User Panel
[#1]
Quoted: There is no way I would let anyone have an easement. Fence and gate. He screwed up buying landlocked property. Sucks for him. Do you really want people driving back and forth by your home? View Quote An easement WILL be granted. You can do it the hard way (court, trial, judges, expense, time) or the easy way (have lawyer draft easement document, get it surveyed, get everyone’s signature, record. |
|
[#2]
OP, I should say that in most states (well...many states) someone using land for a certain number of years can claim that land. So the gentleman's agreement can turn into actual loss of land with no recompense.
You are definitely right to get this Right of way, Easement, or whatever you choose to do, set in writing legally. I know it seems like subdivisions will never come to you, but things happen. Many, many people have had their ways of life damaged by not looking at the worst possibility happening in the future, and planning for THAT. Hopefully it never happens. If it does, you have your ducks in a row. |
|
[#3]
Quoted: An easement WILL be granted. You can do it the hard way (court, trial, judges, expense, time) or the easy way (have lawyer draft easement document, get it surveyed, get everyone’s signature, record. View Quote I think this is highly dependent on state law, local legal climate, and most importantly historic uses of the properties in question so I think your post stating an easement will be granted no matter what is misguided. It may be true, but it's not an absolute truth. |
|
[#4]
Quoted: Man it sounds like you guys have seen some horror stories. I haven't had to deal with any assholes or screwballs in my 40 or so years at least when it comes to property issues. Everyone around here kinda knows each other because of it being rural Red is the main road, friends 6 acres, blue is the driveway in question, my acreage in the middle with green being trees and my diagonal driveway, yellow being what the new neighbor wants to give, and then the rest of his property. Easement would be about 15ft wide https://i.ibb.co/nzM428m/Untitled1-20230507094838.png Talking to him yesterday I told him I'd probably plant some of the acre and let the wife grow flowers on the rest. Because of the old fence that cuts the 3 acres off from the rest of his property he said he didn't have any plans for that area including the acre he planned on giving me beyond planting some sawtooths on the remaining 2 acres. Maintenance wise part of his business is tractors and he volunteered to maintain the whole length in blue. He seems like a dude who just found his spot. He's a bird hunter and has 3 ponds and 2 big fields on the opposite side of his property from me, probably 3/4 mile back. His deed states there can be only one living residence on the 50 acres for the next 25 years so I'm not to worried about mass sub division behind me. Good hearing some different input View Quote I do not understand what you are gaining from the "yellow". Easements run with the land. In Florida, we have common law means or a statutory way of necessity to force easements. Title to land without access isn't "marketable title". If a court would view your property as the most logical access, there is wisdom in granting an express easement. The easement should not simply recite 15' along the border for ingress and egress. You want to define the rights and responsibilities of the parties. Maintenance, hold harmless language, language about gates, grant of attorney fees to the prevailing party in the event of a dispute, etc. With anything perpetual, it is worth getting it right. Financial compensation is the norm, unless you are gaining equal value with whatever the yellow is. Although the property is locked for 25 years, don't leave your legacy with a potentially huge problem. See an attorney about limiting the easement to serve a single family residence. Your plan for the yellow is not consistent with the purpose of an easement. If yellow is not really being used for access, perhaps a simple 99 year lease for permitted uses fits the bill. All of this comes with the caveat that I am in Florida. Finally, this fella may not be your neighbor next year. Get the agreement right. Since he is the one in need, I would have him pay the freight. |
|
[#5]
