Family Beach House- DS and Friends Using it for Summer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why won’t this thread die?

Because it is fun. Totally entitled OP who has no actual interest in the property but acts like she is lady of the manor. Alleged crazy mom on the other side. Kids trapped in the middle. All of the makings of DCUM fun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charging one kid rent and not the others is so unbelievably trashy and cheap. The cousins don't own the house either.

I'm sure the Duke of Devonshire lets his grandsons stay in the manor house for free and then charges their school friends rent to sleep in the stable, because they're peasants who should be grateful to have any benefit of his attention or to even associate with such people. Not. How utterly gauche.

Uhh, the kids most certainly have an ownership interest. If the cops show up they are 100% the legal owner. So sad youre too dumb to know this. Back to your trailer...

Not unless their name is on the deed.

Seriously?

This why cops run rough shod over citizens all day long. The kids are de facto tenants which grants them the same sights as property owners. LE needs their permission to enter the property unless there is a felony being committed in their witness.

Same goes with rental cars and VRBO.

You are equivalent to the owner of the property if the property owner has agreed to you being there.

Ha ha. I love DCUM-trained lawyers. No. You are completely misstating the law.

That's me you're quoting. I never claimed to be an attorney, but I have worked in commercial real estate for 26 years. If you are an attorney you are a piss poor one because the purpose of a lease to provide the sole and exclusive use of a property and be afforded the exact same rights as an owner, provided the terms are adhered to. From a LE perspective, it's irrelevant if the individual is a tenant or an owner.

Did your online lawyer certificate program skip contract law?

Ha ha. You are too much. You have no idea what you are talking about. Kid who was invited there would be an invitee under the law. Grandkids would also. Stop it. It is irrelevant what you think you know.

Oh, you missed the part where the BILs are actual attorneys (not pretend ones like you) and would draw the lease?

How embarrassing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charging one kid rent and not the others is so unbelievably trashy and cheap. The cousins don't own the house either.

I'm sure the Duke of Devonshire lets his grandsons stay in the manor house for free and then charges their school friends rent to sleep in the stable, because they're peasants who should be grateful to have any benefit of his attention or to even associate with such people. Not. How utterly gauche.

Uhh, the kids most certainly have an ownership interest. If the cops show up they are 100% the legal owner. So sad youre too dumb to know this. Back to your trailer...

Not unless their name is on the deed.

Seriously?

This why cops run rough shod over citizens all day long. The kids are de facto tenants which grants them the same sights as property owners. LE needs their permission to enter the property unless there is a felony being committed in their witness.

Same goes with rental cars and VRBO.

You are equivalent to the owner of the property if the property owner has agreed to you being there.

Ha ha. I love DCUM-trained lawyers. No. You are completely misstating the law.

That's me you're quoting. I never claimed to be an attorney, but I have worked in commercial real estate for 26 years. If you are an attorney you are a piss poor one because the purpose of a lease to provide the sole and exclusive use of a property and be afforded the exact same rights as an owner, provided the terms are adhered to. From a LE perspective, it's irrelevant if the individual is a tenant or an owner.

Did your online lawyer certificate program skip contract law?

Ha ha. You are too much. You have no idea what you are talking about. Kid who was invited there would be an invitee under the law. Grandkids would also. Stop it. It is irrelevant what you think you know.

Patent attorney chiming in. It's been a while since I did contract law, but if the kid is paying rent (or any consideration- could be labor) he is a tenant of the property. There is an offer, an acceptance, and compensation. It's pretty black and white. It's been a few years since school and I never practiced real estate la but there is no distinction between invitee, guest, and tenant if both parties are paying.

That said, we are all just guessing without seeing the lease. No one can be certain of anything absent that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charging one kid rent and not the others is so unbelievably trashy and cheap. The cousins don't own the house either.

I'm sure the Duke of Devonshire lets his grandsons stay in the manor house for free and then charges their school friends rent to sleep in the stable, because they're peasants who should be grateful to have any benefit of his attention or to even associate with such people. Not. How utterly gauche.

Uhh, the kids most certainly have an ownership interest. If the cops show up they are 100% the legal owner. So sad youre too dumb to know this. Back to your trailer...

Not unless their name is on the deed.

Seriously?

This why cops run rough shod over citizens all day long. The kids are de facto tenants which grants them the same sights as property owners. LE needs their permission to enter the property unless there is a felony being committed in their witness.

Same goes with rental cars and VRBO.

You are equivalent to the owner of the property if the property owner has agreed to you being there.

Ha ha. I love DCUM-trained lawyers. No. You are completely misstating the law.

