Squatter, desperate against homelessness, claims her “boyfriend said she can,” gets to live in a house for free.

DETROIT, Mich. — Oct. 27, 2014 — Unless the courts act, a mother, desperate to avoid homelessness, gets to live in a free house in the meantime.  Lyn Williams openly admitted to squatting and claimed that she has a right to live there because her “boyfriend told her she could squat in, and take, a home.”

Williams raised an complaint against the homeowner of record, Sarah Hamilton, alleging that Hamilton tried to run her over with a vehicle.  Hamilton, however, has a different story to tell:

“I had permission from the bank and I also had permission from the police,” Hamilton said. “The police told me there is no more squatters rights, you have the right to take back your property.

“You don’t have the right to physically touch anyone in the home. But once you come in and say you have to get out, this is my house you are not welcome here, you are trespassing. If they don’t leave you can call the police. But police were already there.”

Hamilton says police left before she could finish giving Williams the boot.

“(Williams) came from down the street with a knife and tried to stab me,” Hamilton said. “We had to hop in the car, drove forward and drove in reverse, we were on the grass.”

“When she skirted off, words were exchanged,” Burger said.

“He proceeded to say that I would end up in a lake,” Hamilton said. “He proceeded to say if her belongings were taken out, the house would be fire-bombed.”

“She tried to run me move with her vehicle,” Williams said.

“I never hit anybody,” Hamilton said.

This is NOT related in any way to Occupy Our Homes, the movement where people try to demand alternatives to foreclosures.

Here is where you can see the story:  http://www.myfoxchicago.com/story/27053684/homeowner

Welcome to the entitlement mentality stemming from desperation.  In other words, “I stole it fair and square.”

This is what happens when bankers are above the law and the citizenry is left in abject poverty as a result.  People are left with literally no other choice than to fight each other like rats to survive.

The proper solution for the homeowner is in the courts, but, why should the homeowner pay with the use of her home when she is not the one responsible for the squatter’s situation? On the other side of the fence – this will continue if the bankers are not held responsible for their crimes.  

Bankers reaped profits when homeowners lost their homes to the recessions caused by jobs relocated overseas as a result of laws that reward the outsourcing of jobs with tax breaks.

For every single foreclosure, the banks actually profit four times the value of the home foreclosed upon.  When a home is foreclosed upon, the banks get the insured amount of the loan covered by Private Mortgage Insurance.  Then the bank gets the actual home itself.  Then the banks get to keep whatever was paid on the note’s principle.  Then, on top of that, the bank gets to sell the house again for yet another round of profiteering.

Fox Chicago News posted their story on FaceBook as well:



About Amy Barnes

Author has extensive experience in Retail, including two years as a supervisor. Educated in Psychology, Financial Accounting, Criminal Justice, and Programming. Work experience in Law Enforcement, Security (IT), Programming (REALBasic, SQL, VB, JAVA), Retail.
This entry was posted in Commentary, Courts, CourtWatch, Crime & Punishment, Crime Beat, Economy, Finance, Financials, Foreclosures, Government, Housing, Law Enforcement, News, Occupy Our Homes, OpEd / Misc., Politics, USA News and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.