Quoted: An easement WILL be granted. You can do it the hard way (court, trial, judges, expense, time) or the easy way (have lawyer draft easement document, get it surveyed, get everyone’s signature, record. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: There is no way I would let anyone have an easement. Fence and gate. He screwed up buying landlocked property. Sucks for him. Do you really want people driving back and forth by your home? An easement WILL be granted. You can do it the hard way (court, trial, judges, expense, time) or the easy way (have lawyer draft easement document, get it surveyed, get everyone’s signature, record. Not necessarily. It depends why the property is landlocked. If, for example the same person owned all three parcels and divided them - selling the front and middle and keeping the landlocked property w/o reserving an easement, then there will not be an easement granted b/c the landlocked property owner screwed themselves. If, however, an unrelated 3rd party owned the landlocked land, but used the front two parcels to access his property, then yes it's likely an easement by necessity would be granted. This, of course, is a general rule and may not be exactly applicable in OP's AO. @OP, as others have mentioned the problem will not necessarily be w/ the guy who wants the easement now, but with the people he sells it to. Why is the property landlocked? When did it become landlocked? |
|
[#6]
the property had two prior accesses to my knowledge, nothing in writing just "common usage". One runs through another neighbors yard and currently under another mobile home, the other access more to the cow pasture behind the chicken house ran through my friends property and then through my left side of my property to more of a determent than would be the right side easement. None are official easements and they were in place as friendly agreements between my friend and the former cow pasture owner who had between them like 80 acres. It would be a long drawn out process to deny this new neighbor an easement. As his property is going to be a residence now and not just farm land, the county would most likely look at my easement and just say "hey buddy he's going to add onto yours". Again if this happened i'd be compensated nothing and have a pissed off neighbor behind me who still would get to use my driveway.
I'm still trying to set up a time with the local lawyer, but im hoping he will just write something up for the neighbor to permanently deed me the extra acre in return for the easement for a single family access....if thats possible. Again his property cannot be divided more than once for the next 25 years....alot can happen in 25 years, if were just looking at the last 3. I will most likely be selling this place in 25 years as ill be close to 70 and not be looking to take care of as much. Maybe moving back to florida where i have just 1.5 acres on a nice lake in the middle of nowhere. |
|
[#7]
Quoted: These agreements, and volunteering for things, can all change if he sells the land or just changes his mind. Make it all legal, and conditional, like the rear property has deeded access/right of way/whatever to use that straight road back, in exchange for maintaining the road. Do the legal part as if all three of you hated each other, because if anyone sells their property that's what you could be facing. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Maintenance wise part of his business is tractors and he volunteered to maintain the whole length in blue. These agreements, and volunteering for things, can all change if he sells the land or just changes his mind. Make it all legal, and conditional, like the rear property has deeded access/right of way/whatever to use that straight road back, in exchange for maintaining the road. Do the legal part as if all three of you hated each other, because if anyone sells their property that's what you could be facing. |
|
[#8]
Trade an easement for title to at minimum an equal area of property from the 50 acre parcel.
That easement is more valuable than the adjacent property. The easement boundaries must be clear, and then enforced to avoid future bs. |
|
[#9]
Quoted: ... I need to see if there's anything in law about common use and right of way...ie even if I don't write anything out for his use, would him using it for his driveway overtime entitle him to its use View Quote Yes, and he will gain title without a fight. Pay attention to Fredman. If you want the new neighbor using the property to store his equipment, including the junk, then do nothing. Trade for a strip along the full width of your property, and not just an acre, that new driveway is multiples more valuable as it is useful and will persist forever, or until someone combines all of those adjacent properties. It's business that doesn't need to be hostile, just fair to everyone. |
|
[#10]
People underestimate or blow off the "they've used it for 10 years, and now they can claim it" thing, but it's real.
