[temeculaguy]

I toured some of the redc auction houses today, not much of a crowd and no “investor types” were spotted. People that migrated here that are getting forclosed on will leave the area and rents will go down because people will not commute in the same numbers to rent as those who will commute to buy. Renters live closer to work than owners for the most part. Stay out of the sucker rally and matt is right, it will be with us through most of the summer, when S.D. and O.C. start taking serious hits later this year and $4 gas starts becoming the norm, the exhurbs are gonna get nailed because of migration back to the cities.

[temeculaguy]

I toured some of the redc auction houses today, not much of a crowd and no “investor types” were spotted. People that migrated here that are getting forclosed on will leave the area and rents will go down because people will not commute in the same numbers to rent as those who will commute to buy. Renters live closer to work than owners for the most part. Stay out of the sucker rally and matt is right, it will be with us through most of the summer, when S.D. and O.C. start taking serious hits later this year and $4 gas starts becoming the norm, the exhurbs are gonna get nailed because of migration back to the cities.

[temeculaguy]

I toured some of the redc auction houses today, not much of a crowd and no “investor types” were spotted. People that migrated here that are getting forclosed on will leave the area and rents will go down because people will not commute in the same numbers to rent as those who will commute to buy. Renters live closer to work than owners for the most part. Stay out of the sucker rally and matt is right, it will be with us through most of the summer, when S.D. and O.C. start taking serious hits later this year and $4 gas starts becoming the norm, the exhurbs are gonna get nailed because of migration back to the cities.

[temeculaguy]

I toured some of the redc auction houses today, not much of a crowd and no “investor types” were spotted. People that migrated here that are getting forclosed on will leave the area and rents will go down because people will not commute in the same numbers to rent as those who will commute to buy. Renters live closer to work than owners for the most part. Stay out of the sucker rally and matt is right, it will be with us through most of the summer, when S.D. and O.C. start taking serious hits later this year and $4 gas starts becoming the norm, the exhurbs are gonna get nailed because of migration back to the cities.

[temeculaguy]

I toured some of the redc auction houses today, not much of a crowd and no “investor types” were spotted. People that migrated here that are getting forclosed on will leave the area and rents will go down because people will not commute in the same numbers to rent as those who will commute to buy. Renters live closer to work than owners for the most part. Stay out of the sucker rally and matt is right, it will be with us through most of the summer, when S.D. and O.C. start taking serious hits later this year and $4 gas starts becoming the norm, the exhurbs are gonna get nailed because of migration back to the cities.

[temeculaguy]

I’m still backing Tesla. http://www.teslamotors.com/
They went into full production two weeks ago, looks like they figured out the transmission problem and are now boasting 0-60 in 3.9 seconds with a 135mpg equivalent at .02 cost per mile. The big difference is that other than the rest of the green cars, women will want to ride in your Tesla, nobody can steal it because they wont be able to power it up and old people wont yell at you for driving too slow. They will hit the streets in a few months. Their marketing strategy is brilliant, rather than market to eggheads or environmentalists, their first design is the fastest and sexiest thing on the road, every celeb has already bought one. Next they will come out with their planned 4 dr that is closer to 50k, then it’s on like Donkey Kong.

[temeculaguy]

I’m still backing Tesla. http://www.teslamotors.com/
They went into full production two weeks ago, looks like they figured out the transmission problem and are now boasting 0-60 in 3.9 seconds with a 135mpg equivalent at .02 cost per mile. The big difference is that other than the rest of the green cars, women will want to ride in your Tesla, nobody can steal it because they wont be able to power it up and old people wont yell at you for driving too slow. They will hit the streets in a few months. Their marketing strategy is brilliant, rather than market to eggheads or environmentalists, their first design is the fastest and sexiest thing on the road, every celeb has already bought one. Next they will come out with their planned 4 dr that is closer to 50k, then it’s on like Donkey Kong.

