Property Boundry?

[DizRotus]

Rich,

 

I don't envy you.  Boundary wars are always unpleasant.  

 

Park a couple of old cars along the lot line and be done with it.

 

[JJkizak]

In the lore of movieland sometimes you have to make them an offer they can't refuse.

JJK

[JBCODD]

14 hours ago, DizRotus said:

Rich,

 

I don't envy you.  Boundary wars are always unpleasant.  

 

Park a couple of old cars along the lot line and be done with it.

 

Gots ta love de Carhenge. Used to stop there whenever we took the kids up to Mt. Rushmore and Wind Cave. If you are reasonably nimble you can get most of the way around the sculpture without touching the ground.

[Jeff Matthews]

16 hours ago, tigerwoodKhorns said:

 

With all due respect, this is very bad advice, at least in Nevada.  You must fully understand adverse possession in the local jurisdiction before relying on a survey and paying taxes.  A very nasty result might occur if this is ignored. 

 

 

I've done a few adverse possession cases here and there.  The principles will be similar in all states, although some of the details (important ones, too) will vary.

 

Adverse possession generally occurs when a person occupies, uses or cultivates property owned by another person for an extended period of time.  Here, he's been cutting trees on your property.  You're off to a bad start.  It indicates a misunderstanding as to where the line is.  The longer the misunderstanding goes on, the greater the likelihood the neighbor can win title to part of your property via adverse possession.  The key to losing property by adverse possession is doing nothing to make clear where the line is.  

 

You can put your posts with "No Trespassing" signs out there.  However, unless you have a very, very compelling reason not to put up the fence, I'd put up the fence.  Usually, putting up a fence will draw a more explicit move by the neighbor if he really thinks the property is his.  That's what you want.  If he thinks it's his, you need to find out now - not later (after it's too late and he wins by adverse possession).

 

If stuff hits the fan after the fence goes up, it's time to see a real estate attorney who litigates adverse possession.

[babadono]

1 hour ago, Jeff Matthews said:

I've done a few adverse possession cases here and there.  The principles will be similar in all states, although some of the details (important ones, too) will vary.

 

Adverse possession generally occurs when a person occupies, uses or cultivates property owned by another person for an extended period of time.  Here, he's been cutting trees on your property.  You're off to a bad start.  It indicates a misunderstanding as to where the line is.  The longer the misunderstanding goes on, the greater the likelihood the neighbor can win title to part of your property via adverse possession.  The key to losing property by adverse possession is doing nothing to make clear where the line is.  

 

You can put your posts with "No Trespassing" signs out there.  However, unless you have a very, very compelling reason not to put up the fence, I'd put up the fence.  Usually, putting up a fence will draw a more explicit move by the neighbor if he really thinks the property is his.  That's what you want.  If he thinks it's his, you need to find out now - not later (after it's too late and he wins by adverse possession).

 

If stuff hits the fan after the fence goes up, it's time to see a real estate attorney who litigates adverse possession.

And after the squatter takes possession I still have to pay the taxes? Sounds even more like cattle rustling now.

[Jeff Matthews]

43 minutes ago, babadono said:

And after the squatter takes possession I still have to pay the taxes? Sounds even more like cattle rustling now.

If you lose your ownership via adverse possession, you don't have to pay taxes on it.

[jimjimbo]

I have utilized a pack of crazed, rabid dingoes before to mitigate property line issues with great success.  The African Killer Bees worked pretty well too....

[WillyBob]

AHB is no joke.   A single strand of wire constitutes a fence.

At this point, the neighbor is vandalizing or stealing wood.... unless he is try to abscond with the property.

the shame of the whole thing is that someone may have to get radical before the matter can be determined

[Travis In Austin]

On 4/23/2018 at 3:51 PM, tigerwoodKhorns said:

 

You need an attorney who handles real property and specifically quiet title actions.  If you let this go for too long (or have already done so) he might have a valid adverse possession claim against you depending on the laws in your state. If you decide to try to save a buck you might lose claim to part of your property. 

 

You might not need a lawsuit (or maybe you do need a quiet title action), but you do need competent advice on how to proceed. 

