Adverse possession? in North Carolina? Really? Don't let an "ambitious" attorney get your hopes up.
I see this stuff everyday. This is a product of cheap surveyors, cheap land owners, cheap attorneys and possibly cheap real estate brokers and/or developers.
It's astounding, although not surprising, that it was possible to beckon six surveyors to such a mess. People will never learn.
I would avoid any mention of lot numbers, because this was a protracted subdivision and description by lot of questionable location is the root of the problem. The only way to recover from this original source of error is to eliminate it from future use. We do that by use of coordinate systems and physical monuments. There are particular ways to write the new description that depend on all the surrounding circumstances. Others may have different ideas, but that's mine.
So, you have some iron pipes there, but I would add some ties to the foundation corners of the house, maybe add some coordinates to the pipes, maybe tie to something permanent completely off site.?ÿ The idea is to perpetuate the location with sufficient backup information.?ÿ This happens in modern subdivisions because all lot corners are monumented before sales, so loss or movement of a few can be detected.?ÿ And if everything gets disturbed the coordinates can be used.
In NY, if I could prove those facts with a fair degree of certainty we would win in court. Through retracement law, not adverse possession. Not sure how NC law deals with it.
Yea, I get it, the neighbors want a judge to rule the cousins map is their property through proration. In the event judge decides against it, they threw in an adverse possession claim. We were thinking we had a better shot at that than they do.
Seems like this case is more a matter of law that a matter of surveying. We have a documents saying it??s our land through conveyance, title, taxes, known monuments, and possession. Seems like it would take a lot to change that?
Thanks Duane, I would love for a surveyor to put coordinates in on that pipe and tie it to the grid which is 1300?? away. Problem is, none have done so, and you can??t really tell an man how to do his job.
Title, who owns a piece of property, is usually a different matter from boundary, where the limits of that property are.?ÿ Sometimes they do get intermingled, but generally shouldn't - an argument over a boundary location should not be based adverse possession but rather on acquiescence and practical location. Except SC law does not support acquiescence as much as many other states, so your neighbor threw in adverse possession.
The deed description is to help identify and find the property, but not definitive to control the limits of the property, because of the other factors mentioned in earlier posts, especially that by Holy Cow. ?ÿ Paying taxes relates to title, not boundary.
Existing monuments should carry some weight, but as explained above may not always hold.
You bought the place without a survey. The deed didn't, and doesn't, match the uses and occupations.
You bought the place without a survey, you were friends with your neighbors until you got the notion you wanted everything your deed says you own. You probably bought it based on what you saw, so in a way you tacitly agreed to the existing occupation when you bought it.
The nicest possible thing you could do to regain face in your community would be to get the current uses and occupations surveyed as-built and as-used, and use that survey to revise the deeds, quit-claiming or granting easements as needed.
If a course of action produces joy, peace, harmony, certainty, predictability, or closure, it is easy to get support for it.
If a course of action will only produce misery, anger, fear, uncertainty, it will only get support from those who like, or profit from, that sort of thing.
This might be why some of those surveyors decided you were a coyote fork situation and chewed their arms off (unpaid hours of their God-given lifetime) to escape the misery trap.
Choose joy, apologize, bury the hatchet, have a barbecue and be friends again.?ÿ Free advice.
?ÿ
When we first moved in two years ago, the neighbors said the previous owners ??gave? them a pie slice. It??s just too bad that neither of the parties made it official.
It doesn't take a written agreement to establish a legal boundary. And the fact that a person starts cleaning up land that is possibly not theirs doesn't make it theirs. The court would look for evidence of the agreement. How long ago? What evidence if any is there on the ground of an agreement and has it been continuous? Is there oral testimony of the previous owners that there was an agreement ? The answers to these questions would carry more weight with the county than any surveyors measurements or marks.
I make my comment having only given the posted deeds and map a quick once over. There is plenty I don't know about the specifics. Nevertheless, here goes:
The 1999 deed contains dimensions that suggest that the property corner monuments are not nearly at the dimensions the 1950 map and deed description prepared from it say they should be. Nonetheless, the monuments are called for and therefore their positions are the controlling factors, not the quoted dimensions. Trouble is that 70 years after the fact many of these monuments are very likely gone, any remaining ones may be difficult to find, and those might be remote from your property. Putting Humpty-Dumpty back together again may be quite a challenge.?ÿ Your first surveyor may well have failed to realize that there was such disagreement between dimensions and monuments. Those that followed the 2nd may not have either until you pointed out the 2nd's results. In the end, 3 through 6 agree with 2. So it's 5 against 1. And who knows? If your show No. 1 the results of No. 2, he might change his opinion also.?ÿ
For the record - I see at least a full day of field work recovering monuments and a half day to set new monuments, a few hours of research at the courthouse, a few hours of professional boundary resolution, and 4-6 hours preparing a map documenting the whole thing. So I'm spending 3 full days on this at least. Probably more. Hourly rates vary, but if you are getting guys to sign up for this for hundreds, rather than thousands, of dollars it is no wonder that they fold up and run away when they see that they have run into a buzz saw.?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ?ÿ
When we first moved in two years ago, the neighbors said the previous owners ??gave? them a pie slice. It??s just too bad that neither of the parties made it official.
It doesn't take a written agreement to establish a legal boundary.
Very possibly the previous owner gave them permission to use the "pie slice". Which would preclude any legally enforcable unwritten agreement line.
Forget hiring another surveyor.
I would suggest leasing a the parking area to the neighbor 1 year term renewable every year until they transfer ownership
..."if you are getting guys to sign up for this for hundreds, rather than thousands, of dollars it is no wonder that they fold up and run away when they see that they have run into a buzz saw."