I was a little girl when my dad was running his trap lines along the creek at the bottom of our property. Creek ran along the property line, sort of. I always went with him to check the traps. It was winter, and there was snow on the ground when we made it to the edge of the property...except it wasn't. There was a brand new fence...three strands of barbed wire...across a small corner of my dad's farm, running all the way to the creek and across. The neighbor's house was across a bit of field, and then...the road.... from that new fence. There were not cell phones then. I remember clearly, my dad showing me the fence. He said, " (name of neighbor--let's call him Joe which is not his name) has a habit of fencing off little bits of land. If that fence stays there for a few years, that land will be his. Joe has added to his property on three sides by doing it." So we made it back to the house. My dad had me look up Joe's number in the phone book. The phone book was less than half-an-inch thick, including the yellow pages. We had a party line. He picked up the phone. (This was a big deal because my dad NEVER used the phone. He would ANSWER, but he never made calls.) It was one of those old black telephones with the round dial and the cradle for the handset. It sat on a small table just inside the kitchen. He stood there while it rang until Joe's wife answered. "Maxine, this is (my dad). Get Joe on the line." Joe came on the line. "Joe, this is (my dad). Take that fence down across the corner in front of your house. If it's not down by day after tomorrow, I'm calling the sheriff to come out and cut it." I don't know what Joe said. But the fence went away. And after my dad died, we had to help my mom police the property the same way. Because Joe's sons had the same habit. Folks don't understand that "use" will turn into ownership, if attention is not paid. There you go. An unrequested Kitties story. |
|
[#11]
Quoted: OP, I should say that in most states (well...many states) someone using land for a certain number of years can claim that land. So the gentleman's agreement can turn into actual loss of land with no recompense. You are definitely right to get this Right of way, Easement, or whatever you choose to do, set in writing legally. I know it seems like subdivisions will never come to you, but things happen. Many, many people have had their ways of life damaged by not looking at the worst possibility happening in the future, and planning for THAT. Hopefully it never happens. If it does, you have your ducks in a row. View Quote Every adverse possession law I’ve seen has two elements (aside from tenure of use): You must use it OPENLY and NOTORIOUSLY. What that means is you can’t “hide” your use of the property, and you must use it without permission. If the deeded owner says “sure, you can use that half acre” it’s being used with permission, and is ineligible for an adverse possession claim. |
|
[#12]
|
|
[#13]
Where is the closest section line?
When possible that is what is normally used for access to landlocked land. Before I traded easements with him I would instead "sell" him a slice of your property for access in exchange for an equal size piece of his property that abuts yours. I went through a major lawsuit over an access issue. Bit in my case a new landowner thought he controlled the public road because he now owned the land on both sides of it. Easements can turn into problems down the road. |
|
[#14]
Maybe I'm missing a joke here, but....This is a tech forum. Let's not get carried away. We can discuss and can do so with vigor, but this is not the place for ugliness. If you wish to take the discussion personally when it does not actually affect you, this is not the place for that. ~Kitties Edited a second time to remove the quote by Fredman, so it is obvious that I'm responding to this poster, and not the member he quoted. ~Kitties |
|
[#15]
Quoted: Every adverse possession law I’ve seen has two elements (aside from tenure of use): You must use it OPENLY and NOTORIOUSLY. What that means is you can’t “hide” your use of the property, and you must use it without permission. If the deeded owner says “sure, you can use that half acre” it’s being used with permission, and is ineligible for an adverse possession claim. View Quote I agree. However the "granted permission" often gets very murky years down the road, when people have moved on and others take their place, and when nobody actually remembers, or forgets to assert, the facts of the deal. |
|
[#16]
Let's be sure to maintain civil discourse.
This is an excellent discussion, but nobody here is getting sued, and only one person, OP, has skin in this game. |
|
[#17]
Imo, the thoughts on adverse possession are completely off base, unless op's state laws are wildly different than Florida. The possession here must be open, continuous, exclusive, adverse and notorious. Beyond that, without color of title, the claimant must pay all outstanding taxes, file a certificate of claim (which serves as notice/warning to actual owner) and pay all taxes going forward for 7 years before title may be vested in the claimant.
