NEIGHBORS AND LOT LINES

[DUMBDOG]

Seeing all these posts about neighbors and what they do or try to do and with lot line disputes etc, I decided to share how I handled my situation.

In 1996, purchased a house and thirty acres at auction. The acreage was completely fenced in and I was told by the seller that the fence was his.

After having the land rezoned from Ag to Rural Residential so that the pole barn could be built, built the pole barn. Then in 2001 put the house up for sale. Before this could be done the lot had to be surveyed. From the rezoning I knew that the fences were not quite on the lot line. However on the acre and half that the house was sitting on, the side adjacent to the neighbor was off about fifteen feet in the back.

About this time the neighbor gives me a call and asks what is going on because of the surveying stake on his property and I explained that was where the property line was. His reply was the fence was the property line ever since that he had been down there for over thirty years. He was not happy with the work that my surveyors had done and was going to get his own done. I told him to go ahead they will come up with the same position.

They did come to the same conclusion. Now this gentlemen is quite elderly so I called up his son and he said that they would be moving their fence the next year which was not done, if fact it did not get done for three years.

Last fall I noticed that the son was working on the fence and they had a Bobcat on the back portion of the property tearing down an old building and pushing it aside. The fence is now redone with it being on the other side of the old building. In the area next to my land the fence went in to his property from fifteen feet in the front to over fifty feet in the back.

During the course of owning the property, his nephew has asked to hunt on my property and I have given my permisssion. One time while deer hunting I came across this guy sitting where I was going to sit and it was his brother hunting without the required orange on my property which was posted. He asked me if I could hunt someplace else down there, I declined and politley asked him to leave, which he did. This mans son asked me if he could hunt last fall and I told him no because of the past actions.

The whole point of this is to get along, sometimes you have to give a little but you also have to draw the line when the enroachment is as bad as some of these that I have seen posted here. It did not cost me anything for my patience nor did I need the land in question.

For the rest of the story, after the land next to me was refenced, there was a chain and padlock on the gate, the house is now empty. The gentlemen is now living in a nursing home. It was not that he wanted my land it was just that he thought I was trying to take his.

 

[SnoFalls]

In some cases that 15' could be considered his ...

Even tho the fence wasn't on the line, if the fence has been up for a long enough period of time (I think 'round here it's 7 years), and the fence has been treated as a "property line" (e.g. you only use your side, and the neighbor does use the other side), then it can "become" the property line.

This is why it is important to be diligent about "encroachments". The fact they put up a fence 15' over the line probably could have netted them 15' of your property had they been dishonest enough to try to now claim it ... I suspect it was an honest mistake (surveying wasn't as accurtae just 15 years ago than it is now), and they just used some old markers ...

 

[DUMBDOG]

What markers? There may have been one at the beginning of the property that was sold off, because that was right on. After that it was, "gee that look west to me". /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif There was no marker on the other corner.

The fence base upon appearances and condition was at least 40 years old.

 

[BillG_in_TX]

Dave,

My experience is much like you describe. What "looked" like the property line was just a bulldozer cut that was near the actual property line. When my neighbor confirmed that the line wasn't where he thought it was, he was very apologetic and wanted to make it right.

 

[SnoFalls]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( What markers? There may have been one at the beginning of the property that was sold off, because that was right on. After that it was, "gee that look west to me". /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif There was no marker on the other corner.

The fence base upon appearances and condition was at least 40 years old. )</font>
yup 40 years ago "gee that look west to me" was probably SOP /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

[goaliedad]

Let me preface this by saying I am not an attorney, but had a situation that may be helpful. We bought a lake lot, and had a survey- it showed the property line about 4 feet into the neighbor's yard. They claimed the historic line was right, and that they would claim the property by rights of adverse possesion. I talked to a professional surveyor ( not involved with the first survey ) and an attorney. I was told that inorder to claim the adverse possession they had to know that the property was not theirs, and that no complaint had been made. Luckily we did not end up there- they hired their own survey and our original survey was found to be in error. We had the same amount of property, it just slid 4 feet over. The other line was a deeded access, our surveyor found a pin that the used as a corner of our lot- it should have been the center of the easment.
I think that the adverse possession thing is often throwen around by arm chair legal types, but is really much more difficult to have hold up in court.

