digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Please Digg: Man Comes Home To Find House Demolished by City!!

belleville.com — This guy's house was demolished by the city while he was out of town simply for the bricks the house was made of! Now the city's giving him the runaround claiming they didn't do anything wrong! Hopefully Digg can get this poor guy some national attention and shame the city into fixing the situation.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • CrazyBot, on 10/12/2007, -286/+12I was wondering why I got such a good deal on that house
    Crazybot.com
    • adam192, on 10/12/2007, -378/+52@Skitzzo

      >>Hopefully Digg can get this poor guy some national attention and shame the city into fixing the situation

      Digg does not exist to raise awareness for your cause (however worthwhile you consider that cause to be)
      Digg is not a charity
      It really pisses me off when I see 'please digg'/'digg this' etc in the title. If its a good, interesting story, people will digg it up anyway. If its not, your just helping to lower the quality of articles that reach the front-page.
    • coheedcollapse, on 10/12/2007, -20/+323The thing is, Adam, while Digg isn't meant to raise awareness or help people, some of us enjoy doing just that. If we can entertain ourselves daily and also help people out, why not do it.

      I'm not saying Digg should become a forum of people begging for money, but if it's one person going against an obviously larger force (man vs city government, man vs RIAA) and we have a chance to raise awareness about the problem, I think we should do it.

      That and missing people. Getting the news out to the huge population of Digg could definitely help with that kind of situation.
    • adam192, on 10/12/2007, -170/+18@coheedcollapse

      Yeah thats right. 'Cos when a kid goes missing in, say, New York, it really helps to have that fact advertised to people living everywhere else in the USA (as well as the large minority of diggers such as myself who don't live in the US at all)
    • HMTKSteve, on 10/12/2007, -2/+277Why does this remind me of a Douglas Adams book?
    • rm999, on 10/12/2007, -17/+66I sort of agree with Adam. Periodically Digg does take up some poor soul's cause, but in this case I am confident we aren't being told the whole story. They THINK their house was torn down for bricks? Come on... I like supporting the little guy, but I'm not stupid enough to take up a cause without both sides of the story.

      "[Bonner] said it's the buyer's responsibility to research the property to see whether it is slated for demolition."

      He should be pissed at the guy who sold him the house, not the city. It isn't the city's job to hold people's hands, no government can properly function like that. They decided to tear down someone's house, so he sold it to a naive person. Now it's everyone's fault but his own!
    • SLP1111, on 10/12/2007, -9/+27Welllll...since you said please...Dugg.
    • Lunarshadow, on 10/12/2007, -9/+40Digg isn't /b/, we can show a little compassion.
    • adam192, on 10/12/2007, -24/+53@rm999

      That wasn't my point (allthough I do make that point in a comment further down the page). My point here was that its annoying to see this 'Please Digg' crap... pretty soon Digg will become like Ebay with every post being 'LOOK!!! AMAZING xxx MUST SEE' etc. It just lowers the quality. But obviously no-one agrees with me, 'cos they're digging me down as quickly as if I had raped the guys mum or something
    • vbr2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Something similiar has happened in my town, except it wasn't a demolition. Some roofers mixed up the addresses and ended up taking the wrong house's roof off. Owners arrived after the damage had been done.
    • glock22ownr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Digging this doesnt really help w.o a place to send nastygrams to... They are in St. Louis Illinois btw not Missouri from what I can tell. No luck finding a city website though.
    • binarypower, on 10/12/2007, -8/+16Adam, if you don't want to see articles that say "please digg" or "digg" then just get the greasemonkey script de-n00ber-.... noob.
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -21/+3adam...pretty SOON Digg will be like that? It became like that months ago.

      Hey everybody...the city said they did nothing wrong.

