If I were the homeowners I would move my fences, or other items abd stop mowing the property. Then call the city and complain about the property not being maintained. Then not let him cross your property to maintain it, tell him he has to buy an easement. Eventually he would get sick of fines from the city and proably sell for cost.
@WebCity Films Agree, but you can "allow" them to maintain it and start forcing them to pay some costs. As they add up it becomes less profitable. Not sure if that could backfire though.
@WebCity Films Perhaps not. One thing is for sure, if they all ban together and stop maintaining the property, the "owner" will have to maintain it himself. You can wait it out, watch the property and file complaints every time the grass is an inch higher than it should be and see how long he keeps wanting to deal with it.
I can almost guarantee the owner is one of their neighbors. #1 how will they know when someone "trespasses" and #2 that would explain why they want to keep their identity secret.
Possibly, or a foreign investor. If it is one of the neighbors, they could figure it out fairly quickly by how the person accesses it to maintain it once they stop maintaining the land.
I was a mortgage loan officer for 12yrs. There are 2 other professionals that could be liable. The appraiser should have looked at the survey because of potential flood zones and the total Sq footage of land in the appraisal. Also the seller and realtor offered land for sale they did not have a right to sell.
I went thru a bit over an A-H flood zone almost thirty years ago. Bought a house twelve years ago and when i asked them about flood elevations, they had absolutely NO idea what I was talking about. Everybody has gotten stupid these days.
Seen that before firsthand! There was a separate issue that was since resolved, but it meant we ended up having copies of all of the surveys/maps from over the years. One day, my family and I were enjoying this piece of property minding our own business, when a realtor from the house for sale across the street came on the property with prospective buyers for that house in tow. The realtor was like "And this is..." And we are all like "No, THIS is private property. YOU need to get off of it, and need to look at your deed again!" Fun times.
Shortly after i bought my first home the neighbor pointed out the steps on my back porch actually cross the property line. He was a decent guy but if i asked them to turn down their music or have their guest move out of my drive so my guests could use it his wife would mutter about tearing off my steps or other threats about the infraction. 2 years later i bought that property too and will decide who can be my neighbors as long as i live here.
I owned a house years ago that had no utility easements in the backyard. I had to run off a cable company guy that came on my property and intended to dig up my flower beds against the fence when the cable box was in the neighbors easement behind the fence. He was trying to work on someone else's cable and he had to clear a lot of plant material to access the box, so he wanted to dig my beds up because it was easier. When I showed him the survey, he left. It's very important to know what's on your survey.
I had something very similar but I wasn't home at the time. Came home to find a backhoe in my yard, several of my ceadars I had as a hedge uprooted and a trench across my yard. It was a neighborhood with all the wires underground. The guy looked at me and said, "Do you want cable?" "I already have cable." "We need to replace the line." "Well, not through my yard, are you crazy?" So, the way it was arranged, the main cable junction box was on the main road running by our neighborhood and the distribution box was in the middle of the neighborhood. Originally, they ran the wires along the roads. The neighborhood was private and we all owned the road as well. So, anyway, the way it was arranged, it was way shorter to run the line through my yard, so the guy just decided to do so. I told him to get off my property and then we had a big deal with them trying to do the line through my yard and me suitor damages. The Einstein dug up my septic tile field. In the end, there was no easement, they had to fix everything but it was a giant hassle.
Very interesting. I ran into a similar situation when purchasing my first home. My mortgage company required that I get title insurance and the title company came back and stated that it was a clean title. The day I went to walk into the house the sheriff had changed the locks and had a notice on the door. I had my entire family with me whom just moved from another state with all our belongings packed into a U-Haul and very little money. One phone call to the title company and putting them in contact with the sheriff. The wheels of progress suddenly jumped into high gear. My realtor called me within half an hour asking me to meet them one town over where I was given the keys to a beautiful big home where I stayed for 90 days until they straighten the mess out. When it was time to leave I really missed the temporary home but they paid all of my moving expenses and it was nice to finally get into the home that I purchased. Yes title insurance it was so worth it 😂
Only problem with title insurance is that it often doesn't cover any claims that haven't been filed yet. There are numerous situations where there may not be a title issue on record yet, but someone might be able to make one.
Still just at the beginning of the video, but this isn't a title insurance problem. This is a survey problem. Had they done the survey, they would have learned that the property being sold was smaller than the property being marketed. I am amazed at how many people will make their most expensive purchase and not have any idea what they're getting into. Usually it's just not reading the HOA DCCRs but yeah, surveys is another example.
@@MichaelGreen831 did you not listen to the video? He said get a survey and title insurance to take care of things like this. OP was just saying that even if they had it, the title insurance would probably fuck em too.
My sister had a lakefront property in Florida. It was in a small town and she was fortunate that someone in the tax office called here to say that the lake was up for tax sale. She was able to purchase it and avoided a situation like you described.
I live in gold rich northeastern Georgia and worked for a real estate attorney. A lot of people are surprised to learn that they may not own the mineral rights to their property. The right are usually owned in a large block by one of several families in the area. To have the rights researched can cost thousands. My brother-in-law did not own the mineral rights to his property until the man who did screwed up and didn't pay one year. He payed the fees and picked them up. There is an actual gold mine (not operational) on the property.
I was thinking the same thing if you get injured on someone else's property they're responsible for damages the only hard part is proving injury but I'm sure someone with a little creativity could solve that
Well they can take a trespassing charge but they can still sue remember there's always the old case of a burglar breaking into a building after hours with no trespassing signs posted all over he hurt himself trying to break in and sued and won even tho he did go to jail for trespassing and breaking and entering
@@cnault3244 Post holes. Vertical, gravel lined bottom, with a 4ft post and cement making sure he provides a solid footing for a secure fence around his own property. If you're going get rid of a body, at least put the hole(s) to good use. At least with a fence you can show it off to your neighbors and brag about your hard work.
I know this video is old but i am continually amazed at people who didn't actually look at the disclosures when they bought their home. I distinctly recall examining the parcel map and description of my property.
The hedge part of your story was so similar to my brother. He bought a house and almost 2 years later discovered his property was 10-15' past a row of lilac bushes that was a nice separation from the neighbors house. He had really nice neighbors. The only "issue" after the discovery my brother's lawn mowing responsibilities grew slightly, while the neighbor saved time on maintaining his lawn. Good neighbors are a blessing!
I had a similar issue with a neighbor. We had big yards but the boundary wasn't clearly marked. The only issue was mowing. We both just mowed a bit over where we we believed the line to be. When I moved in there was a vegetable garden that was clearly on his property but he said the previous owner of my house had made it and I was free to use it if I wished, which I did. I gave them lots of vegetables and they gave us deer meat.
The lawyer(1) probably owns the property or is in cahoots with the owner who is also another lawyer(2) doing the same thing with lawyer(1) being the owner.
More likely I suspect it would be either one of the home owners or a realtor, lawyer, or other person who knows the owners and was involved in the sales process and found the property that way. I would look hard at anyone who recently had conflicts with his/her neighbors before this came about. Might have held the knowledge since the sale then when mad, did it.
@edwardschlosser1 knocking the guy off doesnt necessarily improve the situation. An issue here is that its much easier, at least conscience-wise, to do that to this guy (because he had some intent) than it is to do it to whoever or whatever inherits the land next. If you are rubbing arbitrary people out for land, then why the hell are you doing it for a few crappy back yards?
A few years ago the town I live in realized homes that backed up against town owned conservation land had slightly expanded there back yards mostly done by previous owners. The town inspector found homeowners had sheds, fences, and swing sets on the town land. The homeowners got letters telling them to move the stuff or pay huge fines. It was a huge problem. Most of town didn't care. The only person with a problem was the inspector. A few sheds where moved but the problem went away the inspector got in trouble for going into peoples yards, trespassing to see if he could catch people. He had the right to inspect the conservation land, from the conservation land. Instead of walking the land he decided to take multiple shortcuts and really got in trouble when the cops were called and the yard he trespassing in wasn't bordering the conservation land
Something similar happened to one of my Aunts. Her and her husband bought a house on some land, later to find out they did not actually own the land. All paperwork even through the title insurance said it was theirs but a document that pre-dated their purchase showed that the land and the house were separate entities. The bank and the title insurance all ducked responsibility and told them that they were on their own.
That can happen when a mobile home is purchased on acreage. The seller might not disclose that the land and mobile home are in fact separate until later when the land is sold out from under you. The mobile home is considered personal property (with a title of ownership) while the land is real property (deeded to the owner of the land). To attach the mobile home to the property, it must have the hitch and axles removed, placed on a foundation. Then submit forms to the DMV to have the title cancelled and declared the mobile home is real property.
I bought my property with a 4 party well on it. I assumed my water was covered. Much to my surprise, I got water bills, and NO I did not own the water rights with the property. Not only that, in the fine print on my land contract was a clause that forbids me to use pesticides or herbicides because the well is on my property. Now there are like 9-10 houses on my well, and my water pressure has dropped a lot from 25 years ago. (One of the reasons I bought the place, the water pressure was awesome and the water delicious) I bought a house when I was young and ignorant. Lessons learned the hard way. I got screwed over 6 ways to Sunday buying this place, but hey it's only 16 payments from being paid off, and when it is, I am moving, with a lot more knowledge in my head than before.
12 years, adverse posession is 7 years in Florida... I would suggest they get a lawyer to file in the courts. They have been maintaining it, and the previous peaple had been.
This is the land they are talking about: www.google.com/maps/place/Bigelow+Dr,+Holiday,+FL+34691/@28.1976833,-82.7608231,20z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x88c28dde447fd30f:0xe982d52d85852787!8m2!3d28.197437!4d-82.7581275 Click on satellite view to see the house with the pool (left side), as well as the one with the shed (rightside). Now... Here is what the development looked like in 1971 when it was new: www.historicaerials.com/location/28.1974206844397/-82.75993228584193/1971/18 Note that the easement is not clearly defined or broken out. Even the house with the pool was not built yet. I assume the easement (from its shape) was planned as a water line that would go to a new development being built to the left of this development but was never used.
@@TEverettReynolds adverse possession doesn't matter whether or not the land belonged to them. It all depends on whether or not rightful possession of said land was enforced. For 12 years, nobody took actions to enforce the possession of the land, therefore the homeowners do have a case for adverse possession prior to the sale of the land. Adverse possession could be a valid defence.
It's pretty hard to have adverse possession of property for 7 years if you never set foot on it more than 5 or 6 years ago. According to Zillow one of the properties was last sold in 2002, so that owner is probably going to be fine. Another was sold in December of 2013. That's a hair under 7 years ago, and I'd bet that's the one that got the trespassing notice, which means the owner hasn't let them have adverse possession for 7 years. The others have all sold more recently, so they may be SOL. Here's the link to Zillow: www.zillow.com/holiday-fl/?searchQueryState=%7B%22pagination%22%3A%7B%7D%2C%22usersSearchTerm%22%3A%22holiday%2C%20fl%22%2C%22mapBounds%22%3A%7B%22west%22%3A-82.7611994857656%2C%22east%22%3A-82.75806130121818%2C%22south%22%3A28.196707211992525%2C%22north%22%3A28.198671605559866%7D%2C%22mapZoom%22%3A19%2C%22regionSelection%22%3A%5B%7B%22regionId%22%3A11940%2C%22regionType%22%3A6%7D%5D%2C%22isMapVisible%22%3Atrue%2C%22filterState%22%3A%7B%22ah%22%3A%7B%22value%22%3Atrue%7D%2C%22sort%22%3A%7B%22value%22%3A%22globalrelevanceex%22%7D%7D%2C%22isListVisible%22%3Atrue%7D
@@NYpaddler maybe, I did suggest lawyer... There might be a way around it in that it is the whole parcel on the other side. And the previous owners erected the fence. I don't know about specific procedures, it may for example be possible to file it as a class action of all of them beeing similarly situated, at the point the judge is carving up the parcel, well, it gets a little more interesting.
