Neighbor has elected to damage over 20 trees

[Coyote machine]

Did you get a vote from ALL the other property owners to decide that?

One last time, NOT ALL, a majority of parcel owners.

Not really, the neighbor did not do the original survey and I would say he has the reasonable right to the roadway ROW as it was when he bought since no one informed him otherwise. But as 747driver says, best let sleeping dogs lie. For a few feet why get into an expensive legal peeing contest.

Ignorance of the law is never a valid excuse. The neighbor appears to be a thief, according to the OP's detailed descriptions.

 

[Slowpoke Slim]

One last time, NOT ALL, a majority of parcel owners.



Ignorance of the law is never a valid excuse. The neighbor appears to be a thief, according to the OP's detailed descriptions.

So I'm sure the OP will be thrilled to learn that you are willing to fund his legal battle to "Right All Wrongs" in it's entirety, including all appeals, through the end of time.

Cool.

 

[LD48750]

One last time, NOT ALL, a majority of parcel owners.

So if I get approval from 3 of the 6 owners out of 10 I contact and one doesn't respond, I can proceed with whatever I want to?

 

[cqaigy2]

So if I get approval from 3 of the 6 owners out of 10 I contact and one doesn't respond, I can proceed with whatever I want to?

Sure, you can do whatever you think is best.

 

[GirlWhoWantsTractor]

I've seen cityiots move to the country and then DEMAND their neighbor move their cattle fence (that's been there more than 50 years) over a few feet because they got a survey and it's on their side of the line....a line that's been respected for over 50 years with the old neighbor.

City people like DRAMA and are willing to spend thousands of dollars to make sure they have some. lol

SR

.....I do have a lot of hay that cityiots buy when they move out here, and they gotta have those hay burners!

It must be nice to be morally superior to half the people in the United States.

Also good to know that real country folk won't mind me putting my fence a few feet onto their property.

And anyone who has horses is an idiot too. I learned a lot here.

 

[Lelandwelds]

. . . anyone who has horses is an idiot too.

Ooh, yes! Somebody start a "horse people are idiots" thread! I can contribute to that one.

 

[plowhog]

Not sure of the laws in your state, but in California there is something called a prescriptive easement. Other people can acquire rights to your land this way. It requires 5 years of "open and notorious use." One example is a group that was riding their horses through a property for many years. The landowner knew it but did nothing about it. Once 5 years elapsed, the landowner could no longer legally prevent the horse riders from using the trail even though he owned the land. Another thing is permission. If you give someone revocable permission (such as the horse riders) then they can't acquire a prescriptive easement.

I don't know the laws in your State, but if there is any similar statute the neighbor acquired rights to use the road in its current location long ago. But even so, I don't think that permits digging things up and taking them away. If it was me, I would also let sleeping dogs lie.

 

[wagne223]

Not sure of the laws in your state, but in California there is something called a prescriptive easement. Other people can acquire rights to your land this way. It requires 5 years of "open and notorious use." One example is a group that was riding their horses through a property for many years. The landowner knew it but did nothing about it. Once 5 years elapsed, the landowner could no longer legally prevent the horse riders from using the trail even though he owned the land. Another thing is permission. If you give someone revocable permission (such as the horse riders) then they can't acquire a prescriptive easement.

I don't know the laws in your State, but if there is any similar statute the neighbor acquired rights to use the road in its current location long ago. But even so, I don't think that permits digging things up and taking them away. If it was me, I would also let sleeping dogs lie.

As you said state laws differ......and I dont doubt your statement, however.......

In most cases for easements, even prescriptive easements, the petitioner has to show a need for the easement.

I cant imagine a judge granting a prescriptive easement for a recreational horse trail.

 

[Gator6x4]

If a fifty foot (50) easement right of way exists. The OP is standing in quicksand. This means he as a the new property owner can't plant those expensive trees he wants in the easement right of way. In my opinion the best thing the OP could do is obtain a copy of the easement. Find the center of the easement and measure out twenty five foot each side and find where he can stand and throw rocks.

 

[aczlan]

If a fifty foot (50) easement right of way exists. The OP is standing in quicksand. This means he as a the new property owner can't plant those expensive trees he wants in the easement right of way. In my opinion the best thing the OP could do is obtain a copy of the easement. Find the center of the easement and measure out twenty five foot each side and find where he can stand and throw rocks.