      Because they didn't.
    • DooM, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Dude - it's East St. Louis. If they aren't ashamed already, Digg ain't gonna do it. They had NO trash pickup for over a year -- I don't think there is a single computer in East St. Louis... lol...
    • theone3, on 10/12/2007, -2/+45Everyone be on the lookout for Vogon constructor fleets.
    • superal1394, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Hope he can find a towel amongst the rubble, I have a feeling the rest of us need to go and get our towels handy as well, based on this we have a few more hours.
    • warnerrr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10thats why you lie in the mud in front of it, no matter what Ford tells you about going to the pub. I guess people just don't listen.
    • Parasocks, on 10/12/2007, -13/+7Adam, it's annoying for you to be bringing attention to yourself, when we all could be helping this guy get a new house by using our combined mouse power. May I speak for us all when I say, shut your ***** face.
    • MeatBiProduct, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5It was torn down cause its in the ghetto.
    • DEIx15x8, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12This was a good, interesting story that should be posted on Digg, but the poster appears to be out for attention and did it in a stupid way. The "Please Digg" just annoys people and makes them not want to Digg and that whole story about helping people is an obvious joke. The whole post is lame but the story is great, so why couldn't it just have been posted with any number of "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" jokes?
    • orgasmatron, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Wow. I hope he sues the ***** out of the city, thats *****. I'd be pissed
    • aramova, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4That will teach you to hang out with Ford Perfect at the pub all day long...
    • aramova, on 10/12/2007, -0/+20The real story that TFA does not tell...

      Mr. Johnson said: "You were quite entitled to make any suggestions or protests at the appropriate time you know."

      "Appropriate time?" hooted Lewis. "Appropriate time? The first I knew about it was when a workman arrived at my home yesterday. I asked him if he'd come to clean the windows and he said no he'd come to demolish the house. He didn't tell me straight away of course. Oh no. First he wiped a couple of windows and charged me a fiver. Then he told me."

      "But Mr. Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine month."

      "Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? I mean like actually telling anybody or anything."

      "But the plans were on display . . . "

      "On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."

      "That's the display department."

      "With a flashlight."

      "Ah, well the lights had probably gone."

      "So had the stairs."

      "But look, you found the notice didn't you?"

      "Yes," said Lewis, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying Beware of the Leopard."
    • Dvoid, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@Adam

      You're not paying for Digg. Digg is a free website where people express their opinions. If you don't like it, don't read it.
      Apparently:

      A) People DID feel like raising awareness for this cause / they found the plz digg this interesting evident int the 4355 (last time i refreshed)
      B)People didn't agree with YOU (-272 diggs (last time i refreshed))
  • Skitzzo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+27Having just put a contract down on a house of my own, I can only imagine how pissed off I'd be if this happened to me. I don't think I'd be as calm as it sounds he's being... that's for sure.
    • RoshanK, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2Crap I just signed a contract to buy a house today. This makes me want to reconsider buying one.
    • khag7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9he's gotta be calm. he doesn't have any other choice. if he gets enraged and crazy he'll get negative attention.
    • winrules, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21"Before you buy, check for demolition notices."
    • ingxia, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22Never bought a house myself, but wouldn't your lender or bank check that out too? How do you get a loan on a house about to be bulldozed? Or do people outside California buy houses with cash?
    • Lazybones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11a) Use a Realtor they are required to check this sort of thing, well at least where I live they are.
      b) If you purchase in a private sale then YOU need to check this sort of thing out.
      c) I also don't understand how he got a mortgage for this without the bank checking into the property.
    • qwickone, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8It's called a title search. A title search would have found that the house was slated for demolition. And if the title company didnt find this information, guess what, you sue them for the cost of the house and you win. That's what title insurance is. This is standard practice when buying a house. Not saying it totally sucks for this guy, but he just got suckered by the guy that sold him the house. What if you left your car parked in front of your house for 2 days for whatever reason, it gets hit by some drunk driver and they left. You use your insurance to buy a new one. That's the point of insurance. Sucks for you and everything, but youre fault for not having insurance. I feel sorry for him, but not that sorry, he didnt do anything to help himself in the first place.
    • kavaliro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"Before you buy, check for demolition notices."

      That, is what he paid a realtor for. If anyone should be coughing up dough on this one, it's the realtor. Not the city. Unless, of course, he _didn't_ use a realtor, in which case it's his own responsibility to do that kind of investigation.
  • schlurp, on 10/12/2007, -5/+199To be fair the demolition notice had been public for months.
    It was on display in a dark cellar with no stairs in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of The Leopard".
    • edzieba, on 10/12/2007, -3/+66Pity he wasn't there to lie in front of the bulldozer.
    • jftitan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13All i could think of while reading this article, was... OMFG Its actually happening... Why has the guy not raised his thumb"
    • bekeleven, on 10/12/2007, -2/+32I would digg you comment, except that it currently reads +42...

