ashe

Thanks FINS, I mean to me if I was a bank I'd want to make sure the asset securing the loan was sound before loaning the money......still as a private person I do agree that's something you probably want to do before buying a property.....

The clown could very well become that desperate.

I predict that Jewish Lightening will hit the joint.

No, banks don't require structural tests

I got to thinking that in the motion to delay the defense entered they would accept it so long as the status quo remained.....that seems to have been violated by this last action.

Not only that but the owners of the building having conducted the inspections in August, knew they were not maintaining the status quo when they agreed to the delay terms.....

I'm sure it was an effort to get The Hotel Tavern kicked out, I mean why else did he need a delay. also if you are buying a property, wouldn't the bank have required a structural assessment before any loan......course if he just plopped his money down and didn't get a loan then obviously he didn't do his due diligence.

This is a guy that doesn't care about the county or it's people. He thinks he's found a get rich quick scheme......he'll end up sinking millions into his 'project'......

Given the circumstances though, it does seem suspect

I would think they would, but isn't this guy from the finance world? I've seen people like that with no real estate experience have some dream to open something like a B&B or restaurant and get emotional on a purchase and not do their due diligence. I could see someone like him going over the top with inspections for everything he can think of, and I could see him completely missing it.

Prior to purchase.

I am betting the owner has a plan to force the tavern to throw in the towel when he starts his stabilizing of the upstairs. Fins would you not think that a clown that gives 800K for building built at the turn of the century would have the building inspected by an engineer?

I could buy that building is unsafe.

Seems he was trying to get the whole building declared unsafe but it back fired on him. The Tavern remains.

Now the new owner is throwing out the second floor businesses saying his structural engineer says it is unsafe.

This is odd the Ashe County Line reports that tentatively in the motion that Dec 2nd was listed as the date but quotes the lawyer of the Tavern saying it would probably be February.

I guess a good tenant landlord relationship will be impossible after this.

Joseph, A man that would make the statement "he will cost the Tavern millions in legal fees" has no idea what an attorney charges for such a small time matter and shows a real lack of intelligence on his part. In other words he was blowing smoke up some butts and making himself look like someone he isn't.

I wouldn't have agreed to the first delay after the new owners comment about costing the Tavern millions in legal fees. In fact I would have brought that comment to the court attention and then claimed that was the reason for wanting to continue the case.

Couldn't get on the calendar soon enough.

Why are they not having the case in Ashe?