Range wars

[bobm]

On our noon news just now in Vancouver, Wa. --- facts very sketchy as it just happened about an hour before... at a court hearing where a landlord rented some acreage land with a house on it to a 53 year old man who sublet some of it and resulting in a junk yard of sorts. Landlord took the matter to court to evict the man and subleasee. This tenant shot a man in front of the court house and drove off with the sheriff, city police, swat team in pursuit. Shut the highway and interchanges, streets, etc. then this man baled out of his car and into some woods, where there were about 7 shots fired by the swat team. Then the man shot himself.

 

[baymule]

There's nuts everywhere.

 

[Smart Red]

I appreciate your concern about the lack of an attorney, but it would cost between $8,000 and $10,000 for an attorney to take our case through the court system. That makes the land I purchased 40 years ago cost an additional $16,000 to $20,000 an acre and I still might lose and incur further costs.

I have consulted an attorney (at his hourly rate) for some specific questions, but can't afford having him represent me at that price. It would be cheaper to give them the land they covet, but I'm afraid to, because I honestly still don't know how much land they expect or where they think the boundary line should be.

For a court case, the disputed property SHOULD be a well-defined area, but the paperwork from their attorney describes one section and then includes other landmarks outside that section as part of their land as well. I am hoping the judge will take that into consideration when deciding whether to assess charges against me. Especially since this case is costing the neighbors zero.

When they called the Sheriff to report our trespassing on "their" land they showed the deputy a line of stakes -- ones I put on some non-disputed land of mine to prove they never did and still don't know where their property lines are -- that would have run through our house (if extended further) as being a fence line and their boundary.

 

[seedcorn]

RED, this the strangest case I've heard. There has to be surveys somewhere which should settle this.

 

[Smart Red]

There were two surveys done on the property within the past 45 years. The first was to divide the whole 60 acre farm in half (exactly). This was done before the purchase by our first neighbor about 3 years before we bought the second half. That neighbor knew and knows where the true boundary lines ran and will be testifying for us.

Before we purchased, we required a survey be done. Unfortunately, what was shown was done incorrectly. The first neighbor, Mr. B. knew the survey was wrong, but took didn't address the mistake since it was to his advantage. Still, he didn't use or maintain the 'extra' land because he felt uncomfortable with his mistake (and perhaps) feared a future survey would reveal his fault.

At that time, 45 years ago, it was not a legal requirement that surveys of large tracts of land be registered at the courthouse so the surveyor just kept the records. Once he died, the records were gone as well. Neither the new neighbors' survey nor their deed shows them owning the property in question.

My paper does not show me owning the property in question although a letter on the back (dated 1987) clarifies that the missing 15 feet belong to us as what we were given was a "preliminary survey" and my deed correctly shows that the property is ours.

Mr. B has given us a Quick Claim Deed to the (15 feet) property in question. Since, as he states, the property is not and never was his, the deed is solely to clarify for the court that we were and are the owners.

Who knew 45 years ago that additional records needed to be found, documented and kept -- just in case.

 

[seedcorn]

A new survey cant be done? Has to be center point somewhere where all surveys start.

 

[Smart Red]

A new survey was done by the neighbors. It shows that they do not own all the land they thought they owned. Not from the deed. Not from any landmarks. Nope, what they thought they owned was what they imagined for the past 16 years. They imagined a shore section of fence was a line fence. Nope! They imagined 8 feet west of the shed was a legal necessity. Nope, not 40 years ago. They imagined what they could see was theirs until they saw us working on it.

They now have the correct survey information and still do not know exactly where their property ends and ours starts. Because of the landscape,attempting a visual estimate of the boundary lines has always been next to impossible, but they know they are right and a survey they paid for isn't going to change their minds. They thought it was theirs for 16 years so it must be. Their attorney is simply going on the information given to him. That's his job. Once we get together I suspect there will be a speedy solution, but right now, anything I try to say to their attorney is suspect.

Fortunately, I do have records.

 

[baymule]

Red, I'll come up there and open up a six-pack of Texas whup-ass all over them and stomp a mudhole in their face fer ya'!!!!

 

[Smart Red]

I appreciate your enthusiasm and intentions, but I much prefer instructing them -- this is an ideal teachable moment -- in proper civilized behavior before I find a mudhole.

 

[baymule]

Be sure to wear proper mudhole stomping BOOTS!!