      Don't want to ruin it.
    • nukethewhales, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"Thats the display department."
    • spvaland, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1I don't see how OSX tore this guy's house down.
  • adam192, on 10/12/2007, -21/+23From the article:

    He [some city official] said it's the buyer's responsibility to research the property to see whether it is slated for demolition.

    So yeah it was not nice (and quite possibly illegal) for the origional owners to sell him the house having recieved a demolition order, but he's a mug for not getting it checked out. Had any competent lawyer been advising him at the time of purchase, he would have found out about the demolition order. I feel bad for the guy, but the ultimate responsibility lies with him.
    • DavidtheDuke, on 10/12/2007, -20/+13My dad buys and flips houses for a living. I'm sure he doesn't go around making sure it won't be DEMOLISHED the next day.
    • p0und, on 10/12/2007, -8/+14i believe adm192 is correct. it is the responsibility of the buyer to check on or have their attorney check on these things. the buyer may be able to sue the seller in this case though because it seems that the sellers were aware of the scheduled demolition and they may have left that little tid bit out of the seller's disclosure.
    • adam192, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8@DavidtheDuke

      There's lots of things you should check when you buy a house... such as do other people/properties have right of way through the garden, whether the next-door neighbours have planning permission to build a multi-story carpark right next door to your property, etc. Why shouldn't this be one of them?

      edit: p0und beat me to it
    • dt40, on 10/12/2007, -1/+52In many states, it is the responsibility of the seller to disclose anything they know about that could materially affect the value of a house.

      Certainly, imminent demolition would qualify as something that affects a house's value.
    • paperhat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5This guy apparently didn't bother to get title insurance on his house. If he had then the city's condemnation would have come up in the title search, and if it didn't, the title insurance would be on the hook for a new house.
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7DavidtheDuke..then your dad is not very good at his job.
    • Flame500, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3What ever happened to home inspections?
    • tiedyeman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8If "any competent lawyer been advising him at the time of purchase"? Are you kidding? This is East St. Louis, IL. It is one of, if not the most blighted ghettos in the country. The majority of the population doesn't have access to basic services, health care, primary education, etc. The average household income is $13,596 and you are criticizing him for not having his attorney look into it more closely. Should he have done that on the way to the polo club, or after he picked his kids up from private school?
    • olik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They demolished it for the bricks? ***** detector = raging
  • Fi9nutz, on 10/12/2007, -23/+65Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy all over again
    • pustulio, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11That's what I was thinking the whole time I was reading that.
    • leftfoot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+31You got your towel?
    • theBrink, on 10/12/2007, -20/+1and I'm thinking about south park's towely now, OMG!
    • wilf_brim, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13I had to read TFA just to make sure that the owners name wasn't Arthur Dent.
    • custerfluck, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Great stuff... +42 diggs moment I hope nobody f's it up.
      they just did....
      damn
      I'll take it down a notch bring it back to 42 and keep it there
    • muka3d, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Fi9nutz: "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy all over again" +42 diggs
      That's how it looked when I got here...:)
  • huphtur, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24Where was Ford Prefect when ya need him?
  • D4r7h3v1l, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Damn Mr. Prosser!
  • flamingmb, on 10/12/2007, -13/+2I have this thing against digging stories that have "Please digg!" or "lets get it to the front page!" in the title or discription. Dont tell me what to do.
  • gregmo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7God East St. Louis. Though it's considered the most dangerous part of the country, no one deserves this crap. I hope the city gets their comeuppance
  • Karted, on 10/12/2007, -18/+4I'm not going to digg for the fact you are asking for it to be dugg. Instead ill report it as lame.
  • stephenv, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I would make a Volgon joke, but I haven't the heart. Hope this guy wins a massive lawsuit against the previous owner (it was probably bank-owned from the sound of the neighborhood).
  • Zaphod63, on 10/12/2007, -46/+1This man is owed nothing... No Digg
    • WasabiBomb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+28Tell ya what, Zaphon63- the next time you're on fire, I won't piss on you to put you out. After all, you're owed nothing.
    • BinaryCleric, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15How is he owed nothing when the city destroyed his home? I'm sorry buy if I came home to find a pile of brinks I would not only sue the city but also the demolition crew for professional negligence as well as theft.
    • musicmantrs, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8@Binary
      Did you not read the article? It had been scheduled for demolition for 20 months... It is the fault of the former owners and the fault of Mr. Hill that he was not notified; they sent a letter informing the former owners and they decided not to pass that on. The former owners are at fault; if he wants a money grab don't take it from the local government take it from the people that failed to inform you.
    • dunezone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@musicmantrs