We are talking about access here, not an outright taking of another's land. The law - both common and statutory, abhors a land-locked property. There will be an easement. Whether it is over op's land depends on factors, but it sounds as though access via op's land is sensible. As I and others have mentioned before, op is best served reducing it to an express easement, defining the boundaries, rights, obligations and limitations . It is also the best avenue to obtain consideration for the access. |
|
[#18]
Quoted: Imo, the thoughts on adverse possession are completely off base, unless op's state laws are wildly different than Florida. The possession here must be open, continuous, exclusive, adverse and notorious. Beyond that, without color of title, the claimant must pay all outstanding taxes, file a certificate of claim (which serves as notice/warning to actual owner) and pay all taxes going forward for 7 years before title may be vested in the claimant. We are talking about access here, not an outright taking of another's land. The law - both common and statutory, abhors a land-locked property. There will be an easement. Whether it is over op's land depends on factors, but it sounds as though access via op's land is sensible. As I and others have mentioned before, op is best served reducing it to an express easement, defining the boundaries, rights, obligations and limitations . It is also the best avenue to obtain consideration for the access. View Quote See this is interesting. Your requirements for adverse possession are FAR more stringent than ours. AND...Your "will be an easement" statements...yeah, there may or may NOT be one here. State to state, this differs significantly. I agree completely with your end statement. Get the easement, defined clearly, with rights, boundaries and obligations expressed. And set limitations. In writing, with lawyers and the required assignation for your clerk/county/state for the recording of deeds and amendments. |
|
[#19]
Quoted: See this is interesting. Your requirements for adverse possession are FAR more stringent than ours. AND...Your "will be an easement" statements...yeah, there may or may NOT be one here. State to state, this differs significantly. I agree completely with your end statement. Get the easement, defined clearly, with rights, boundaries and obligations expressed. And set limitations. In writing, with lawyers and the required assignation for your clerk/county/state for the recording of deeds and amendments. View Quote Yeah, here, there would be an easement, one way or another. I don't think one can be locked out of their property. Here a new subdivision of a property will not be approved if it would landlock a parcel with no access. In my township, a new subdivision or lot line revision requires parcels to have road frontage; I don't think an easement will even do. But if somehow an old parcel is in that situation, the owner will be able to gain access somehow. My wife and I are building on a landlocked parcel right now. Said parcel doesn't even have a surveyed easement, but there is language in the deed that describes the access through the neighboring parcel. We happen to own the neighboring parcel through which we access though, so we weren't concerned. But for a bit the township said we would have to do a lot line revision to give the parcel we are building on road frontage; even if we weren't going to use it for access, they wanted some form of access to be an option in the future. We were able to get away without doing anything however. I showed the deed language pertaining to access to the township solicitor and he ended up giving it the green light. More than a couple people at the township were confused as to how that parcel ended up landlocked in the first place, but it's because it was done 50+ years ago and presumably the rules were a little different back then. |
|
[#20]
Quoted: Yeah, here, there would be an easement, one way or another. I don't think one can be locked out of their property. A new subdivision of a property will not allow a parcel to be landlocked with no access, but if somehow an old parcel is in that situation, the owner will be able to gain access somehow. View Quote I think it is changing here, but perhaps more slowly. We still have some degree of "do something stupid, reap the rewards." Meaning if you buy a landlocked piece of property, and nobody will grant you an easement, well...wtf were you thinking when you bought it? I will tell you that depending on the county and the government in said county, this may or may not apply, and the whole "you need to have intelligence and be smart about these things" is dying here, as it has died in so many other places. (I don't think that's all bad. But I do kind of hate that the requirement to know what you are buying is fading away, as an indication of the intelligence and capability of the population in general. ) Anyway. We are probably not far behind you. But we are not there quite yet. |
|
[#21]
