Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Confirmed by local news that the tenants are a mother and daughter.

If she actually has a small child & no money, she may not have anywhere to go. That's not to say that she's not taking advantage of the owner, but I can understand why she'd prioritize her kid's well-being over the adult non-resident children of the owner, who she may never have met.

"Prioritizing your kid's well-being" is a nice way to say "theft?"

Do you know what agreement she has with the owner?

Obviously the RE agent wants to make it seem like the housekeeper is the bad guy. She may have had an agreement to do housekeeping in exchange for free rent.

Pictures don't look like much housekeeping has been done.

yup. just a terrible person taking advantage of the elderly, it should be a crime with jail time

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Confirmed by local news that the tenants are a mother and daughter.

If she actually has a small child & no money, she may not have anywhere to go. That's not to say that she's not taking advantage of the owner, but I can understand why she'd prioritize her kid's well-being over the adult non-resident children of the owner, who she may never have met.

"Prioritizing your kid's well-being" is a nice way to say "theft?"

Do you know what agreement she has with the owner?

Obviously the RE agent wants to make it seem like the housekeeper is the bad guy. She may have had an agreement to do housekeeping in exchange for free rent.

Pictures don't look like much housekeeping has been done.

Anonymous wrote:Omg Greg Gutfeld is talking about it right now on his show

Ew.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Confirmed by local news that the tenants are a mother and daughter.

If she actually has a small child & no money, she may not have anywhere to go. That's not to say that she's not taking advantage of the owner, but I can understand why she'd prioritize her kid's well-being over the adult non-resident children of the owner, who she may never have met.

"Prioritizing your kid's well-being" is a nice way to say "theft?"

Do you know what agreement she has with the owner?

Obviously the RE agent wants to make it seem like the housekeeper is the bad guy. She may have had an agreement to do housekeeping in exchange for free rent.

Right. The article also says they don't have the resources to start eviction proceedings, but the realtor 100% could point them in the right direction/help get things started... and apparently hasn't. Unless perhaps the PoA doesn't extend to that because the eldery relative has not consented to formal eviction or there is more to the story.

In short, I'm not saying this person isn't a grifter, but I think the fact they haven't even tried to start legal proceedings suggests there is more to the story.

Anonymous wrote:Plot twist: A very generous benefactor buys the house and gifts it to the housekeeper. Win-win situation. Not likely, but would make for a good hallmark movie.

How is gifting a house to a squatter taking advantage of a sick, elderly homeowner a win-win?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Confirmed by local news that the tenants are a mother and daughter.

If she actually has a small child & no money, she may not have anywhere to go. That's not to say that she's not taking advantage of the owner, but I can understand why she'd prioritize her kid's well-being over the adult non-resident children of the owner, who she may never have met.

"Prioritizing your kid's well-being" is a nice way to say "theft?"

Do you know what agreement she has with the owner?

Obviously the RE agent wants to make it seem like the housekeeper is the bad guy. She may have had an agreement to do housekeeping in exchange for free rent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Confirmed by local news that the tenants are a mother and daughter.

If she actually has a small child & no money, she may not have anywhere to go. That's not to say that she's not taking advantage of the owner, but I can understand why she'd prioritize her kid's well-being over the adult non-resident children of the owner, who she may never have met.

"Prioritizing your kid's well-being" is a nice way to say "theft?"

Do you know what agreement she has with the owner?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Confirmed by local news that the tenants are a mother and daughter.

If she actually has a small child & no money, she may not have anywhere to go. That's not to say that she's not taking advantage of the owner, but I can understand why she'd prioritize her kid's well-being over the adult non-resident children of the owner, who she may never have met.

"Prioritizing your kid's well-being" is a nice way to say "theft?"

Anonymous wrote:Confirmed by local news that the tenants are a mother and daughter.

If she actually has a small child & no money, she may not have anywhere to go. That's not to say that she's not taking advantage of the owner, but I can understand why she'd prioritize her kid's well-being over the adult non-resident children of the owner, who she may never have met.

Confirmed by local news that the tenants are a mother and daughter.

Anonymous wrote:Interview with the realtor makes it sound like the housekeeper is definitely taking advantage of an elderly person

https://nypost.com/2022/04/14/virginia-man-selling-home-after-squatter-refuses-to-leave/

“Three years ago, a woman was cleaning the senior owner’s house and she convinced him that she needed a place to stay,” Rodger-Rickert said. “So he offered her the basement, but then she never left. And she does not pay rent.”

Interview with the realtor makes it sound like the housekeeper is definitely taking advantage of an elderly person

https://nypost.com/2022/04/14/virginia-man-selling-home-after-squatter-refuses-to-leave/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what's up with the house, anyone know? Redfin now lists it as off market
https://www.redfin.com/VA/Fairfax/3709-Prado-Pl-22031/home/9617644

The MLS says it went from pending to canceled on 4/13. That’s really strange.

Perhaps the owner has died. Someone posted earlier with a source from the family and said they wanted it sold before he died to avoid probate.

Anonymous wrote:So what's up with the house, anyone know? Redfin now lists it as off market
https://www.redfin.com/VA/Fairfax/3709-Prado-Pl-22031/home/9617644

The MLS says it went from pending to canceled on 4/13. That’s really strange.

Anonymous wrote:Why has the sheriff not been called? It's not that hard.

The owner doesn’t want them evicted, so the people who have POA for him aren’t going to call the sheriff.