Jump to content

Court upholds $573,000 penalty against East Sacramento homeowner who worked on cars in his yard


Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, Matt Harwood said:

 

Agreed. These wounds are 100% self-inflicted.

 

It sounds like the city is willing to work with him and probably won't go to the wall to collect 100% of the fine if he starts acting rational and makes some effort to remediate the situation. All he has to do is reach out and cooperate with them.


Degree of difficulty: he's a sovereign citizen kook.

 

Usually city and town employees are lazy and hide behind their desk. Not all....that would be unfair.......just 98 percent. By the the time the city is after you, you have been asking for it for years. Once they actually have to do real work and deal with you.......it's not going away. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Peter for trying your best to herd the cats on this seemingly straightforward "non-car-related" issue (would it be on here if it was boats, furniture, construction debris, etc). Maybe we need a cat bylaw on here!! If it gets to page 2 might be time to euthanize!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/31/2022 at 11:07 AM, 1912Staver said:

Well, I view it a little differently. A few twisted soul's might go as far as to say I am a bit of a  " hoarder ". God I hate that word. Wife works in Community Mental Health and Addictions, and has done many home visits on " Real " hoarders. She 100 % agrees my collection is a bit out of hand, but not even close to the threshold of hoarder.

 

One man's well stocked inventory of car parts is another's hoard, I guess. My neighbor runs an "antique" shop and their house is more a warehouse. Fortunately, they are moving so I hope the days of stacks of what looks like garbage in the driveway all day, everyday is soon to be a memory, I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This illustrates my point exactly. People loose sight of the fact that hoarding is a mental illness that has a clearly defined meaning and exact parameters for diagnosis by a Mental Health Professional.  The way I see this label thrown around on this forum is about as real world and appropriate as Ralph Kramden observing some behavior exhibited by Ed Norton and declaring " Norton, you are a mental case ".

 

  My advice is to leave the DSM - 5 to the Doc's.

 A collector is a collector until properly evaluated by a Mental Health professional.

Edited by 1912Staver (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have five vintage cars on my small suburban allotment: two drivers and three projects. My neighbours love them. Be a good neighbour and you can do whatever you like. This gentleman obviously wasn't a good neighbour.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

A few years ago the codes official tagged two of my project cars in my driveway. When I purchased the cars the codes stated that they were exempt from the inoperable motor vehicle clause if they were antique vehicles for collector purpose. Sometime along the way county officials changed the code by eliminating the phrase. After that any vehicle was at risk unless in a structure  with four walls and a roof. Fortunately it doesn’t specify the structure must be a permanent one. I hope that they don’t realize that one could use a cheap canvas garage and be within code , please don’t tell them! I fought to make the cars mobile and managed to keep them. Unfortunately since then I have seen antique vehicles disappearing from yards, usually just singles. I’m a firm believer that project vehicles and the hobby should be protected regardless of whether one can afford a garage. Saying one can only restore antique autos if garaged is essentially saying only those with enough money to afford the garage can restore old cars. That’s elitist! I believe that one could fight the constitutionality of the code due to restrictions imposed on the pursuit of happiness guaranteed by the constitution. I’m not saying the offender who accrued such a fine was right, he should have made attempts to appease officials or contest their actions. Thanks for letting me vent. Let us all be vigilant when codes restrict our hobby! 

Edited by Rusty Heaps (see edit history)
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...