      What do you mean its just the former owners fault? It would be the former owner for misinforming the buyer if he was aware of the bulldozing(if thats illegal), second the bull dozing company(if it was not done by city workers) is liable since they should of done a last minute check to the owner, and finally the city should of done a last minute check to make sure the owner was aware. A simple statement of saying it was up for bulldozing for 20 months is no excuse if the former or current owner was never informed by letter or in person.
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2BinaryCleric...and you would get ZERO because you would have sued the wrong people. The city and the demolition company LEGALLY demolished hte building.

      dunezone...don't go into law. NONE of what you said is true, either legally, or ethically. You think the city and demolition company has to do checks every week or so to make sure the house hasn't been sold to an unsuspecting owner? Nope. They get clearance, and they then prepare and demolish. If someone else scams someone into buying hte property, it is THEIR fault, not the demolition company or the city.
    • dunezone, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Im saying they dont have to do checks every week, but they should be covering their asses before they bulldoze a house, so one last check is not going to kill them.
    • MeredithTesla, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Sorry dunezone, but you're incorrect on this one. I live in Illinois and there is Complete Disclosure law on the books when it comes to home sales, they taught us this in high school consumer education for goodness sake. If there's anything defective or likely to cause a decrease in value on the house, the seller is responsible. If you purchase a house with airconditioning, you're going to expect it works right? Come summer time it doesnt work; if the seller was aware of this then they are liable for it. They can and most likely will be pulled in to court if it can't be settled peacefully.

      I'm gonna go with its the sellers fault, and maybe hope the city changes its policy to send out a Final Notice about a month before the actual demolishing.
    • MeredithTesla, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1applogies dunezone, I attempted to edit the name to broomett there and missed the countdown.
  • diehard2k5, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7Is Please Digg: The new Breaking News????
  • Jakerius, on 10/12/2007, -14/+11When did Digg become a charity/medium for PSA's?
    • Rhine23, on 10/12/2007, -9/+6I would argue after the James Kim ordeal.
  • starguy, on 10/12/2007, -12/+7Previous owner didn't demolish the house. The city and its contractors did. Reasons to own a shotgun. And a towel.

    The guy probably didn't live in the house, but was refurbishing it to rent it out. Therefore it was still just an investment to him without much personal attachment beyond the work he put in to it. Irregardless, its his house, and noone no matter what has the right to drive up to it and commence to demolishing it. The more I read of the laws of this country online the more I realize how utterly, profoundly corrupt it is. The same laws that apply to you do not apply to the state or city or government at all. Its disgustingly hypocritical
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3So...what your REALLY dumb brain is saying is that if your proerty is scheduled for demolition, and you want to save it, you should sell it. And that way, no matter what, NO ONE can demoloish now?

      You REALLY make this site look bad, and with Digg, that is saying a lot.
    • missflibbles, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Work on your English or something, too. "Irregardless" is not a standard English word, and even if it were, it'd be a double-negative.
    • magamus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@ missflibbles: irregardless IS a word. it is not a commonly used word, but it IS a word. it is an adverb.
      please check the dictionary yourself before telling others to.
    • magamus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@ myself (edit stopped): American Heritage and Merriam-Webster dictionaries list the word as non-standard (M/W) and as standard (AH) for use in the English language. and even with the word being a double negative, i ain't never heard anyone use it wrong. lol. still, do you really believe that most Americans use the English language properly?
  • nwa122, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Total BS. How is it his responsibility to check to see if the house is to be torn down? Who does that? "House looks great Sir, I just gota make sure its not scheduled to be leveled!" The city should give him his bricks back and rebuild his *****.
    • p0und, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7clearly, you've never bought a house before. you would be amazed at the amount of ***** that both the buyer and seller have to go through.
    • paperhat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8> How is it his responsibility to check to see if the house is to be torn down? Who does that?

