[zithromaxlinks]

Illegal Occupation Of Homes A Continuing Problem

December 19, 2011 4:50 PM

Share this 4
2 comments
(credit: CBS)


From Investigates

Filed under

Local, News, Syndicated Local
Related tags

Adverse Possession, Alfonso Carrillo, Denise O'Connell, German Jasso, Grand County, Illegal Occupation, Larry Asbery, Laura Gutierrez, Leo Piechocki, Rick Sallinger, Winter Park

WINTER PARK, Colo. (CBS4) – It is one of the more bizarre outcomes of our mortgage crisis — illegal occupation of homes.

CBS4 Investigator Rick Sallinger found people have moved into vacant homes under foreclosure in Aurora, Denver, and now the Winter Park area.

There’s a common thread in illegal occupations. That thread appears to be a Denver area man who calls himself a real estate consultant. Investigators say he is telling Hispanics, including illegal immigrants, if they move into empty homes and make improvements they can claim the houses as their own under what’s called “adverse possession.”

A family that had been living in a house told a neighbor they were moving up to a pricier neighborhood.

“He said, ‘We are going to be buying a house in Rendezvous for just the taxes; a million and a half dollar home.’ And I said, ‘Really?’ ” neighbor Diane Collier said.
They moved into a 5,200 square foot, five bedroom, five bath home with a fireplace-heated bathroom, and spectacular views. Real estate agent Denise O’Connell was attempting to sell it.

“You can kind of see the layout where there was a television, a couch over here, a table in this area; obviously they moved in,” O’Connell said.

So law enforcement was contacted. They arrested German Jasso and his wife Laura Gutierrez on charges, including felony theft and trespassing. Grand County sheriff’s investigator Sgt. Leo Piechocki says the couple indicated they ad been helped by real estate consultant Alfonso Carrillo.

Alfonso Carrillo (credit: CBS)

“It appears Mr. Carrillo is finding homes in foreclosure and moving people into the homes without any authority to do so,” Piechocki said.

Carrillo is also being investigated in the occupation of two other homes in the Winter Park area discovered by real estate agents.

“They’re very quiet, they are hiding behind the walls in that property,” O’Connell said.

Carrillo already has a case pending in Denver District Court where he faces multiple counts of theft and forgery. He is accused of filing phony deeds and taking thousands of dollars from people he puts in the houses.

CBS4 first learned about Carrillo from an Aurora man who found his home occupied. Larry Asbery had been in the hospital and when he got out he found people living in his house. The person claiming to own the house told CBS4 it was obtained with the help of Carrillo.

While Carrillo said he couldn’t speak to CBS4 because of the advice of his attorney, he served the Grand County Sheriff’s Department with legal papers, not yet filed, claiming that department is systematically targeting minorities with wrongful eviction.

Law enforcement authorities told CBS4 if people think they can quickly take over vacant homes through adverse possession, they are wrong. It typically takes 18 years to just apply for that.

THIS IS WHAT I FIND INTERESTING. This Carrillo guy is up to something, looks like a loop hole where he can definitely benefit financially thought theft.

Check this out.
Basic requirements for adverse possession

Adverse possession requires at a minimum five basic conditions being met to perfect the title of the disseisor. These are:

• Actual possession of the property – The disseisor must physically use the land as a property owner would, in accordance with the type of property, location, and uses. Merely walking or hunting on land does not establish actual possession. In Cone v. West Virginia Pulp & Paper, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that Cone failed to establish actual possession by occasionally visiting the land and hunting on it, because his actions did not change the land from a wild and natural state. The actions of the disseisor must change the state of the land, as by clearing, mowing, planting, harvesting fruit of the land, logging or cutting timber, mining, fencing, pulling tree stumps, running livestock and constructing buildings or other improvements.

• Open and notorious use of the property – The disseisor's use of the property is so visible and apparent that it gives notice to the legal owner that someone may assert claim. It must be of such character that would give notice to a reasonable person. If legal owner has knowledge, this element is met; it can be also met by fencing, opening or closing gates or an entry to the property, posted signs, crops, buildings, or animals that a diligent owner could be expected to know about.

• Exclusive use of the property – The disseisor holds the land to the exclusion of the true owner. If, for example, the disseisor builds a barn on the owner's property, and the owner then uses the barn, the disseisor cannot claim exclusive use. (Note: There may be more than one adverse possessor, taking as tenants in common, so long as the other elements are met.)

• Hostile or adverse use of the property – The disseisor entered or used the land without permission. Renters, hunters or others who enter the land with permission are not hostile. The disseisor's motivations may be viewed by the court in several ways: Objective view—used without true owner's permission and inconsistent with true owner's rights. Bad faith or intentional trespass view—used with the adverse possessor's subjective intent and state of mind (mistaken possession in some jurisdictions does not constitute hostility). Good faith view—a few courts have required that the party mistakenly believed that it is his land. All views require that the disseisor openly claim the land against all possible claims.

• Continuous use of the property – The disseisor must, for statute of limitations purposes, hold that property continuously for the entire limitations period, and use it as a true owner would for that time. This element focuses on adverse possessor's time on the land, not how long true owner has been dispossessed of it. Occasional activity on the land with long gaps in activity fail the test of continuous possession. Courts have ruled that merely cutting timber at intervals, when not accompanied by other actions that demonstrate actual and continuous possession, fails to demonstrate continuous possession. If the true owner ejects the disseisor from the land, verbally or through legal action, and after some time the disseisor returns and dispossesses him again, then the statute of limitation starts over from the time of the disseisor's return. He cannot count the time between his ejection by the true property owner and the date on which he returned.