Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I suspect that money will cross hands and Mr. Davenport will get a new curb cut and driveway out of the deal.
I doubt the resolution of this will ever make the news, but I am SURE that you'll be following this mess, Mike. I hope you'll come back and share it with us?
I didn't say there was no such thing as "real estate agents"....but up until the 1990s' there was no such thing as "buyer agency"...
Everyone worked for the seller. An agent's job was to get a house sold and they technically always represented the seller; there was no buyer representation at that time.
I will have to let the buyer's agent I used in 1978 know your thoughts on this.
I think she can get it worked out even now, if she understands the power of negative press and how to use it to her advantage. She can get the guy to cave.
I doubt the resolution of this will ever make the news, but I am SURE that you'll be following this mess, Mike. I hope you'll come back and share it with us?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poggly Woggly
Be interesting to find out what happens. Maybe next your wife needs to get out of the house you can check it out
I betcha there will be a recording at the Register of Deeds when it is unraveled and settled.
I will have to let the buyer's agent I used in 1978 know your thoughts on this.
I think she can get it worked out even now, if she understands the power of negative press and how to use it to her advantage. She can get the guy to cave.
"...Buyers Agent in '78..."
I wanna see THAT buyers agency agreement. I'm curious who drafted it back in the day.
Ok so let's say you were a buyer looking at her property. You go look at it and clearly the driveway for the other house is where it is. I'm going to assume, being the buyer, that that land is not my property. Any normal person would. I'm going to submit my offer based up what I see, which is what was done.
Now, if you were buying the other house, discovering your driveway isn't even on the property you are buying, that is where issues would be magnified!
I would think anyone buying land would be getting a survey, unless you were in an easily segmented development. I can see an argument made for skipping it in that case.
Ok so let's say you were a buyer looking at her property. You go look at it and clearly the driveway for the other house is where it is. I'm going to assume, being the buyer, that that land is not my property. Any normal person would. I'm going to submit my offer based up what I see, which is what was done.
Now, if you were buying the other house, discovering your driveway isn't even on the property you are buying, that is where issues would be magnified!
I would think anyone buying land would be getting a survey, unless you were in an easily segmented development. I can see an argument made for skipping it in that case.
I would feel much more confident in my leverage in telling a seller to cure an encroachment and provide a driveway back onto property I was buying than I would to tell a neighbor to abandon a claim on property I was selling or buying, land that he had been using for 20+ years.
If seller for either lot was aware of the encroachment, but doesn't disclose it, and cannot deliver good title, they may be on the hook for all their buyers' expenses.
Ok so let's say you were a buyer looking at her property. You go look at it and clearly the driveway for the other house is where it is. I'm going to assume, being the buyer, that that land is not my property. Any normal person would. I'm going to submit my offer based up what I see, which is what was done.
Now, if you were buying the other house, discovering your driveway isn't even on the property you are buying, that is where issues would be magnified!
I would think anyone buying land would be getting a survey, unless you were in an easily segmented development. I can see an argument made for skipping it in that case.
As a buyer, I’ve always looked at the published lot dimensions and acreage (.15, .30, .40). I wouldn’t be happy to learn during a survey that my lot dimensions are inaccurate.
For a builder especially, lot dimensions are important. Particularly width in long, narrow lots.
The more I look at all the documents, old maps etc I really think that the driveway is not that bad. It aligns pretty much with the point of ingress off the street that obviously the City or Developer put in so if anyone made the initial mistake then it was them. Dude still should have gotten himself a survey before paving his driveway but this lady has allowed it for years. It cannot be more than a foot (probably just a few inches if that).
The main issue to me is the landscaping area that he put in. According to the article Dude says that "it's a separate issue". From all the pictures I have looked at, I get the feeling he was not happy with how her yard looked and from what I saw on these pictures it did not appear to be very well maintained all these years. It still did not give him the right to landscape that area though.
And I think the man's claim to adverse possession is with the driveway not the landscaping. He does not want to tear up the entire driveway to move it over a few inches especially when she has not said anything in over 20 years!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