      Probably 99.9% of home buyers. When you get a mortgage you are required to get title insurance. The title company checks for stuff like this before they issue the policy. Even buyers who pay with cash usually get title insurance.
    • voidptr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9He shouldn't have done it, but his closing lawyer and title insurance company damn well should have.
    • gameforge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@p0und
      Exactly what I was thinking. The

      1) Title company
      2) City
      3) Wrecking crew
      4) Insurance company

      and if the house was being financed, the

      5) Loan underwriter

      or, if underwritten by computer, definitely the

      6) Loan processor
      7) Computer

      all should have caught this, ignoring the fact that the former homeowner is 100% responsible for disclosing information like this when they sell it (or the real estate agent, if one was involved).

      In that city, maybe they really do claim that it's a buyer's job to verify whether a house is scheduled for demolition. And it is, as much as it's anyone's personal responsibility to look out for themselves and their money. But, the city should not demolish a house based on whomever the owner was some months prior to the demolition. They should ensure that the party which was notified of the demolition is still the party that owns the house, like, the day they tear it down. Not to mention that the city simply hired a wrecking crew; the wrecking crew should also be paying attention to what their employer asks them to do, whether private or government... titles (i.e. deeds), if not any other documentation, should be publicly available.

      If it is in fact the buyer's responsibility to verify whether a house is flagged for wrecking, his responsibility is only as much as the half-dozen or so other parties involved in both purchasing and demolishing a house.

      Which is good news for this guy - he has a LOT of people to take to court (meaning more chances of some kind of settlement).
    • Petrarch1603, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3i used to work for chicago title. If this happened to one of our clients there would have been hell to pay. Occasionally there would be claims paid off, but i have never heard of something like this.
  • attica, on 10/12/2007, -11/+2this reminds me of Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy...
  • GregR, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Time to talk to a lawyer!

    When the house was purchased, there should have been a title search done. I'm not sure but I'd think there'd be a note re: the pending demolition there.
    • Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3When you finance a house, you always have a title search and insurance. The title company would be liable for this little cockup.
    • beotch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The insurance doesn't cover your loss, it covers the bank's.
    • mousky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The article states that the purchaser should have researched their property at the town hall to ensure that it has no orders on it. That seems to imply that the demolition order would NOT show up during a title search. Can anyone confirm or clarify this?
  • TunaFishGangsta, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"Demolition coordinator Marcus Johnson said the house, which was torn down in December, was not destroyed because of the dollar value of the bricks. He said the frame houses are still standing because the contractor hasn't had time to get to them."

    Yeah, they don't have time to knock down the houses that aren't made of valuable bricks!
  • D3koy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Was his name Arthur Dent?
  • triskaid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3yellow
    • iDiggIt42, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3No, the correct answer is obviously blue.
  • attica, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0ya, you ought to read the entire series.

    the home owner should too then he'll know whats gonna happen to him.
  • Acill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Thats just crazy, but i am sure he will get some sort of resolve to it in the end.
  • BrandonAbell, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Would it have been that hard for the City to post a notice ON THE DOOR of the house and perhaps verify that it was not occupied at the time? I don't think that sending a letter qualifies as due diligence for that city for something of this magnitude.
  • 5hop4orce, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Hopefully Digg can encourage some people to form a shotgun militia and murder every city official involved in this tyranny.
  • 15charmaxwtf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They should pay out of their own pockets, not tax payers.
  • DIAF, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Sue the sellers. They are to blame. They are probably sipping mojitos in Mehico by now.
    • takyseo, on 12/22/2007, -0/+0I don't think they should sue the sellers, I think they should pay out of pocket though.
      This is kind of messed up, goes to show you how things are nowdays though.

