• Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Considering she no longer has to pay to maintain something that has been useless to her for years, she’s better off in some ways. If she had let someone rent it and live there, this couldn’t have occurred. At some point in the past she decided it was cheaper and easier to board it up, that decision probably took into account the expense of demolishing it. Now that’s been done for her at no cost, she has options. But those facts will be part of the legal case.

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      You have no idea what the real estate market is in that area and it’s not for you to decide if she’s better off without that property. Fuck off.

      I’d fucking tell the company to put all the old lumber back in place.