6352-89 Confirm unsafe structure at 1467 Ridgewood

Home Browse Search

Board of Building Standards Public Hearing February 13, 1989 fire, Hr. Ockinpton stated that he did not have much experience with arson fires, but that this was the opinion of the fire marshal. He then stated that the fire marshal indicated that this type of cutting was the same method used in the arson fire on Bunts Avenue. Chairman Wright then asked if there were any members of the public that would like to be heard. Attorney Edward H. Janis came forward. Hr. Janis stated that he was the attorney for Agnes Koontz. After Chairman Wright swore-in Hr. Janis, Hr. Janis stated the following= 'This case was apparently begun by another attorney in 1979 when Hr. & Hrs. Reed became delinquent on their note and mortgage to Hrs. Koontz. Apparently an agree- ment was reached between parties whereby Hr. & Hrs. Reed caught up their payments and they continued to live in the property for quite some time even though an action was taken. I inherited the action when the other attorney passed away. Hr. Ockington testi- fied that the property had been abandoned and indeed it has. Hr. & Hrs. Reed have left the area as far as I can determine~ howev- er, they did so after a Judgment was obtained and foreclosure, procedure begun. Now the reason it has taken so long, and I offer this evidence in mitigation of the idea that we are here today to show cause, is that we have sold this property twice and both times the sales have fallen through. One time it fell through because a buyer reneged and this was done with the con- sent of the parties because another buyer had subsequently pur- chased the property at Sheriff Sale. That buyer also filed a motion to have the sale voided and we had a contested hearing on it and the court ruled that because of an error in the advertise- ment prepared by the Sheriff's office, they would have to void the sale. We had a third sale and at that point the property was not reappraised at any lower value than the first two sales. And that was not sold for want of bidders. A reappraisal was asked and a fourth sale was scheduled. While that was happening, Hr. Ockington contacted me in late November, early part of December. We had a sale schedule for January 28th and that sale had to be withdrawn because the sheriff's department, in picking up the new sale, picked up the old description again. But Hr. Ockington is not quite correct in terms of the efforts that have been made since we were notified that proceedings would be begun to try to comply with the city's problem and the property's problem in general. First of all, I would like to point out that Hrs. Koontz doesn't own this property. The title holders are Betty Harry Reed--all she has is a mortgage. But notwithstanding that, we made arrangements through the building department and appar- ently through the police and fire departments to get our contrac- tor in there to exam the premises. He prepared an estimate which I submitted to the Common Pleas Court in support of a motion to have the property reappraised at a lower value in hopes that it would sell--someone would be interested in rehabilitating the