Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Man is forced to hand title for $125,000 parcel of Delaware land to neighbor who erected GOAT PEN on property, then successfully claimed squatter's rights
MAILONLINE ^ | 7 March 2023 | HARRIET ALEXANDER

Posted on 03/07/2023 12:49:22 AM PST by dennisw

Burton Banks, an Atlanta-based financial advisor, inherited from his father several plots of land in Ocean View, Delaware Banks wanted to sell part of the property in 2021, but learnt that his neighbor Melissa Schrock had been grazing her goats on the land

A judge last month ruled that Schrock had been on the property for more than 20 years and so had squatter's rights: Banks was forced to hand over the land

A judge in Delaware has ordered a businessman hand over a $125,000 parcel of land to his neighbor after she kept her goats on the land for over 20 years and claimed squatter's rights.

Burton Banks, an Atlanta-based financial advisor, inherited the uninhabited plot of land in Ocean View, Delaware, from his father Ralph.

In 2021 Banks and his husband David Barrett decided they wanted to sell the plot of land, which sits empty and undeveloped.

But he discovered that around two thirds of an acre was being used by his neighbor Melissa Schrock, who had erected a pen for her goats on the land.

'It's just always been my backyard since I was a little kid,' Schrock said.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Food; Gardening
KEYWORDS: communism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-109 next last
To: skr
The fact that the “squatter” has built an improvement on the property goes a long way to reinforcing their claim in most states.

I’m working with a friend in a business situation where he may be in a good position to act on a “squatter’s rights” claim. In this case there may be no opposition because he is squatting on a common area in an HOA and — due to a combination of some unusual circumstances over the years — the common area is only accessible through his property anyway.

21 posted on 03/07/2023 3:20:23 AM PST by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen
Vermont has squatters rights, 7 years.

New Hampshire doesn't have squatters rights.

22 posted on 03/07/2023 3:25:08 AM PST by Mogger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: joma89

Adverse possession is found in Roman law as well.


23 posted on 03/07/2023 3:36:39 AM PST by Romulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

Lost an inherited building lot because of squatters rights. Grandmother let the neighbors use half the lot for a driveway for 30 years. My grandmother passed and the lowlife neighbors claimed it was theirs.


24 posted on 03/07/2023 3:36:59 AM PST by NH Red
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

Banks and his husband......see, now i don’t care, and those goats dodged a bullet.
( to be clear, I am for property owners rights! Not the squatters)


25 posted on 03/07/2023 3:37:18 AM PST by ronniesgal (friends don't let friends be Kardashians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mogger

Well....it worked against the Indians. The saga continues...


26 posted on 03/07/2023 3:38:59 AM PST by If You Want It Fixed - Fix It ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: JustaTech

“In AZ it’s called Adverse Possession, and the time period is ten years.”

While I realize that not everyone here has a background in real estate, I’m still surprised by how few people are familiar with Adverse Possession, as it’s one of the oldest laws in the books. And yes, it most often involves a driveway or a fence that is accidentally (or purposely) located incorrectly, and then stays in place, uncontested, for a certain amount of time. Usually not a big deal, but this article was a bit strange as to how the judge used it.


27 posted on 03/07/2023 3:58:41 AM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: NH Red
That’s exactly the type of situation adverse possession (“squatter’s rights”) laws are designed for. No offense to your grandmother, but anyone who gives a neighbor free use of a piece of property without a lease agreement or contract in place probably isn’t suited to own property in the first place.

It’s kind of odd to see so many people weighing in here about the sanctity of property rights — and then applying this standard to cases where property owners didn’t care much about it at all.

28 posted on 03/07/2023 4:05:31 AM PST by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: BobL

It’s important to note that these cases don’t involve someone setting up a tent on the property for 48 hours and then claiming it as theirs. In every state where I’ve come across adverse possession situations, the period of occupancy is measured in years. In the case I referenced earlier on this thread, I believe the adverse possession period is 30 years.