[temeculaguy]

I’m still backing Tesla. http://www.teslamotors.com/
They went into full production two weeks ago, looks like they figured out the transmission problem and are now boasting 0-60 in 3.9 seconds with a 135mpg equivalent at .02 cost per mile. The big difference is that other than the rest of the green cars, women will want to ride in your Tesla, nobody can steal it because they wont be able to power it up and old people wont yell at you for driving too slow. They will hit the streets in a few months. Their marketing strategy is brilliant, rather than market to eggheads or environmentalists, their first design is the fastest and sexiest thing on the road, every celeb has already bought one. Next they will come out with their planned 4 dr that is closer to 50k, then it’s on like Donkey Kong.

[temeculaguy]

I’m still backing Tesla. http://www.teslamotors.com/
They went into full production two weeks ago, looks like they figured out the transmission problem and are now boasting 0-60 in 3.9 seconds with a 135mpg equivalent at .02 cost per mile. The big difference is that other than the rest of the green cars, women will want to ride in your Tesla, nobody can steal it because they wont be able to power it up and old people wont yell at you for driving too slow. They will hit the streets in a few months. Their marketing strategy is brilliant, rather than market to eggheads or environmentalists, their first design is the fastest and sexiest thing on the road, every celeb has already bought one. Next they will come out with their planned 4 dr that is closer to 50k, then it’s on like Donkey Kong.

[temeculaguy]

I’m still backing Tesla. http://www.teslamotors.com/
They went into full production two weeks ago, looks like they figured out the transmission problem and are now boasting 0-60 in 3.9 seconds with a 135mpg equivalent at .02 cost per mile. The big difference is that other than the rest of the green cars, women will want to ride in your Tesla, nobody can steal it because they wont be able to power it up and old people wont yell at you for driving too slow. They will hit the streets in a few months. Their marketing strategy is brilliant, rather than market to eggheads or environmentalists, their first design is the fastest and sexiest thing on the road, every celeb has already bought one. Next they will come out with their planned 4 dr that is closer to 50k, then it’s on like Donkey Kong.

[temeculaguy]

Definition of Vandalism in the california penal code

594 P.C. (a) Every person who maliciously commits any of the following
acts with respect to any real or personal property not his or her
own, in cases other than those specified by state law, is guilty of
vandalism:
(1) Defaces with graffiti or other inscribed material.
(2) Damages.
(3) Destroys.

The Key phrase is “not his or her own.” The law doesn’t care if there is a loan against the property, the owner is the person on the deed, even if they have no equity. Breaking the contract is not criminal as someone else mentioned, the contract or loan docs may say that you can’t destroy the house but it is not criminal, the only punishment can be monetary and if they had money they wouldn’t be losing the house.

There are excpetions and one of them is arson, you can’t burn it down, even if it is yours free and clear, not because it is vandalism but because lighting fires is bad. Domestic violence vandalsim is another, destroying the property of your spouse even in a community property state for the purpose of terrorizing them will land you in jail, so put that sledgehammer away because even though your name is on her car, it will be a night in the pokey for you if you redecorate it.

Rather than have the courts or the police prevent it, here’s a novel idea, don’t let people buy houses with nothing down, people with equity rarely destroy their house or sell off the appliances and fixtures. I think they should take pictures of thrashed repos, enlarge them and hang them on the walls in lending institutions, visible to the approvers.

[temeculaguy]

Definition of Vandalism in the california penal code

594 P.C. (a) Every person who maliciously commits any of the following
acts with respect to any real or personal property not his or her
own, in cases other than those specified by state law, is guilty of
vandalism:
(1) Defaces with graffiti or other inscribed material.
(2) Damages.
(3) Destroys.

The Key phrase is “not his or her own.” The law doesn’t care if there is a loan against the property, the owner is the person on the deed, even if they have no equity. Breaking the contract is not criminal as someone else mentioned, the contract or loan docs may say that you can’t destroy the house but it is not criminal, the only punishment can be monetary and if they had money they wouldn’t be losing the house.

There are excpetions and one of them is arson, you can’t burn it down, even if it is yours free and clear, not because it is vandalism but because lighting fires is bad. Domestic violence vandalsim is another, destroying the property of your spouse even in a community property state for the purpose of terrorizing them will land you in jail, so put that sledgehammer away because even though your name is on her car, it will be a night in the pokey for you if you redecorate it.