Quoted: I think it is changing here, but perhaps more slowly. We still have some degree of "do something stupid, reap the rewards." Meaning if you buy a landlocked piece of property, and nobody will grant you an easement, well...wtf were you thinking when you bought it? I will tell you that depending on the county and the government in said county, this may or may not apply, and the whole "you need to have intelligence and be smart about these things" is dying here, as it has died in so many other places. (I don't think that's all bad. But I do kind of hate that the requirement to know what you are buying is fading away, as an indication of the intelligence and capability of the population in general. ) Anyway. We are probably not far behind you. But we are not there quite yet. View Quote You'd probably find our building experience, or maybe I should say getting a building permit experience, interesting... We're building on the property I grew up on. My parents' house was/is on a 98ac parcel, and across the yard about 100 yards away, my grandparents lived in a mobile home on a subdivided lot a little over an acre. My parents still live in their house. My wife and I are building on the acre parcel where the mobile home was. I own both properties now, but as far as the township is concerned, that does not matter. They are separate parcels, and the township treats it as if we don't own the land around that parcel. As I said in the last post, I had to prove to the solicitor that we had deeded access to that parcel in lieu of road frontage. We had to name the driveway and assign a new address to both houses for EMS purposes (when I was a kid, they actually shared an address number, can't do that anymore). This township requires you run your gutter water into underground stormwater pits, a concept that doesn't work at all if your ground happens to be clay. Well we have a pond that leaks down over the hill from where we're building. I argued to the township engineer that it acts almost exactly like a stormwater retention pond, so can I just dump the gutter water into that. He agreed, until he saw my site plan and noticed it was 20' outside of the 1ac parcel we're building on. He said I'd have to do a pit because I can't dump the water off the property like that. It doesn't matter that I own that neighboring property with the pond. I understand why they do such things, to avoid headaches in the future as land changes hands, gets chopped up and sold off, etc.. But it can be frustrating. |
|
[#22]
Quoted: Maybe I'm missing a joke here, but....This is a tech forum. Let's not get carried away. We can discuss and can do so with vigor, but this is not the place for ugliness. If you wish to take the discussion personally when it does not actually affect you, this is not the place for that. ~Kitties View Quote Joke? Seriously? In my state there is a legal mechanism whereby if you have landlocked property you can force an easement. Why you think this is a joke, or worthy of mod interruption, is beyond me. |
|
[#23]
Quoted: Joke? Seriously? In my state there is a legal mechanism whereby if you have landlocked property you can force an easement. Why you think this is a joke, or worthy of mod interruption, is beyond me. View Quote I think the joke remark was pointed at the person whose post was edited out by the mod, not you. There was originally let's say a non-courteous, GD-style remark toward your post that got edited out. |
|
[#24]
Quoted: Joke? Seriously? In my state there is a legal mechanism whereby if you have landlocked property you can force an easement. Why you think this is a joke, or worthy of mod interruption, is beyond me. View Quote I edited the person responding to you. His response was inappropriate. ~Kitties |
|
[#25]
Quoted: You'd probably find our building experience, or maybe I should say getting a building permit experience, interesting... We're building on the property I grew up on. My parents' house was/is on a 98ac parcel, and across the yard about 100 yards away, my grandparents lived in a mobile home on a subdivided lot a little over an acre. My parents still live in their house. My wife and I are building on the acre parcel where the mobile home was. I own both properties now, but as far as the township is concerned, that does not matter. They are separate parcels, and the township treats it as if we don't own the land around that parcel. As I said in the last post, I had to prove to the solicitor that we had deeded access to that parcel in lieu of road frontage. We had to name the driveway and assign a new address to both houses for EMS purposes (when I was a kid, they actually shared an address number, can't do that anymore). This township requires you run your gutter water into underground stormwater pits, a concept that doesn't work at all if your ground happens to be clay. Well we have a pond that leaks down over the hill from where we're building. I argued to the township engineer that it acts almost exactly like a stormwater retention pond, so can I just dump the gutter water into that. He agreed, until he saw my site plan and noticed it was 20' outside of the 1ac parcel we're building on. He said I'd have to do a pit because I can't dump the water off the property like that. It doesn't matter that I own that neighboring property with the pond. I understand why they do such things, to avoid headaches in the future as land changes hands, gets chopped up and sold off, etc.. But it can be frustrating. View Quote Yes indeed. Ours is not nearly as onerous. However, even ours is very frustrating. I, too, understand why they do it. Just a hassle and can cost a lot more money than it should have to. |
|
[#26]
