real estate question

ron22

ron22

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
1,446
Location
MN
Display Name
Display name:
Ron Hammer
I know an aviation forum is the best place to ask about real estate and receive legal advice J

Not really looking for legal advice more wonder just what you would do.

I recently purchased a foreclosed house.
I received a letter from the Tax Assessor office about an issue with my legal description. I talked to them today and based on my legal description I now own more land than anyone thought.
According to the Tax Assessor the Title company or I should pay for a new survey and change the description to meet what they (County) think I own and am currently taxed on.

My current legal description describes a rectangle then says LESS AND EXCEPTING from the above tract conveyed to ….by Deed Sept 1, 1979 and recorded in book .. page ..

If you look at the wonderful picture I made what is in green is what I thought I bought and what I am currently taxed on. The Blue is what is broke off in 1979. Gray is the road. White is the property the neighbors think they own and are currently taxed on. The Tax Assessor checked the other titles and they do not cover the land in question


When I bought the property they did a spot survey and I have a picture that shows the property shape in the green but the Legal description above.

So now what would you do?
Push the Title Company to do something about it?
Do nothing and not care?
Be an a$$ to my three neighbors (2 on other side of road 1 on other side of split off area) and tell them that is my land and they have to stop using it.
 
Interesting question......

Was there any "adverse possession" in the past filed by the previous owner??
 
My father had a house that had something similar, neighbor was squatting on a few feet(neighbor had been there before my dad's house was built.) When he sold the house the bank made the new owner move the fence to the proper line. Sounds like the tax people want it to be yours the bank might too. Is there any back taxes you will be responsible for if you lay claim?
 
ron22 said:
I know an aviation forum is the best place to ask about real estate and receive legal advice J

Not really looking for legal advice more wonder just what you would do.

I recently purchased a foreclosed house.
I received a letter from the Tax Assessor office about an issue with my legal description. I talked to them today and based on my legal description I now own more land than anyone thought.
According to the Tax Assessor the Title company or I should pay for a new survey and change the description to meet what they (County) think I own and am currently taxed on.

My current legal description describes a rectangle then says LESS AND EXCEPTING from the above tract conveyed to ….by Deed Sept 1, 1979 and recorded in book .. page ..

If you look at the wonderful picture I made what is in green is what I thought I bought and what I am currently taxed on. The Blue is what is broke off in 1979. Gray is the road. White is the property the neighbors think they own and are currently taxed on. The Tax Assessor checked the other titles and they do not cover the land in question


When I bought the property they did a spot survey and I have a picture that shows the property shape in the green but the Legal description above.

So now what would you do?
Push the Title Company to do something about it?
Do nothing and not care?
Be an a$$ to my three neighbors (2 on other side of road 1 on other side of split off area) and tell them that is my land and they have to stop using it.
Click to expand...

My aunt put a fence through the middle of a fruit stand over an issue like this. It doesn't take much for someone to get uppity about property. As much as I hate to say it, I'd take the option in bold.

I would come to a signed agreement with them for use of it though and not tell them they had to stop and that you're only protecting your interests.

I've seen several cases where each year a guy makes one more lap with the lawn mower and thinks he owns what he mows, so much so that he's willing to pay a lawyer to argue it.
 
Last edited:
IMHO you'll be better off claiming the property you legally own. If there's a question just present the plat from the county.
 
Right of adverse possession and prescriptive ROW laws vary from state to state. You should talk to a local surveyor or real estate attorney about your situation.

In Missouri, I think it's 7 years. If they've been using it for seven years unchallenged, then it's theirs.

It may not matter who owns the deed to the land, more importantly who's been using the land? Right of adverse possession and prescriptive ROW cases can be really messy and expensive.
 
Op, following up on Tim's most excellent post who has been using or claiming the blue area?
Adverse possession is not something you automatically get. It usually has to be granted by a judge after a survey is completed of the contested land after 7 years of " uncontested, open and notorious use". All parties are then notified and their claim is heard by the judge.