The first home that I purchased nearly fifty years ago was known as a "battleaxe" block with access via a laneway between the two homes in front of me. The homes in front of me also used the laneway to access their respective garages. When I purchased the property I was required to have a survey done for financing. The property had a rear access large enough to allow a vehicle to enter the property. There was no vehicular access at the front of the property as the home fronted a public golf course. Several years after purchasing the property one of my neighbours in front of me sold his home. Shortly after the new neighbours advised me that my vehicular access was infringing on their property and what I believed to be a driveway in reality was just a single gate entrance less than one metre in width. I requested a copy of the survey report on my property from my finance institution and sure enough the survey showed the actual legal access plus indicating the non approved vehicular access. The finance company advised me that my solicitor should have advised me of the situation, which unfortunately he had not. It seems that many, many years previously a gentleman's handshake agreement had been made allowing vehicular access to the property and that subsequent purchasers of the property in front of me were not aware that my property line infringed on their property. It was only for an observant new owner intent on claiming his rightful property that I was made aware of the situation. In effect my property value was reduced dramatically due an oversight on the part of my solicitor who should have made it known that the driveway access within my property had not been made legal. To further add insult to injury what I believed to be a driveway down to my property entrance was actually a pedestrian walkway and thus vehicular traffic was not allowed.
In Texas, that's known as An Unrecorded Easement. Depending on how long it had been going on, continuous use might have established a permanent right to continue doing so. Especially if one could show that there had actually been an agreement at one point. Settling it would probably still involve lawyers and courts, the best thing would have been for the homeowners to work it out between themselves and record the agreement for future property owners.
The assessors office owes you the taxes, with interest, that you paid for every year that access was included in their assessment and the tax bill they levied upon you. They collected twice on the same real estate from two different people, and you were not liable for yours.
I can understand the frustration. I bought 6.5 acres in Oregon. Then 6 months later found out that 1/2 of it is a right of way for Bonneville power. Bonneville power is basically the federal government so basically I have to ask their permission to do anything with that portion of the property. Wish I had known before buying.
About 15 years ago I bought my hovel (some might call it a house) and hired an attorney to review the transaction prior to signing the paperwork. That couple of hundred dollars saved me over two thousand dollars. I was purchasing using my VA entitlement and the lender had tacked on fees not allowed under that provision. Yay lawyer. A week after moving in I got a survey done, put up a fence, cleaned up the yard, and made fast friends of otherwise ordinary neighbors. Lawyer+survey+fence=no drama.
How do you sue somebody for not holding up their end of an agreement you made on their behalf? "Your honor, dickwad owes me ten grand for landscaping services." "How did you know dickwad wanted your landscaping services." "What do you mean? I forced them on him w/o his knowledge. You know, like government taxes and regulations." "You're not the government. GTFO my court."
That's outrageous. It sounds like the previous 9 homeowners didn't know about that tract of land either. I guarantee you that I wouldn't grant easement through any of my property to that "trust" without it costing it "more than [it] could pay".
If the nine prior homeowners never rose the issue, and the trust exercised its ownership of the property by paying taxes on it, the trust might have eminent domain rights over it.
I am so glad you mentioned the saying about attorneys who represent themselves... and then went further to talk about specializations. I've had some people I was close to as a kid become lawyers, and then NOT say "I'm a real estate lawyer from NY" when giving commentary on criminal law in california.
In some older towns there use to be a road in the backyard that was used for coal delivery. This road is long abandoned but on the survey it is a 20ft easement owned by the town. The town can sell it at any time so it is a good idea to buy it first.
In the past, including 2008, I've performed lots of real estate appraisal work in Holiday, Florida. Back then it was fairly standard for the lender to require a land survey. I would imagine there might be some culpability there with the lender.
Something similar occurred in Pinellas County some years ago when someone bought, for back taxes, an easement surrounding a large pond behind a dozen or so houses. The purchaser then built a tall fence blocking the view to the pond. Then charging the home owners for the easement .
Can't charge a fee to use an easement. He could charge a fee to access the pond but he'd have to set it up as a business and get licencing, permits and zoning changes. The zoning change won't happen unless he buys the zoning board.
I've been a Texas real estate broker for 35 years, but I'm not an attorney, so this isn't legal advice. I've had surveyors fail to properly document something and then later have to pay to "fix" their error. That might help the homeowner whose survey didn't show the separate parcel at all. However, basic Texas title insurance might not provide any help in similar instances here because the policy has an exception for errors in boundaries. There's an addtional title insurance rider available for about 5% more of the policy that covers shortages in boundaries and encroachments. I think that the extra coverage would help a homeowner in a similar situation in Texas.
Every Home I've purchased, in SC and NC, required a land survey and marking posts to mark property until closing. Also at closing purchaser signs off on photos and maps showing property boundaries, I'm sure to avoid this kind of mess.
In extremely rural, extremely southern Virginia one guy owned a right of way for a railway which was completely removed. He successfully forced some people to pay him for a right of way ACROSS HIS RIGHT OF WAY until his buddy the judge retired. In Indiana, a gas pipeline company was taking out trees and buildings in people's yards after decades of placement: legal control of a right of way, of course. I live in rural Pennsylvanian where the township ordinance states public roads have a 16 to 25 foot right of way, which is pretty funny since very old houses and barns frequently are as close as three feet. And of course, imminent domain trumps all private ownership. Welcome to the land f the free, if you can afford to pay.
Where I live, this is very common. I once looked at a piece of property that was 21 acres. After viewing it, it was very obvious it was not that big. There was a housing plan on both sides of the wooded area. After looking at the lot sizes on the plot map, I could see that all the houses, (about 10 on each side), on both streets adjoining the property had "extended" their backyards about a 75-100ft beyond their property lines into the wooded area. Buyer beware... I always compare the "legal" description to the actual property.
Your comments on real estate law are spot on. I am an Owners Corporation Manager in Australia and spend my whole working day dealing with this area of our state laws. I really enjoy when a general lawyer calls me to argue a point as they are often wrong and misquote the legislation. While I work in property management and provide documentation for property transfers, I would still have a licensed agent and conveyancer do my home sale.
Wow, such a different way of buying property over there! Over here we hire solicitors/lawyers to do conveyance on any property, part of the conveyance is carrying out searches of documentation for past and future planning, services, and "title", it's really not optional, and I'm pretty sure we don't even have "title insurance" because of this. On the adverse possession aspect, I think that 12 years is the UK threshold btw (it was the very first thing that popped into my head when you outlined the issues these guys are having)
Someone in the government's land management office brought that land at an tax auction. Just business! File a suit to make the owner known to the public.
I don't think so. I think someone just saw an opportunity to sell the land to the adjacent landowners. See google maps: www.google.com/maps/place/Bigelow+Dr,+Holiday,+FL+34691/@28.1976833,-82.7608231,20z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x88c28dde447fd30f:0xe982d52d85852787!8m2!3d28.197437!4d-82.7581275 The property could even be sold to the houses on Tiki street, just north of Bigelow street. So it has value.
@@kennethjohnson4456 Probably not. Whoever is behind this is notorious for buying land and then harassing the local homeowners www.tampabay.com/archive/2008/05/04/the-invisible-land-grab/
@@ExpIohd The case of the private road would probably fail in court. The residents have used it for 30 years and maintained it all this time, including paving it. I don't see any court now denying access to their properties. I believe adverse possession in Florida is seven years.
@@TEverettReynolds - The houses on Tiki could not use it as there is a drop off between the two yards. A retaining wall there is with a 6 to 10 foot drop I am guessing. Look at your link and view it with satelite and zoom in. The shadows give away the 1 story drop from the pool to the area below. This was a driveway/alley access for the rear of the houses and very well might have right of way or use on the deed prior to this tax sale.
That's why you always get a survey before buying a house. My wife and I were going to forego, but our realtor highly recommended it. Within a month of moving in, our neighbor said she thinks our fence encroaches. Pull out the survey, all is good.
When I was a child the homeowner behind my parents sued them and our next door neighbor for taking his backyard. Which even as a kid I thought was funny since I had watched his house built. I just remember him over yelling at my Mom. My dad looked stuff over and called the local bank holding the mortgage to see if they had any idea what to do. They sent someone out to survey since they held the notes on both houses and were concerned. In the end it turns out the street behind us was put in wrong. They built the road with the centerline about 10 ft off. So everything was off from there. Since my parent's street and house was built first the neighbor behind us lost out. But not after dragging everyone into court, etc. Lucky for my parents the bank represented them so they lost no money over it.
I have neighbor like that they try to take done my fence down when I had my land surveyed found out three feet of there property i owned before I had this done they telling me that two feet of my property was there's so put a bigger fence up
My Wife's Grandparents "lost" 50 Acres to Ft Knox when they started fencing in the Training Areas. But they had never had a Survey done so there was really nothing they could do. Nothing they could have done anyway because, hey, Ft Knox.
The period of time for adverse possession in Florida is seven years, so the proeprty owners have used and maintained the disputed parcels WITHOUT permission of the land trust. Ergo, possession has transferred to the homeowners.
I was wondering about this. It's also seven years in Tennessee and my first thought when he said it was bought in 2008 was "how long is the period of time of open and aggressive use for hostile possession?". Hopefully the homeowners get an easy win here.
@@boblewis8838 oh, then you understand that when you said what you said that you were wrong. Merely using and maintaining a property for 7 years is insufficient for a party to obtain the property via adverse possession. They'd also have to either have color of title or pay taxes on the property for those seven years, in addition to occupying and maintaining the land, then have to the land conveyed to them by the courts. It doesn't just happen after 7 years by operation of law as you were intimating.
I have a piece of property on which I decided to build a garage at that time the original survey markers from before the property was subdivided still existed. So for setback reasons I measured to find my actual property line. When I found the exact corner of the property I dug down and found an old survey stake. I showed it to my new neighbor because it could help him if he had a similar project. His fence had been installed six inches on to his side of the line he asked me so I own that six inches. I said I believe so. From that time on he mowed his side with his string trimmer. He moved before I had a chance to ask if he thought I showed him the marker to get him to trim the grass or if he just wanted everyone to know that six inch strip was his.
the banks definitely care. if you got a clean survey and title insurance, and the bank approves - at least nine real estate sales, presumably nine surveys, nine title insurance policies, nine property transfers w local county- every single one - at least 36 professionals in this field - had to have made big errors that no one caught. This is shady af.
I'm located in Toronto, Canada and it's the norm here to have real estate lawyers as part of any real estate transaction. It is their job to review everything and point out issues like this. We also have title insurance as well. I wouldn't dream of purchasing a home without a lawyer reviewing everything.
At one time the last ten feet of my backyard was an alley. Said alley was abandoned by the city many, many years ago. Whomever was in the home then took possession of that ten feet. That little fact became interesting when a development went in on the other side of my fence. My fence didn't move. The developer built one less townhouse ☺
When my parents purchased an acre of land many decades ago (that they built a home on in 1965) they traded a 9-foot wide strip on the south side for 9 feet of the neighboring lot on the east side, so the neighbors on the east could run their driveway out to the side street rather than onto the highway. Many years later my parents set up a trust. When we were ready to sell the property after our parents' deaths, we found out that whoever had set up the trust neglected to place the eastern 9-foot strip into the trust (it was a separate parcel). This came out in the title search that was done once we had a potential buyer. Our estate attorney actually had to consult a real estate attorney to see what could be done and avoid the 9-foot strip having to go to probate. Turned out there's a thing called the probate referee, who came out and appraised the 9-foot strip, and as the appraised value was under some figure, it didn't have to go to probate. Whew! I'll never know if my parents simply didn't know (or remember) that the 9-foot strip was a separate parcel, or whether the attorney who set up the trust screwed up by not doing a title search then.
Considering they want to remain anonymous I would guess one of the 9 homeowners involved is the actual owner of the backyard strip and is looking to skin his neighbors without them finding out it was him.
I had something similar happen. My fence extended onto city property and one day the city showed up and told me I had to move it. Long story short; after at first refusing to do anything the city leased this area to me for 99 years after my great city councilor went to bat for me. Also I had my lawyer contact the previous owners and they paid for it under threat of them fraudulently selling me the property. When one looks at a fenced in area a resonable person would assume that is what was being offered to them in a land sale. Similar to changing out the existing carpeting or light fixtures after a house was sold. They played games with the survey too during the sale but no one cared at the time but we all knew why when this event happened. They knew and sold it under false pretenses. Ended up okay though in the end.