Quoted: Think on this for a minute, right now the guy seems to a nice guy. You go ahead and allow him an easement, then sometime down the road, he begins to invite and host others who may not respect property and property rights to the point you want the crap to stop and stay away from your property, but wait, you gave him an easement. Now you have an issue with him and his rowdy friends, with not much you can do about it. View Quote And that is exactly what will happen. Pretty soon you have the "good guy's" kids/grandkids/POS friends tearing up the road with atvs, making ruts in your fields, etc. You want to help the guy and that's understandable- offer to sell him a sliver of land into his piece where he can develop his own road. |
|
[#27]
Quoted: Every adverse possession law I’ve seen has two elements (aside from tenure of use): You must use it OPENLY and NOTORIOUSLY. What that means is you can’t “hide” your use of the property, and you must use it without permission. If the deeded owner says “sure, you can use that half acre” it’s being used with permission, and is ineligible for an adverse possession claim. View Quote Not to mention ADVERSELY. If they gave you permission, it's not adverse. A friend of mine was in the habit of giving every neighbor unsolicited permission for harmless recreational/hunting access to his land for that reason. One of them still pulled all the stakes when he had a survey done. Assholes will always be assholes. |
|
[#28]
Quoted: See this is interesting. Your requirements for adverse possession are FAR more stringent than ours. AND...Your "will be an easement" statements...yeah, there may or may NOT be one here. State to state, this differs significantly. I agree completely with your end statement. Get the easement, defined clearly, with rights, boundaries and obligations expressed. And set limitations. In writing, with lawyers and the required assignation for your clerk/county/state for the recording of deeds and amendments. View Quote This its very state specific. In some states it always chases back up the subdivision history, so unrelated neighboring parcels are not at risk even if more logical or easier. Maine is like that. which can actually make things trickier if you buy a neighboring parcel with an ease to access. As that easement may not actually be legal to use to access an adjoining, but unrelated third parcel. |
|
[#29]
Quoted: There is no way I would let anyone have an easement. Fence and gate. He screwed up buying landlocked property. Sucks for him. Do you really want people driving back and forth by your home? View Quote I don’t think the op has a choice depending on state law, the property owner has the right to access his land locked property, and anyone near him that has a problem with it should have bought the property themselves. Op could maybe try being a stick in the mud and difficult and maybe the guy will pursue another property to go through, or he takes it to court, but if he’s going to get the easement one way or another I think you benefit by reaching an agreement and getting something out of it like he’s offering. If he sells, same deal, the next potential owner will have to sort it out. What’s the worst case scenario? |
|
[#30]
Quoted: An easement WILL be granted. You can do it the hard way (court, trial, judges, expense, time) or the easy way (have lawyer draft easement document, get it surveyed, get everyone’s signature, record. View Quote Pretty sure this is the case in Georgia. We’ve got a deeded easement that’s been recorded in the superior court where the property is located. If you go through with the deal, consult an attorney that specializes in this area. Our farm would have been landlocked, but there is an easement with gate. We have to maintain the easement and all associated costs. I’ve not seen the legal description in many years, but as I recall it was very specific. I would be very cautious in doing this deal. If it were me, I would consider all the negative things that could happen, in the worst case scenario. Can I live with it? That’s something you’ll have to answer. Good luck. |
|
[#31]
Quoted: Think on this for a minute, right now the guy seems to a nice guy. You go ahead and allow him an easement, then sometime down the road, he begins to invite and host others who may not respect property and property rights to the point you want the crap to stop and stay away from your property, but wait, you gave him an easement. Now you have an issue with him and his rowdy friends, with not much you can do about it. View Quote Or someone buys it and puts in a trailer park. |
|
[#32]
Quoted: I wouldn't need it, he's offering to give an acre of his land as an easement in return for use of the driveway....he has 3 acres of land he has no plan on using that butt up against my property as there's an old fence that cuts through those 3 from the rest of his property 1/3 of the length of my current driveway is an easement from my friend, 2/3 is my property, the new neighbor is asking for a part of the back 3rd How much more complicated would it be for him to deed that acre to me instead of making it an easement...and I don't plan on deeding him the driveway part just making the easement We all have a decent amount of land View Quote let him put HIS drive on HIS land he offered you. and in the future SOMEONE has to maintain your drive that others would be using. I would not do anything for him. its like the roomie thing, never works. |
|
[#33]
|
|
[#34]
Are you the closest way from his property to a road ? Also make the easement 30 foot wide and no wider. In many places 30 foot is a driveway and a 60 foot easement can be used to create a road for multiple houses. You are going to have a lot of traffic when construction starts.