How much land area we talking about? Is it in city limits or county control?

I suggest you have a new survey done by a licensed surveyor, and talk to a real estate attorney.

If the neighbor has been using the land for a long period of time and you try and claim it there will be hard feelings. If you try and claim it for your own there is going to be a fight. Being the new guy on the block you coming in and try and re-write the property lines is going to **** off everyone. Been there, done that.

Every case is different and complex. Keep us informed as to your progress.
 
Last edited:
It's actually ten years in Missouri. You need to take everything to a real estate lawyer. If you have owner's title insurance, they would definitely be the place to start.
 
Actually that site leaves a lot to be desired and lacks any cognizant parts of the Missouri adverse possession rules.

However, the problem with the Ron Hammers case isn't likely adverse possession to begin with. We're off on a bizarre tangent anyhow.
 
timwinters said:
This seems to be a pretty accurate site on the topic

http://shwagr.com/posts/a-squatters-50-state-guide-to-stealing-property-by-adverse-possession
Click to expand...

The site lists Nebraska as 10 years for adverse possession. I can assure you it is 7. I just went through a challenge a few years ago. A neighbor opened my gate came onto my land and drilled a well on my side of the fence because he felt the surveyed property line was not on the fence line. In Nebraska we have fence laws also. If a fence has stood for more than 7 years and no one disputes its location the fence becomes the boundary. In my case I got a new well. :D
 
Last edited:
flyingron said:
However, the problem with the Ron Hammers case isn't likely adverse possession to begin with. We're off on a bizarre tangent anyhow.
Click to expand...

Well, Ron said his neighbor thinks he owns part of the property.

???
 
I suggest you speak with the closing attorney or title office that handled the closing for your purchase. They should be able to tell you exactly what it is that you own. Relying on information from the tax man's office is not recommended. I wouldn't spend a dime on surveying something I potentially do not own. When you buy property, you normally sign an agreement to correct any errors in recorded documents. This may be just that scenario. Adverse possession has nothing to do with what you described. I've been a real estate professional for over fifteen years, for what it's worth.
 
This is in Missouri.

There are 3 neighbors involded. The blue area the Deed is clear and they (neighbors) own that. This Deed makes sence to everyone involded.
The white is the areas in question. And not real usefull to me.
The total area of the rectangle is 4 acres. The blue "good deed" is about 1 acre. The Green area (mine) is 2 acres so that would mean the white area is less then 1 acre (min the 2 roads)

Now who wants to tell Neighbor 1 about 1/4 of the land you think you own is mine.
Neighbor 2 you are now land locked (no house just lot)
Neighbor 3 about 1/3 of the land you think you own is mine.

Updated picture with road I forgot about and showed neighbors.

The land did have a "spot" survey and the description is what I said but their "drawing" (Spot = drawing only no stakes) shows the area in the green.
I do plan on calling the Title company and the company that did the survey today.
 
Sounds like a typical government office records error and the citizen has to pay to correct. Prolly take a lawyer to tell the assessor that what you bought is what you bought and what they think you bought is their problem. Even then you may have to pay to clean-up the mess. The sad thing is that they probably have the correct documents laying around somewhere and never got around to updating the "book".
 
I hate to say this, but laziness and cheapness is no excuse in real estate. Neighbors often decide they have more land than they do because, well it suits them. If they really thought that they would hire a surveyor and find out for sure. It isn't that expensive. If someone buys a property without verifying the survey and walking it off to be sure, well, no comment.

If you have title insurance, it is tied to the survey and legal description. I would go back to the title company first and see if they'll sort it out.
 
It doesn't appear that any of the three parcels do you a speck of good so, unless we're talking about a significant size, then I'd probably just quit claim deed them to the appropriate neighbors and go down the road. That'd probably be a lot cheaper than trying to lay claim to them, even if you have rightful claim.