That's me you're quoting. I never claimed to be an attorney, but I have worked in commercial real estate for 26 years. If you are an attorney you are a piss poor one because the purpose of a lease to provide the sole and exclusive use of a property and be afforded the exact same rights as an owner, provided the terms are adhered to. From a LE perspective, it's irrelevant if the individual is a tenant or an owner.

Did your online lawyer certificate program skip contract law?

Ha ha. You are too much. You have no idea what you are talking about. Kid who was invited there would be an invitee under the law. Grandkids would also. Stop it. It is irrelevant what you think you know.

Patent attorney chiming in. It's been a while since I did contract law, but if the kid is paying rent (or any consideration- could be labor) he is a tenant of the property. There is an offer, an acceptance, and compensation. It's pretty black and white. It's been a few years since school and I never practiced real estate la but there is no distinction between invitee, guest, and tenant if both parties are paying.

That said, we are all just guessing without seeing the lease. No one can be certain of anything absent that.

Correct. And none are owners. And the grandkids have no special rights beyond what the invited kid would have.

Actual lawyer. Don’t just play one on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charging one kid rent and not the others is so unbelievably trashy and cheap. The cousins don't own the house either.

I'm sure the Duke of Devonshire lets his grandsons stay in the manor house for free and then charges their school friends rent to sleep in the stable, because they're peasants who should be grateful to have any benefit of his attention or to even associate with such people. Not. How utterly gauche.

Uhh, the kids most certainly have an ownership interest. If the cops show up they are 100% the legal owner. So sad youre too dumb to know this. Back to your trailer...

Not unless their name is on the deed.

Seriously?

This why cops run rough shod over citizens all day long. The kids are de facto tenants which grants them the same sights as property owners. LE needs their permission to enter the property unless there is a felony being committed in their witness.

Same goes with rental cars and VRBO.

You are equivalent to the owner of the property if the property owner has agreed to you being there.

Ha ha. I love DCUM-trained lawyers. No. You are completely misstating the law.

That's me you're quoting. I never claimed to be an attorney, but I have worked in commercial real estate for 26 years. If you are an attorney you are a piss poor one because the purpose of a lease to provide the sole and exclusive use of a property and be afforded the exact same rights as an owner, provided the terms are adhered to. From a LE perspective, it's irrelevant if the individual is a tenant or an owner.

Did your online lawyer certificate program skip contract law?

Ha ha. You are too much. You have no idea what you are talking about. Kid who was invited there would be an invitee under the law. Grandkids would also. Stop it. It is irrelevant what you think you know.

Patent attorney chiming in. It's been a while since I did contract law, but if the kid is paying rent (or any consideration- could be labor) he is a tenant of the property. There is an offer, an acceptance, and compensation. It's pretty black and white. It's been a few years since school and I never practiced real estate la but there is no distinction between invitee, guest, and tenant if both parties are paying.

That said, we are all just guessing without seeing the lease. No one can be certain of anything absent that.

Correct. And none are owners. And the grandkids have no special rights beyond what the invited kid would have.

Actual lawyer. Don’t just play one on DCUM.

Ehhh, we don't know if the grandkids are owners or not. They may very well be on title or even party to a trust if it's held that way. Patent attorney again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charging one kid rent and not the others is so unbelievably trashy and cheap. The cousins don't own the house either.

I'm sure the Duke of Devonshire lets his grandsons stay in the manor house for free and then charges their school friends rent to sleep in the stable, because they're peasants who should be grateful to have any benefit of his attention or to even associate with such people. Not. How utterly gauche.

Uhh, the kids most certainly have an ownership interest. If the cops show up they are 100% the legal owner. So sad youre too dumb to know this. Back to your trailer...

Not unless their name is on the deed.

Seriously?

This why cops run rough shod over citizens all day long. The kids are de facto tenants which grants them the same sights as property owners. LE needs their permission to enter the property unless there is a felony being committed in their witness.

Same goes with rental cars and VRBO.

You are equivalent to the owner of the property if the property owner has agreed to you being there.

Ha ha. I love DCUM-trained lawyers. No. You are completely misstating the law.

That's me you're quoting. I never claimed to be an attorney, but I have worked in commercial real estate for 26 years. If you are an attorney you are a piss poor one because the purpose of a lease to provide the sole and exclusive use of a property and be afforded the exact same rights as an owner, provided the terms are adhered to. From a LE perspective, it's irrelevant if the individual is a tenant or an owner.

Did your online lawyer certificate program skip contract law?

Ha ha. You are too much. You have no idea what you are talking about. Kid who was invited there would be an invitee under the law. Grandkids would also. Stop it. It is irrelevant what you think you know.