We had a slightly different situation here in San Diego years ago, involving the beach front houses that had a boardwalk behind them, between the houses and the beach. The city actually owned a strip larger than the boardwalk, but the homeowners, pretty much all of them, enclosed the unused areas up to the boardwalk, as part of their private yards. The city made it known that when the time came to enlarge the boardwalk, the land would be reclaimed. But until then they would leave things as they were. Then came the time when the foot/ bike traffic on the boardwalk was getting excessive, and it was time to widen it. And all the homeowners, who should have known they were occupying the city's property, screamed and cried and filed lawsuits and generally threw tantrums. They lost and the boardwalk was enlarged.
That's hilarious. They do a similar thing where I live, if you fence in part of the public owned utility easement as part of your yard, they usually won't do anything, but if they need to access or do work in that area, they'll take out the offending section of fence. It doesn't happen often, but when it does I always laugh.
had a similar situation happen here in Connecticut. Long story short, A railroad had a long spur line that was not used. They pulled the tracks up 30 years ago. There was a housing boom in the area, bunch of new developments, the builders had to of known the railroad had a right of way when they got the permits. The people who purchased the houses did not do there research, railroads decides to put tracks back down.... and now about 20 mcmansions are 100 feet from a railroad track. They tried going to court but lost. The railroad legally owned the land and it was well marked out in the towns records. If anything they should have gone after the builder.
A similar thing happened at Seacliff State Beach (south of Santa Cruz). Homeowners assume they own to the edge of the oceanfront bluff but the Lot lines are actually several feet back. They have patios, decks, planters, and fences on the State side of the boundary. They cured that over time by notifying the Lot owner every time a lot listed for sale, the homeowner cleaned it up quick so as to not get a lis pendins to mess up the sale.
I bought a house in the 1980s and sold it about 35 years later (on Long Island, NY). I had an Attourney represent me at the purchase and, a different Attourney at the time I sold said house. At the sale, I was amazed at the amount of paperwork generated and mentioned that fact to my Attourney. He replied that all that paperwork was designed to protect buyers & sellers from fraud (I DID buy Title Insurance when purchasing the house even though it was a "Private Sale"). My Attourney also mentioned that the LACK of said mountain of paperwork is why some in states (and he mentioned FL specifically) had such a high rate of real estate fraud. Who knew?
When we went to sell the first house we had purchased, we discovered that the original survey was incorrect. The survey was a rectangle but with the 4th side described as going off 180 degrees in the wrong direction. We had to get the prior owner to sign off on the survey change, and he said, of course, "what's in it for me".
Steve, you mentioned both mortgages and title insurance in this video, but I don't believe either would be valid. 1. The mortgage is only made on what is titled to the specific property, so they would already know the lot size and the area covered. 2. The title search would only be done on the property being sold, while not looking at the properties behind it.
---We bought a new home and the builder made fun of us for insisting we wanted to get an independent survey to check it against the plat. Makes me wonder why they cared when we paid for it.
I had a surveyor do a deed search at the courthouse on my house before I built my garage. Good thing too. It's how I found out the game commission had stolen a 1/2 acre off the back of my property. The lender , tax records and previous owner showed 1.25 acre lot but the courthouse showed the deed had been changed to only show .76 acres and the other 1/2 acre had been given to the state in a clerical error. The lawyer said it would cost more to sue the state than the property is worth.
I have .25 acres with a shed in the back. Utility workers had to mark off underground utilities because the cable company may be doing fiber optic to home upgrades. I'm wondering what will happen in the future because my shed sits right over where some of the lines they painted would travel. 🤔 As an aside, while I was house shopping, I made EXTENSIVE use of the county auditors online real estate maps as well as fema flood insurance maps to make sure there weren't any surprises.
When I purchased my first property 30 years ago, the Title Insurance only paid the mortgage holder. To add me to the insurance cost more, which I paid. Also I had a largish down payment, but not enough to avoid Private Mortgage Insurance. As soon as I met the 20% I believe it was requirement, I was able to cancel it. From what I understand some PMI is prepaid for the life of the loan, but I have not bought a property with a low enough down pay entire since to keep up on it. Steve will be happy to hear me say "You need to get a lawyer for these things."
Would it work to let the grass and weeds grow on the property, then file a complaint with the city that the condition of the property is a health and safety hazard?
@@kewlztertc5386 We don't know if the Land Trust did not pay taxes. It would make sense they did if they are claiming ownership not to mention that they bought it from the city. Nor do we know if the homeowners' property taxes included the strip of land. I doubt it did. I suspect everyone paid taxes but the home owners didn't realize that they weren't paying taxes on the contested strip.
The same sort of thing happened in Champaign Illinois a few years back,. some guy up near Chicago bought up these parcels knowing what they were and then tried getting the home owners to buy the small parcels for much more. Made a big stink etc. As soon as this broke and people noticed that the city and or county was to blame for the issues then it slowly stopped getting mentioned.
My mother, when she was moving and needing a new place to live, found a piece of property. Nice wooded lot in a developing neighborhood. The title was reportedly clear, the land surveyed. The county reported it open for building. After digging a well and then applying for the building permits to start the house THEN the county said.. Oh by the way, the entire property is easements, you can't build on any of it... Yeah our bad, but you can't sue us. Fortunately a neighbor who had a barely trickling well was interested since her well came in with high flow. She lost some money, but the time lost was even worse.
I am a certified land specialist in Arizona and was an instructor for the Arizona department of real estate, in my classes I asked the participants (including attorneys) if they owned property, if they said yes I asked if they stored the deed in a safe or safe deposit box. A lot of them said yes, I asked where they stored their title insurance policy and most said " I don't know, probably in the file". The deed is a recorded document and does not need to be protected in a safe and the title insurance is not usually recorded ( in Arizona you could record it) and is a most important document. I have had clients that saved many thousands of dollars and a lot of grief by using the title insurance.
while buying my current property I noticed it didn't list an easement for access to the property. I brought this up to the title company and they easily fixed it ( for them ) buy excluding it from their policy. the selling RE agent and I spent 2 days at the court house tracking down the correct easement.
Steve, it is ABSOLUTELY NOT POINTLESS to have legal representation when purchasing real property. We bought vacant land (residential site, totaling 2+ acres for our home). We had good foresight to buy the property for a very good low price. I worked in real estate law as a legal assistant/legal secretary, and I wouldn't even purchase the vacant property (like sign a contract to buy it) without making certain that all the ducks were in a row correctly. Similar parcels to the ones we purchased were going for $140,000 a few months later, more than 20 times what we paid! I will always be grateful for the time I spent working in the legal field. There are just so many pitfalls for folks who are uneducated about real estate.
Similar situation occurred in the Gulf front town of Suwannee. A whole bunch of "canal front" properties turned out to stop short of the canals. The intervening strips of land were acquired at tax sales. Sea walls, docks, boat houses, hundreds of thousands dollars of waterfront investment were found to be on property owned not by the home owners who made the improvements, but by an investor.
Now the law requires a real estate agent and the banks interject all their regulations, the seller didn't accurately define the property and how the hell is any of this goes through without a surveyor?
I'm a retired architect. When I bought this property I took the property description and used it to draft a civil site plan of the property, then went and surveyed it myself to include all the buried wiring, trees, contours of the land and more. I have a 66' wide easement that runs the full length down the East section of the property. If I didn't know about the easement I would have built on it. I understand their dilemma.
Another note, NEVER TRUST a survey from the selling realtor, even if it looks like a legal plat. I was once interested in buying 5 acres and received a plat from the realtor. What wasn't shown was a huge gas line easement running diagonal through the property. Always get your own survey done.
@@JeremyEllwood I am hoping to move to a larger location. Get my 43 ft vertical up. Fire up the 'new to me' Collins S Line. Nothing like radios that glow in the dark. A bit rusty on my CW. Use to do about 18 wpm. 73's.
@@tompinnef6331 I am tech so don't do (need) CW (though I still want to learn it anyway - it's good info to have). I live within city limits and close enough to the approach path of Flint Bishop airport where I have to be careful of my height so once I get the needle up there, I'll be looking at a probable 25 to 30 foot vertical which, running on 2 meters isn't horrible. When at the farm, I was running a 90 foot vertical at 2 meters with 60W. God, I miss that thing. I have some HF equipment I want to get running but I need to upgrade my license to transmit for that. I've never run HF. I've listened, but never had the opportunity to chat on it. Was hearing Ireland with an HF horizontal run across the fields and excellent propagation (Winter). Real life took over and I haven't been able to hobby as much as I'd like.
Some of the home owners seem to have a pretty good claim for it, if they band together and get a really good lawyer. FL law is 7 years of occupation. The question is, can the courts apply that retroactively to the previous owners so the current owners get the relief as well?
@@bretwalley4673 it doesn't matter if they've known about it since 2008, those homeowners have had an "open and notorious" occupation of the land since then.
@@bretwalley4673 You want me to feel sorry for some asshole who knowingly buys development limited properties and then tries to bully homeowners? Now the question becomes what has this land trust company done in the past 12 years other than trying to sell this property on Craigslist.
@@bretwalley4673 Nobody here is talking about the guy with the room addition/pool except for you; it has nothing to do with this land company harassing homeowners. If this land trust company is so desperate for the property, then they should take the homeowners to court for it. They won't because they'll end up with nothing. Have you even seen the backyards? i.imgur.com/MxoVEkS.png If you think I'm overstating the land company harassing homeowners, then you haven't read much about them www.tampabay.com/archive/2008/05/04/the-invisible-land-grab/
Bought a house in the '70's on a handshake. Had the property surveyed and matched to court house record plats in two counties, because at one point the property was in one county, the state re-surveyed the boundary and Voila! The house in question is now in another county! The survey I had done was the real eye opener! It all looked pretty obvious as to where the property lines are, gravel road, line of mature trees, houses lined up on the street in the same fashion, etc. Lo and behold the property line was much closer to the neighbors house! It included part of his driveway and his well! He about had a cow over it, but we remained good friends over the years. The county made it so difficult to redo and resubdivide the boundary area that we just gave up on it. Well it's back on the front burner as the neighbor died and we are selling the house and property. Title insurance is the best insurance you'll probably never use!
As a builder in the NY area, I buy and sell properties regularly. Often hedge rows, rows of trees, fences and stone walls are not on the actual property line. Most neighbors are not aware and get upset when I explain it to them.
Something similar happened to me & my neighbors. Gross mismanagement by two HOA property manager co. & poor HOA board oversight lead to 2 or 3 tracts of HOA green space going into tax sale. After the purchase the new owner of the unbuildable land locked green space tried to extort purchases of the green space behind our lots. We all told him where to stick it. Then when he croaked his business partner & daughter inherited the land & tried a softer extortion feigning ignorant heiress just trying to offload land she didn't want. My guess is that these home might had been apart of a now defunct HOA & the homes might have been sold originally as HOA patio homes where you only own house & foundation footprint. It would explain the utility easement immediately out the back-door & why a seemingly abandoned track of unusable & unaccessible land would go to tax sale.
My question is that since at least one of the surveys that was done did not specify where the land past the utillity easement belonged, did the government charge taxes on the same piece of land to two individual owners? Because if so it could be argued that the land in question was never delinquent in whole at any time in the past and therefore should never have been sold at auction in the past. Because if this is the case, and it is a big if here, then the local government could impose an imminent domain action, pay the land trust the appraisal value and distribute the land to the home owners as compensation. Done and done.
Bunch of new owners who have not owned for more than 7 years. Sale resets the clock. If one of the previous owners had made the claim and won then the deed and associated paperwork would have been updated and passed to successive owners and title insurance would cover it.
@@davidtherwhanger6795 from the story here it sounds like the county knows that the 20' piece existed and has kept tax records on it (hence being able to sell it at tax sale).the survey not coming back with information on land that was past the property line isn't surprising (once you establish where the lines and property adjacent to the client are and essentially make a property island who owns the rest of the county isn't a concern from a survey standpoint). eminent domain has a requirement to be for public use or public betterment so i dont see how a local government could utilize ED to use taxpayer money to redistribute land back to private owners with no public benefit.
