187
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
187 points (99.5% liked)
Offbeat
1199 readers
1 users here now
The world is a weird place filled with even weirder news.
Post your funny, weird, strange, or quirky news stories here!
Lemmy.ca Rules
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No porn.
- No Ads / Spamming.
Community Rules
- No editorialized titles
- No satire news sites (The Beaverton, The Onion, etc...)
- No politics
- Submissions must be no older than 2 months (i.e. the article should be "recent" news)
Similar Communities
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I think the city is crazy to think they can recover it, but it sounds like both houses were probably worthy of demolition and the owner just got it done for free.
An occupied house in good condition wouldn’t be mistaken for the wrong one.
Reading the article, it sounds like the mistake was because of the address, I couldn't find enough information in the article to know if the mistaken house was in poor condition. Were you expecting the actual demolition crew to question the work order?
From what I gather, the house was inspected and deemed not fit for habitation. They failed to mail the notices to the proper address. House was too get torn down either way, the guy in the story just didn't get the warnings.
Nah bro even if it's in poor condition you can't just trash private property
Morally I agree. But the legal system doesnt