Oh, you missed the part where the BILs are actual attorneys (not pretend ones like you) and would draw the lease?

How embarrassing.

DP. Please. There are no major legal markets in areas where a beach house would be. So either they are not the legal superstars you think they are or they are too cheap/stupid to realize they need to hire an attorney that is familiar with landlord tenant law in the jurisdiction where the house is located.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charging one kid rent and not the others is so unbelievably trashy and cheap. The cousins don't own the house either.

I'm sure the Duke of Devonshire lets his grandsons stay in the manor house for free and then charges their school friends rent to sleep in the stable, because they're peasants who should be grateful to have any benefit of his attention or to even associate with such people. Not. How utterly gauche.

Uhh, the kids most certainly have an ownership interest. If the cops show up they are 100% the legal owner. So sad youre too dumb to know this. Back to your trailer...

Not unless their name is on the deed.

Seriously?

This why cops run rough shod over citizens all day long. The kids are de facto tenants which grants them the same sights as property owners. LE needs their permission to enter the property unless there is a felony being committed in their witness.

Same goes with rental cars and VRBO.

You are equivalent to the owner of the property if the property owner has agreed to you being there.

Ha ha. I love DCUM-trained lawyers. No. You are completely misstating the law.

That's me you're quoting. I never claimed to be an attorney, but I have worked in commercial real estate for 26 years. If you are an attorney you are a piss poor one because the purpose of a lease to provide the sole and exclusive use of a property and be afforded the exact same rights as an owner, provided the terms are adhered to. From a LE perspective, it's irrelevant if the individual is a tenant or an owner.

Did your online lawyer certificate program skip contract law?

Ha ha. You are too much. You have no idea what you are talking about. Kid who was invited there would be an invitee under the law. Grandkids would also. Stop it. It is irrelevant what you think you know.

Oh, you missed the part where the BILs are actual attorneys (not pretend ones like you) and would draw the lease?

How embarrassing.

DP. Please. There are no major legal markets in areas where a beach house would be. So either they are not the legal superstars you think they are or they are too cheap/stupid to realize they need to hire an attorney that is familiar with landlord tenant law in the jurisdiction where the house is located.

Man, you are just dumb as a box of rocks. You know where huge amounts of Big Law Partners retire? The coast of the Carolinas. It's probably the number 1 spot on the East Coast.

[Anonymous]

LOL @ the idea that BIL's are retired biglaw partners who've kept their licenses current and waived into NC so they can practice landlord tenant law. Plausible!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LOL @ the idea that BIL's are retired biglaw partners who've kept their licenses current and waived into NC so they can practice landlord tenant law. Plausible!

Keep digging. You don't and a license to execute a lease.

[Anonymous]

*don't need a license

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charging one kid rent and not the others is so unbelievably trashy and cheap. The cousins don't own the house either.

I'm sure the Duke of Devonshire lets his grandsons stay in the manor house for free and then charges their school friends rent to sleep in the stable, because they're peasants who should be grateful to have any benefit of his attention or to even associate with such people. Not. How utterly gauche.

Uhh, the kids most certainly have an ownership interest. If the cops show up they are 100% the legal owner. So sad youre too dumb to know this. Back to your trailer...

Not unless their name is on the deed.

Seriously?

This why cops run rough shod over citizens all day long. The kids are de facto tenants which grants them the same sights as property owners. LE needs their permission to enter the property unless there is a felony being committed in their witness.

Same goes with rental cars and VRBO.

You are equivalent to the owner of the property if the property owner has agreed to you being there.

Ha ha. I love DCUM-trained lawyers. No. You are completely misstating the law.

That's me you're quoting. I never claimed to be an attorney, but I have worked in commercial real estate for 26 years. If you are an attorney you are a piss poor one because the purpose of a lease to provide the sole and exclusive use of a property and be afforded the exact same rights as an owner, provided the terms are adhered to. From a LE perspective, it's irrelevant if the individual is a tenant or an owner.

Did your online lawyer certificate program skip contract law?

Ha ha. You are too much. You have no idea what you are talking about. Kid who was invited there would be an invitee under the law. Grandkids would also. Stop it. It is irrelevant what you think you know.

Oh, you missed the part where the BILs are actual attorneys (not pretend ones like you) and would draw the lease?

How embarrassing.

DP. Please. There are no major legal markets in areas where a beach house would be. So either they are not the legal superstars you think they are or they are too cheap/stupid to realize they need to hire an attorney that is familiar with landlord tenant law in the jurisdiction where the house is located.

Man, you are just dumb as a box of rocks. You know where huge amounts of Big Law Partners retire? The coast of the Carolinas. It's probably the number 1 spot on the East Coast.

