Notifications
Clear all

Sea Change

10 Posts
6 Users
1 Reactions
246 Views
MightyMoe
(@mightymoe)
Posts: 9988
Supporter
Topic starter
 

From a state with the most "liberal" AP laws. 

This would make every AP case, except one, that I've ever looked into become invalid. 

 
Posted : January 23, 2025 8:50 am
(@lurker)
Posts: 954
Member
 

What are the drawbacks? Seems reasonable to me. You shouldn't expect to claim ownership of property that you have not paid the taxes on. If you thought it was your property and you want to make a claim to it based on adverse possession it seems reasonable to expect that you have paid the taxes on the property.

 
Posted : January 23, 2025 1:24 pm
MightyMoe
(@mightymoe)
Posts: 9988
Supporter
Topic starter
 

I'm not against this one. 

It will change AP drastically in the state.

Little if any drawbacks that I can see. 

The only case that I can think of where it wouldn't be a good thing was very unusual. 

 
Posted : January 23, 2025 1:33 pm
Norman_Oklahoma
(@norman-oklahoma)
Posts: 7728
Member
 

Basically adds payment of taxes on the claimed property as a requirement.  That part is common. Nevertheless, it is going to be really hard to positively prove that taxes have been paid on the portion of property being claimed unless that portion is a really large proportion of the whole. It will  effectively eliminate claims on minor strips.   

 
Posted : January 23, 2025 2:23 pm
Williwaw
(@williwaw)
Posts: 3384
Supporter
 

I've seen several AP attempts here, non of them successful, unless of course you were an attorney on the case. Are there any successful AP cases that are worth looking at in your respective states? 

Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get me.

 
Posted : January 23, 2025 2:48 pm

(@rovaut)
Posts: 10
Member
 

I'm aware of a number of instances in which assessors and tax collectors have scoured the property lists to see properties of uncertain ownership, with longterm unpaid taxes, and had people they knew find ways to claim and acquire these parcels.

I've also seen instances where a town will quietly declare town owned property to be excess and of no value, then auction it quietly to someone who miraculously is able to obtain building, well and sewer permits a month later so a house or two can be built.

I'd personally be more comfortable with the burden of proof of your claim riding on you having located the true owners and/or heirs and formally notifying them that you intend to pursue an AP claim, along with notifying the tax collectors who the true owner is, which should start the tax taking clock at the moment the owners have been officially notified.

 

 
Posted : January 23, 2025 2:57 pm
(@bstrand)
Posts: 2359
Member
 

This wouldn't change anything in Idaho that I'm aware of; you already need to be paying property taxes on the land if you wish to have a successful adverse claim.

I actually have not 1 but 2 projects going right now where my client or one of the adjoiners appears to have a legitimate adverse claim, including having met the tax paying requirement.

I don't expect it will rise to the level of court since in each case the claimant appears to be on good terms with the neighbors, but I'm still honestly surprised to find people who have managed to meet the tax paying requirement.

 
Posted : January 24, 2025 8:17 am
MightyMoe
(@mightymoe)
Posts: 9988
Supporter
Topic starter
 

Are there any successful AP cases in the state?

How much time have you got?

Here is one of the appalling ones (at least from my perspective):

Cook vs. Eddy 2008 Wyoming Supreme court

EDMOND A. COOK V. IVAN EDDY :: 2008 :: Wyoming Supreme Court Decisions :: Wyoming Case Law :: Wyoming Law :: US Law :: Justia

 

I'm thinking payment of taxes would nix that one. 

Although can two parties pay taxes on a piece of property? And will the county inform the record owner that someone else is paying the taxes?

 

 

 

 
Posted : January 24, 2025 10:41 am
1
(@bstrand)
Posts: 2359
Member
 

Posted by: @mightymoe

Are there any successful AP cases in the state?

I have a coworker who has seen 1 happen for real and he says the situation is similar to one of my current projects.  I have not heard of any others though.

How much time have you got?

One owner has been occupying the space for 30+ years and the other has been occupying the space for 19 years.  The requirement is 20+ years.

Although can two parties pay taxes on a piece of property? And will the county inform the record owner that someone else is paying the taxes?

These are the sort of questions I might have been asking before I saw it for myself too but both of them are ultimately irrelevant.

In one case Parcel A intended to give a strip of land to Parcel B.  Parcel A or B apparently called the assessor and gave them a rough description of the strip, the assessor assigned the strip a parcel number and started billing Parcel B the taxes on it which Parcel B has been paying for 19 years.  A deed was never recorded for the strip or Parcel B + the strip.

In the other case some siblings inherited their grandparents house in an old subdivision and the siblings hired me to do a boundary survey on the property.  Did the survey which revealed multiple encroachments onto the adjoiner's property which google earth shows having been there since at least 1991.  My survey showed the area of what they have title to to be 0.6 acres.  The siblings noticed the city had been taxing the grandparents on 0.9 acres for the last several decades.  The siblings assume the extra 0.3 acres of tax has been on the encroaching areas which thus satisfies a potential adverse possession claim...

 
Posted : January 24, 2025 11:44 am
Norman_Oklahoma
(@norman-oklahoma)
Posts: 7728
Member
 

Posted by: @mightymoe

will the county inform the record owner that someone else is paying the taxes?

Will the county even know? Taxes are generally accessed on the basis of assessed value. Of which land area is a factor, but it's not a direct relationship.   

The case of Cook v. Eddy hinges on whether the fence was one of convenience, or intended as a boundary. The court heard testimony both ways but found one side more credible.  We see no statement of how big the parcels were otherwise. If these were 4000 acre ranches on each side, as is common, I think, in Wyoming 40 acres, more or less, would maybe not move the tax needle enough.  

 
Posted : January 24, 2025 2:26 pm