 

[SnoFalls]

My story ...

My property has a drive that butts against my west property line (about 600' or so). It crosses about 20' of my west neighbors lot at the south end (that 20' has an access easement recorded).

When I first looked at the property there was an old rail car sitting on the ground and used as "storage" (aka full of trash/junk) on the east side of the driveway. When I made an offer, one of the conditions was to have the "junk" in that "storage" hauled away (I mighta made use of it as a shed or something). Turns out it was the westside neighbors storage/junk, and when I closed, shure nuf, it had been drug across the driveway and across the prop line to their side (just barely, aka not "setback", but over the "line").

So, my neighbor *knows* the driveway is inside my side of the prop line! Also, the only easement along that driveway is for utility repair (a power line runs down my side of the drive).

But every few months here comes my neighbor driving onto my property to get access to stuff on his side. He also would tell tradesmen to just use it to do repairs at his well/pumphouse, etc. So now I have god knows who just driving up my *private* drive, whenever my neighbor finds it convient to use my driveway.

I finally had to stop him and tell him to "cease". I told him him can call me and get "permission" to use the drive, but otherwise I'll gate the drive and put a fence along the propline. He started to get all huffy until I said I'll simply escort anyone off the property that trespasses and I will be armed.

I now get a phone call every 2 months or so for permission (which I've not yet refused).

 

[Jstpssng]

Sticky, sticky subject. Nothing raises people's dander more than property line issues; and often the problem goes back for decades to when land was cheap and plentiful. One of nmy favorite deed descriptions read

"Thence to the spot where the old cow lies down in the afternoon."

Care to help me find THAT corner? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif


This is "From the 'Lectric Law Library's stacks";




REQUIREMENTS FOR OBTAINING LAND BY ADVERSE POSSESSION

A trespasser is entitled to legal ownership of property if his
occupation of the property is hostile, actual, open and notorious,
exclusive and continuous for a period of years set by state statute. (We
explain each of these terms below.) Some states, such as California,
also require the trespasser to have paid the local property taxes on the
land.(1) The time required, which varies from state to state, is usually
twenty years. It can be as short as five years when the trespasser pays
the property taxes.

For more from their site click HERE

 

[6or7dazeaweek]

I was surprised recently to read about a 200 year old law still on the books in New York...where in you can lose your property. I think it's called something like "adverse property or adverse possession". I'm not into legal things but there's a dispute going on in my town over a lot of property that was grabbed or claimed under this archaic law.

I was going to cut & paste the article here, however, there was a disclaimer at the bottom noting that it could not be reproduced...so I just took heed and casually mention this for what it's worth.

It basically boils down to the fact that you need clear property lines established....period.

 

[SnoFalls]

BTW, here's a good link for us "arm chair" lawyers ... note state laws vary WIDELY in these regards ...

 

[MadDog]

I have had cases involving the issue of "adverse possession." At least in Massachusetts, to defeat the title held by the record owner (owner as described in the deed and any recorded plot plans or surveys) the person claiming ownership by adverse possession must have asserted such possession continuously, for an uninterrupted period of 20 years and the possession has to have been "open, notorious and adverse."

That means that he has to have been using the land, not by your permission, but pursuant to his claim that it was his as a matter of right, and not anyone else's, and have been doing so openly. An adjoining landowner building a fence on your land, and using the land on his side of the fence as his, for a 20 year period, can constitute "open, notorious and adverse" possession and can result in the record titleholder losing that land by adverse possession.

That is why, if you discover that a neighbor has put up a fence on your land and is using the land, it is important to act to correct the situation. This does NOT mean that you have to tear down the fence or sue the neighbor for trespass. If you don't presently mind him using the land, but don't want to lose your ownership of it, what you need to do is to bring the matter to his attention, demonstrate that the land is actually yours, and tell him that he may continue to use it, for the present, with your permission, so long as he acknowledges (in writing, of course, to prevent future disputes) that (1) the land is yours and (2) the fence and his use of the land are continuing, not as a matter of his right, but as a matter of your permission. It is also prudent, at least once every 20 years, to open a portion of the fence and make entry on the land and to document (by dated photograph and affidavit of a witness, for example) that this has been done. This prevents the neighbor's possession from being "continuous" for 20 years.