+1. My family owns a house on Dataw Island and about half the residents there are retired lawyers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charging one kid rent and not the others is so unbelievably trashy and cheap. The cousins don't own the house either.

I'm sure the Duke of Devonshire lets his grandsons stay in the manor house for free and then charges their school friends rent to sleep in the stable, because they're peasants who should be grateful to have any benefit of his attention or to even associate with such people. Not. How utterly gauche.

Uhh, the kids most certainly have an ownership interest. If the cops show up they are 100% the legal owner. So sad youre too dumb to know this. Back to your trailer...

Not unless their name is on the deed.

Seriously?

This why cops run rough shod over citizens all day long. The kids are de facto tenants which grants them the same sights as property owners. LE needs their permission to enter the property unless there is a felony being committed in their witness.

Same goes with rental cars and VRBO.

You are equivalent to the owner of the property if the property owner has agreed to you being there.

Ha ha. I love DCUM-trained lawyers. No. You are completely misstating the law.

That's me you're quoting. I never claimed to be an attorney, but I have worked in commercial real estate for 26 years. If you are an attorney you are a piss poor one because the purpose of a lease to provide the sole and exclusive use of a property and be afforded the exact same rights as an owner, provided the terms are adhered to. From a LE perspective, it's irrelevant if the individual is a tenant or an owner.

Did your online lawyer certificate program skip contract law?

Ha ha. You are too much. You have no idea what you are talking about. Kid who was invited there would be an invitee under the law. Grandkids would also. Stop it. It is irrelevant what you think you know.

Oh, you missed the part where the BILs are actual attorneys (not pretend ones like you) and would draw the lease?

How embarrassing.

DP. Please. There are no major legal markets in areas where a beach house would be. So either they are not the legal superstars you think they are or they are too cheap/stupid to realize they need to hire an attorney that is familiar with landlord tenant law in the jurisdiction where the house is located.

Man, you are just dumb as a box of rocks. You know where huge amounts of Big Law Partners retire? The coast of the Carolinas. It's probably the number 1 spot on the East Coast.

+1. My family owns a house on Dataw Island and about half the residents there are retired lawyers.

That sounds like a special kind of hell.

[Anonymous]

Die already!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:LOL @ the idea that BIL's are retired biglaw partners who've kept their licenses current and waived into NC so they can practice landlord tenant law. Plausible!

And need to CHARGE KIDS for sleeping in the family compound (lol) shed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charging one kid rent and not the others is so unbelievably trashy and cheap. The cousins don't own the house either.

I'm sure the Duke of Devonshire lets his grandsons stay in the manor house for free and then charges their school friends rent to sleep in the stable, because they're peasants who should be grateful to have any benefit of his attention or to even associate with such people. Not. How utterly gauche.

Uhh, the kids most certainly have an ownership interest. If the cops show up they are 100% the legal owner. So sad youre too dumb to know this. Back to your trailer...

Not unless their name is on the deed.

Seriously?

This why cops run rough shod over citizens all day long. The kids are de facto tenants which grants them the same sights as property owners. LE needs their permission to enter the property unless there is a felony being committed in their witness.

Same goes with rental cars and VRBO.

You are equivalent to the owner of the property if the property owner has agreed to you being there.

Ha ha. I love DCUM-trained lawyers. No. You are completely misstating the law.

That's me you're quoting. I never claimed to be an attorney, but I have worked in commercial real estate for 26 years. If you are an attorney you are a piss poor one because the purpose of a lease to provide the sole and exclusive use of a property and be afforded the exact same rights as an owner, provided the terms are adhered to. From a LE perspective, it's irrelevant if the individual is a tenant or an owner.

Did your online lawyer certificate program skip contract law?

Ha ha. You are too much. You have no idea what you are talking about. Kid who was invited there would be an invitee under the law. Grandkids would also. Stop it. It is irrelevant what you think you know.

Patent attorney chiming in. It's been a while since I did contract law, but if the kid is paying rent (or any consideration- could be labor) he is a tenant of the property. There is an offer, an acceptance, and compensation. It's pretty black and white. It's been a few years since school and I never practiced real estate la but there is no distinction between invitee, guest, and tenant if both parties are paying.

That said, we are all just guessing without seeing the lease. No one can be certain of anything absent that.

Correct. And none are owners. And the grandkids have no special rights beyond what the invited kid would have.

Actual lawyer. Don’t just play one on DCUM.

Ehhh, we don't know if the grandkids are owners or not. They may very well be on title or even party to a trust if it's held that way. Patent attorney again.

Doubtful their names are on the deed. If you can't sell the property, it ain't yours.