1:09 - he's got to know that 'affidavit' needs to be spelled properly for the document to be binding
As much as I support the rights of a neighborhood's property owners to protect their investments, the home appears to be in pretty good shape. He'll need to get utilities turned on, but as long as he's taking care of the home, I would argue they're actually better off than having the home sit empty. I'm speaking from the experience of someone who owns a home in a neighborhood still filled with vacant foreclosures.
I bought my daughter's home in 2007. Including down payment and property taxes, I've paid over $200,000 into it and the current tax value (reassessed in Jan of this year) is still nearly $10,000 less than the amount owed on the mortgage. I could take out a new mortgage and buy a smaller place around the corner for roughly $200,000 and then buy another place for myself for roughly $400,000, give the current property back to the bank and come out way ahead in a few years. The $200K is gone, but maybe it's more accurate to say I've only *really* lost $100K since I would've spent $100K in rent over the past 4 years anyway.
If I'd been as smart as this guy, though, I would've just moved into a vacant property and waited for the bank to kick me out. It's quite common for people out here to live in homes that they stopped paying the mortgage on 2+ years ago. Most get to stay at least a year, rent-free, before the foreclosure is complete and they're forced to move. In the most extreme case I know of, one family has been banking their payment for over 3 years now. Lucky bastards.