The time period necessary to acquire ownership by adverse possession, as well as what is necessary to perfect (or to defeat) it, may vary from state to state, but that is the way it is in Massachusetts.

Hope this helps.

 

[HomeBrew2]

Kindof interesting: In Kalifornia, in addition to the generic Adverse Possession requirements, the claimant actually has to pay property taxes on the claimed area.

 

[SnoFalls]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Kindof interesting: In Kalifornia, in addition to the generic Adverse Possession requirements, the claimant actually has to pay property taxes on the claimed area. )</font>

that's true in WA state too ... but "prescriptive easements" and "easements by use" can all of a sudden restrict *your* use (aka no fence or gate), yet you retain the *right* of paying taxes on that land ...

 

[ByronBob]

These stories make for good reading for sure. It also makes you cringe at what happens in the world.

The problem is people don't think alike. So the 2 sides to every story come out. What 1 thinks is right isn't how the other side see's it.

So the lawyers have a feast with us poor people fighting over these meager little feet we claim as our own. And to think the ancestors here just pulled out a 50 caliber to settle things. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[HomeBrew2]

Very good point! Many of the [very] rural areas around here, many hundreds or thousands of acres farms/ranches, have "county" roads every mile or so (grid) ... all of which fell under county jurisdiction by prescription. Now days, of course, the counties are trying to shed road maintenance responsibilities like the bird flu /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif
The whole topic of adverse possession really comes down to landowners being prudent in "maintaining" their land ... as I understand it.
Cheers!

 

[HomeBrew2]

Well, some of the stories promote cringing but, most are, it seems to me, a matter of education. I cringe at the thought of people going into the transaction of owning real property without any real knowledge of the subject. It's so easy and so common-place to buy a house or property that no one seems to give it much thought ... kindof like buying a car, maybe. But, real estate is, usually, the biggest asset anyone acquires ... but few seem to know much about the basic rules, regulations, responsibilities related to it. That's not to say that it's not a LOT more complicated now than it was 20 years ago but, obtaining basic knowlwdge is essential.
The point: more people could think alike if we all had the same foundation to base our thoughts on. Same thing with financial issues ... you have to go find the info yourself ... it's not taught in schools nor the topic of everyday conversation. It is though, a real problem.
Cheers!

 

[kensfarm]

"After having the land rezoned from Ag to Rural Residential so that the pole barn could be built"

Farmers can't build pole barns on Ag property?

 

[MadDog]

"And to think the ancestors here just pulled out a 50 caliber to settle things."

Very Darwinian --"the survival of the Fastest." /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Seriously, I'm afraid it is part of the human condition; the capacity of folks to see someone else's point of view objectively decreases in direct proportion to their own personal interest in the matter.

 

[DUMBDOG]

As the area that I am in has grown, the zoning laws have changed. You need to have 40 acres to be considered Ag. With a lot size of thirty acres zoned Ag, there was nothing that could be built. If the house had been damaged by a storm or burned down, it could not be rebuilt with the zoning in place.

Had to play their game, rezone, then build the pole barn, then sell off the house. You could not even build a building over 1000 square feet without a house on the property. Had I sold the house first would not have been able to build a 3000 sq ft pole barn. The current and proper zoning on this piece of property is Rural Residential.

 

[TC18guy]

That's some crazy zoning there. Sounds like an effort to force you or some future property owner to acquiese to their master plan. There is just no logical reason why a 30 acre farm should not be albe to have a pole building without a house.

Maybe it was mentioned earlier, but if not, adverse possesion and prescriptive easements are legal principles that need to be proven in court. There is nothing automatic them and the time periods are often just guidelines. A publicly recorded survey is also an excellent way to stake your claim in defense.