|
I may have gotten myself into a mess. I'm in Maryland.
If someone might have the basis for a successful claim for adverse
possession, for the required number of years, but hasn't pursued it in
court, if I do something now that would have interrupted the required
time period had I done it before the required time period had been
fulfilled, if I do it now, will I reset the clock, will he lose the
value of the 7 or 10 years that have already elapsed?
I don't know that he plans a claim, but I am at the end of one group
of townhouses, and he is the the first house in the next building.
Who actually owns the land is not at all obvious and would not be
known if we didn't have a map, and if I didn't have the word of the
first owner of my house that he planted the bushes on his land. The
neighbor has maintained this little piece of land with no complaint
for all these years, (because he wanted my bushes trimmed much smaller
and uglier than I wanted them) and I can't help thinking he hasn't
complained because he expects some sort of reward in the future, such
as ownership. Also we don't get along well for some reason, and I am
about to irritate him by insisting he remove the bagworms from his fir
trees, so that my trees don't get them. (One of my trees had a few
last year, much too high for me to pick them off. This year I will
have to hire a lawn service to spray them if they become infected.
I've been asking him to take steps for a year and 7 months, and at
first he said he was going to cut down the 9 foot tree anyhow, then he
claimed that's not the way bagworms spread, and now he just brushes
me, and another neighbor, off.
This next door n'bor, or he in combination with the homeowner's
association's gardener, has been maintaining this small part of my
land for 7 years or so, maybe 10. The land is a triangle with an 8
foot base (facing the street) whose perpendicular is about 12 feet.
That is, just 48 square feet. It includes the 5 bushes that he has
trimmed, on the 8 foot side.
He usually does lawnmowing when the grass isn't even high enough to be
cut by mower. But in the last maybe 7 years, i've weeded the area
under the bushes 3 or 4 times, covered that area with mulch once,
shoveled the snow on the sidewalk in front of it 5 or 6 times, mowed
the lawn portion 2 or 3 times (although I doubt anyone noticed and if
they did they thought he mowed it), so having done all this stuff, I
thought that he had no chance of pursuing an adverse possession claim.
But now I've lost all the receipts, and I think I can't prove that
I've done anything, except by my assertion.
OTOH, I have a new digital camera, and I could go buy a couple bags of
mulch, and take before and after pictures, including pictures of the
bags of mulch (and including me with the mulch if you tell me that
will help).
Is that what I should do, and will it restart the clock for adverse
possession, even if he had 10 years or more already.
Thanks a lot.
If you are inclined to email me
for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)
|
| |
| |
mm <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote:
If someone might have the basis for a successful claim for adverse
possession, for the required number of years, but hasn't pursued
it in court, if I do something now that would have interrupted the
required time period had I done it before the required time period
had been fulfilled, if I do it now, will I reset the clock, will
he lose the value of the 7 or 10 years that have already elapsed?
At least in California, once the prescriptive period passes, title
vests automatically in the adverse possessor, subject to confirmation
by court. Subsequent actions will not re-set the clock.
Stu
|
| |
| |
n 10 Apr 2008, mm <mm2005@bigfoot.com> said/asked:
I may have gotten myself into a mess. I'm in Maryland.
If someone might have the basis for a successful claim for
adverse possession, for the required number of years, but
hasn't pursued it in court, if I do something now that
would have interrupted the required time period had I done
it before the required time period had been fulfilled, if I
do it now, will I reset the clock, will he lose the value of
the 7 or 10 years that have already elapsed?
Sometimes, Yes or No - depending on the specific nature of the
easement obtained by prescription, if there has been such, or title
obtained by adverse possession, if they apply.
HOWEVER, the facts as you seem to state them above and go on to
describe them below raise some (obvious!), "Is the Emperor Wearing Any
Clothes?" questions applicable to pretty much all of your apparently
presumed premises (not least including if, among other things, you are
referring only to a period of only "7 or 10 years").
I am at the end of one group of townhouses,
and he is the the first house in the next building.
[He alone or] in combination with the homeowner's
association's gardener, has been maintaining this
small part of my land for 7 years or so, maybe 10
. . . . a triangle with an 8 foot base (facing the street)
whose perpendicular is about 12 feet. That is, just
48 square feet. It includes the 5 bushes that he has
trimmed, on the 8 foot side.
Who actually owns the land is not at all obvious
and would not be known if we didn't have a map,
and if I didn't have the word of the first owner
of my house that he planted the bushes on his land.
You nowhere make clear whether (though you refer to a "homeowners
association") you refer to residential units comprising a part of a
condominium development, in which event you may not (individually) own
the area with the bushes in question, or to stand-alone and
privately-owned parcels of land.
And even if the latter, notably missing from your posting query is any
actually explicit statement to the effect that your and your
neighbor's respective deeds make clear on whose land the small
garden/shrubbery area to which you refer is located; and yet if that
area is on property your and his deeds confirm is owned by him, as you
suggest (by way of your factual vagueness in this connection) may be
at least possible, then your concern would seem to be moot.
neighbor has maintained this little piece of land
with no complaint for all these years . . .
. . . i.e., you seem to be saying, a period ("7 to 10 years")
substantially less than the Maryland twenty-year period required to
establish an easement by prescription or title by way of adverse
possession, and, at that, with your prior owner's and, later, your
permission . . .
. . . (because he wanted my bushes trimmed
much smaller and uglier than I wanted them)
and I can't help thinking he hasn't complained
because he expects some sort of reward in the
future, such as ownership.
Conceivably, you may have some realistic factual basis that would
explain why you "can't help thinking" what you say, but, if so, you
have yet to report what it is (assuming, that is, that you were
referring to a period which, unlike the period you do mention, made
your concern a timely one). Meanwhile, you have yet to explain
factually how/that what you say about respective bush-trimming
preferences did not, as noted, derive from your predecessor in
interest and/or you having given your bush-trimming neighbor (or is it
the homeowners' association's gardener?) permission to trim your
bushes (if they're actually yours).
But in the last maybe 7 years, i've weeded the area
under the bushes 3 or 4 times, covered that area
with mulch once, shoveled the snow on the sidewalk
in front of it 5 or 6 times, mowed the lawn portion 2
or 3 times (although I doubt anyone noticed and if
they did they thought he mowed it), . . .
In other words, you seem also to be saying, your neighbor's use of the
land and bushes was not "continuous" much less "exclusive" viz-a-viz
you - right?
And even if you may not have said explicitly to him that he trimmed
the bushes shorter than you would have preferred (or, again, did you
say that and yet communicate your permission that he may do so?), how
is that behavior "hostile" in the title to or use of land as
distinguished from mere cosmetic sense of "hostil[ity]"?
. . . so having done all this stuff, I thought that he
had no chance of pursuing an adverse possession claim.
But now I've lost all the receipts, and I think I can't
prove that I've done anything, except by my assertion.
Perhaps, too, you might answer for yourself why you appear to believe
that others would not find credible your recounting of your own
actions of which you have direct/personal knowledge?
I have a new digital camera, and I could go buy a couple
bags of mulch, and take before and after pictures,
including pictures of the bags of mulch (and including
me with the mulch if you tell me that will help).
Is that what I should do, and will it restart the clock for
adverse possession, even if he had 10 years or more already.
Of course, you may do that -- but EVEN IF one were to presume (though
perhaps in substantial part contrafactually) that the "clock" has
accumulated up to 10 years of (some sort of) use for the benefit of
your neighbor and, in addition, in the other respects you "can't avoid
thinking" about, to the extent that these issues continue to vex you,
you might want to consider these two (and maybe especially the second)
alternatives too (or instead):
First, verify (if need to achieve this be, by way of a your
commissioning a professional survey) who owns what portions of what
land; and
Second, to the extent that you have well-founded reason to
conclude that the triangle of land in question and bushes thereon do
belong to you, write your neighbor a letter, a copy of which you will
take steps not later to lose (and, if you are especially
punctilious[albeit, if so, perhaps in this respect superfluously
obsessive/compulsive?], which also even might be filed in the
miscellaneous papers portion in the land records office) to the effect
that you do not consider that what he has so far done thereon to have
been any (much less all) of continuous or uninterrupted and actually
possessory and notorious and exclusive and hostile to your
ownership/use and under a claim by him of title or ownership and/but,
to avoid any question about these matters, that are confirming by that
written communication the previously communicated permission for such
acts, albeit without suggesting that he alone has the prerogative to
do whatever is the trimming/maintenance in question, and that, in
addition, you give him permission (s/k/a, a "license") to continue his
occasional said pruning, etc., which, however, you reserve the right
unilaterally to revoke at any time without any prior notice albeit
that you do not have any present intent to do that.
And (also: obviously) if you have any further doubts about the matter,
you might want actually to consult a Md. attorney near you who knows
about this sort of Stuff whether in his or her opinion your so doing
will suffice to "st
|
| |
| |
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 07:17:23 -0400, Stuart Bronstein
<spamtrap@lexregia.com> wrote:
mm <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote:
At least in California, once the prescriptive period passes, title
vests automatically in the adverse possessor, subject to confirmation
by court. Subsequent actions will not re-set the clock.
Dang. That's not good for me. And Maryland might well be like
California.
Then what about the other requirements? As far as I can remember
Exclusive. I continued to walk on the land, **
Uninterrupted He might have fulfilled this one.
Notorious Neighbors and onlookers had no way to tell ***
Unpermitted. It's clear that I permitted him to do all this.
Claim of Right. There is no reason to think his deed****
Hostile. He did nothing to exclude me from the little
piece of land. No fence, no words spoken, no sign.
IIRC, these are the 6 requirements, and I think he has only fulfilled
one of them, certainly not all. Am I on track?