This is so easy to identify by an appraiser during the purchase. Sue the appraiser AND the realtor. A good real estate attorney may have success with easement by prescription.
A few years ago we had a situation here, almost in FLA. A locally owned outdoor advertising company had a sign on a leased plot at the entrance to a golf resort. The lease came up for renewal and the land owner would not renew because they had built 8 houses along the road to the resort, adjacent to the sign, I know the owner of the sign company and he is the kind you don't cross. Somehow he came into possession of a 10 foot wide strip between the road and the frontage of all 8 houses. He installed a fence which locked all of the homeowners out. I feel sure that in court he would have lost as I understand you can not landlock a homestead. For expedience the fence came down and the sign went back up.
Sounds like a "decommissioned / abandoned" alleyway...very common in central Phoenix AZ. My lot is much deeper (front to back) compared to my neighbors because we purchased that portion of the alley when it was decommissioned by the City. Props to the City for offering the land to current property owners individually, rather than as a "whole piece". Another neighbor bought three "chunks" (creating a dogleg) and installed a bocce court. Make sure you have a survey before buying!!!
Glad you mentioned "Adverse Possession" cuz that was the first thing I was thinking. A good judge would probably take one look at this BS and grant it out of principle. Good ideas in the comments section too!!
Adverse Possession was my first thought. According to the internet(not a reliable source) , it's 7 years in Florida. They may want to check their tax records and see if they've been paying taxes on the land, but otherwise if they've been living there that long, it seems they meet most of the requirements of Hostile Claim, Actual Possession, Open and Notorious Possession, Exclusive and Continuous Possession, and cultivation, improvement, or protection from a substantial enclosure on the land. This is not legal advice.
I agree. If they've been paying taxes on that property, they need to have their property tax reassessed and bill the past paid taxes to the trust. ( I know. Unlikely to be paid)
I thought about this angle, but remember how the easement changed hands to be owned by the trust; it was sold at auction for unpaid property taxes. Nobody was paying the taxes on that land, and presumably the trust has kept their tax bill up to date. The most likely reason for the trust to own the property in the first place is to use it as a money pit to claim against other tax bills as a business loss deduction.
@@DaremoTen no..they had their homes prior to the tax sale that went to the trust, so they could not have been paying the taxes. I am leaning toward the idea that it was one of the neighbors who bought the land and does not like his neighbors.
I'd wonder about whoever sold them those houses in the first place. *Somebody* built a whole slew of fences enclosing land that wasn't part of the properties. Could this be some sort of long con, where the property seller made it look like the property included more than it really did, so that they could come back later and demand more money for the rest? It'd certainly explain why the trust's owner wanted to remain anonymous - I doubt the courts would look favorably on such a practice.
When we bought our property I made sure of several things. Survey was one of them, the first was make sure it's outside city limits, no HOA, water and mineral rights included. I do have an easement so my neighbor can get to another property he owns back there. But he told me not to worry because he uses another easement on someone else's property. T one point his father owned all the Land, my house was built in 1970. I have a fence line all around the property, and the survey is identical. Including the the fence that separates the parcels. We have one 4 acre parcel that the house and shop is on, and a 5.75 parcel that is a wooded area.
This happens in the UK as well. Usually with odd bits in front of buildings. Many have been forced to pay to get access to their own front door. We call them Ransome Strips.
This video just proves the fact that laws have to become more simplified. You seem to be honorable that can't be said about many of the legal profession.
I have seen this situation before,, and I can make a good guess as to how it happened. An easement,, a former intended alley perhaps,, was vacated. Easements and streets can be vacated. The city processed the paperwork to vacate that easement,, and then never told or explained that the now vacant property needed to have its taxes paid. Was the vacation of that easement requested by the current owner? Now that would make a very serious case about this incident. the thing to do, is look back in the city or county records to see who owned this property before it was purchased at auction. The developer? The city? There is a great probability that no one owned the property before that auction. The city or county,, in that case, should be raked over the coals,,, very slowly.
People mention easements, but I don't see how that would apply. An easement is another person's claim to use your property. If the strip were an easement, then it would be "on property owned by these houses." Right? So if they were like "nah, we're done with your land. thank you" then the house owners would be "cool, now I can build that monster brick pizza oven I've always wanted."
@@petermgruhn No, not always. Let's say,,,, Subdivision was platted in 1927. All lots laid out,, all streets laid out. The streets are still an easement,, owned by the city, county or state. Move on 70 years and the one street is never used,, never has been used, grass growing on it and mowed by the guy next door,,, he always thought it was just part of his lawn. The city may want to 'clean up' its map,, and it would love to have property taxes coming in. They vacate the property,, a process that removes it from public right of way and makes it private land again,,, which now they want to sell to make more money. The auctions are public,,, but that means you have to go to the property tax site to check,, or the surplus property lists. It is public,,, just rarely publicized. I have used a specific case as my example that I was aware of from day one. The really underhanded portion of my example is that the city never informed the guy who had been using the lot as his lawn for 40 years. No one knocked on the door, no none said, "You should bid on the property." They just sold it. Lost his yard and part of his garage.
You know remember our laws will allow someone to squat on a property for years with the owners hands tied in legal bullcrap. However if you try to do things legally they still sometimes pull random BS like this.
As a title examiner if the fences on a survey doesn't match the property lines i add an exception for that to the the schedule B excluding the property outside/inside a fence
A good presentation, Steve, but I am surprised you failed to mention one important point. The one about title insurance. Certainly all nine of these homeowners DO have title insurance. But the insurance is not to blame here. The function of title insurance is to assure that the property has no faults and issues with the title, the title is clear, and can be transferred to you. In this case, all those were apparently true. No claims to the title, no legal issues later. As far as not owning what they thought they owned, that is not the responsibility of title insurance. It is the responsibility of the home owner to know. And a competent survey is the way to do that. Not title insurance. The property was sold to them as "Parcel XXXX" and so on, as described at the county registrars office. That is all you bought, nothing else. It is not the responsibility of the title insurance to inform you of what you don't own. That includes the street, the easement, the property behind the backyard area, and so on. Not yours, never was, the end. When you go into a closing, that is what you are doing, transferring the property as described by that parcel number. The homeowners probably got what they bought and paid for, nothing more. The perception of further ownership was just false perception. Title insurance is a necessity and a wise move, but it is NOT intended to protect you against everything. Whether the homeowners have created an easement for themselves by using the property unchallenged for several years, that is a seperate question.
I have an even better idea. Have the city/county seize the land under eminent domain, pay the current "owner" the assessed value of $937 (as stated in a news report), and then turn the land over to the homeowners. Thank you Kelo v. City of New London.
@@ExpIohd If you think the ruling in Kelo said the government can seize property and give it to a bunch of residential homeowners to make their yards bigger you should actually read it.
Kelo is about a private concern being able to take your property (legal plunder), because the new owners will be paying more in property tax than the present ones. One of the sad happenings in this case is the big pharmaceutical firm, after raising all this hell, abandoned their project and didn't build their multi million dollar project after all. In the end, New London wound up loosing big. A bird in the hand, right? A similar thing happened in Merriam Kansas. Someone was operating a used car lot out of an old gas station, the property of which they happened to own. Along comes the city of Merriam, who had been approached by a Mercedes dealership who wants to build there, except this pesky used car lot was in their way. The city says, "No problem, we can use eminent domain." The shiny new luxury cars go into the new lot. And during the next election, the majority of the city council gets voted out.
Alternatively, make them fence it off and maintain it. It isn't clear if there is any access to the plot in question, so the homeowners might be able to deny access to the bastards. Catch 22: they have to maintain it but must trespass in order to do so.
Had something similar happen right next door. Former landlord in my town lost all his properties in my neighborhood. This included houses and land. These are all former mining properties and were broken up into odd lots. Behind several on one street is this exact scenario with the land between the houses and a creek being separate. A bunch of people bought lots site unseen and found out that they didn't get property with any kind of access to it. We have a yard next to my house that was bought. Guy thought he was getting it and half of a double block. Found out all he got was a useless piece of property and a driveway and abandoned it as he couldn't use it for anything and no one wanted it for the price he wanted
Great show. You brought up points I did not realize when I bought my home years ago (sold since). Question; if you paid taxes on the property in question, can you collect them back from the county/state or sue the new owner?
When you buy a house usually you know the lot size and location. Seems these people assumed the land behind them was public land and that no one would ever challenge them using it
According some of the articles I read on this one of them *did* a survey and I quote "didn’t point out the land trust property at all". Something about this sends up red flags.
If I were the homeowners I would move my fences, or other items abd stop mowing the property. Then call the city and complain about the property not being maintained. Then not let him cross your property to maintain it, tell him he has to buy an easement. Eventually he would get sick of fines from the city and proably sell for cost.
I was thinking the same thing.
Was about to type the same.
Doesn’t help the guy with the pool
@WebCity Films Agree, but you can "allow" them to maintain it and start forcing them to pay some costs. As they add up it becomes less profitable. Not sure if that could backfire though.
@WebCity Films Perhaps not. One thing is for sure, if they all ban together and stop maintaining the property, the "owner" will have to maintain it himself. You can wait it out, watch the property and file complaints every time the grass is an inch higher than it should be and see how long he keeps wanting to deal with it.
I can almost guarantee the owner is one of their neighbors. #1 how will they know when someone "trespasses" and #2 that would explain why they want to keep their identity secret.
Possibly, or a foreign investor.
If it is one of the neighbors, they could figure it out fairly quickly by how the person accesses it to maintain it once they stop maintaining the land.
Honestly sounds exactly like something a county tax buyer would do. Someone saw this in the tax sale booklet.
There is a lawsuit in all of this: deed search supplier should be sued. Aren't there supposed to be setbacks?
my guess its more of a bill gates type of shit, that or black rock or some strange chinese company trying to subvert.
I think it's the bank. Like he said, a bank giving a mortgage loan would have wanted to know the details of the property.
I was a mortgage loan officer for 12yrs. There are 2 other professionals that could be liable. The appraiser should have looked at the survey because of potential flood zones and the total Sq footage of land in the appraisal. Also the seller and realtor offered land for sale they did not have a right to sell.
I went thru a bit over an A-H flood zone almost thirty years ago. Bought a house twelve years ago and when i asked them about flood elevations, they had absolutely NO idea what I was talking about. Everybody has gotten stupid these days.
Seen that before firsthand! There was a separate issue that was since resolved, but it meant we ended up having copies of all of the surveys/maps from over the years. One day, my family and I were enjoying this piece of property minding our own business, when a realtor from the house for sale across the street came on the property with prospective buyers for that house in tow. The realtor was like "And this is..." And we are all like "No, THIS is private property. YOU need to get off of it, and need to look at your deed again!" Fun times.
@@Telephonebill51 Do you mean if the house was in a known flood plain?
Shortly after i bought my first home the neighbor pointed out the steps on my back porch actually cross the property line. He was a decent guy but if i asked them to turn down their music or have their guest move out of my drive so my guests could use it his wife would mutter about tearing off my steps or other threats about the infraction. 2 years later i bought that property too and will decide who can be my neighbors as long as i live here.
I owned a house years ago that had no utility easements in the backyard. I had to run off a cable company guy that came on my property and intended to dig up my flower beds against the fence when the cable box was in the neighbors easement behind the fence. He was trying to work on someone else's cable and he had to clear a lot of plant material to access the box, so he wanted to dig my beds up because it was easier. When I showed him the survey, he left. It's very important to know what's on your survey.
Who has been paying the taxes.
Who pays the taxes is irrelevant for an easement
I had something very similar but I wasn't home at the time. Came home to find a backhoe in my yard, several of my ceadars I had as a hedge uprooted and a trench across my yard. It was a neighborhood with all the wires underground. The guy looked at me and said, "Do you want cable?"
"I already have cable."
"We need to replace the line."
"Well, not through my yard, are you crazy?"
