Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: property line situation

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Steve-
Nature's laws regarding the effect of a surcharge from one property to the next do not recognize man made boundaries.  Shouldn't you be looking at the actual effect? 
 
Regrding the legal requirements, I think they are covered in California by Civil Code Section 832, not the Building Code (From www.leginfo.ca.gov website):
 
"832.  Each coterminous owner is entitled to the lateral and
subjacent support which his land receives from the adjoining land,
subject to the right of the owner of the adjoining land to make
proper and usual excavations on the same for purposes of construction
or improvement, under the following conditions:
   1. Any owner of land or his lessee intending to make or to permit
an excavation shall give reasonable notice to the owner or owners of
adjoining lands and of buildings or other structures, stating the
depth to which such excavation is intended to be made, and when the
excavating will begin.
   2. In making any excavation, ordinary care and skill shall be
used, and reasonable precautions taken to sustain the adjoining land
as such, without regard to any building or other structure which may
be thereon, and there shall be no liability for damage done to any
such building or other structure by reason of the excavation, except
as otherwise provided or allowed by law.
   3. If at any time it appears that the excavation is to be of a
greater depth than are the walls or foundations of any adjoining
building or other structure, and is to be so close as to endanger the
building or other structure in any way, then the owner of the
building or other structure must be allowed at least 30 days, if he
so desires, in which to take measures to protect the same from any
damage, or in which to extend the foundations thereof, and he must be
given for the same purposes reasonable license to enter on the land
on which the excavation is to be or is being made.
   4. If the excavation is intended to be or is deeper than the
standard depth of foundations, which depth is defined to be a depth
of nine feet below the adjacent curb level, at the point where the
joint property line intersects the curb and if on the land of the
coterminous owner there is any building or other structure the wall
or foundation of which goes to standard depth or deeper then the
owner of the land on which the excavation is being made shall, if
given the necessary license to enter on the adjoining land, protect
the said adjoining land and any such building or other structure
thereon without cost to the owner thereof, from any damage by reason
of the excavation, and shall be liable to the owner of such property
for any such damage, excepting only for minor settlement cracks in
buildings or other structures.



833.  Trees whose trunks stand wholly upon the land of one owner
belong exclusively to him, although their roots grow into the land of
another.


834.  Trees whose trunks stand partly on the land of two or more
coterminous owners, belong to them in common."

The above is qualified as Jordan suggests: IANAL  :<)
Regards, 
Bill Cain, S.E.
Berkeley CA
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: S. Gordin <mailbox(--nospam--at)sgeconsulting.com>
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Sent: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 10:10:19 -0700
Subject: Re: property line situation

Guys,
 
All this legal stuff is very exciting.  However, at this point, I am much more concerned about the BUILDING code references on surcharges from one property on another.  Can anybody point me in the right direction?
 
Steve Gordin SE
Irvine CA
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: property line situation



On 6/26/06, Jordan Truesdell, PE <seaint1(--nospam--at)truesdellengineering.com> wrote:
I missed the original post, but if you're talking about adverse possession, my memory is that the encroacher/squatter must make their act openly and plainly, such that the owner has a reasonable expectation of seeing the encroachment. The act must also be deliberate, with the intent to use the land which the encroacher does not own. Good records are necessary, as is normally a large amount of time, though I believe it may vary from 7 years to 30 years depending on the state. As they say on the internet IANAL, this is just from memory of a surveying class I took in Maryland, many years ago.
Jordan


Polhemus, Bill wrote:
I don't think you can use this to "sneak" into ownership of property that isn't yours, however. I seem to recall from my days as a survey party chief, that this only pertained if it was done with full knowledge by the original owner that the encroachment was taking place.
 
As it is right now, only the government can come and take your property without due process (e.g. Kelo).
 

From: Daryl Richardson [mailto:h.d.richardson(--nospam--at)shaw.ca]
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 10:10 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: property line situation
 
Steve,
 
        There used to be an old common law principle whereby Party One, who used property belonging to Party Two for many years could actually claim the subject property as his own (possibly on the basis that it had been abandoned by Party Two, the original owner).
******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp * * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to: * * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp * * Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web * site at: http://www.seaint.org ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********



Jordan is correct on this.....the exact rules & time limits vary by state.  

In some states there are parcels by virtue of the way the property  is "recorded or originally deeded" that are exempt from "adverse possession"

Unfortunately, unless the parties can agree on a solution, resolving this may require the use of an attorney.    :(

cheers
Bob

Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. All on demand. Always Free.