Started By
Message

re: BLM vs. Nevada Rancher

Posted on 4/22/14 at 1:46 pm to
Posted by WildTchoupitoulas
Member since Jan 2010
44071 posts
Posted on 4/22/14 at 1:46 pm to
quote:

My point is that aside from property taxes, you are not paying for this service out of pocket.

You're going to have to fill me in on to what you're referring. I'm having a hard time seeing the relevance of your point.
quote:

And what do you mean "How Handy"?

I thought you were backing the cost to the gov't out of the total cost to make it look cheaper.

It seems that we're dealing with the gov't as land owner here. The costs to the gov't ARE their costs. It was stated in the thread that these costs exceeded the total amount of back 'rent'. I simply said that it doesn't matter if the costs exceed what is owed when it comes to removing an intransigent tenant. I would pay more than what is owed me to remove a tenant - if I had to. I mean, what's the alternative?

...at least I think that's what you're referring to.
Posted by Dick Leverage
In The HizHouse
Member since Nov 2013
9000 posts
Posted on 4/22/14 at 1:55 pm to
I am sorry for the confusion.

In a nutshell, I disagree that it cost more to remove a tenant than what they owe you in back rent . Only in a very unique circumstance would that be so.

My tenant owed me $2600 in back rent and refused to leave. It cost me $73 to legally remove him . And really nothing because the fee was added in the judgement against him.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram