Adverse Possession
Adverse Possession
Drill me on this legal claim of property?
Re: Adverse Possession
Google told me to look at wikipedia
"Adverse possession is a rule in property law. This rule says that if property is not being used by its owner while another person is using the property, this other person (called an "adverse possessor") becomes the new owner of the property. To get these rights, the adverse possessor usually must use the property in the way a normal owner would do for a period of time, typically 20 years. In some jurisdictions, a form of adverse possession exists in which the adverse possessor ends up with sharing some rights to property with the owner, such as a right-of-way, instead of getting all the rights."
State law and relevant court decisions could make a difference.
"Adverse possession is a rule in property law. This rule says that if property is not being used by its owner while another person is using the property, this other person (called an "adverse possessor") becomes the new owner of the property. To get these rights, the adverse possessor usually must use the property in the way a normal owner would do for a period of time, typically 20 years. In some jurisdictions, a form of adverse possession exists in which the adverse possessor ends up with sharing some rights to property with the owner, such as a right-of-way, instead of getting all the rights."
State law and relevant court decisions could make a difference.
The closest helping hand is at the end of your own arm.
-
- Posts: 440
- Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:08 pm
Re: Adverse Possession
I like this quote from Wikipedia because it breaks the idea down into it's separate components (usually, depending on the state, YMMV).
The adverse possessor is usually required to prove non-permissive use which is actual, open and notorious, exclusive, adverse, and continuous for the statutory period.
-
- Posts: 3512
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 4:28 pm
- Location: Western Washington
Re: Adverse Possession
It's a practice designed to legally recognize what has effectively been true. Basically, if a person acts as if they own a piece of property long enough, and the person who actually has title to the land does nothing of substance to make plain their actual ownership of the land, the first person can claim ownership.
It's hard to expand more without either basically going over everything, or waiting for a specific question.
It's hard to expand more without either basically going over everything, or waiting for a specific question.
Re: Adverse Possession
+50123 wrote: State law and relevant court decisions could make a difference.
"Don't trust everything you read on the Internet"- Abraham Lincoln
- lthenderson
- Posts: 8499
- Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 11:43 am
- Location: Iowa
Re: Adverse Possession
Growing up on a farm, we have plenty of examples of this. Many times, field boundaries don't follow what is practical to access with a tractor and equipment, i.e. on the opposite side of a deep ditch or stream. Rather than drive all the way around, through fields owned by others, we often rent the small piece of land to the adjacent land owner for $1/year so that adverse possession laws don't take affect. My parents have at least three situations like this that I can think of off the top of my head.
Re: Adverse Possession
This is the simplest solution. A written agreement allowing the other party the use of the property "for compensation". That maintains your rights while letting them use it.lthenderson wrote:... we often rent the small piece of land to the adjacent land owner for $1/year so that adverse possession laws don't take affect.
It's not an engineering problem - Hersh Shefrin | To get the "risk premium", you really do have to take the risk - nisiprius
Re: Adverse Possession
I think the time frame can be as few as seven years. Another method is to kick the offending party off the land for a day every seven years (or whatever time period applies in your state). Or put up a fence. And fix it every seven years.
-
- Posts: 13977
- Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 1:39 pm
Re: Adverse Possession
In almost all cases, the shorter time frames only apply when the adverse possessor has a good faith deed (even if not valid) and/or has paid the taxes on the property during those years.
Adverse possession has taken on mythical status. Unfortunately, like most myths it is not based on any reality. They are rarely successful in modern times.
The courts have increasing applied a strict approach requiring the adverse possession to be physical occupation with improvements, obvious to the community (not just the owner) and exclusive and continuous for the entire required period without permission of the owner.
Adverse possession has taken on mythical status. Unfortunately, like most myths it is not based on any reality. They are rarely successful in modern times.
The courts have increasing applied a strict approach requiring the adverse possession to be physical occupation with improvements, obvious to the community (not just the owner) and exclusive and continuous for the entire required period without permission of the owner.
Re: Adverse Possession
Well my property corners have been overlapped by a survey for a new adjacent property owner. I have been at this residence since 1978, did not get title insurance when I purchased property---one surveyor told me that is what adverse possession was really designed for to protect a long time landowner from incorrect or contested surveys.
I think the renting of property for access --falls into "prescriptive easement" territory, where you and others or the public have been accessing property for a long time and the landowner never stopped you--you could claim prescriptive easement.
I think the renting of property for access --falls into "prescriptive easement" territory, where you and others or the public have been accessing property for a long time and the landowner never stopped you--you could claim prescriptive easement.
Re: Adverse Possession
Sounds like you are getting a lot of words thrown at you.
First, the use that creates adverse possession is not sanctioned. It is against the property owners desires and for an extended period of time. The person is seeking title to that land. I have a client who bought a piece of property from someone who was able to win such a case. The reason for creating an agreement as someone else suggested for use is to prevent such a claim.
A prescriptive easement is a right gained to use someone else's property but not to title of that property. The classic example is a trail across someone's property.
From the very limited info that you have provided, it sounds like you have a survey or legal description dispute. One would want to determine the source of the difference first. You have a legal description for your property and it should be attached to a chain of title that you can research. The new adjacent owner has the same circumstance but if they purchased title insurance and you did not, then they have someone else with an interest in researching and winning that fight for them.
I would start by researching the title chain for each property, legal descriptions, and control points that were used for surveys to set the descriptions. It could be a fun education in the history of your property. The money that you saved by not purchasing title insurance will now be eaten up by your time so might as well make it fun.
First, the use that creates adverse possession is not sanctioned. It is against the property owners desires and for an extended period of time. The person is seeking title to that land. I have a client who bought a piece of property from someone who was able to win such a case. The reason for creating an agreement as someone else suggested for use is to prevent such a claim.
A prescriptive easement is a right gained to use someone else's property but not to title of that property. The classic example is a trail across someone's property.
From the very limited info that you have provided, it sounds like you have a survey or legal description dispute. One would want to determine the source of the difference first. You have a legal description for your property and it should be attached to a chain of title that you can research. The new adjacent owner has the same circumstance but if they purchased title insurance and you did not, then they have someone else with an interest in researching and winning that fight for them.
I would start by researching the title chain for each property, legal descriptions, and control points that were used for surveys to set the descriptions. It could be a fun education in the history of your property. The money that you saved by not purchasing title insurance will now be eaten up by your time so might as well make it fun.
I own the next hot stock- VTSAX
- Mrs.Feeley
- Posts: 830
- Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 1:52 am
Re: Adverse Possession
A neighbor planted pines along the edge of a farmer's property to give himself a hunting stand for his cabin. He claimed he was unaware of the property lines. After the farmer died he sued the estate for adverse possession of the property with the pines. According to him he won.
Adverse possessions laws and rulings vary a lot by state. Adverse possession laws typically require that one occupy, use or fence off the property for 20-25 years but in response to pressure from various industries many states have been lowering the bar. Our state is considering going from a 20- to a 7-year use requirement.
Adverse possessions laws and rulings vary a lot by state. Adverse possession laws typically require that one occupy, use or fence off the property for 20-25 years but in response to pressure from various industries many states have been lowering the bar. Our state is considering going from a 20- to a 7-year use requirement.