So, the way it was arranged, the main cable junction box was on the main road running by our neighborhood and the distribution box was in the middle of the neighborhood. Originally, they ran the wires along the roads. The neighborhood was private and we all owned the road as well. So, anyway, the way it was arranged, it was way shorter to run the line through my yard, so the guy just decided to do so. I told him to get off my property and then we had a big deal with them trying to do the line through my yard and me suitor damages. The Einstein dug up my septic tile field.
In the end, there was no easement, they had to fix everything but it was a giant hassle.
Very interesting. I ran into a similar situation when purchasing my first home. My mortgage company required that I get title insurance and the title company came back and stated that it was a clean title. The day I went to walk into the house the sheriff had changed the locks and had a notice on the door. I had my entire family with me whom just moved from another state with all our belongings packed into a U-Haul and very little money. One phone call to the title company and putting them in contact with the sheriff. The wheels of progress suddenly jumped into high gear. My realtor called me within half an hour asking me to meet them one town over where I was given the keys to a beautiful big home where I stayed for 90 days until they straighten the mess out. When it was time to leave I really missed the temporary home but they paid all of my moving expenses and it was nice to finally get into the home that I purchased. Yes title insurance it was so worth it 😂
Can you tell us what had happened? That's a crazy story
Thank your real estate agent, aka snake oil salesman. 100% what they are supposed to deal with.
But you STILL didn't get the actual Title, did you? You're probably just listed as the "Tenant" on the Deed. See my earlier comment.
Well that story is actually a breath of fresh air. Good story
Only problem with title insurance is that it often doesn't cover any claims that haven't been filed yet. There are numerous situations where there may not be a title issue on record yet, but someone might be able to make one.
In my limited experience, Title Insurance seems to cover everything except what actually happens.
Oh, that's just all forms of insurance.
Still just at the beginning of the video, but this isn't a title insurance problem. This is a survey problem. Had they done the survey, they would have learned that the property being sold was smaller than the property being marketed.
I am amazed at how many people will make their most expensive purchase and not have any idea what they're getting into. Usually it's just not reading the HOA DCCRs but yeah, surveys is another example.
@@MichaelGreen831 did you not listen to the video? He said get a survey and title insurance to take care of things like this.
OP was just saying that even if they had it, the title insurance would probably fuck em too.
Similar to flood insurance. It's federal and it insures you the ability to borrow money to rebuild your house.
@@Nevir202 yeah. I watched the whole thing. You skipped the first sentence of my comment.
Why is it every time Steve says "this a crazy story " the sentence ends with "from Florida "😂
To be fair, Michigan is the northern Peninsula of Florida.
What's up with the Floridians?
@@robertlee9395 The owner of the easement apparently lives in California.
@@robertlee9395 most of them are from up north.
@@ron58r Lol. That narrows it down.
My sister had a lakefront property in Florida. It was in a small town and she was fortunate that someone in the tax office called here to say that the lake was up for tax sale. She was able to purchase it and avoided a situation like you described.
I live in gold rich northeastern Georgia and worked for a real estate attorney. A lot of people are surprised to learn that they may not own the mineral rights to their property. The right are usually owned in a large block by one of several families in the area. To have the rights researched can cost thousands. My brother-in-law did not own the mineral rights to his property until the man who did screwed up and didn't pay one year. He payed the fees and picked them up. There is an actual gold mine (not operational) on the property.
Let them trespass you, force them into court.
Schnieder should have an "accident" near the pool. Sue them for $50K. See how much they really want to keep the property.
The kangaroo courts today would probably find that the person who constructed the pool is liable.
Thunderhorse @ Sickle AAF/Downs Barracks-Fulda Gap
@@sceptre1922 Across the "sweet smelling field". Ironhorse! Delta Co.
I was thinking the same thing if you get injured on someone else's property they're responsible for damages the only hard part is proving injury but I'm sure someone with a little creativity could solve that
Well they can take a trespassing charge but they can still sue remember there's always the old case of a burglar breaking into a building after hours with no trespassing signs posted all over he hurt himself trying to break in and sued and won even tho he did go to jail for trespassing and breaking and entering
The trust owner wants to remain anonymous, otherwise he'll wind up filling up a hole out in the middle of the woods.
The brakes on my car failed. But I have auto insurance. Be a good add on to "The Godfather".
t's Florida. He'd feed an alligator.
dam alligators and their drunk driving
=)
@@cnault3244 Post holes. Vertical, gravel lined bottom, with a 4ft post and cement making sure he provides a solid footing for a secure fence around his own property. If you're going get rid of a body, at least put the hole(s) to good use. At least with a fence you can show it off to your neighbors and brag about your hard work.
I know this video is old but i am continually amazed at people who didn't actually look at the disclosures when they bought their home. I distinctly recall examining the parcel map and description of my property.
The hedge part of your story was so similar to my brother. He bought a house and almost 2 years later discovered his property was 10-15' past a row of lilac bushes that was a nice separation from the neighbors house. He had really nice neighbors. The only "issue" after the discovery my brother's lawn mowing responsibilities grew slightly, while the neighbor saved time on maintaining his lawn.
Good neighbors are a blessing!
I had a similar issue with a neighbor. We had big yards but the boundary wasn't clearly marked. The only issue was mowing. We both just mowed a bit over where we we believed the line to be. When I moved in there was a vegetable garden that was clearly on his property but he said the previous owner of my house had made it and I was free to use it if I wished, which I did. I gave them lots of vegetables and they gave us deer meat.
The lawyer(1) probably owns the property or is in cahoots with the owner who is also another lawyer(2) doing the same thing with lawyer(1) being the owner.
How much do you want to bet that the lawyer "representing" the trust is also the *owner/controller* of the trust?
A typical shyster move...
More likely I suspect it would be either one of the home owners or a realtor, lawyer, or other person who knows the owners and was involved in the sales process and found the property that way. I would look hard at anyone who recently had conflicts with his/her neighbors before this came about. Might have held the knowledge since the sale then when mad, did it.
@@clouddancer7624 who said he was a Christian? They tend to be so full of hate, I wouldn't be surprised if he was.
Probably related to a city council member...
@edwardschlosser1 knocking the guy off doesnt necessarily improve the situation. An issue here is that its much easier, at least conscience-wise, to do that to this guy (because he had some intent) than it is to do it to whoever or whatever inherits the land next. If you are rubbing arbitrary people out for land, then why the hell are you doing it for a few crappy back yards?
@@myyoutubehandle1234 it isn't a generalization if you've ever been to Alabama.
A few years ago the town I live in realized homes that backed up against town owned conservation land had slightly expanded there back yards mostly done by previous owners. The town inspector found homeowners had sheds, fences, and swing sets on the town land. The homeowners got letters telling them to move the stuff or pay huge fines. It was a huge problem. Most of town didn't care. The only person with a problem was the inspector. A few sheds where moved but the problem went away the inspector got in trouble for going into peoples yards, trespassing to see if he could catch people. He had the right to inspect the conservation land, from the conservation land. Instead of walking the land he decided to take multiple shortcuts and really got in trouble when the cops were called and the yard he trespassing in wasn't bordering the conservation land
Something similar happened to one of my Aunts. Her and her husband bought a house on some land, later to find out they did not actually own the land. All paperwork even through the title insurance said it was theirs but a document that pre-dated their purchase showed that the land and the house were separate entities. The bank and the title insurance all ducked responsibility and told them that they were on their own.
That can happen when a mobile home is purchased on acreage. The seller might not disclose that the land and mobile home are in fact separate until later when the land is sold out from under you. The mobile home is considered personal property (with a title of ownership) while the land is real property (deeded to the owner of the land). To attach the mobile home to the property, it must have the hitch and axles removed, placed on a foundation. Then submit forms to the DMV to have the title cancelled and declared the mobile home is real property.
"This isn't personal, it's just business." This line occurs a number of times in the "Godfather" movies. Hm.
As I look over large property parcels in New Mexico, I was warned to research the water, mineral and other land use rights before I buy. Good advice.
I bought my property with a 4 party well on it. I assumed my water was covered. Much to my surprise, I got water bills, and NO I did not own the water rights with the property. Not only that, in the fine print on my land contract was a clause that forbids me to use pesticides or herbicides because the well is on my property. Now there are like 9-10 houses on my well, and my water pressure has dropped a lot from 25 years ago. (One of the reasons I bought the place, the water pressure was awesome and the water delicious) I bought a house when I was young and ignorant. Lessons learned the hard way. I got screwed over 6 ways to Sunday buying this place, but hey it's only 16 payments from being paid off, and when it is, I am moving, with a lot more knowledge in my head than before.
12 years, adverse posession is 7 years in Florida... I would suggest they get a lawyer to file in the courts. They have been maintaining it, and the previous peaple had been.
This is the land they are talking about:
www.google.com/maps/place/Bigelow+Dr,+Holiday,+FL+34691/@28.1976833,-82.7608231,20z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x88c28dde447fd30f:0xe982d52d85852787!8m2!3d28.197437!4d-82.7581275
Click on satellite view to see the house with the pool (left side), as well as the one with the shed (rightside).
Now... Here is what the development looked like in 1971 when it was new:
www.historicaerials.com/location/28.1974206844397/-82.75993228584193/1971/18
Note that the easement is not clearly defined or broken out. Even the house with the pool was not built yet. I assume the easement (from its shape) was planned as a water line that would go to a new development being built to the left of this development but was never used.
and improvements (ie; pool, and shed) would help their case.
@@TEverettReynolds adverse possession doesn't matter whether or not the land belonged to them. It all depends on whether or not rightful possession of said land was enforced. For 12 years, nobody took actions to enforce the possession of the land, therefore the homeowners do have a case for adverse possession prior to the sale of the land. Adverse possession could be a valid defence.
It's pretty hard to have adverse possession of property for 7 years if you never set foot on it more than 5 or 6 years ago. According to Zillow one of the properties was last sold in 2002, so that owner is probably going to be fine. Another was sold in December of 2013. That's a hair under 7 years ago, and I'd bet that's the one that got the trespassing notice, which means the owner hasn't let them have adverse possession for 7 years. The others have all sold more recently, so they may be SOL. Here's the link to Zillow: www.zillow.com/holiday-fl/?searchQueryState=%7B%22pagination%22%3A%7B%7D%2C%22usersSearchTerm%22%3A%22holiday%2C%20fl%22%2C%22mapBounds%22%3A%7B%22west%22%3A-82.7611994857656%2C%22east%22%3A-82.75806130121818%2C%22south%22%3A28.196707211992525%2C%22north%22%3A28.198671605559866%7D%2C%22mapZoom%22%3A19%2C%22regionSelection%22%3A%5B%7B%22regionId%22%3A11940%2C%22regionType%22%3A6%7D%5D%2C%22isMapVisible%22%3Atrue%2C%22filterState%22%3A%7B%22ah%22%3A%7B%22value%22%3Atrue%7D%2C%22sort%22%3A%7B%22value%22%3A%22globalrelevanceex%22%7D%7D%2C%22isListVisible%22%3Atrue%7D
@@NYpaddler maybe, I did suggest lawyer... There might be a way around it in that it is the whole parcel on the other side. And the previous owners erected the fence.
I don't know about specific procedures, it may for example be possible to file it as a class action of all of them beeing similarly situated, at the point the judge is carving up the parcel, well, it gets a little more interesting.
The first home that I purchased nearly fifty years ago was known as a "battleaxe" block with access via a laneway between the two homes in front of me. The homes in front of me also used the laneway to access their respective garages. When I purchased the property I was required to have a survey done for financing. The property had a rear access large enough to allow a vehicle to enter the property. There was no vehicular access at the front of the property as the home fronted a public golf course. Several years after purchasing the property one of my neighbours in front of me sold his home. Shortly after the new neighbours advised me that my vehicular access was infringing on their property and what I believed to be a driveway in reality was just a single gate entrance less than one metre in width. I requested a copy of the survey report on my property from my finance institution and sure enough the survey showed the actual legal access plus indicating the non approved vehicular access. The finance company advised me that my solicitor should have advised me of the situation, which unfortunately he had not. It seems that many, many years previously a gentleman's handshake agreement had been made allowing vehicular access to the property and that subsequent purchasers of the property in front of me were not aware that my property line infringed on their property. It was only for an observant new owner intent on claiming his rightful property that I was made aware of the situation. In effect my property value was reduced dramatically due an oversight on the part of my solicitor who should have made it known that the driveway access within my property had not been made legal. To further add insult to injury what I believed to be a driveway down to my property entrance was actually a pedestrian walkway and thus vehicular traffic was not allowed.