      Debt
  • MosaicM, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8Any story that has "Please Digg" in it automatically gets a bury from me. I don't care if aliens raped your puppy and then severed all your limbs. Don't beg for diggs!
    • tomi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Might want to watch your dog tonight, you're next.
  • ravens326, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3East St. Louis is not only a piece of *****, but the town officials are absolutely moronic. No wonder why Springfield, USA (Simpsons) leap frogged this town in the top 300 cities in the country. Hahaha. Attention city officials: you want to piss your citizens off? Destroy their houses while they are out. Lets see how fast you all lose your precious power hungry jobs.

    http://www.dpodgor.net
    • kylesiue, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1You know there's way more than one springfield in the US...I think there's like one in every state almost maybe two in some
      and I'm glad to hear you think people that are stuck in a crappy city is so funny
    • ravens326, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Springfield, USA, from the tv show The Simpsons. Not in any US state because its location has remain a mystery. I am majoring in geography, you think I don't know that there are many cities named Springfield in the US? Are you really that much of a moron? And yes, East St. Louis is a ***** town, but that doesn't mean that the people who live there are *****. It means the people running the city are *****.
  • PeTeRZz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1thats so ***** up..
  • MeltedUFO, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Ford, what about my home?
  • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1Will you morons PLEASE come back to reality. Digg will NEVER get anything "national attention" Far less than 1% of hte coutnry has ever HEARD of Digg. And about 1% of that actually visits it.

    NO story on Digg has ever been talked about by national news media solely for being on Digg. And since hte site is going downhill with each new member that joins, it never will.
    • m1ch184, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I assume that's why digg is 19th on alexia

      ...because no one comes here.
    • Skitzzo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1are you drunk? digg stories get picked up by the national media all the time. Digg members get interviewed by the national media all the time. Digg has more traffic than most media outlets.

      Hi, welcome to reality, moron!
  • AriaStar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Three little words:

    This is *****.
  • stoppedcode12, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I think I hear the dolphins leaving earth.
  • arkowi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1His protest should've been made months ago. These plans have been on display at the planning office now for a year.
    • Akaji, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Yes, because everyone drops by the planning office every once in a while to see if their house is about to be demolished.

      I suspect that most homeowners have never stepped foot into a planning office, much less thought that there was any possibility that their house could be scheduled for demolition without their knowledge.
    • Parasocks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yeah, to me it sounds like seller should be responsible to disclose this. Kind of like selling a stolen car.
    • broomett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Akaji...no..but everybody SHOULD check to see if a house that they are about to BUY is about to be demolished. He didn't. And because of that, he got scammed.
    • fitchmicah, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2ok, when you bought your house did YOU think that it was possible that the city could come knock it down without telling you?
  • Harboggles, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4They had to make way for a new hyper space junction :-P

    Douglas Adams ftw
  • TehChinny, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3omfg that guy got pwned
  • Nesh, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7It must be Thursday, I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
  • cmwotring, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm not siding with either party on this, however it seems the city might give a little more notice than sending something in the mail. When your car is broken down on the side of the highway the police put a bright orange sticker on it warning of impending action. The city certainly could have gone to the house to see if it indeed was inhabited. It's pretty obvious if someone is living in a house or not. The buyer should have looked into potential demolition, but come on lets err on the side of precaution before you just demolish someones home.
  • 4myjoy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Can you say scam...

    This guy got taken by whoever sold him the house and the people that handled the sale.
  • 5DMT, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12 "But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning
    office for the last nine month."
    "On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them."
    "That's the display department."
    "With a torch."
    "Ah, well the lights had probably gone."
    "So had the stairs."
    "But look, you found the notice didn't you?"
    "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a
    locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door
    saying Beware of the Leopard."
  • atomicfission92, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Dam, I saw something messed up like this happen in NYC. They tore down the wrong house. Luckily no one was inside.
  • TheToecutter, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Digg can't help the guy. But I bet laywers are lined up around the block salivating at their cut of the settlement sure to come from the city.
  • redcard, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Anyone who feels sorry for this guy obviously has never bought a house.

    The paperwork and hassle I went through to purchase this condo dug up everything about the place and the past owner I ever wanted to know. There is NO way someone can simply just get a mortgage (or any bank action) on a place that has a standing demolition order.