Hmmm, you MIGHT want to re-read the PO's post from last night:

OK...here is the latest update !! Your assessment Coyote pretty much sums it up ! The neighbor ceased his activities once he knew we owned the property.
We finally got it survey last friday...the surveyor knows the land from prior work. Told him we wanted the ROW marked also along with the other property lines. Didn't bother him and let him do his work...took 7 hrs ! When he was done he had us walk with him to each marker. Thats when the fun began !
In everyones deed, all property runs to the center of the road which then establishes the ROW with 25' on each side of the center of the road. He mentioned when he started and we some what knew this, that the center of the road is NOT where it should be. Never could figure out why everyones property markers ( previous surveys ) didn't go to the center of the road but instead were all on the other side of the current road from our property.
Here is the surveyors explanation. First the development was layed out and surveyed lot by lot per the Plat survey, which is the governing document.. The road was then plotted using the center of everyones property. Well the dozer driver must have had to much moonshine !! They never followed the property markers ! The roads path was made according to where they could put a road ( rock ledges, steep drop offs etc. ).They got somewhat close but never down the center of the property lines. So instead of our property line being in the center of the current road it is 4' on the other side of the road toward our neighbors. When you get to the top of the road the center line of the road runs right through the middle of a power pole ! It was done all *** backwards. Should have put the road in first then plot the property lines.
The neighbor was home when we had the survey done and once in awhile he would come out and watch from a distance. He now knows where the true center line of the road is vs where the current road runs.
Yes...we did consult our lawyer on our options. By Tenn. law, even though there is a 50' ROW the easement is only for other property owners to access their property since this is private land. They have no right to damage or remove soil,rocks,trees etc off of your property and then take it and put it on their own property without permission. Told him we would hold off on filing anything and wait and see if the neighbor continues ...I think the neighbor understands, now that it has been surveyed.
As I have stated...thanks to everyones input here..... we have learned alot in this fiasco !! So have at it boys...maybe another 300 posts !!!
Now if I can just get Morton out here to build our barn. Have the materials but they are super busy. Lets me finish up on building the new kitchen cabinets.....

Survey Points.Thats the power pole in true center of the road..The other markers are property points and reflect true center of the road. The current road edge is 4 ft to the left.
View attachment 563999View attachment 564000View attachment 564001

Aaron Z

 

[Coyote machine]

So I'm sure the OP will be thrilled to learn that you are willing to fund his legal battle to "Right All Wrongs" in it's entirety, including all appeals, through the end of time.

Cool.

I'm not funding anything, period, nor did I offer to?!:confused2:
How the heii you concluded that from what I stated is a mystery to mankind. I stated facts brought to our attention by the OP numerous times.
Cool.

So if I get approval from 3 of the 6 owners out of 10 I contact and one doesn't respond, I can proceed with whatever I want to?

You can do whatever you want to. I did not define what the majority means, and neither did the covenant(s) most likely. Reminder there are 16 parcels in the development, two of which are owned by the thief/neighbor, so you'd likely need more than 3 of 6 of ten to establish a majority; but hey you're the expert, right?:cloud9:

 

[4570Man]

I'm not funding anything, period, nor did I offer to?!:confused2:
How the heii you concluded that from what I stated is a mystery to mankind. I stated facts brought to our attention by the OP numerous times.
Cool.



You can do whatever you want to. I did not define what the majority means, and neither did the covenant(s) most likely. Reminder there are 16 parcels in the development, two of which are owned by the thief/neighbor, so you'd likely need more than 3 of 6 of ten to establish a majority; but hey you're the expert, right?:cloud9:

It started out at 10 properties and was later changed to 16. Nobody knows what the whole story is it’s changed so many times.

 

[Coyote machine]

There is also the legal term referred to as 'right of adverse possession', which describes a situation where someone uses someone else's property over a long period of time, (for instance 10 years), and at the end of said term has the right to the property through the remedy of law pertaining to same.

Similar to the prescriptive easement already described.

Laws vary State to State, and even with the law on one's side, in the end it's all about interpretation of same in each specific case. Questions?

 

[Coyote machine]

It started out at 10 properties and was later changed to 16. Nobody knows what the whole story is it’s changed so many times.

I stay with the latest data provided by the OP. You?!

 

[two_bit_score]

As you said state laws differ......and I dont doubt your statement, however.......

In most cases for easements, even prescriptive easements, the petitioner has to show a need for the easement.

I cant imagine a judge granting a prescriptive easement for a recreational horse trail.

:drink:

 

[two_bit_score]

It started out at 10 properties and was later changed to 16. Nobody knows what the whole story is it’s changed so many times.

That is a tremendous understatement imho. :thumbsup:

Or you were just being kind and giving the OP benefit of the doubt.

Now, which is it? :laughing:

 

[MossRoad]

Again, fellas, the OP already agreed that he didnt' do the greatest job at presenting all the details at once, we all had a good laugh, learned some stuff about right of ways, and that was nice.....

So stop poking him in the eye every chance you get.

 

[two_bit_score]

Again, fellas, the OP already agreed that he didnt' do the greatest job at presenting all the details at once, we all had a good laugh, learned some stuff about right of ways, and that was nice.....

So stop poking him in the eye every chance you get.

:melodramatic: unch:



.

 

[Al 2]

" I cant imagine a judge granting a prescriptive easement for a recreational horse trail. " There are instances here where long time canoe portages are deemed public highways under the definition of Public Highways Act.
Al

 

[dodge man]

Does the road lie within the easement? Nothing saying it has to be in the center of it.