I think that sums up the situation
myself I would want a retainer of More than $5,000 to investigate the situation and make a Preliminary report. I expect the $$$ to go way beyond that to reach resolution.
The Lawyers have probably already bled you for more than that already.
***my advice, since saving $ seems to be of your highest importance: Have a nice afternoon on a park bench, decide where you Both want the lines to be.
That would be a "boundary line agreement" ... drive some posts in the ground to mark the corners. Then get a Surveyor to make a Map (have him file/record it in the public records!) and write a "legal description".
Provide that map and description to your Lawyer. Have him formalize it and get notarized signatures (include lenders) and get it recorded.
My best wishes... Peter
I'm not licensed in your state, but here are some general answers to your questions posed in the OP.
"my question would be, what are the land principles about holding monuments that have been in place and observed for over 70 years?"
There may be many legal principles involved.?ÿ Far too many to list all of them and how they may apply to your boundaries in this situation.?ÿ It sounds like none of the previous surveyors have taken the time to properly explain the legal principles they have employed (if any).
?ÿ
"at what point can you change the parallel bearings for each lot?"
Surveyors can't?ÿ"change" the parallel bearings.?ÿ What should be happening is the retracement of the boundaries.?ÿ Chances are, when the boundaries are properly found, the current/reported bearings and distances will not match the record bearings, distances, and angles, nor will the lines be exactly parallel ?ÿ- that's just the way it is.?ÿ The record bearings, distances, etc., usually do not control the location of the boundaries - they are guides to be used in finding the actual boundaries and corners.?ÿ?ÿ Far too many people (including surveyors) erroneously believe the bearings and distances in a deed, or on a plat, solely control where boundaries are located.?ÿ
?ÿ
"is it proper to prorate distance and disregard parallel lots and original monuments?"
It depends.
?ÿ
North Carolina has a lot of Acquiescence and Agreed Boundary Cases:
510. Carney v. Edwards
Supreme Court of North Carolina. December 13, 1961 256 N.C. 20
Headnote: That prior deed did not refer to survey did not prevent parties from showing what they did to locate land conveyed.
Document Summary: Action to remove cloud from title to tract. The Superior Court, Wake County, Heman R.
Clark, J., rendered judgment for plaintiff and defendants appealed. The Supreme Court, Rodman, J., held that
where deed used southwest corner of land of named person as part of description and lines of named person's
land must be located before controversy as to ownership of specific area could be determined, court should
have undertaken to locate named person's lands by applying parol testimony to description in deed conveying it.
New trial.
511. Wagner v. Bauman
Supreme Court of North Carolina. May 3, 1961 254 N.C. 594
Headnote: Admissions and parol agreement as to location of a boundary were competent evidence of place where boundary
was located, but neither such admissions nor parol agreement could, in fact, change boundaries of a deed and vest title to
land not conveyed.
Document Summary: Action in trespass to try title. The Superior Court, Watauga County, J. W. Pless, Jr., J.,
entered judgment for plaintiffs and defendants appealed. The Supreme Court, Rodman, J., held that instruction
that plaintiff was entitled to prevail if the jury found that there was an agreement in 1946 that the line was as
contended for by plaintiff was prejudicial error, as neither such agreement, nor any admission made in 1946
could, in fact, change boundaries of 1945 deed and vest title to land not conveyed by such deed. New trial.
512. Geddie v. Williams
Supreme Court of North Carolina. April 1, 1925 189 N.C. 333
Headnote: Adverse possession and use of lands in dispute are competent on question of location of dividing line.
2 Cases that cite this legal issue
Document Summary: Appeal from Superior Court, Cumberland County; Calvert, Judge. Action by Simon
Geddie against N. A. Williams. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. New trial granted.
513. Becton v. Goodman
Supreme Court of North Carolina. February 23, 1921 181 N.C. 475
Headnote: In a proceeding to determine a boundary line, the court properly permitted a witness to be asked, over plaintiff's
objection, the question, Up to the time that lots 5 and 6 got into the ownership of the same parties, how did the owners on both
sides work in reference to the line in controversy?
Document Summary: Appeal from Superior Court, Craven County; Connor, Judge. Proceedings to determine
boundary line by J. W. Becton against E. A. Goodman. From an adverse judgment, plaintiff appeals. No error.
514. Becton v. Goodman
Supreme Court of North Carolina. February 23, 1921 181 N.C. 475
Headnote: In a proceeding to determine a boundary line, the court did not err in permitting a witness to be asked and to
answer over plaintiff's objection the question, with reference to a given matter, Where did the owners of a lot farm? the answer
being that there was a pine thicket where the line went through, etc.
Hahaha, yes. I would totally do that. The only problem is how they went about it. See the neighbors on the back tract 2 with the boundary agreement made it known early on that they are interested in our property and would purchase for a bit more than market value. We declined of course because we purchased the lot with the same interest. The neighbors that are disputing the line have carefully and methodically used deception to make us believe that what we purchased isn??t ours over 1.5 years. It came to a point where we stopped entertaining or being friendly to their nonsense, which at that point they (we believe) have performed a small town land surveying SHAKE DOWN. Their cousin literally has suspended anyone from completing any honest work for us. I have yet to receive any completed work from a surveyor hired of a boundary retracement per our deeds and original monuments. It??s kind of comical except for the whole litigation side of this. I don??t like being a victim in any circumstance and at this juncture that is the position I am in. I did entertain the idea of letting her park, but you have to be honest, you can??t be a snake in the grass or weasel about it. If they would have come to me from the beginning saying hey, you know, the parking situation for us isn??t great and we would appreciate your help until she gets out of college... I would have been neighborly and obliged. College age girl lacks respect, it was wherever the car stopped, no thought put into her driving, just wherever the car stopped.
