Homeowner Terry Hoskins Decides to Demolish House Rather then Let Bank Foreclose - Video

These are the lengths some people will go through to get their house ready for the bank to take it back. This is a unique case involving tax liens, a family feud, and more. But in the end, this guy would rather demolish his house than let the bank have it.

These are the lengths some people will go through to get their house ready for the bank to take it back. Homeowner Terry Hoskins decided he would rather demolish his house than let the bank have it. This is a unique case involving tax liens, a family feud, and more.

More details here.

Sam Cass
Sam Cass: Sam Cass, MBA, JD, University of Texas at Austin. Always a fan of Leonardo Da Vinci.


  • Woody Smith

    February 20, 2010

    This is the latest consequence of the entire tea party, Sarah Palin-loving ridiculous crap going on in this country. There is a growing feeling that if the government or a bank has "wronged" you, then you can take whatever action you want. This schmuck signed a mortgage and obviously had a cross-default provision in his other loans. Nobody was taking action against him outside of the legal framework. It drives me crazy that this video has glorified what he is done. There should be a second video showing this guy spending some time behind bars. is precisely why many European countries have laws that allow a bankrupt debtor to be thrown in jail.

  • Ted

    February 20, 2010

    Agree in some ways with Woody Smith. This guy had a business loan and his house was obviously collateral. The tea partyiers must be mixed on this. Screw the government but what about personal responsibility?

    On the other hand, is there anything illegal about demolishing your house before you hand it over?

    Personally, I would have been a man and just accepted the fact I screwed up. Hand the house over and move on.

  • george wimmer

    February 20, 2010

    if he owed less than 170K to the bank and IRS they should have let him sell the house and get out of debt for 170K. He had a buyer for that. If that is the case the bank was just being greedy. If his debts totaled more than 170K then the bank has every right in its best interest to block the sale and get full market value on the resale of the property to recover the debt...not enough info in the reporting to base an opinion on and IRS records are private. My guess is his debts totaled more than his equity...

  • Jim Brandon

    February 21, 2010

    This is the kind of "let me cut off my nose to spite you" rationale that the entire world knows to expect from everyone in Moscow, Russia ... but not Moscow, Ohio?

  • drew z

    February 21, 2010


    I loved your attitude--that's awesome! I'm for you 100%!


  • Mike M

    February 22, 2010

    How does this have ANYTHING to do with the Tea Party movement?

    This guy obviously has a screw loose, and it's a shame that the reporter (who obviously has no idea what the terms he's speaking of actually mean) didn't bother to research "cross-collateralization", which is a standard practice in finance.

    Well the media has once again proven to be lazy, I'm shocked.

  • Todd

    February 22, 2010

    "How does this have ANYTHING to do with the Tea Party movement?"

    I think it's more of a reference to the virulant anti-government, anti-bank attitude of many people, especially tea-partyers. They like calling anything they don't like unconstitional. Repossessing a house - unconstitutional.

    Not all are like this but that's how the movement is broadly portrayed in my opinion.

  • Sophie

    February 23, 2010

    In another story I read, Mr. Hoskins claimed that he had a buyer ready to fork over the owed $170k and buy the house. However, the bank refused this offer, saying it could reap greater profits via foreclosure.

    To me, this casts Mr. Hoskins in a much more sympathetic light. That something is the law, does not necessarily make it moral (to use the worn example of slavery).

    While Mr. Hoskins's actions were certainly extreme, any person who has struggle with finances, banks, and/or the IRS can understand his consuming frustration, although, admittedly, most of us would not resort to bulldozing a building.

    As long as the house still belonged to him when he leveled it, I don't see how his actions were illegal, but I would imagine the banks have deep enough legal pockets to jail him for some infraction or another. Indeed, in a time banks increasingly routinely and needlessly screw customers over in the name of profit, taking money from the government in one hand and from consumers in the other, Mr. Hoskins's questionable actions nonetheless seem to provide a sense of justice to the burdened people.

    For those of you worried this vigilante might walk the streets a "free" man (if you can call such a debted man free), I'm sure he will face some kind of consquences. At least he'll have a steady supply of shelter in jail, eh?

  • Biff Bumpaw

    February 24, 2010

    I don't see this tax psycho as heroic. He's a guy who didn't think he had to pay taxes on his business earnings, gets IRS tax liens attached to his home and destroys it when it is to be legally foreclosed.

    He's a criminal trying to cheat the Govt. He should be behind bars.

  • Tea Party?

    February 25, 2010

    There is some really bad reporting in this story, like the guy owed 160K on a 350K house. NOT exactly.
    House is worth 300K, comm'l property worth appx 1.1 mil; total 1.4 mil value.
    Banks holds mtg on both props of 1.1 mil total; Might be 160K and 950K, but the total is 1.1mil for release; cross colateralized.
    The guy wants the Bank to accept 160K and release the house; CRAZY idea.
    NOT paid State or Fed'l taxes in about 6 yrs. Owes 100K+ to Ohio and 150K+ to IRS.
    Currently in Ch 7 Bankruptcy. He had destroyed property of the bankruptcy estate. Bad idea; the Feds don't go for this.
    Probably going to be insurance fraud charges after the Bank files a claim due to additional insured clause in policy. More criminal actions.

    So how we doing so far? This guy is hardly someone to empathise with.

  • «
  • Page 1 of 1
  • »
Add your Comment

or use your BestCashCow account


Featured - 30 Year Fixed Mortgage Rates 2024

Lender APR Rate (%) Points Fees Monthly
Learn More
Mutual of Omaha Mortgage, Inc.
NMLS ID: 1025894
6.725% 6.625% 0.75 $3,298 $2,049 Learn More
Rocket Mortgage
NMLS ID: 3030
7.064% 6.990% 0.75 $2,400 $2,127 Learn More
CrossCountry Mortgage
NMLS ID: 3029
Learn More
NMLS ID: Not a Lender
Learn More