In Texas, that's known as An Unrecorded Easement. Depending on how long it had been going on, continuous use might have established a permanent right to continue doing so. Especially if one could show that there had actually been an agreement at one point. Settling it would probably still involve lawyers and courts, the best thing would have been for the homeowners to work it out between themselves and record the agreement for future property owners.
The assessors office owes you the taxes, with interest, that you paid for every year that access was included in their assessment and the tax bill they levied upon you. They collected twice on the same real estate from two different people, and you were not liable for yours.
"Flag lot" around here.
What a nightmare!
I can understand the frustration. I bought 6.5 acres in Oregon. Then 6 months later found out that 1/2 of it is a right of way for Bonneville power. Bonneville power is basically the federal government so basically I have to ask their permission to do anything with that portion of the property. Wish I had known before buying.
This sounds just like something that will make everyone's lawyer money!
he’s probably one of the affected “neighbors”
Yep
Sounds like just another scam. 😕
About 15 years ago I bought my hovel (some might call it a house) and hired an attorney to review the transaction prior to signing the paperwork. That couple of hundred dollars saved me over two thousand dollars. I was purchasing using my VA entitlement and the lender had tacked on fees not allowed under that provision. Yay lawyer. A week after moving in I got a survey done, put up a fence, cleaned up the yard, and made fast friends of otherwise ordinary neighbors. Lawyer+survey+fence=no drama.
Well.....charge to mow “Trusts” land!!!! Because they haven’t been maintaining it. Sue them back!!!
How do you sue somebody for not holding up their end of an agreement you made on their behalf?
"Your honor, dickwad owes me ten grand for landscaping services."
"How did you know dickwad wanted your landscaping services."
"What do you mean? I forced them on him w/o his knowledge. You know, like government taxes and regulations."
"You're not the government. GTFO my court."
That's outrageous. It sounds like the previous 9 homeowners didn't know about that tract of land either. I guarantee you that I wouldn't grant easement through any of my property to that "trust" without it costing it "more than [it] could pay".
If the nine prior homeowners never rose the issue, and the trust exercised its ownership of the property by paying taxes on it, the trust might have eminent domain rights over it.
I am so glad you mentioned the saying about attorneys who represent themselves... and then went further to talk about specializations.
I've had some people I was close to as a kid become lawyers, and then NOT say "I'm a real estate lawyer from NY" when giving commentary on criminal law in california.
In some older towns there use to be a road in the backyard that was used for coal delivery. This road is long abandoned but on the survey it is a 20ft easement owned by the town. The town can sell it at any time so it is a good idea to buy it first.
In the past, including 2008, I've performed lots of real estate appraisal work in Holiday, Florida. Back then it was fairly standard for the lender to require a land survey. I would imagine there might be some culpability there with the lender.
Not the lender, but the surveyor and title company. The lender will likely sue the title company.
Would the appraisal people be aware of it?
@@neileskew3454 yes. That's part of their job. You can't properly appraise the value of the property without knowing exactly where its boundaries are
“Vacated easement that may used and maintained”
I would guess the real estate agents knew exactly what was transpiring and are guilty of omission.
say it in english...fraud.
agreed
What do you want to bet that the group is a bunch of real estate attorneys
Or collusion?
Doubtful. Life is to short to do business that way.
Something similar occurred in Pinellas County some years ago when someone bought, for back taxes, an easement surrounding a large pond behind a dozen or so houses. The purchaser then built a tall fence blocking the view to the pond. Then charging the home owners for the easement .
Okay, that settles it. Either I don't know what an easement really is / really could be, or people are just using the term wrong.
Can't charge a fee to use an easement. He could charge a fee to access the pond but he'd have to set it up as a business and get licencing, permits and zoning changes. The zoning change won't happen unless he buys the zoning board.
I've been a Texas real estate broker for 35 years, but I'm not an attorney, so this isn't legal advice. I've had surveyors fail to properly document something and then later have to pay to "fix" their error. That might help the homeowner whose survey didn't show the separate parcel at all. However, basic Texas title insurance might not provide any help in similar instances here because the policy has an exception for errors in boundaries. There's an addtional title insurance rider available for about 5% more of the policy that covers shortages in boundaries and encroachments. I think that the extra coverage would help a homeowner in a similar situation in Texas.
Every Home I've purchased, in SC and NC, required a land survey and marking posts to mark property until closing. Also at closing purchaser signs off on photos and maps showing property boundaries, I'm sure to avoid this kind of mess.
In extremely rural, extremely southern Virginia one guy owned a right of way for a railway which was completely removed. He successfully forced some people to pay him for a right of way ACROSS HIS RIGHT OF WAY until his buddy the judge retired.
In Indiana, a gas pipeline company was taking out trees and buildings in people's yards after decades of placement: legal control of a right of way, of course.
I live in rural Pennsylvanian where the township ordinance states public roads have a 16 to 25 foot right of way, which is pretty funny since very old houses and barns frequently are as close as three feet.
And of course, imminent domain trumps all private ownership. Welcome to the land f the free, if you can afford to pay.
Where I live, this is very common. I once looked at a piece of property that was 21 acres. After viewing it, it was very obvious it was not that big. There was a housing plan on both sides of the wooded area. After looking at the lot sizes on the plot map, I could see that all the houses, (about 10 on each side), on both streets adjoining the property had "extended" their backyards about a 75-100ft beyond their property lines into the wooded area. Buyer beware... I always compare the "legal" description to the actual property.
Your comments on real estate law are spot on. I am an Owners Corporation Manager in Australia and spend my whole working day dealing with this area of our state laws. I really enjoy when a general lawyer calls me to argue a point as they are often wrong and misquote the legislation. While I work in property management and provide documentation for property transfers, I would still have a licensed agent and conveyancer do my home sale.
Wow, such a different way of buying property over there! Over here we hire solicitors/lawyers to do conveyance on any property, part of the conveyance is carrying out searches of documentation for past and future planning, services, and "title", it's really not optional, and I'm pretty sure we don't even have "title insurance" because of this. On the adverse possession aspect, I think that 12 years is the UK threshold btw (it was the very first thing that popped into my head when you outlined the issues these guys are having)
Someone in the government's land management office brought that land at an tax auction. Just business! File a suit to make the owner known to the public.
I don't think so. I think someone just saw an opportunity to sell the land to the adjacent landowners. See google maps: www.google.com/maps/place/Bigelow+Dr,+Holiday,+FL+34691/@28.1976833,-82.7608231,20z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x88c28dde447fd30f:0xe982d52d85852787!8m2!3d28.197437!4d-82.7581275 The property could even be sold to the houses on Tiki street, just north of Bigelow street. So it has value.
@@TEverettReynolds One of the home owners saw the opportunity during their land and title survey. Right?
@@kennethjohnson4456 Probably not. Whoever is behind this is notorious for buying land and then harassing the local homeowners
www.tampabay.com/archive/2008/05/04/the-invisible-land-grab/
@@ExpIohd The case of the private road would probably fail in court. The residents have used it for 30 years and maintained it all this time, including paving it. I don't see any court now denying access to their properties. I believe adverse possession in Florida is seven years.
@@TEverettReynolds - The houses on Tiki could not use it as there is a drop off between the two yards. A retaining wall there is with a 6 to 10 foot drop I am guessing. Look at your link and view it with satelite and zoom in. The shadows give away the 1 story drop from the pool to the area below. This was a driveway/alley access for the rear of the houses and very well might have right of way or use on the deed prior to this tax sale.
That's why you always get a survey before buying a house. My wife and I were going to forego, but our realtor highly recommended it. Within a month of moving in, our neighbor said she thinks our fence encroaches. Pull out the survey, all is good.
When I was a child the homeowner behind my parents sued them and our next door neighbor for taking his backyard. Which even as a kid I thought was funny since I had watched his house built. I just remember him over yelling at my Mom. My dad looked stuff over and called the local bank holding the mortgage to see if they had any idea what to do. They sent someone out to survey since they held the notes on both houses and were concerned. In the end it turns out the street behind us was put in wrong. They built the road with the centerline about 10 ft off. So everything was off from there. Since my parent's street and house was built first the neighbor behind us lost out. But not after dragging everyone into court, etc. Lucky for my parents the bank represented them so they lost no money over it.
I have neighbor like that they try to take done my fence down when I had my land surveyed found out three feet of there property i owned before I had this done they telling me that two feet of my property was there's so put a bigger fence up
My Wife's Grandparents "lost" 50 Acres to Ft Knox when they started fencing in the Training Areas. But they had never had a Survey done so there was really nothing they could do. Nothing they could have done anyway because, hey, Ft Knox.
@@SGTJDerek dang... that would have been a long long time ago... right. Figure they would claim eminent domain... done
@@Kaliburz Knox didn't start fencing in the Bullitt County side until after Sept. 11.
The period of time for adverse possession in Florida is seven years, so the proeprty owners have used and maintained the disputed parcels WITHOUT permission of the land trust. Ergo, possession has transferred to the homeowners.
I was wondering about this. It's also seven years in Tennessee and my first thought when he said it was bought in 2008 was "how long is the period of time of open and aggressive use for hostile possession?". Hopefully the homeowners get an easy win here.
You have no idea how adverse possession works.......
@@oneswellfoop No, actually I do having won several adverse possession cases.
@@boblewis8838 oh, then you understand that when you said what you said that you were wrong. Merely using and maintaining a property for 7 years is insufficient for a party to obtain the property via adverse possession. They'd also have to either have color of title or pay taxes on the property for those seven years, in addition to occupying and maintaining the land, then have to the land conveyed to them by the courts.
It doesn't just happen after 7 years by operation of law as you were intimating.
but obvisously they aren't paying property taxes on this property
I have a piece of property on which I decided to build a garage at that time the original survey markers from before the property was subdivided still existed. So for setback reasons I measured to find my actual property line. When I found the exact corner of the property I dug down and found an old survey stake. I showed it to my new neighbor because it could help him if he had a similar project. His fence had been installed six inches on to his side of the line he asked me so I own that six inches. I said I believe so. From that time on he mowed his side with his string trimmer. He moved before I had a chance to ask if he thought I showed him the marker to get him to trim the grass or if he just wanted everyone to know that six inch strip was his.
the banks definitely care. if you got a clean survey and title insurance, and the bank approves - at least nine real estate sales, presumably nine surveys, nine title insurance policies, nine property transfers w local county- every single one - at least 36 professionals in this field - had to have made big errors that no one caught. This is shady af.
I'm located in Toronto, Canada and it's the norm here to have real estate lawyers as part of any real estate transaction. It is their job to review everything and point out issues like this. We also have title insurance as well. I wouldn't dream of purchasing a home without a lawyer reviewing everything.
Anything goes in America the most corrupt country in the world that masquerade as the most innocent and fairest worlds police force
At one time the last ten feet of my backyard was an alley. Said alley was abandoned by the city many,
many years ago. Whomever was in the home then took possession of that ten feet. That little fact
became interesting when a development went in on the other side of my fence. My fence didn't move.
The developer built one less townhouse ☺
When my parents purchased an acre of land many decades ago (that they built a home on in 1965) they traded a 9-foot wide strip on the south side for 9 feet of the neighboring lot on the east side, so the neighbors on the east could run their driveway out to the side street rather than onto the highway. Many years later my parents set up a trust. When we were ready to sell the property after our parents' deaths, we found out that whoever had set up the trust neglected to place the eastern 9-foot strip into the trust (it was a separate parcel). This came out in the title search that was done once we had a potential buyer. Our estate attorney actually had to consult a real estate attorney to see what could be done and avoid the 9-foot strip having to go to probate. Turned out there's a thing called the probate referee, who came out and appraised the 9-foot strip, and as the appraised value was under some figure, it didn't have to go to probate. Whew! I'll never know if my parents simply didn't know (or remember) that the 9-foot strip was a separate parcel, or whether the attorney who set up the trust screwed up by not doing a title search then.
