Posted on 06/29/2021 2:45:05 PM PDT by Whyfor
Imagine purchasing a home and living in it and paying taxes on that home and property for decades. Then being told part of that property you paid taxes on is in violation and must be being taken away without compensation. Not only that, you’re responsible for footing the cost of removing the stuff you have on that land, like your fence or shed. Oh, and it has to be done in a few months time.
(Excerpt) Read more at homehacks.co ...
Sounds like adverse possession to me and the city is SOL, but government is the greediest, most corrupt and murderous force on Earth, so good luck with that.
Local lawyers are gonna get rich on this stuff...it is a type of eminent domain...for a stupid trail...
Or is the a HOA wanting to seize some interior space for “common areas”?
It happens all the time. Its why we pay for Title Insurance on property transfers.
Usual click-bait headline which is totally misleading. They built beyond their property line boundary. But I guess the article would sound less exciting if it said, "Residents told to remove structures from land which they don't own".
Sounds to me like these folks butted up against land they didnt own and thought nothing would ever become of it. They expanded their yards/lot into this area and never thought about the usage changing.
Well usage did change and the owners (city) now say get your sheds and fence and all else out’s here!
Oh well
Correct these people over stepped their boundaries in more than 1 way.
I think homeowners encroached on unimproved public land. Happens a lot. Now, the city wants to develop it. In Oregon, that would just invite tent communities to spring up.
Imagine a grandmother, living alone on a fix income, long after her husband has past. She is incapable of making a living and relies on prior investments and social security to make ends meet. She doesn't have children in schools. Those days have past some 50 plus years ago. But she in essence rents her property from the school district.
Further more, imagine the same grandmother that is at the whims of the township, borough or city that dictates that she must do unexpected things to her property that has never been done. This can comes as changes in ordinance and other mandates. A common one on the rural fringes of suburbia is connecting to municipal water and sewage, when essentially free water and septic as been used for years. Not only is there a cost to connect, but an ongoing fee to be paid that increases the expenses of living in that property. The expense is in the thousands of dollars when granny is living on a fixed income predicated on foreseen expenses from years ago.
I find it much more humane to respect property rights. That includes the ability to own your property and never have to pay for it again. That includes the ability to continue to do the things that have worked for decades without further expense. The same principles apply to all property, real or not.
It’s a trick the media uses all the time to get viewers, or clicks. Misrepresent a situation and withhold critical information to create some outrage.
Bet the property tax won’t be reduced.
Off topic
Thats how often it happens. There is an insurance industry built around it.
Most of us think we have more land then we do. The first couple feet are easement that any utility company can use. And it can be a company you don’t use. Spectrum came and put lines under my driveway and lawn because the neighbors wanted that crappy service when I have Comcast. I did my best to stop them but it’s unfortunately legal.
Nope. Not the owners property. They were stealing the land. I hope that get fined heavily by the county.
So, if like other cities and states, if a homeowner has maintained a public or private owned property for so many years, they can rightly claim that property as theirs, otherwise, the city is right in saying that they have exceeded their rightful property boundary.
This is Sacramento, so I don't know what their rules are with regards to this situation.
Adverse possession might not apply to claims against the government. Maybe the doctrine of settled boundaries?
they weren’t paying taxes on it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.