|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| The owners of a Fair Lawn house where the brother of New York Giants cornerback Janoris Jenkins is accused of killing a man claim the NFL player is responsible for the subsequent loss in home value. The property owners identified in a court document filed Thursday as S.R. and N.R. Tummalapenta say the value of their Van Saun Place house has gone down by at least 30 percent. They are seeking at least $700,000 from Janoris Jenkins. |
I don’t agree. Put yourself in their shoes. If you sold your house at a 30% loss would you be happy?
The murder isn’t Jenkins’ fault but that doesnt change the fact that it happened and the homeowners have to pay those consequences.
These people are probably hoping that they are a big enough pest that Jenkins will pay them 25 or 50K to just go away.
Quote:
This is some one just looking for free money.
100% agree. You going to sell your home for 30% less? I’m sure as hell not especially if you did nothing to bring the house value down.
I don’t agree. Put yourself in their shoes. If you sold your house at a 30% loss would you be happy?
The murder isn’t Jenkins’ fault but that doesnt change the fact that it happened and the homeowners have to pay those consequences.
Quote:
This is some one just looking for free money.
I don’t agree. Put yourself in their shoes. If you sold your house at a 30% loss would you be happy?
The murder isn’t Jenkins’ fault but that doesnt change the fact that it happened and the homeowners have to pay those consequences.
That's the risk you take when you rent out your property. Risk sometimes brings rewards and sometimes it goes south. This time it went south and they are looking to blame someone else when the risk they took didn't pay off.
I wish I could do that with some of my stocks.... like GE. Who do I blame when that risk really went south? No one. Who do I sue now that I lose a ton of cash? No one.
Haha, fuck you man. I’m not the type of person to sue someone, never have and don’t plan on doing it. But taking a loss like that sucks and that’s what insurance is for. Should the home owners be happy their property value has plummeted due to a murder? They should just suck it up right?
Fucking idiot.
Quote:
In comment 14353612 DavidinBMNY said:
Quote:
This is some one just looking for free money.
I don’t agree. Put yourself in their shoes. If you sold your house at a 30% loss would you be happy?
The murder isn’t Jenkins’ fault but that doesnt change the fact that it happened and the homeowners have to pay those consequences.
That's the risk you take when you rent out your property. Risk sometimes brings rewards and sometimes it goes south. This time it went south and they are looking to blame someone else when the risk they took didn't pay off.
I wish I could do that with some of my stocks.... like GE. Who do I blame when that risk really went south? No one. Who do I sue now that I lose a ton of cash? No one.
Oh please you people would be the first people coming on bbi and pouring your heart out that you’re getting screwed. Equating stocks to equity in your home is Apple to oranges. Maybe if the ge owner rented his house out and had a murder and stocks went down i would entertain it. This person got screwed on renting to someone who had someone murdered. Yes I would be pissed too.
Jenkins owed them a legal duty to act with reasonable care to what, prevent another person from murdering someone in the house?
Was it reasonably foreseeable that Jenkins guest would kill someone in the house?
Wouldn't the murder's act in killing the person itself be a superseding intervening event?
And what did Jenkins do to that would constitute a breach of his "legal" duty? Assuming in the first place that there was a legal duty.
And, finally, can the homeowners show a proximate cause from the loss in home value to the killing? This is probably the easiest thing for them to do, as long as they find experts that are willing to connect the dots under oath.
This sounds ridiculous to me. If Jenkins was the killer, yeah, if he was in the house when it happened, maybe. But he was neither.
Quote:
This is some one just looking for free money.
I don’t agree. Put yourself in their shoes. If you sold your house at a 30% loss would you be happy?
The murder isn’t Jenkins’ fault but that doesnt change the fact that it happened and the homeowners have to pay those consequences.
"Some times an accident is just an accident" (SCOTUS)
Just because you suffered an injury doesn't automatically mean someone else has to be found responsible and liable for damages.
We can feel sorry for the neighbor, but if it ain't Jenkin's fault, it ain't Jenkin's fault.
But if you want to go after his brother, well....
Quote:
In comment 14353614 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
In comment 14353612 DavidinBMNY said:
Quote:
This is some one just looking for free money.
I don’t agree. Put yourself in their shoes. If you sold your house at a 30% loss would you be happy?
The murder isn’t Jenkins’ fault but that doesnt change the fact that it happened and the homeowners have to pay those consequences.
That's the risk you take when you rent out your property. Risk sometimes brings rewards and sometimes it goes south. This time it went south and they are looking to blame someone else when the risk they took didn't pay off.
I wish I could do that with some of my stocks.... like GE. Who do I blame when that risk really went south? No one. Who do I sue now that I lose a ton of cash? No one.
Oh please you people would be the first people coming on bbi and pouring your heart out that you’re getting screwed. Equating stocks to equity in your home is Apple to oranges. Maybe if the ge owner rented his house out and had a murder and stocks went down i would entertain it. This person got screwed on renting to someone who had someone murdered. Yes I would be pissed too.
First off, Janoris Jenkins was in Florida at the time of the incident
Both victim and suspect were living in the house.
They got into a fight and one person killed the other.
So why is Jenkins being sued? What did HE do? It might make sense to sue his brother because he was the one doing the killing... But the problem is that the brother is broke while Janoris has a ton of cash.
I know..... we'll sue Janoris.... that makes NO sense unless it is a pure cash grab. Sue the brother if the case has merit.
So you don't blame the person at fault, blame the guy with the money. Too funny.
If the comps show that the neighborhood doesn't match the complaint, then it is BS. If other houses went for more, then why did they sell? Who forced the owners to sell 1 year after the murder? It is like selling your car after a wreck and not fixing it.
Sadly though dumbass juries think that insurance will pay aand many times ignore the facts.
So the house was worth $2.3 mill?
They are suing him, it doesn’t mean they are winning. What would you do if this was your property, just chalk it up to bad luck and move on?
They are suing him, it doesn’t mean they are winning. What would you do if this was your property, just chalk it up to bad luck and move on?
How about wait a while? Let it pass. Nobody forced them to sell. That is where they will have an issue. People over value their houses all the time and take their house off the market. I don't know the market in North Jersey, but that seems like an awful large discount.
The murder isn’t Jenkins’ fault but that doesnt change the fact that it happened and the homeowners have to pay those consequences. [/quote]
That is the risk you take when you rent a home.
The rest? The landlords are claiming that Jenkins basically sublet the house without their permission to his brother and the guy he killed. I'm no lawyer, but the whole thing smells like a fishing expedition that will get settled for significantly less than what they're asking, but will still cover their cost to repair plus some of the inconvenience. I doubt it goes anywhere near addressing the decline in property value, nor should it.
Taking this to court would be a long and expensive process that they wouldn't undertake unless very sure of winning.
Much more likely that they are just going for a quick settlement at a fraction of the $700,000.
JJ may not have committed the act but if the lease is in his name he can be held accountable.