👍👍 I think the homeowners knew where the property lines are, they just wanted a few feet more. Happens all the time
Considering they want to remain anonymous I would guess one of the 9 homeowners involved is the actual owner of the backyard strip and is looking to skin his neighbors without them finding out it was him.
I'm thinking it's the lawyer.
I'm thinking it is a bank.--or the city of Holiday!
I had something similar happen. My fence extended onto city property and one day the city showed up and told me I had to move it. Long story short; after at first refusing to do anything the city leased this area to me for 99 years after my great city councilor went to bat for me. Also I had my lawyer contact the previous owners and they paid for it under threat of them fraudulently selling me the property. When one looks at a fenced in area a resonable person would assume that is what was being offered to them in a land sale. Similar to changing out the existing carpeting or light fixtures after a house was sold. They played games with the survey too during the sale but no one cared at the time but we all knew why when this event happened. They knew and sold it under false pretenses. Ended up okay though in the end.
When a new house was build next to me it was determined the fence for the old house was mine so it didn't get torn down.
We had a slightly different situation here in San Diego years ago, involving the beach front houses that had a boardwalk behind them, between the houses and the beach. The city actually owned a strip larger than the boardwalk, but the homeowners, pretty much all of them, enclosed the unused areas up to the boardwalk, as part of their private yards. The city made it known that when the time came to enlarge the boardwalk, the land would be reclaimed. But until then they would leave things as they were.
Then came the time when the foot/ bike traffic on the boardwalk was getting excessive, and it was time to widen it. And all the homeowners, who should have known they were occupying the city's property, screamed and cried and filed lawsuits and generally threw tantrums. They lost and the boardwalk was enlarged.
That's hilarious. They do a similar thing where I live, if you fence in part of the public owned utility easement as part of your yard, they usually won't do anything, but if they need to access or do work in that area, they'll take out the offending section of fence. It doesn't happen often, but when it does I always laugh.
had a similar situation happen here in Connecticut. Long story short, A railroad had a long spur line that was not used. They pulled the tracks up 30 years ago. There was a housing boom in the area, bunch of new developments, the builders had to of known the railroad had a right of way when they got the permits. The people who purchased the houses did not do there research, railroads decides to put tracks back down.... and now about 20 mcmansions are 100 feet from a railroad track. They tried going to court but lost. The railroad legally owned the land and it was well marked out in the towns records. If anything they should have gone after the builder.
A similar thing happened at Seacliff State Beach (south of Santa Cruz). Homeowners assume they own to the edge of the oceanfront bluff but the Lot lines are actually several feet back. They have patios, decks, planters, and fences on the State side of the boundary. They cured that over time by notifying the Lot owner every time a lot listed for sale, the homeowner cleaned it up quick so as to not get a lis pendins to mess up the sale.
I was there when that happened. Some people's doors ended up opening just about onto the boardwalk.
I quit maintaining the property and call the city about the garbage and tall grass and let the fines fly.Or send them a bill for grass cutting.
I was just about to say that, and when the owner try’s to access it to cut the grass. Charge a “fee” 😁
Two can play this game.
I bought a house in the 1980s and sold it about 35 years later (on Long Island, NY). I had an Attourney represent me at the purchase and, a different Attourney at the time I sold said house. At the sale, I was amazed at the amount of paperwork generated and mentioned that fact to my Attourney. He replied that all that paperwork was designed to protect buyers & sellers from fraud (I DID buy Title Insurance when purchasing the house even though it was a "Private Sale"). My Attourney also mentioned that the LACK of said mountain of paperwork is why some in states (and he mentioned FL specifically) had such a high rate of real estate fraud. Who knew?
When we went to sell the first house we had purchased, we discovered that the original survey was incorrect. The survey was a rectangle but with the 4th side described as going off 180 degrees in the wrong direction. We had to get the prior owner to sign off on the survey change, and he said, of course, "what's in it for me".
Steve, you mentioned both mortgages and title insurance in this video, but I don't believe either would be valid.
1. The mortgage is only made on what is titled to the specific property, so they would already know the lot size and the area covered.
2. The title search would only be done on the property being sold, while not looking at the properties behind it.
I agree, I had to get title insurance for purchasing a home, and the title documentation clearly delineated the property lines.
---We bought a new home and the builder made fun of us for insisting we wanted to get an independent survey to check it against the plat. Makes me wonder why they cared when we paid for it.
Hand the trust a 12 year bill for maintaining the yard.
Attach a mechanics lean
I had a surveyor do a deed search at the courthouse on my house before I built my garage. Good thing too. It's how I found out the game commission had stolen a 1/2 acre off the back of my property. The lender , tax records and previous owner showed 1.25 acre lot but the courthouse showed the deed had been changed to only show .76 acres and the other 1/2 acre had been given to the state in a clerical error. The lawyer said it would cost more to sue the state than the property is worth.
I have .25 acres with a shed in the back. Utility workers had to mark off underground utilities because the cable company may be doing fiber optic to home upgrades. I'm wondering what will happen in the future because my shed sits right over where some of the lines they painted would travel. 🤔
As an aside, while I was house shopping, I made EXTENSIVE use of the county auditors online real estate maps as well as fema flood insurance maps to make sure there weren't any surprises.
Love your ARRL shirt. Been a ham radio enthusiast for 10 years now..(actually a lot longer but got my license 10 years ago)
When I purchased my first property 30 years ago, the Title Insurance only paid the mortgage holder. To add me to the insurance cost more, which I paid. Also I had a largish down payment, but not enough to avoid Private Mortgage Insurance. As soon as I met the 20% I believe it was requirement, I was able to cancel it.
From what I understand some PMI is prepaid for the life of the loan, but I have not bought a property with a low enough down pay entire since to keep up on it. Steve will be happy to hear me say "You need to get a lawyer for these things."
Would it work to let the grass and weeds grow on the property, then file a complaint with the city that the condition of the property is a health and safety hazard?
If the owner of that land is threatening the home owner with trespass, the home owner definitely cannot mow the yard...
@WebCity Films Home owner simply takes the citation back to the city and says, "Not my land, not my responsibility."
@@boikatsapiens499 Pretty much. County records will show that it no longer belongs to the addressed or the fined person.
@WebCity Films The homeowner didn't pay taxes on the other person's (scammer's property). both owners paid their own taxes.
@@kewlztertc5386 We don't know if the Land Trust did not pay taxes. It would make sense they did if they are claiming ownership not to mention that they bought it from the city. Nor do we know if the homeowners' property taxes included the strip of land. I doubt it did.
I suspect everyone paid taxes but the home owners didn't realize that they weren't paying taxes on the contested strip.
The same sort of thing happened in Champaign Illinois a few years back,. some guy up near Chicago bought up these parcels knowing what they were and then tried getting the home owners to buy the small parcels for much more. Made a big stink etc. As soon as this broke and people noticed that the city and or county was to blame for the issues then it slowly stopped getting mentioned.
My mother, when she was moving and needing a new place to live, found a piece of property. Nice wooded lot in a developing neighborhood. The title was reportedly clear, the land surveyed. The county reported it open for building. After digging a well and then applying for the building permits to start the house THEN the county said.. Oh by the way, the entire property is easements, you can't build on any of it... Yeah our bad, but you can't sue us. Fortunately a neighbor who had a barely trickling well was interested since her well came in with high flow. She lost some money, but the time lost was even worse.
I am a certified land specialist in Arizona and was an instructor for the Arizona department of real estate, in my classes I asked the participants (including attorneys) if they owned property, if they said yes I asked if they stored the deed in a safe or safe deposit box. A lot of them said yes, I asked where they stored their title insurance policy and most said " I don't know, probably in the file". The deed is a recorded document and does not need to be protected in a safe and the title insurance is not usually recorded ( in Arizona you could record it) and is a most important document. I have had clients that saved many thousands of dollars and a lot of grief by using the title insurance.
while buying my current property I noticed it didn't list an easement for access to the property.
I brought this up to the title company and they easily fixed it ( for them ) buy excluding it from their policy.
the selling RE agent and I spent 2 days at the court house tracking down the correct easement.
Steve, it is ABSOLUTELY NOT POINTLESS to have legal representation when purchasing real property. We bought vacant land (residential site, totaling 2+ acres for our home). We had good foresight to buy the property for a very good low price. I worked in real estate law as a legal assistant/legal secretary, and I wouldn't even purchase the vacant property (like sign a contract to buy it) without making certain that all the ducks were in a row correctly. Similar parcels to the ones we purchased were going for $140,000 a few months later, more than 20 times what we paid! I will always be grateful for the time I spent working in the legal field. There are just so many pitfalls for folks who are uneducated about real estate.
Similar situation occurred in the Gulf front town of Suwannee. A whole bunch of "canal front" properties turned out to stop short of the canals. The intervening strips of land were acquired at tax sales. Sea walls, docks, boat houses, hundreds of thousands dollars of waterfront investment were found to be on property owned not by the home owners who made the improvements, but by an investor.
at $4,000 down, and $300/hour, hiring an attorney can be more expensive than buying a car
Now the law requires a real estate agent and the banks interject all their regulations, the seller didn't accurately define the property and how the hell is any of this goes through without a surveyor?
I'm a retired architect. When I bought this property I took the property description and used it to draft a civil site plan of the property, then went and surveyed it myself to include all the buried wiring, trees, contours of the land and more. I have a 66' wide easement that runs the full length down the East section of the property. If I didn't know about the easement I would have built on it. I understand their dilemma.
Another note, NEVER TRUST a survey from the selling realtor, even if it looks like a legal plat. I was once interested in buying 5 acres and received a plat from the realtor. What wasn't shown was a huge gas line easement running diagonal through the property. Always get your own survey done.
Nice T Shirt - Haven't been to a field day for a bit. Reminds me to get my radio fired up again. Take care 'Spin'
Yep, love the shirt , wonder where it came from :) do we have a lawyer in the ranks? On TH-cam :)
I need to get mine reinstalled. Moved a year ago and still working on the house so haven't gotten the needle in the sky yet.
@@JeremyEllwood I am hoping to move to a larger location. Get my 43 ft vertical up. Fire up the 'new to me' Collins S Line. Nothing like radios that glow in the dark. A bit rusty on my CW. Use to do about 18 wpm. 73's.
@@tompinnef6331 I am tech so don't do (need) CW (though I still want to learn it anyway - it's good info to have).
I live within city limits and close enough to the approach path of Flint Bishop airport where I have to be careful of my height so once I get the needle up there, I'll be looking at a probable 25 to 30 foot vertical which, running on 2 meters isn't horrible.
When at the farm, I was running a 90 foot vertical at 2 meters with 60W. God, I miss that thing.
I have some HF equipment I want to get running but I need to upgrade my license to transmit for that. I've never run HF. I've listened, but never had the opportunity to chat on it. Was hearing Ireland with an HF horizontal run across the fields and excellent propagation (Winter). Real life took over and I haven't been able to hobby as much as I'd like.
@@JeremyEllwood If I remember right - techs have access to 10 meters?
I'm placing this comment here so that in the future I can claim this channel as mine....
File for adverse possession, claiming it had been maintained by the property owners
Some of the home owners seem to have a pretty good claim for it, if they band together and get a really good lawyer. FL law is 7 years of occupation. The question is, can the courts apply that retroactively to the previous owners so the current owners get the relief as well?
@@bretwalley4673 Sue the title company.
@@bretwalley4673 it doesn't matter if they've known about it since 2008, those homeowners have had an "open and notorious" occupation of the land since then.
@@bretwalley4673 You want me to feel sorry for some asshole who knowingly buys development limited properties and then tries to bully homeowners? Now the question becomes what has this land trust company done in the past 12 years other than trying to sell this property on Craigslist.
@@bretwalley4673 Nobody here is talking about the guy with the room addition/pool except for you; it has nothing to do with this land company harassing homeowners.