29 posted on 03/07/2023 4:09:55 AM PST by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

“It’s important to note that these cases don’t involve someone setting up a tent on the property for 48 hours and then claiming it as theirs.”

Or coming home from a relatively short vacation to find people camped out in one’s house. Those cases, where the police won’t evict them show our society reverting to Third World, or really Animal Kingdom, levels.


30 posted on 03/07/2023 4:13:47 AM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

Don’t worry. It’s not communism, it’s squatter’s rights.


31 posted on 03/07/2023 4:14:20 AM PST by ArcadeQuarters (You can't remove RINOs by voting for them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

The time period for adverse possession is set by statute and varies from state to state. Some places it is as short as 7 years.


32 posted on 03/07/2023 4:17:51 AM PST by AndyJackson (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

The wife and I purchased some land and my sister and brother-in-law bought the other half of the land, which was initially a six-acre plot, now split into 2.5 acres and 3.5 acres plots, for my sister and us, respectively.

One of the first things I noticed was the property line and the fence line was off by a little less than a quarter of an acre on each of our plots.

We wrote the neighbor to ask them about the discrepancy. Luckily, the gentleman asked us to come around and see the reasoning for the discrepancy.

About 25 years ago his neighbors upstream dammed up the creek that ran through the area. About two years later the dam busted and washed out a 27’ deep ravine that ran along the property lines of my neighbor and what is now our properties. There are about eight 30’ long, 36” diameter culverts sticking up and out of the sandy ravine bottom, strewn about 100’ feet along what used to be the property line.

Our neighbor and the owners of what is now our property decided it was easier to move the fence up onto the non-washed-out ridge and they strung a new fence. They also installed a single wire strand that runs along the actual property line to mark the property boundaries. As he stated, unless we want to bring in thousands of yards of dirt to backfill that ravine, there is nothing that can be built on the shifting sandy bottom of that ravine.

We wrote this letter to get this situation rectified within the first year we got the property, to ensure we did not get caught in a “squatters” rights scenario. Luckily for us, our neighbor and the old owners were friends. And we were luck our neighbor was friendly, honest, and he was very nice about the whole situation.


33 posted on 03/07/2023 4:18:33 AM PST by ExTxMarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

Can he at least go after her to reimburse him the property taxes on the land for the last 20 years?


34 posted on 03/07/2023 4:20:14 AM PST by Eternally-Optimistic (anything is possible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

This is evil.


35 posted on 03/07/2023 4:27:56 AM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith….)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator
Nope. His neighbor had occu0ation. He gave it up.

Having allodial title would have made ANYTHING his neighbor did immaterial. Fact is, he didn't allodially own his land, his municipality/county did, and therefore the municipality/county was within its 'rights' to take away this man's 'color of title', and transfer to his neighbor.

If he had allodial title, only he could do so... not a court or magistrate on his behalf.

36 posted on 03/07/2023 4:30:06 AM PST by C210N (Everything will be okay in the end. If it’s not okay, it’s not the end.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: spincaster

It is so hard for me to believe that these laws are still the best way to do this in the 21st century.


37 posted on 03/07/2023 4:30:10 AM PST by babble-on
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
2/3s of an acre is about 170' x 170'...

He should have had it surveyed ...if it wasn't and posted....and sent a letter to the goat farmer if he was going to be out of town.

Adverse possession is well known and happens every day.

38 posted on 03/07/2023 4:30:11 AM PST by Sacajaweau ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

This is how the law works though generally you not only have to prove occupation but also upkeep, paying taxes etc on said land etc. don’t know this states exact laws but this is a legal Avenue to become the owner of land.


39 posted on 03/07/2023 4:32:09 AM PST by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JustaTech

Went through the same thing with a buddy.


40 posted on 03/07/2023 4:32:16 AM PST by Sacajaweau ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-109 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson