Real estate General topic

[plowhog]

How else would a buyer even know?

You don't always know. That's one of the many reasons why real estate is interesting.

What Are Prescriptive Easements?

Prescriptive easements are held by people who gain a right to use someone else’s property. Find out if you should buy property encumbered with easements.

www.rocketmortgage.com

 

[WinterDeere]

You don't always know. That's one of the many reasons why real estate is interesting.

What Are Prescriptive Easements?

Prescriptive easements are held by people who gain a right to use someone else’s property. Find out if you should buy property encumbered with easements.

www.rocketmortgage.com

So, I did a little digging, and in PA it takes 21 years of continuous, uninterrupted use to establish a prescriptive easement. I found one statement that it had to be "validated" before sale of the property, for a buyer of the property to be bound by it, but honestly couldn't find more clarity or backup statements on that. I've honestly never heard of this being an issue for anyone in PA, but was able to find a few cases online.

If it's really only 5 years in California, then yeah... I could see that being much more of a thing. Most people own property more than 5 years, and may not change their usage much over such a short time period, but 21 years for continuous uninterrupted use of anything on a property must be much less common.

 

[paulsharvey]

So, your rules may (will vary), but my understanding; the person seeking the easement would have to go to a judge, and provide the evidence of the continued use. The use would have to be open and obvious, and could not be in violation of law. IE, if the property was posted during thebl use period, that would not count. If before the period of time (7 years?) is meet, the user is told to stop use (you would need evidence of that) then that also would prevent it.

I think most of this has to do with absentee land owners, or worse yet, friendly neighbors. You let your neighbor short cut across your property ad a good will thing, he or the next owner could push the issue, and establish an enforceable easement. No good deed goes unpunished.

 

[WinterDeere]

No good deed goes unpunished.

Every year for the last 12 years, I've dumped truckloads of walnuts and leaves into the edge of a drainage ditch on my neighbor's property, per their request, as the area suffers a lot of erosion, and dumping organic matter in there helps to replace some of what the prior year's storms have washed away. I don't know how much it's actually helping him, but it gives me a good place to get rid of the stuff, and seems to make him happy too.

Here's hoping for another 9 years of uninterrupted use, before I need to deal with any potential new neighbor, on this issue. Getting rid of many thousands of pounds of messy rotting walnuts any other way would be a serious hardship. I believe the prior owners going back to at least 1986 have used the same area for dumping yard waste.

 

[ultrarunner]

I was taught if use is by permission that permission can be revoked.

 

[plowhog]

Here's hoping for another 9 years of uninterrupted use

Well, you are doing it with their permission. In my area that changes things entirely.

You could request that the current owner give you a deeded easement that is recorded on title. Then it would be permanent, and "run with the land."

If the current owner likes you doing this it might be a good time to negotiate. Maybe even toss in a little $$ as goodwill.

 

[paulsharvey]

I was taught if use is by permission that permission can be revoked.

Until the period if time has passed to establish an easement, yes. Now, State laws really Vary a ton of all this stuff, like adverse possession, Easements, ripen rights, squatters, ect. And also, thus is kinda the meeting point of real estate, real estate attorney, surveyor, and title insurance.

So, a classic example; a city/county/state/individual/corporation has a drainage easement, going to a water body, to discharge treated storm water; let's say, legal description shows a 200 ft easement to the lake; lake level drops 500 feet (not vertical, I mean shore receeds), that entity still has an enforceable drainage easement to the water body, not just the 200 ft shown on the legal description.

Edit: this could also make the easement holder responsible for maintaining that additional 500 lf too...

 

[the old grind]

Yes, state laws do vary a lot. In MI there is no adverse possession, or right of easement to claim.

My E & W property lines were misunderstood long before a house was built next door. PO here was thought to be 'encroaching' and was sued. PO had the place surveyed and the suer found that 10' of his house was on what would become my land in 2000. He was up a tree when I moved in.

The guy who built and mined sand and screened gravel at my place long ago had indeed encroached on ~800' when digging the pond. Old tree lines were used in error from front to back since WW II or before and that ~'800 of my shoreline still belonged to the orchard.

Everything was securely locked in place by the deeds as recorded. So I traded Pat 500' x 30' for 40' x 800' or so. New survey, then our deeds were updated with the changes & recorded as such. There was no other way to treat these two areas under MI law, but both Pat and I got to keep what we thought we'd owned all along, came out winners, and get along very well.

 

[plowhog]

State laws really Vary a ton of all this stuff, like adverse possession, Easements, ripen rights, squatters, ect.

On January 1, 2023 California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) gutted private property rights in favor of utility companies. Personally I believe this is illegal and unconstitutional, but it is now the "law of the land" and it is imposed on me whether I like it or not. Our utility company, PG&E, can now come on my land and cut down any tree that, in their view, has any chance of making contact with a power line. They have the legal right to raze an entire corridor through my property. (In my case, 3 corridors for 3 power lines.) Whether I object or not. And when they drop trees, they leave the fallen trees and logs behind.

From the new regulation:

"a person who owns, controls, operates, or maintains an electrical transmission or distribution line may traverse land as necessary, regardless of land ownership or express permission to traverse land from the landowner, ... The clearances obtained when the pruning is performed shall be at the full discretion of the person that owns, controls, operates, or maintains any electrical transmission or distribution line, "

https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/public-resources-code/prc-sect-4295-5/

 

[WinterDeere]

On January 1, 2023 California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) gutted private property rights in favor of utility companies. Personally I believe this is illegal and unconstitutional, but it is now the "law of the land" and it is imposed on me whether I like it or not. Our utility company, PG&E, can now come on my land and cut down any tree that, in their view, has any chance of making contact with a power line. They have the legal right to raze an entire corridor through my property. (In my case, 3 corridors for 3 power lines.) Whether I object or not. And when they drop trees, they leave the fallen trees and logs behind.

From the new regulation:

"a person who owns, controls, operates, or maintains an electrical transmission or distribution line may traverse land as necessary, regardless of land ownership or express permission to traverse land from the landowner, ... The clearances obtained when the pruning is performed shall be at the full discretion of the person that owns, controls, operates, or maintains any electrical transmission or distribution line, "

https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/public-resources-code/prc-sect-4295-5/

Wow... California has gone full Communist!