n this case study Martin was faced with losing his land to Otis who claimed to have lived there for twenty years and to the lease company that had lend money to Andrew, one of his partners joint tenancy owner for the mountain property. Legal advice Looking at Martin’s case legally, he was right to contact the attorney for the necessary legal actions. According to laws that states joint ownership of properties, a co-owner of a joint tenancy with rights of survivorship deed may sever the joint tenancy by filing a petition to partition. This was the same case that the son of Peter, Andrew did.
They had a right to terminate the joint ownership with him because he was unable to clear a loan. When a joint co-owner deals in any way with a property inconsistent with a joint tenancy, that co-owner will be treated as having terminated the joint tenancy. (“The Bene? ts And Pi? alls Of Joint Tenancy,” n. d. ) In my own opinion in that case of lenders trying to foreclose the property, they shouldn’t have done that to the whole property but rather with the interest or shares that were initially owned by the Peter and let the others co-owners to continue enjoying their properties.
Religion advice In connection to the Mountain property in religion point of view, Martin seemed like didn’t have a use for the property? When Andrew used his interest at the property to ask for loan, he was right to allow the son of Peter. Returning to his land after thirty years for fishing and finally found Otis who have lived in the land for twenty years, he should at least have allowed him to continue staying until the time he was able to use it or sell it. The way Otis handled the case wasn’t supposed to be in that manner because he was aware that the property did not belong to him.
On the other hand, Martin should have joined in to save the land by helping Andrew raise the money to repay in return he should have paid later or leave some shares to him in the property. Coastal Property Problem faced Martin in this case was being faced by a problem of losing his coast property to the government for the construction of Tar Heel Family Resort. The city attorney though assured him that he was going to be compensated of his market value as well as trying to make him understand the benefits that will come along with the construction of the hotel.
Religion advice Martin had previously smiled about the idea of the people who were to be moved from their land before he saw what was to happen to him. In this case it seemed he wasn’t a good sympathizer to other people difficulties. As a religion brother I would have advised him to show mercies in such cases and learn to help people. Among them were employment opportunities, improvement to the economy and infrastructures in that region was about grown due to construction of that hotel. In this case even going to court to challenge this decision was being selfish and felt that didn’t care about the growing of country and other people around him.
Legal advice The legal measures that would have been taken concerning the land should have been taken to court to try and counter government’s decision which he did. But on the other hand he should have considered that he is being compensated so that he can acquire another piece of land. There were a lot of advantages that would have been brought by the Tar Heel Family Resort.
Considering this and other advantages, still keeping in mind that he was being compensated as the city attorney assured he should have agreed to the deal and let the society benefit from the open business ideas that would have come along with the construction of the hotel. Personal Property Problem Martin was being faced with losing his car when taking his friend to a diner. Religion advice In this case Martin was ignorant and assumed a lot of things from the start as he did not consider the choice of clothing for his girlfriend. He should have had an open mind before proceeding to advice the lady about the clothes to wear.
Also losing his car he should have known the hotel well enough before trusting a person to handle his car. In this case my advice would have been asking him to ensure that he know every hotel well enough before including the code of dressing and how it operates before advising someone or recommending something. Legal advice In my case $5,600. 00 that the man who was in possession of the vehicle shouldn’t have been paid. This was because Martin should have just made sure that he provided the receipts of ownership to the vehicle. (“Why Auc?on Proper? es Are O”en an Investor’s Nightmare,” n. d. ).
He would have also sued the traders that conducted that business without asking for the legal documents of that car. In this case such businesses would be minimized. References The Benefits and Pitfalls of Joint Tenancy. (n. d. ). Retrieved August 5, 2015, from http://www. investopedia. com/articles/pf/08/joint-tenancy. asp Why Auction Properties Are Often an Investor’s Nightmare. (n. d. ). Retrieved August 5, 2015, from http://www. fruitfulpropertyinvestment. co. uk/auction-properties. html.