|
|
[#35]
No, unless that’s the absolute only access. Can he get there any other way.
What if he sells? I’ve done this twice. But it was their only ingress. It’s permanent. |
|
[#36]
|
|
[#37]
The easement will travel with the deed.
The next guy might be an asshole with a meth-lab and a beagle mill. If you must, offer him permission. Permission can be rescinded. |
|
[#38]
Update.
We agreed to the acre deeded to me, in the write up by the lawyer. Don't remember the specific verbage he used, but the driveway cant be used by a business or more than one residence. The lawyer agreed if I had declined it could be a nasty court process and this might be the best situation. Since that he has already graded and gravelled the driveway |
|
[#39]
|
|
[#40]
Quoted: I think this is highly dependent on state law, local legal climate, and most importantly historic uses of the properties in question so I think your post stating an easement will be granted no matter what is misguided. It may be true, but it's not an absolute truth. View Quote I know it is a state law thing but here my understanding from the lawyers is that you can not deny access to a landlocked property. If none of the owners will agree to a reasonable offer then an easement will be forced on someone. As mentioned by others I think it sounds far far better to work out and record the easement and restrictions now than put up a gate, say "fuck you" and roll the dice with the courts. |
|
[#41]
Quoted: Update. We agreed to the acre deeded to me, in the write up by the lawyer. Don't remember the specific verbage he used, but the driveway cant be used by a business or more than one residence. The lawyer agreed if I had declined it could be a nasty court process and this might be the best situation. Since that he has already graded and gravelled the driveway View Quote I think that sounds like the best you could hope for. You did the right thing. |
|
[#42]
Quoted: I know it is a state law thing but here my understanding from the lawyers is that you can not deny access to a landlocked property. If none of the owners will agree to a reasonable offer then an easement will be forced on someone. As mentioned by others I think it sounds far far better to work out and record the easement and restrictions now than put up a gate, say "fuck you" and roll the dice with the courts. View Quote Unless I'm mistaken, land was never homesteaded in a fashion that would landlock the land. If parcels were landlocked it was required that you purchase parcels together to ensure access. If the land is landlocked it's because at some point in time someone made the deliberate decision to allow a parcel to become landlocked by subdivision or selling off a landlocked parcel that should have never been sold separate from the parcel that is the access route. Thus, it falls back to "somebody did something careless or stupid, and careless or stupid people kept going along with it. There is no obligation for others to make up for those careless actions so you get to figure out for yourself how to access your landlocked parcel". That's how most courts see it here from my experience. There is a parcel I know of that sat unused for over 2 decades because it was carelessly subdivided which ended up labdlocking a parcel by mistake. Before it was caught that parcel had been sold. The court would NOT force an easement and nobody would buy the parcel once the mistake came to light. So the owner sat on it until finally an adjoining owner bought it... Another example (demonstrating the right way to do it). A big farmer near me just filed for bankruptcy and had 2100 acres sold at a Sheriff's sale. There were numerous landlocked parcels. The conditions of sale were that those parcels could ONLY be purchased in combination with other parcels that would allow access. So if 1 landlocked parcel had 3 different parcels that would allow access they auctioned the 3 accessible parcels first. The ONLY people allowed to bit on the landlocked parcel was the winning bidders of the 3 accessible parcels. People that sell landlocked parcels without access and people that buy those parcels reap what they sow, at least in free states like mine. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.