If this land trust company is so desperate for the property, then they should take the homeowners to court for it. They won't because they'll end up with nothing. Have you even seen the backyards? i.imgur.com/MxoVEkS.png
If you think I'm overstating the land company harassing homeowners, then you haven't read much about them
www.tampabay.com/archive/2008/05/04/the-invisible-land-grab/
Bought a house in the '70's on a handshake. Had the property surveyed and matched to court house record plats in two counties, because at one point the property was in one county, the state re-surveyed the boundary and Voila! The house in question is now in another county! The survey I had done was the real eye opener! It all looked pretty obvious as to where the property lines are, gravel road, line of mature trees, houses lined up on the street in the same fashion, etc. Lo and behold the property line was much closer to the neighbors house! It included part of his driveway and his well! He about had a cow over it, but we remained good friends over the years. The county made it so difficult to redo and resubdivide the boundary area that we just gave up on it. Well it's back on the front burner as the neighbor died and we are selling the house and property. Title insurance is the best insurance you'll probably never use!
As a builder in the NY area, I buy and sell properties regularly. Often hedge rows, rows of trees, fences and stone walls are not on the actual property line. Most neighbors are not aware and get upset when I explain it to them.
Something similar happened to me & my neighbors. Gross mismanagement by two HOA property manager co. & poor HOA board oversight lead to 2 or 3 tracts of HOA green space going into tax sale. After the purchase the new owner of the unbuildable land locked green space tried to extort purchases of the green space behind our lots. We all told him where to stick it. Then when he croaked his business partner & daughter inherited the land & tried a softer extortion feigning ignorant heiress just trying to offload land she didn't want.
My guess is that these home might had been apart of a now defunct HOA & the homes might have been sold originally as HOA patio homes where you only own house & foundation footprint. It would explain the utility easement immediately out the back-door & why a seemingly abandoned track of unusable & unaccessible land would go to tax sale.
I wonder if adverse possession could be exercised here, especially on the fenced-in lots?
My question is that since at least one of the surveys that was done did not specify where the land past the utillity easement belonged, did the government charge taxes on the same piece of land to two individual owners? Because if so it could be argued that the land in question was never delinquent in whole at any time in the past and therefore should never have been sold at auction in the past.
Because if this is the case, and it is a big if here, then the local government could impose an imminent domain action, pay the land trust the appraisal value and distribute the land to the home owners as compensation. Done and done.
Bunch of new owners who have not owned for more than 7 years. Sale resets the clock. If one of the previous owners had made the claim and won then the deed and associated paperwork would have been updated and passed to successive owners and title insurance would cover it.
@@davidtherwhanger6795 from the story here it sounds like the county knows that the 20' piece existed and has kept tax records on it (hence being able to sell it at tax sale).the survey not coming back with information on land that was past the property line isn't surprising (once you establish where the lines and property adjacent to the client are and essentially make a property island who owns the rest of the county isn't a concern from a survey standpoint). eminent domain has a requirement to be for public use or public betterment so i dont see how a local government could utilize ED to use taxpayer money to redistribute land back to private owners with no public benefit.
This is so easy to identify by an appraiser during the purchase. Sue the appraiser AND the realtor. A good real estate attorney may have success with easement by prescription.
A few years ago we had a situation here, almost in FLA. A locally owned outdoor advertising company had a sign on a leased plot at the entrance to a golf resort. The lease came up for renewal and the land owner would not renew because they had built 8 houses along the road to the resort, adjacent to the sign, I know the owner of the sign company and he is the kind you don't cross. Somehow he came into possession of a 10 foot wide strip between the road and the frontage of all 8 houses. He installed a fence which locked all of the homeowners out. I feel sure that in court he would have lost as I understand you can not landlock a homestead. For expedience the fence came down and the sign went back up.
Sounds like a "decommissioned / abandoned" alleyway...very common in central Phoenix AZ. My lot is much deeper (front to back) compared to my neighbors because we purchased that portion of the alley when it was decommissioned by the City. Props to the City for offering the land to current property owners individually, rather than as a "whole piece". Another neighbor bought three "chunks" (creating a dogleg) and installed a bocce court. Make sure you have a survey before buying!!!
Glad you mentioned "Adverse Possession" cuz that was the first thing I was thinking. A good judge would probably take one look at this BS and grant it out of principle.
Good ideas in the comments section too!!
If it were your property that was in danger of being taken because the neighbor’s ignorance of their property boundary, would you still feel the same?
Adverse Possession was my first thought. According to the internet(not a reliable source) , it's 7 years in Florida. They may want to check their tax records and see if they've been paying taxes on the land, but otherwise if they've been living there that long, it seems they meet most of the requirements of Hostile Claim, Actual Possession, Open and Notorious Possession, Exclusive and Continuous Possession, and cultivation, improvement, or protection from a substantial enclosure on the land. This is not legal advice.
I agree. If they've been paying taxes on that property, they need to have their property tax reassessed and bill the past paid taxes to the trust. ( I know. Unlikely to be paid)
I thought about this angle, but remember how the easement changed hands to be owned by the trust; it was sold at auction for unpaid property taxes. Nobody was paying the taxes on that land, and presumably the trust has kept their tax bill up to date. The most likely reason for the trust to own the property in the first place is to use it as a money pit to claim against other tax bills as a business loss deduction.
They weren't paying taxes if it was bought at a tax sale.
@@SusieAspen From the information given, it sounds like many residents purchased their homes after the land was sold to the trust.
@@DaremoTen no..they had their homes prior to the tax sale that went to the trust, so they could not have been paying the taxes. I am leaning toward the idea that it was one of the neighbors who bought the land and does not like his neighbors.
I'd wonder about whoever sold them those houses in the first place. *Somebody* built a whole slew of fences enclosing land that wasn't part of the properties. Could this be some sort of long con, where the property seller made it look like the property included more than it really did, so that they could come back later and demand more money for the rest? It'd certainly explain why the trust's owner wanted to remain anonymous - I doubt the courts would look favorably on such a practice.
The trustee is most definitely a lawyer. More than likely tied to local courthouse staff.
When we bought our property I made sure of several things. Survey was one of them, the first was make sure it's outside city limits, no HOA, water and mineral rights included. I do have an easement so my neighbor can get to another property he owns back there. But he told me not to worry because he uses another easement on someone else's property. T one point his father owned all the Land, my house was built in 1970. I have a fence line all around the property, and the survey is identical. Including the the fence that separates the parcels. We have one 4 acre parcel that the house and shop is on, and a 5.75 parcel that is a wooded area.
This happens in the UK as well. Usually with odd bits in front of buildings. Many have been forced to pay to get access to their own front door.
We call them Ransome Strips.
This video just proves the fact that laws have to become more simplified. You seem to be honorable that can't be said about many of the legal profession.
I have seen this situation before,, and I can make a good guess as to how it happened. An easement,, a former intended alley perhaps,, was vacated. Easements and streets can be vacated. The city processed the paperwork to vacate that easement,, and then never told or explained that the now vacant property needed to have its taxes paid.
Was the vacation of that easement requested by the current owner? Now that would make a very serious case about this incident. the thing to do, is look back in the city or county records to see who owned this property before it was purchased at auction. The developer? The city? There is a great probability that no one owned the property before that auction. The city or county,, in that case, should be raked over the coals,,, very slowly.
People mention easements, but I don't see how that would apply. An easement is another person's claim to use your property. If the strip were an easement, then it would be "on property owned by these houses." Right? So if they were like "nah, we're done with your land. thank you" then the house owners would be "cool, now I can build that monster brick pizza oven I've always wanted."
@@petermgruhn No, not always. Let's say,,,, Subdivision was platted in 1927. All lots laid out,, all streets laid out. The streets are still an easement,, owned by the city, county or state. Move on 70 years and the one street is never used,, never has been used, grass growing on it and mowed by the guy next door,,, he always thought it was just part of his lawn. The city may want to 'clean up' its map,, and it would love to have property taxes coming in. They vacate the property,, a process that removes it from public right of way and makes it private land again,,, which now they want to sell to make more money. The auctions are public,,, but that means you have to go to the property tax site to check,, or the surplus property lists. It is public,,, just rarely publicized. I have used a specific case as my example that I was aware of from day one. The really underhanded portion of my example is that the city never informed the guy who had been using the lot as his lawn for 40 years. No one knocked on the door, no none said, "You should bid on the property." They just sold it. Lost his yard and part of his garage.
@@Sailor376also Thanks for the example.
You know remember our laws will allow someone to squat on a property for years with the owners hands tied in legal bullcrap. However if you try to do things legally they still sometimes pull random BS like this.
As a title examiner if the fences on a survey doesn't match the property lines i add an exception for that to the the schedule B excluding the property outside/inside a fence
A good presentation, Steve, but I am surprised you failed to mention one important point. The one about title insurance. Certainly all nine of these homeowners DO have title insurance. But the insurance is not to blame here. The function of title insurance is to assure that the property has no faults and issues with the title, the title is clear, and can be transferred to you. In this case, all those were apparently true. No claims to the title, no legal issues later. As far as not owning what they thought they owned, that is not the responsibility of title insurance. It is the responsibility of the home owner to know. And a competent survey is the way to do that. Not title insurance.
The property was sold to them as "Parcel XXXX" and so on, as described at the county registrars office. That is all you bought, nothing else. It is not the responsibility of the title insurance to inform you of what you don't own. That includes the street, the easement, the property behind the backyard area, and so on. Not yours, never was, the end. When you go into a closing, that is what you are doing, transferring the property as described by that parcel number. The homeowners probably got what they bought and paid for, nothing more. The perception of further ownership was just false perception.
Title insurance is a necessity and a wise move, but it is NOT intended to protect you against everything.
Whether the homeowners have created an easement for themselves by using the property unchallenged for several years, that is a seperate question.
Here's what they should do. Dump on it and then complain about it to the county.
That would be illegal. It would be kind of hard to claim someone else did it. :)
I have an even better idea. Have the city/county seize the land under eminent domain, pay the current "owner" the assessed value of $937 (as stated in a news report), and then turn the land over to the homeowners. Thank you Kelo v. City of New London.
@@ExpIohd If you think the ruling in Kelo said the government can seize property and give it to a bunch of residential homeowners to make their yards bigger you should actually read it.
Kelo is about a private concern being able to take your property (legal plunder), because the new owners will be paying more in property tax than the present ones.
One of the sad happenings in this case is the big pharmaceutical firm, after raising all this hell, abandoned their project and didn't build their multi million dollar project after all. In the end, New London wound up loosing big. A bird in the hand, right?
A similar thing happened in Merriam Kansas. Someone was operating a used car lot out of an old gas station, the property of which they happened to own. Along comes the city of Merriam, who had been approached by a Mercedes dealership who wants to build there, except this pesky used car lot was in their way. The city says, "No problem, we can use eminent domain." The shiny new luxury cars go into the new lot. And during the next election, the majority of the city council gets voted out.
Would be a shame if they stopped taking care of that property. Then people started getting injured on it and sued.
They were already warned about trespassing
They should send the owners a bill for maintaining their property.
Alternatively, make them fence it off and maintain it. It isn't clear if there is any access to the plot in question, so the homeowners might be able to deny access to the bastards.
Catch 22: they have to maintain it but must trespass in order to do so.
@@ScottinWV-bgij can't charge for rent if there wasn't a lease. But I know if I don't mow my lawn the city will do it for me and send me a bill..
And this is why they should all be awarded the land they’ve used and maintained all these years.
Had something similar happen right next door. Former landlord in my town lost all his properties in my neighborhood. This included houses and land. These are all former mining properties and were broken up into odd lots. Behind several on one street is this exact scenario with the land between the houses and a creek being separate. A bunch of people bought lots site unseen and found out that they didn't get property with any kind of access to it. We have a yard next to my house that was bought. Guy thought he was getting it and half of a double block. Found out all he got was a useless piece of property and a driveway and abandoned it as he couldn't use it for anything and no one wanted it for the price he wanted
Great show. You brought up points I did not realize when I bought my home years ago (sold since). Question; if you paid taxes on the property in question, can you collect them back from the county/state or sue the new owner?
When you buy a house usually you know the lot size and location. Seems these people assumed the land behind them was public land and that no one would ever challenge them using it
According some of the articles I read on this one of them *did* a survey and I quote "didn’t point out the land trust property at all". Something about this sends up red flags.