Rather than have the courts or the police prevent it, here’s a novel idea, don’t let people buy houses with nothing down, people with equity rarely destroy their house or sell off the appliances and fixtures. I think they should take pictures of thrashed repos, enlarge them and hang them on the walls in lending institutions, visible to the approvers.

[temeculaguy]

Definition of Vandalism in the california penal code

594 P.C. (a) Every person who maliciously commits any of the following
acts with respect to any real or personal property not his or her
own, in cases other than those specified by state law, is guilty of
vandalism:
(1) Defaces with graffiti or other inscribed material.
(2) Damages.
(3) Destroys.

The Key phrase is “not his or her own.” The law doesn’t care if there is a loan against the property, the owner is the person on the deed, even if they have no equity. Breaking the contract is not criminal as someone else mentioned, the contract or loan docs may say that you can’t destroy the house but it is not criminal, the only punishment can be monetary and if they had money they wouldn’t be losing the house.

There are excpetions and one of them is arson, you can’t burn it down, even if it is yours free and clear, not because it is vandalism but because lighting fires is bad. Domestic violence vandalsim is another, destroying the property of your spouse even in a community property state for the purpose of terrorizing them will land you in jail, so put that sledgehammer away because even though your name is on her car, it will be a night in the pokey for you if you redecorate it.

Rather than have the courts or the police prevent it, here’s a novel idea, don’t let people buy houses with nothing down, people with equity rarely destroy their house or sell off the appliances and fixtures. I think they should take pictures of thrashed repos, enlarge them and hang them on the walls in lending institutions, visible to the approvers.

[temeculaguy]

Definition of Vandalism in the california penal code

594 P.C. (a) Every person who maliciously commits any of the following
acts with respect to any real or personal property not his or her
own, in cases other than those specified by state law, is guilty of
vandalism:
(1) Defaces with graffiti or other inscribed material.
(2) Damages.
(3) Destroys.

The Key phrase is “not his or her own.” The law doesn’t care if there is a loan against the property, the owner is the person on the deed, even if they have no equity. Breaking the contract is not criminal as someone else mentioned, the contract or loan docs may say that you can’t destroy the house but it is not criminal, the only punishment can be monetary and if they had money they wouldn’t be losing the house.

There are excpetions and one of them is arson, you can’t burn it down, even if it is yours free and clear, not because it is vandalism but because lighting fires is bad. Domestic violence vandalsim is another, destroying the property of your spouse even in a community property state for the purpose of terrorizing them will land you in jail, so put that sledgehammer away because even though your name is on her car, it will be a night in the pokey for you if you redecorate it.

Rather than have the courts or the police prevent it, here’s a novel idea, don’t let people buy houses with nothing down, people with equity rarely destroy their house or sell off the appliances and fixtures. I think they should take pictures of thrashed repos, enlarge them and hang them on the walls in lending institutions, visible to the approvers.

[temeculaguy]

Definition of Vandalism in the california penal code

594 P.C. (a) Every person who maliciously commits any of the following
acts with respect to any real or personal property not his or her
own, in cases other than those specified by state law, is guilty of
vandalism:
(1) Defaces with graffiti or other inscribed material.
(2) Damages.
(3) Destroys.

The Key phrase is “not his or her own.” The law doesn’t care if there is a loan against the property, the owner is the person on the deed, even if they have no equity. Breaking the contract is not criminal as someone else mentioned, the contract or loan docs may say that you can’t destroy the house but it is not criminal, the only punishment can be monetary and if they had money they wouldn’t be losing the house.

There are excpetions and one of them is arson, you can’t burn it down, even if it is yours free and clear, not because it is vandalism but because lighting fires is bad. Domestic violence vandalsim is another, destroying the property of your spouse even in a community property state for the purpose of terrorizing them will land you in jail, so put that sledgehammer away because even though your name is on her car, it will be a night in the pokey for you if you redecorate it.

Rather than have the courts or the police prevent it, here’s a novel idea, don’t let people buy houses with nothing down, people with equity rarely destroy their house or sell off the appliances and fixtures. I think they should take pictures of thrashed repos, enlarge them and hang them on the walls in lending institutions, visible to the approvers.

[Author]

Posts