The House That Had to Move
A Seattle man faces an expensive bureaucratic nightmare when he realizes his brand-new home was built on the wrong plot of land.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
An annoying instance is just now worrying Mr. Roberts, a local resident. Some time ago, he purchased a lot and began the erection of a neat cottage, which only recently had the finishing touches put on it. Mr. Roberts settled down comfortably with his family, but was rudely disturbed a few days ago by a demand for the lot on which his house stood. He resisted the demand, but the claimant brought proof that he had a clear title to the property and Mr. Roberts had to yield. He found on investigation that when he purchased, he had been shown the wrong lot, and that his house would have to be moved. This is now being done, the new location being some 48 feet back of the old one. Mr. Roberts is anxious to know who will bear the expense, as he does not think he should, as he did not make the mistake.
“He found on investigation that when he purchased, he had been shown the wrong lot, and that his house would have to be moved.”
The precarious nature of property titles and the high cost of housing are perennial Seattle themes. While modern title insurance and surveys have theoretically mitigated this specific risk, the 'annoying incident' of moving a house because of a clerical error remains a potent metaphor for the instability of homeownership in a city defined by rapid development and boundary disputes.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.