    This guy either did not get his funding legally, or did not close the sale legally.
  • cfrazier, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14I work in tech sales and East St Louis is part of my territory. About half of the church's in town have purchased their copiers from my company. This is not surprising, the city is corrupt as it gets. A couple of years ago they were sued in federal court for having the police department severely beat a political opponent and when the judge issued the damages, the city lawyer said the guy would never see a penny because the city was broke. The judge then said fine, he gets the dead to city hall as of right now and the city has to pay him rent or the original damages. This actually happened. Also, there was a city manager 4 years ago that was murdered after he challenged the mayor. 2 years ago the police chief and 2 people from city hall were charged in federal court with hiring a hit man to kill a witness (federal informant) in a vote buying scheme. They also burned one of the fire department's 3 stations when talks about funding were being held.

    This guy needs help with what he is up against. Also, the main reason the town is one of the worst in the nation for crime is city hall. If the local government does this, why should they fight crime, or ordinary people care?

    Don't forget, he bought the house from the county, i.e. the local govenment. You figure that if you purchase a house from teh govenment that they will not come back and knock it down and say that it is your fault. The city most likely did not correctly file condemnation papers, that would have been noticed on the required title search for teh mortgage.

    God bless this guy!
    • Skitzzo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Finally an informed comment. I'm amazed at how many people think they know what's going on and havent even READ THE STORY
  • AceTracer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Serves him right, the plans have been on the display in the local planning office for nine months, in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard".
  • blackjack75, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5And yet we don't care when it happens every day in Palestine... (destroying people's houses 5 years after construction because the occupying force had not authorized the construction).
    • SilenceBroken, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3With all due respect for Palestine, I'm sure we don't care when something like this were to happen in Liberia or Ecuador or the Czech Republic. Do injustices similar to this happen in countries like those I've named and like Palestine? You bet! Is it our responsibility to care for all those injustices in other countries? No, it's not. We cannot save the world. What happens in our home country is far more relevant to us than what happens in those other countries unless we are more directly involved.

      I'm not saying we shouldn't reach beyond our borders to try to make a positive impact on the world. We absolutely should! However, we shouldn't feel guilty because we don't protest every injustice overseas. It's a healthy part of human nature to stick up for the home team and to let the other areas tend to their own matters.
    • cfrazier, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2AMEN!!!!!

      Also, one other difference, Palestinians were bombs and blow up inocent women and children....
    • aamer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@silencebroken:

      "we shouldn't feel guilty because we don't protest every injustice overseas"

      ... except it's not an issue of protesting it. we actually fund it.
  • StealTheRR, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"Hill and O'Neal tried to talk to council members at the City Council meeting Thursday, but were prevented because they were not listed on the agenda."
    Ridiculous; like something out of the movies.
  • kylesiue, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I used to live a few miles from E St. Louis ..now i'm about 30 more minutes from it.
    I've seen it and drove through it a number of times.
    It IS in bad shape. Buildings are all messes, lots of boarded up windows, lots of burnt down buildings and buildings that just fell over.

    If you don't know, East St. Louis is the part of St. Louis that they builit on the Illinois side of the Mississippi and some odd years back ..I think it was the 20's or something....it was a HUGE place for people to live because it was where you lived if you were going to commute to St. Louis daily to work.
    Lots of people with jobs = people selling stuff so there was lots of opportunity for stores to open..which creates more jobs.
    So you have this large community..
    Eventually commerce left the city and therefore all the care for it was lost because no one wants to upkeep a city that large if they aren't going to make money off of it.
    They've struggled for a long time with crime and poverty since then.
    We will leave the reasons why people left out because its speculation on my part but..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_St._Louis,_Illinois

    read the part about Recent East St. Louis if you care.

    anyway, I believe there are SOME nice places there...a hospital, a junior college which isn't too bad, and some other things......but for the most part you wouldn't want to stop at a stop sign there at night.
    • fitchmicah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3the reasons why "they" left are summed up by the term "white flight"

      if you don't believe me, look on the census web site, there are some spots in east st. louis with 100% black people living there, right next to areas of 99.9% white people
    • kylesiue, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0like i said, i'm not going to say it......but I lived really close for 16 years and anyone who's in that area know all about how things work.
  • Brett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I wonder if he qualifies for "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition" now...
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 81 of 81 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.