Parcel #3 for example, is it a 10' x 30' triangle or a 50' x 150' triangle? If the former, quit claim it away, if the latter then you may want to get clear title and then market it to the neighbor.

And first do what Alex suggested and check with the title company but if you didn't have a survey done then likely you have no survey endorsement.
 
Last edited:
I've been through something similar with a lot in CO, and I'll tell you what I did. It was also during a purchase cycle, the only difference is that I did a quick survey myself and found the errors.

To me, this is pretty important. Not just to protect your land, but to protect your deed. I have no idea how your title policy reads, but more than likely they'll tell you to go get bent, and won't pay a dime unless there's a dispute over actual possession. My title company basically said to have it surveyed, report the survey to the recorder, send a copy to each neighbor, and put up visible markings(not spot/tab) where the actual boundaries are.

So, that's what I did. I let the neighbors know that there were deficiencies in the locations of the lot boundaries, and I was going to resolve it. Then I got a survey who took the info from the oldest source when the land was first parceled into res lots. Then we staked it out, took pictures, pounded stakes with streamers. Sent the new survey into the recorders office(there's a delay of a few months for people to file an objection) they recorded it, and notified the assessor.

One thing I learned, if there's an objection to the survey during the recording notify your title co NOW. Don't wait if one of your neighbors challenges it, let the title company know in writing that there's a cloud on the title they wrote the policy on, and you'll expect them to enforce the title policy as written. I had a lot more trouble with the title company than the neighbor and the recorder/assessor. Meh - maybe my title company were just being buttheads.

YMMV
 
Just for info these are rough sizes
#1 is 150' x 80'
#2 is 80' x 180'
#3 is 200' x 80'
 
ron22 said:
Just for info these are rough sizes
#1 is 150' x 80'
#2 is 80' x 180'
#3 is 200' x 80'
Click to expand...

Interesting, those are some fairly substantial chunks of land. Whatever you do, keep us informed.

Edit: Those are fairly substantial if you're in an urban or suburban setting...about a half acre or a little more total maybe. Out in the country, not so much.
 
Last edited:
A little follow up question for you real estate gurus, Do you buy title insurance and why?
My last real estate purchase was a college condo for our son, the lawyer really pushed the title insurance, I understand the very large commission angle. But, he seemed offended that I wouldn't pay $5-600.00 extra to insure that he had done his job correctly.:rolleyes:
I have bought it in the past, maybe 10-15 times and finally decided that it's a waste of money. I don't know of anyone that has successfully filed a claim, so am I being smart or foolish? :dunno:
 
N747JB said:
A little follow up question for you real estate gurus, Do you buy title insurance and why?
My last real estate purchase was a college condo for our son, the lawyer really pushed the title insurance, I understand the very large commission angle. But, he seemed offended that I wouldn't pay $5-600.00 extra to insure that he had done his job correctly.:rolleyes:
I have bought it in the past, maybe 10-15 times and finally decided that it's a waste of money. I don't know of anyone that has successfully filed a claim, so am I being smart or foolish? :dunno:
Click to expand...


This.....:yes:........:mad2:..
 
Title insurance is a bugaboo, and there is some history of shenanigans associated with it. If you have a loan, getting title insurance is almost always going to be a requirement of the lending company, just like homeowners policy. As for getting paid off, I have to admit, that I've never had one actually pay out on an imperfect title. But - I have heard several situations where the title company that issued the policy went to great lengths to perfect it.

I sold a lot 3 years ago, and my middle initial was missing on the deed commitment. I don't know if I saw it and let it go, or if I just missed it(never use my initial), or what but the title company came back to me and had it resolved with a new recording. They advised me that I had to pay for the change, and I told them the money is spent, and if they want the $165 in fees they can go see Helen Waite. I don't know who ate the fees, but if I was the buyer, I'd make the title insurer pay for it, cuz they missed it the first time.

