like the city loses. It should have insisted that the lien be paid at the auction as a part of the purchase price and put it as part of the closing requirements.
12:13PM - you are dead on my friend. Makes simple sense.
ReplyDeleteI beg to differ 12:13. Not to be argumentative but when you purchase a distressed property at auction you also take on past taxes and leins. Nice to see you following this Blog again CJ but as I've always said in the past, you need to get into another line of business.
ReplyDeleteFor once I agree with Comegys-the Cannons can afford it.Hell,they can add the extra costs to the rent like all the landlords do.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the poster who asked didnt he inherit "enough" money.For some people,no amount of money is ever "enough"-especially that group(Salisbury landlords)
The Cannons were not forced to buy the property or to pay for it due to the liens and could have simply said thanks but no thanks.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know how much the deed is for? I'll bet it is much less than $10,000.
The city has walked all over small property owners for a long while. This time they have affected one with money. They usually grant them more privilage than the rest of us because they have the power to fight back. That whole department smells of crooks now and under the BHZ as well.The city will vote to keep the money even thou by the letter of the law they shold refund it. They will make him fight for it knowing the litigation expenses will exceed the questioned amount. That is what they told me one time. The one who approved all the work should have it taken from his or her pay.They would be more careful the next time they do that to someone. Everyone who has been mistreated by the city should band together and let it be known what they have experienced
ReplyDeleteThe cannon Brothers have the resources to pay the bill which Joe said they knew about this bill long before the property settled. They have bought and sold property here in this area long enough to know how the system works.With knowledge of how they do business this is a common thing with them. If you knew where some of there other properties were and rode around and looked at them you could understand where I am coming from. They get these violations all the time but in their defense the garbage they rent to is most of why they end up in the mess they are in. Every one thinks landlords make a killing and some do but for the most part being a landlord is not all sugar coated. This is not the first time however the Cannon Boy's have been cited and the city has had enough of it.
ReplyDeleteHe can win in a court of law,If heard in another town. After all he is an attorney. Wasn't he or his brother on the city counsil when they crafted all these crazy laws in 1997 ? They have made the individual property owners sell their homes in frustration to the big time landlords.Now the sword is cutting both ways. Mr. Stevensons Ego will not allow him to back down.
ReplyDeleteI bet I could make him back down.
ReplyDeleteBy law He dosn't have to pay it. But when does Salisbury follow laws themselves? They only use them on their citizens. Let us know the verdict. A bunch of us would like our complaints heard too.We have no recourse.
ReplyDeleteIf the lien was properly recorded at the courthouse, the property cannot be transferred to the buyer until the lien is paid. It is the seller's responsibility to pay it. This buyer chose to pay the lien to achieve the property transfer. The buyer needs to sue the seller or just forget about it. The City of Salisbury has no legal need to refund the amount.
ReplyDelete$7,450.00 was the selling price! On May 12, 2009. That's what, 1.5 months into grass season?
ReplyDeleteI get my first grass notice at the end of April even after I have cut it two or three times. After two notices they start making money off people.They cut it without warning. They are told to get the first notices out before the end of April.They charge $298.00 and pay out $30.00 to cut it and it's their word against yours. Don't forget the grass in the sidewalk cracks.. They charge $298.00 for that too.. and let it grow all over town for others . Morals of a Georgia Highway Patrol
ReplyDeleteThe Cannons have owned rental properties for decades, they KNOW the drill--to claim ignorance is despicable.
ReplyDeleteWhat was the outome of the special meeting. I have been walked all over by the crooks in the city and can't even get any attention from they city council, I am so poor they just blow me off like an insect and stomp all over my fingers when I try to pull myself up. At least he has enough power to get a special meeting.
ReplyDeleteJoe: There is a difference in buying property at an "auction" and buying property at a tax sale. When you buy property at an auction and bid, i.e., $10,000.00, all past due water bills, tax, city liens, etc. are deducted from the bid price. So the purchaser still only pays $10K. Plus a purchaser at auction obtains title within 45 to 60 days, so there is little time for additional liens to be incurred. On the other hand, when you buy property at a tax sale, you cannot even begin foreclosure proceedings for 6 months. It is often more than one year before a tax sale purchaser obtains title, leaving substantial time for additional liens to be incurred against the property. And remember, the neglect of the property is directly due to the actions, or inactions, of the then existing owner of the property. Not the purchaser at the tax sale.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, a tax sale purchaser does not own the property until he obtains a judgment of foreclosure from the court, which, as previously stated, generally takes a year or more. Even if a tax sale purchaser were made aware of a housing code violation, he could not correct the same as, until a judgment was obtained from the Circuit Court, he would be trespassing on someone else's property. The problem with a tax sale is that, unlike the auction where past due taxes and lien fees, etc. are deducted from the sale proceeds, in a tax sale the additionally incurred liens are added to the sale price. On the one hand, it is not fair, on the other hand, that is the way it is.
The problem is with the tax sale statute which need to be addressed by the legislature.
However, one needs to bear in mind that most answers in life are not that simple.
Paul Wilber knows all that yet he let them do what they did.Paul needs to as well as that whole department. The police state of salisbury
ReplyDelete