** I weeded under the bushes, mowed the lawn a few times (even if
those things are hard to prove)
*** no way to tell he thought the land was his. Other than maybe that
he mowed it, but I mowed it too, but less often. He didn't walk on it
anymore than I did, except when mowing it. I thought he had done all
the trimming himself, but recently I heard something that implied he
probably didn't trim the bushes personally most of the time. I think
he hired the community gardening service, which some of the other
neigbhors also do to mow their personal lawns, and an onlooker can't
tell if he hired them or if I did.
I permitted him to do all this. When I first found the community
gardener trimming the bushes, 7 or 10 years ago, I told him not to do
it, but that was the gardener. The neighbor wasn't there iirc, and
even if he was, I didn't say that to the neighbor, because I was
avoiding confrontation directly with him. Later my anger had cooled,
and by the next time the bushes were trimmed, I assumed the neighbor
himself did it. At any rate, I think it would be hard to find anyone
other than me who was present during that conversation. The gardener,
the cop, no one even knows their names.
**** no reason to think that his deed includes this land. He just
started trimming the bushes because he thought I was letting them grow
too tall and too thick and that a mugger would hide behind them and
mug his girlfriend. Even though that is incredibly unlikely, it was
more likely where he used to live. Doesn't he have to have to have
some more legal basis for the original claim? I didn't want to rely
on this because the first owner told me he had a survey done, but he
didn't leave the survey results behind, and I'd have to pay for
another I guess.
Stu
If you are inclined to email me
for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)
|
| |
| |
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 07:17:27 -0400, nospam@isp.com wrote:
On 10 Apr 2008, mm <mm2005@bigfoot.com> said/asked:
. . . i.e., you seem to be saying, a period ("7 to 10 years")
substantially less than the Maryland twenty-year period required to
establish an easement by prescription or title by way of adverse
possession,
Maryland requires 20 years!!! In that case, I really am off the hook.
Well, it looks like I did take away something from my ignominious
experience as a law student in NY, and that is that in NYS it is 10
years, which is why I was getting nervous. I thought if NYS was 10
years, they all were. Now that I've checked, I'm amazed at how wide
the range is. But you and two webpages say Md. is 20 years, So I
have no problem, and I'll do everything now that I said or thought I
should have done before.
http://www.lawchek.com/resources/forms/que/advposs.htm
Turns out one state has 21 years, several states have 20, several 10
years, several 7, some has 5, one 3, and one even 2, in some
circumstances. So it's best to know the law in your own state.
New Jersey has 60 years for uncultivated land and 30 years for other
real estate!
......
. . . (because he wanted my bushes trimmed
much smaller and uglier than I wanted them)
and I can't help thinking he hasn't complained
because he expects some sort of reward in the
future, such as ownership.
Conceivably, you may have some realistic factual basis that would
explain why you "can't help thinking" what you say, but, if so, you
have yet to report what it is (assuming, that is, that you were
I didn't want to make the post too long, and I thought the rules here
were that I should try to confine things to the legal aspects of this.
Sure I have my reasons for thinking what I do, but I can discuss the
likelihood that I'm right with friends here, who may know as much
about psychology and human nature as the posters here. But they
certainly don't know as much law as you guys do.
And it doesn't even matter if I'm right about what he's thinking. It's
enough that I might be right, and I should take precautions as if I
were right. Which I will.
Thanks for your help.
If you are inclined to email me
for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)
|
| |
| |
mm wrote:
Stuart Bronstein <spamtrap@lexregia.com> wrote:
Dang. That's not good for me. And Maryland might well be like
California.
Might well. But remember there's a difference between adverse
possession (obtaining ownership) and a prescriptive easement (right to
continue use but not technically ownership). The difference (at least
here in CA) is that for ownership you also have to have paid the taxes
on the property for the prescriptive period.
Then what about the other requirements? As far as I can remember
Exclusive. I continued to walk on the land, **
Uninterrupted He might have fulfilled this one.
Notorious Neighbors and onlookers had no way to tell ***
Unpermitted. It's clear that I permitted him to do all this.
Claim of Right. There is no reason to think his deed****
Hostile. He did nothing to exclude me from the little
piece of land. No fence, no words spoken, no sign.
The basic purpose of all these requirements is that he clearly show
that he claims ownership. In you case it sppears to me that he didn't
come close.
Stu
|
| |
| |
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 07:32:11 -0400, mm <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
. . . .
Turns out one state has 21 years, several states have 20, several 10
years, several 7, some has 5, one 3, and one even 2, in some
circumstances. So it's best to know the law in your own state.
. . . .
The exact conditions also vary from state to state. Oregon, for
example, requires objective and reasonable good faith belief of
ownership at the time of entry and entry under claim or right or color
of title. Or. Rev. Stat. @ 105.620. This has, however, been
interpreted to apply only when title did not vest prior to the
effective date of the statute.
Daniel Reitman
|
| |
| |
|