 

Nothing like a letter from a lawyer.  

[Travis In Austin]

8 hours ago, Jeff Matthews said:

I've done a few adverse possession cases here and there.  The principles will be similar in all states, although some of the details (important ones, too) will vary.

 

Adverse possession generally occurs when a person occupies, uses or cultivates property owned by another person for an extended period of time.  Here, he's been cutting trees on your property.  You're off to a bad start.  It indicates a misunderstanding as to where the line is.  The longer the misunderstanding goes on, the greater the likelihood the neighbor can win title to part of your property via adverse possession.  The key to losing property by adverse possession is doing nothing to make clear where the line is.  

 

You can put your posts with "No Trespassing" signs out there.  However, unless you have a very, very compelling reason not to put up the fence, I'd put up the fence.  Usually, putting up a fence will draw a more explicit move by the neighbor if he really thinks the property is his.  That's what you want.  If he thinks it's his, you need to find out now - not later (after it's too late and he wins by adverse possession).

 

If stuff hits the fan after the fence goes up, it's time to see a real estate attorney who litigates adverse possession.

Does he have to pay the  taxes for that to occur.  Are you required to pay the taxes in Texas to prevail on adverse possion?

[Jeff Matthews]

2 hours ago, dwilawyer said:

Does he have to pay the  taxes for that to occur.  Are you required to pay the taxes in Texas to prevail on adverse possion?

Texas has different periods for adverse possession which depend on various circumstances.  For example, if the person holding adversely holds under "color of title," the period of possession required is shorter.  There is a similar type of rule for adverse possessors who pay property taxes.  So, the answer in Texas would be, "No, but his required period of possession likely will be longer than it would have been had he paid taxes."  This is all in Chapter 16 of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code, beginning at Section 16.021.  

[Travis In Austin]

2 hours ago, Jeff Matthews said:

Texas has different periods for adverse possession which depend on various circumstances.  For example, if the person holding adversely holds under "color of title," the period of possession required is shorter.  There is a similar type of rule for adverse possessors who pay property taxes.  So, the answer in Texas would be, "No, but his required period of possession likely will be longer than it would have been had he paid taxes."  This is all in Chapter 16 of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code, beginning at Section 16.021.  

I see that, so if you have a deed, that has wrong legal description, that is color of title and adverse possessor only has a 3 year statute to satisfy.  The public policy would be with conflicting deeds, you need to resolve them quickly before tresassor begins to detrimentaly rely on his erroneous legal description.

 

For a person who adversely possesses and pays property taxes (which almost never happens) then there is a 5 year statute.  Everything else is ten years.

 

Does a standard Texas title policy provide coverage of a detainer, quiet title action?  Or does it require the much more expensive ALTA policy to cover property disputes?

 

Plant italian cypress down the row every five feet.  Stake you claim and helo enviornment at same time.

[Jeff Matthews]

5 hours ago, dwilawyer said:

I see that, so if you have a deed, that has wrong legal description, that is color of title and adverse possessor only has a 3 year statute to satisfy.  The public policy would be with conflicting deeds, you need to resolve them quickly before tresassor begins to detrimentaly rely on his erroneous legal description.

 

For a person who adversely possesses and pays property taxes (which almost never happens) then there is a 5 year statute.  Everything else is ten years.

 

Does a standard Texas title policy provide coverage of a detainer, quiet title action?  Or does it require the much more expensive ALTA policy to cover property disputes?

I haven't researched it, but I don't think a wrong legal description gets you to color of title.  The statute mentions a muniment which is not properly recorded, is only in writing, or has some "technical" defect.  I imagine some errors in the legal description might make the cut, such as maybe a harmless misspelling.  By way of example, if the deed to your home describes the Brooklyn Bridge, you don't have color of title.

 

As to paying property taxes, we have a newer statute which now allows co-tenants by heirship to adversely possess in 15 years if they pay taxes (among other things).  See Section 16.0265.  It is very common for a co-tenant to pay taxes.  Usually, one will occupy the land, while the others have moved on and basically forgotten about it.  This goes on for many years until the occupying person feels like he should be the sole owner since he's the only one who paid taxes and kept up the property for all these years.

