You obviously don’t know real estate law. If someone builds a fences across your property line and you do nothing about it for, oh! Let’s say 15 years.
They can legally claim that you’ve deeded your real rights to that land.
I know. We bought a house on fenced property which had an addition built on it in 1982. We still own the real property. But now the Home Owner Association, which owns the adjoining parcel, is concerned that the fence is inside their property line by 15 feet. Well gosh, it has been 25 years since that addition was approved and 35 years since the original fence was laid out and built, and no one, NO ONE, said a word when notified that an addition was going to be built.
We would have to tear down our family room and move our back fence. But the law about this is very clear. If the owner’s don’t kick the trespassers out after ten years, it belongs to the trespassers.
Too bad, so sad. IT IS THE LAW, folks.
You obviously don’t know anything about aerial photos. If the path you say was there for years but suddenly shows up is not on historical aerial photos, then you’re lying.
“You obviously don’t know real estate law. If someone builds a fences across your property line and you do nothing about it for, oh! Let’s say 15 years.
They can legally claim that you’ve deeded your real rights to that land”
Yep, and that is why whenever you have a survey of your land you should always ask to have it show your house and adjoining appurtenances on the survey map..Have seen some very surprising results when that was done-property lines that cut through the house, garage, between house and garage and even showing the house was in two counties with the county line splitting the house; even saw a house situated between two States (NY and Pa)!.... Many surveys only show the boundary lines of the property and may note a right of way or easement and that would not reveal the problems...
I think you need to translate for those in rio linda:
“You snooze, you lose.”
(we still don’t know if it is an easment or the actual land given)
Pretty much an all-encompassing and possibly unwarranted attack. Real Estate law varies state to state. Not sure of current law, but in the old-olden days in California, for one to obtain land via adverse possession the legal requirements held to utilizing the property in a wanton manner, while paying the annual property tax on same. Not sure of the time constraints but seem to remember that such "possession" and tax submission was required for seven consecutive years.
This case had nothing to do with any fence.
It was a bald faced move to prevent the development of a very legal subdivision lot. The testimony given by the plaintifs was perjured, as proven by aerial photographs on file with the Bolder city engineer.
This is a clear case where the judge should have ‘recused’ himself due to his personal relationship with the plaintiff, but instead used his position to do a big favor for his friend.
Is that what you meant by “it’s the law?”