Question on Property Law
- Thread starter PSU_Chicago
- Start date
Someone upthread suggested that putting the hoop right on the property line may violate zoning codes. That sounds probably right to me. Makes no sense to allow people to build structures right on the property line in residential areas.
I would go in person to the building code or zoning department and ask to speak to an inspector. My guess is that most inspectors would be sympathetic with your situation and could give you good advice and guidance on top of explaining what the zoning code is.
I would also take pictures of the damage caused by your neighbors and continue to take pictures as the damage may mount. Legally you almost certainly have a valid claim for damages. Again, you want to do everything possible to resolve this amicably with neighbors, but I would have this information and evidence in my back pocket if negotiations go South.
I would go in person to the building code or zoning department and ask to speak to an inspector. My guess is that most inspectors would be sympathetic with your situation and could give you good advice and guidance on top of explaining what the zoning code is.
I would also take pictures of the damage caused by your neighbors and continue to take pictures as the damage may mount. Legally you almost certainly have a valid claim for damages. Again, you want to do everything possible to resolve this amicably with neighbors, but I would have this information and evidence in my back pocket if negotiations go South.
Exactly - I deal with competent surveyors almost every day in jurisdictions around the country. Their ass is on the line for sloppy work and they’ve got tough jobs.
Must vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. I was helping a Korean woman with zero knowledge about lending to obtain a refinance. The initial cost estimate included a charge for a survey, even though the woman bought the house (in a comparatively new development) in the summer of 2018. I called the title co. and asked whether we really needed a survey. Obtained deed and title co. decided they didn't need survey -- didn't exactly say why survey not needed. I didn't bother asking because we got what we asked for.
Last edited:
I don't think this has to be a big hassle for you at all. After you have exhausted any communication with the homeowner, contact the county/city code inspector and tell them your neighbor's newly constructed basketball hoop violates the property line and you have a valid survey to prove it. The inspector should then be obligated to ask the homeowner to remove the hoop away from your property line. It seems to me that a basketball hoop should have a certain amount of set-back from the property line. I don't think the homeowner would have any choice but be forced to remove it or be subject to fines. It would be interesting to see a picture of the hoop.
Not true at all. Adverse possession is based on a number of factors with one of the first being the fact that neither of you are aware of the correct property line location. In this case since there is a survey, it's out the window.
Did the title company request an affidavit from the owner that there had been no additions or improvements to the property since the date of the initial survey?
I just had this problem.
There was a pin already there. The bank just did a drive by and saw the pins. The builder in the neighboring home encroached on my property buy burying their utilities on my property (before I bought it and without anyone knowing). The city verified that they encroached and that this is a zoning violation. But they will do nothing, it is a civil matter. The builder claims that "kids" moved the pins. That is BS but if that is what he needs to say to save face, I am OK with it. Fact is, he factored in a lot of money to trench the tree row and get around a large tree they wanted to save. And when it came time, he simply cut through my yard, saving about 30 feet of trenching, and pocketed the difference. I pointed that out to the neighbor...for a moment they were defensive. But in a day they called and said they would remediate it. They really have no choice.
Regardless, the pins don't make a difference. Nor does the bank's actions. In the end, they are using your property. They might as well take your car for a drive as well. What is right is right. And if you try to sell your property and you know of the encroachment, in Ohio, you must disclose this or are legally liable to a suite. In the end, it drives down your property value.
That factor is not a requirement of adverse possession in any jurisdiction of which I'm aware.
All well and good, except that I don't live in NC, and there 100% wasn't a survey when I bought my property. I'm not saying that is the case everywhere, I'm just saying that surveys are not universal as some are implying.
My larger point to the OP is that the juice may not be worth the squeeze to fight this and they should ask themselves what are the pluses and minuses of making a big deal about it.
Huh? Where is that an element of adverse possession? A survey actually helps an adverse possession claim because it eliminates any question of whether the encroachment was with hostile intent (which is an element). If my law school and bar remembrances are correct, it’s (1) open and notorious, (2) continuous, (3) exclusive, (4) actual, and (5) under hostile intent, for a period of 21 years in PA I believe.
My memory is that it is about 21 years in Ohio and 18 years in Florida -- both of which I have had occasion to deal with. Thought you were probably being overly solicitous to the poster (in a good way) because I suspected there was a long period of time before adverse possession would kick in.
Slightly later edit. Looked these up. Ohio 21 years. Florida 7 years. Might have been longer 20 years ago when a contractor built a dirt road through my parents' comparatively remote 40 acre parcel in Florida with zero permission or knowledge by my parents. The road serviced the contractor's development of about 150 homes. There was potentially a serious issue there, but no one ever raised it when the land was marketed and sold.
Last edited:
It is that simple when you are in a non-litigious situation. Guess what happens when you pay your surveyor and your opponent (neighbor) pays their surveyor? Suddenly it isn't so exact.
If you include states with 20 year periods with those having 21 year periods, it's the 2nd most common time frame across the country (10 being the most common ... barely; 15 being 3rd most common). A couple have 30. A couple have 5.
Wow - I could ask this board how to screw in a lightbulb and I bet I could get 4 pages of arguments about it.
I wonder if the party claiming adverse possession in those states also must have paid the real property tax on the subject property, as in California. Most of the time, the claimant is not adversely possessing an entire legal parcel; only a portion of it. Since real property tax bills are for the entire legal parcel and are typically mailed out to and paid by the record owner, it is rare that the taxes paid element is satisfied. Thus, we see a lot more prescriptive easement claims (in which taxes on the subject property do NOT have to be paid by the claimant) than we do adverse possession claims.
you make a great point. So if I, owning a property, paid taxes on it for 25 years can have a part of it taken away from adverse possession? If I paid the property taxes, that flies in the very face of the concept of adverse possession.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
FB Recruiting May 2nd Official Visit Weekend Visitors / Updates
- Latest: nittanynationrecruiting-aiden
-