If you buy and flip, or buy and refi maybe I wouldn't do a title policy if I could get away without it. If you buy and hold, chose the oldest title company on record for your homestead and buy it. The policy is good for the life of the ownership, and with the way things go these days, could save you many thousands if someone takes title to your home through some kind of scam. I don't usually buy title insurance for the previous search and clearance, but to see that the future ownership is protected.

I bought a piece of land in CO out in the country and the way the title policy was written was worthless. It had a bunch of terms like "Property may have surface access to mineral rights, blah-blah-blah, property may be subject to easement from potential electric/gas/water blah-blah-blah". I rejected it and said if you are going to be paid, and you are going to issue a policy, there will be no "MAY/possible/potentially" statements in it. The job is to research and report on the definite articles that you are insuring to convey. It took three tries but they finally ponied up a strict policy. Watch for that when you get your title work.

Also, watch for history of conveyed by a trust. If a trust was involved, have the trust researched. Many property issues come up in fights about trusts from an estate where the dead relative has bickering kids who want everything grampa had in their name. Trusts in RE are a horrible mess.
 
docmirror said:
I bought a piece of land in CO out in the country and the way the title policy was written was worthless. It had a bunch of terms like "Property may have surface access to mineral rights, blah-blah-blah, property may be subject to easement from potential electric/gas/water blah-blah-blah". I rejected it and said if you are going to be paid, and you are going to issue a policy, there will be no "MAY/possible/potentially" statements in it. The job is to research and report on the definite articles that you are insuring to convey. It took three tries but they finally ponied up a strict policy. Watch for that when you get your title work.
Click to expand...

Exactly, you can always object to their long list of exclusions and force them to remove them from the policy...if they want the policy they'll remove them.

Our corporate atty at O'Reilly used to LOVE screwing with title insurance companies. Of course he is an atty so it's a given that he loves screwing with most people just for the sport of it.

I'd like to say that I learned a lot from him but it would be more accurate to say that I learned a little from him but that more importantly we became good friends, and he now writes all my objection letters. I have survey endorsement on the 160 acres I'm sitting in the middle of now...and never had a survey performed. (the local title company still comments on that one every time I enter their office..."we've never seen....")

;)

Good friend with varied talents are very valuable friends!
:yes:
 
WakeNCAgent said:
I suggest you speak with the closing attorney or title office that handled the closing for your purchase. They should be able to tell you exactly what it is that you own. Relying on information from the tax man's office is not recommended. I wouldn't spend a dime on surveying something I potentially do not own. When you buy property, you normally sign an agreement to correct any errors in recorded documents. This may be just that scenario. Adverse possession has nothing to do with what you described. I've been a real estate professional for over fifteen years, for what it's worth.
Click to expand...


Wanna bet.......

This will make your blood boil too.....

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_7494276
 
N801BH said:
Wanna bet.......

This will make your blood boil too.....

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_7494276
Click to expand...

Yup. Very similar to what the OP is facing down the road in 7 or 10 or 15 or whatever years. Get it surveyed, know what you know, notify the neighbors, and depending on the effort involved, fence it and put up no trespass signage. This is why title policy is important.

BTW, I think the judge erred in his justification. The actual owners paid taxes on the property for the entire adversity. Maybe I'm on the wrong track, but if an owner pays taxes on property they do not have to actively use the property for possession to remain. One doesn't walk every inch of one's property regularly in the 'reasonable' world. Additionally, the adversity was of the nature transitive, and not remotely permanent(no structure, no grading, pavement, drainage, improvements, etc) so the transitive nature of the possession weighs in favor of the actual owner and not the trespasser.

There's some shenanigans going on with the "former Boulder mayor" and the judge. I'm pretty certain once it gets to the state where the former mayor is a nobody, it'll be reversed. But - I could be wrong...
 
WakeNCAgent said:
I've been a real estate professional <snip>
Click to expand...

Okay...

I can't resist...

I've bought and sold dozens...hundreds actually...of properties over the last 30 years or so and...

That's an oxymoron if I ever heard one. :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top