5/18/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

TO: The Board of County Commissioners FROM: LL:e � William G. Collins II - Deputy County Attorney DATE: May 7, 1993 SUBJECT: Resolution No. 92-132 - Demolition Lien Pursuant to Resolution No. 92-132 as recorded at 0. R. Book 942, Page 993-996, the costs of demolition were reported by the Building Official to the County Attorney's Office to prepare liens for the recovery of those costs to be placed on the real property. The owners of the unsafe structures were listed in the Exhibit A attached to said resolution. The first parcel listed was 4810 30th Avenue. Parcel No. 22-32-39-00005-0020-00008.0; owner Bennie Hill and Jimmie Lee Hughes. Our files indicate that their first notice to abate an unsafe structure was mailed June 9, 1990. The letter to owner was returned stamped "NO SUCH ADDRESS". No action was taken for approximately two years. Two years later, on June 26, 1992 another letter was sent out and returned for insufficient address. Four months prior to that attempted service, ownership of the property changed hands by virtue of a Tax Deed recorded at O.R. Book 925, Page 2338. Section 100.080(a), I.R.C. provides for a lien to be filed in the Official Record Books against the owner of the property or the person responsible for compliance with the Code, for costs incurred by the County. Notice of intent to adopt a lien resolution shall be given to the proposed lienee. Said lienee may appear before the Commission and be heard on the proposed lien resolution. Subsection (b) of that statute provides for the lien and notice provisions of Chapter 162 to pertain unless other notice has already been provided. In this case no notice was ever provided to the owner of the property since February 26, 1992, Albert C. Hazelwood, Jr. Chapter 162.12(2) (c) provides that evidence of an attempt to mail notice (to the owner/lienee), together with posting, along with proof of posting by affidavit including a copy of the notice posted, and the date and places of its posting is sufficient to show notice requirements have been met without regard to whether or not the actual violator received such notice. However, in this instance notice was not provided to the owner/lienee who, in June of 1992, would have been Albert C. Hazelwood, Jr. Thus, even a proper affidavit of posting would not suffice to cure the defective delivery. Had the property still been owned by Bennie Hill and Jimmie Lee Hughes, then such service may have been saved by the posting and the evidence of attempts at mail service. ( The prior owners own no other real estate in Indian River County which could be liened.) However, the failure to update the ownership records and serve the actual owner defeats the validity of any lien we could attempt to impose against the property. Because the proposed lienee did not receive a notice of intent to adopt a lien resolution as stated in Resolution No. 92-132, a lien should not be recorded against the above -referenced property. Rather, a notice of no lien should be recorded as to that property. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached Notice of No Lien. F*7 aooK 89 P* 553 SAY 1 8 199