 

We also have 25-year periods as described in Sections 16.027 and 16.028.

 

In Texas, title policies are regulated, and only one standard policy is used.  There is no option to buy a different policy.  Texas title policies exclude coverage for the rights of parties in possession, so these will not foot the bill for actions to quiet title.  A buyer should inspect the property before closing and look for evidence that somebody other than the seller is using the property or any part of it.  For example, if a trail goes from your neighbor's property, across the property you are buying, you are on notice that the neighbors might claim a right to the property.  In addition, a survey will reveal fences being off from the actual property line.  Most people don't care if a fence is a few inches off, and this is a common way adverse possession occurs.  

[rplace]

Thanks for all the input. I spent Tuesday morning at Tractor Supply Co looking at fence posts. Manage to cut my pants severely and my leg just a bit. They gave me a free pair of pants! How is that for customer service? I was blown away.

 

So I get back to the compound with my 6.5' posts, signs, wire, and fence post setter. On about the 5th post the owner comes out. Completely different tune from days past. I think the surveyor must have been enough to have him realize I was not joking around. He was very calm, polite and dare I say friendly....no not friendly the guy is still a bit of a jerk but for sure he had his tail between his legs. You could tell in his voice and demeanor he was rattled. 

 

He says you don't have to put up the signs, I'll respect the survey markers. He more or less agreed that the first/corner marker was what he had thought several years ago when we built but seems he differed on the angle the property line cut after that. I was correct he was mistaken....though I still personally believe, based on previous conversations, that he knew all along what was mine and what was his his. He just thought since we rarely are on that part of the property that he could "take" liberties and appear to have more near his driveway leading to house. Long story but the short version is he built way to close to the boundary for a 10+ acre lot and I think he regrets the placement. Tough S#!t man, your problem not mine. Leave my stuff alone.

 

I told him I had to put the signs up as my next step was the cops and a lawyer. I needed the signs to clearly state my purpose. The signs are pointed right at his driveway has he passes and only about 15' from the driveway. In some spots the posts/signs are only about 30' from his house. I actually felt a bit bad as they are right in his face and pretty ugly IMO. Why oh why didn't he build more into his property?!?! We talked some more he apologized for what was downed and tried some lame excuse that the guy he hired got carried away. We discussed the spraying and a few other issues.

 

In the end I agreed to remove the signs but keep the fence posts to clearly mark the boundary line. We agreed that if during the summer I did not see brush growing back up that the signs would return. He promised up and down to never set foot across the line again. Agreed to not spray roundup, agreed that he was wrong. Thanked me for taking the signs down and shook my hand at least 3 times.

 

All in all I'm happy with the results because the sighs were obnoxious and so close to his house. I felt sort of bad for his wife and kids having to look at them. Again what were they thinking when they built?

 

I think I am now in the "trust but verify" mode. I'll be keeping a close eye out. I'd like to believe that we are all ultimately decent and do the right thing given a chance...but it is pretty hard these days. My wife thinks I am bit too trusting. Time will tell. I'm not returning all the signs, that is for sure.

[WillyBob]

good deal

most people will do right ... some just need a little "encouragement"

[jimjimbo]

18 hours ago, jimjimbo said:

I have utilized a pack of crazed, rabid dingoes  lawyers

fixed it

[rplace]

4 minutes ago, jimjimbo said:

fixed it

 

I would have gone with Dingos as a first try. Not a fan of lawyers. Exhibit A your honor, Neil's grammar police state. Sorry, no offence Jeff and Travis.

[DizRotus]

11 hours ago, rplace said:

My wife thinks I am bit too trusting.

 

Trust him unless he proves that to be a mistake.

[dirtmudd]

 

[DizRotus]

13 hours ago, rplace said:

 

I would have gone with Dingos as a first try. Not a fan of lawyers. Exhibit A your honor, Neil's grammar police state. Sorry, no offence Jeff and Travis.

 

So, you meant to offend me?