Do You Think It's Fair For The City To Remove People's Cars From Their Yards If They Aren't Running?

Question

I watched on the News tonight, and they're doing this in the city I currently reside in. Tow trucks are coming in and hauling off the cars that no longer work in people's yards. They call them eye sores. I was surprised because I assumed that if your vehicle was on your private property, that you were paying for, then it was your business if you wanted to keep it there. I guess it's not. There were a lot of angry people too.... Is that really fair?

Well, I think they did it because the Homeowners Association in the area was making a big deal about it, and I guess the contacted the city about the problem. But the law enforcement agents overseeing it agreed that it should be done because neighborhood children could get into the cars. That explanation made no sense to me either.....but whatever.

Answer 1

This kind of thing makes my blood boil.
I feel like my property is my property and as long as I do not make noise to disturb my neighbors, trespass on their property, etc then what I do is my business.
If my neighbors was to leave junk cars on their property that is up to them. Same is I want to paint my house in polka dots.
Whoever is paying the taxes and bought the land/house has the right to do as they please as long as they do not disturb others. I do not count supposed eyesores as a disturbance.

Answer 2

A big part of the reasoning used to remove cars is that they are eyesores, or reduce the property value of neighbors. I didn't realize that we had a constitutional right to remove anything deemed an eyesore from our sight, or that property values must be protected at all costs. I think this is a good example of local government gone mad, and if the courts were doing their job they would side with anyone suing over their property being illegally seized.

Ghettos, and low income housing could also said to be eyesores, probably to a majority of citizens, should their property be seized as well?

If my neighbor was doing something I didn't enjoy, like leaving things on their lawn, the neighborly thing to do is to talk to them about it, not have the city impose it's will on the poor soul. This sounds like a city problem, where you have forgotten that people are people, not annoyances that should be dealt with by strangers in uniforms.

Answer 3

yeah its fair, its in the zoning laws for your city. Its to prevent junk yards or car dealers from popping up in suburbia. Do you know how many verman can live in an old car? (my great grandfather had one his property they had to litterally burn every years cause the rats and coons and opossoms would take it over.. and snakes!

In the city I use to work for, we even had a 3 day limit for how long a vehicle could be parked on the street...even if the tags were still valid. We had an old Jeep that had to sit a couple weeks till we got the parts to fix it... they chalked the tires.. so we would go out and roll it forwards ot backwards a few inches every couple of days.

I have to admit... I would not want to live next to a cluttered up junked up house.

If the people have been given warning to move the vehicle and they ignored it.. the city has every right to remove it.


if the vehicle is a closed storage area, ie a garage/shed etc.... its fine. Out of sight out of mind

Answer 4

Sorry bearing directly to the wear and tear on your sources. to respond to your questions: a million) contract to everlasting scarring to tree: if i'm superb, the tree isn't lifeless, yet broken. you may in basic terms be entitled to value of restoration/maint or value of substitute much less depreciation (if perfect) - no longer the two. 2) in case you have faith you nevertheless have a valid factor - positioned up written proofs (perferably from extra desirable than one source to validate)- verbal won't do. Request the adjuster to re-evaluate their place based on your proofs 3) recommendations: If the employer paid, you does no longer be entitled to circulate to small claims as nicely for sources injury (word: unknown what state you're in). 4) in case you compromise directly to pursue small claims - you may sue the driving force for damages - word, the employer will represent the insured and circulate you out of small claims right into a civil court, which will reason you to get carry of an atty. evaluate your project. maximum folk of businesses are extra desirable than honest with persons in settling claims. word: coverage isn't for human beings to be positioned at a extra effective place than they have been previously the loss - many get perplexed in this situation.

Answer 5

That is crazy! What were they thinking to remove someone's stuff from their property? Everybody has their rights to do whatever (as long as it doesn't hurt anybody) on their property--dead cars and whatsoever.

No, I don't think it makes any sense at all. If they feel that those cars are some kind of an eye pollution then they can make their choice to turn their head another way!

Answer 6

As one who has been on both sides of this issue, I have mixed feelings. In our community a code enforcement officer puts a notice on one's property informing them that they have so many days to have it removed, and then action will be taken.

We have neighbors who feel that their yard is a suitable place to store/display all kinds of junk and that is unacceptable to those of us who want our property values to remain steady.

Of course, sometimes it is difficult to get rid of personal property in a short amount of time. But becoming packrats open to criticism is not a welcome position to be in in one's neighborhood.

Answer 7

"Blight" and "public eyesore" are legal term to do this. They could have fixzed it but didnt. (Having lived near a person who left three cars in bits in his yard, I am glad the city is doing something)

Answer 8

that keeps the value of your homes and neighborhood up; however, if someone trust passed on my property in the attempt to take my property, i would recommend they use a bullet proof vest

Answer 9

EVERYBONO BECAUSE DY DO NOT HAVE TOTHE MONEYTO PAY FOR INSURANCE ALL THE TIME AND THEY REALY NEED THIER CARS, SO THAT CAUSES A PROBLEM AND THEN THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR SOMETHING THAT THEY REALY NEED AND STILL DONT HAVE THE MONEY

Answer 10

NO, PERSONALLY I WOULD REPORT THE CAR STOLEN AND HAVE THE MAN IN THE TOW TRUCK ARRESTED FOR AUTO THEFT.