trespassingA law dating back hundreds of years to English common law, has been invoked in Colorado to steal a lot a couple were planning to use to build their dream home on.

Boulder couple Don and Susie Kirlin bought a piece of land in the early 1980s some 200 yards from their home. Raising a family delayed their construction plans until 2006 which is when they discovered the land had been stolen by neighbors - although what you and I might call theft, was in fact perfectly legal.

Their neighbors - a former judge and his lawyer wife used something called "adverse possession" to claim the land as their own, even though the Kirlins had paid property taxes and homeowners association dues on the lot for more than 20 years.

And that time period is important.

The judge and his wife pointed out that they owned the land under adverse possession which requires a person to use their property in a way that indicates obvious and exclusive ownership for a required length of time that varies by State. In Colorado it is 18 years - in Florida it is SEVEN.

The Kirlins also lost out because the judge and his wife had used the land. They had walked their dogs on it, created trails, held political fund-raisers - all without the knowledge or permission of the Kirlins. Under the law, the Kirlins did not explicitly prevent the other couple from using the land.

The best ways to avoid this are to walk the land regularly and if you suspect someone is using it without your permission, put up a fence and post "NO TRESPASSING" signs. And most important of all, consult with an attorney.

Last October a district judge awarded one third of the land to the judge and his wife - an estimated $1m value and now the Kirlins are going back to court to see if they can have that decision overturned.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

(Copyright © 2008 By Simon L Conway All Rights Reserved.)

Please give me a call if you have questions about the Central Florida real estate market.  You can reach me on 407 876 8200.  Also visit my web site at http://www.simonconway.net/ or http://www.move2orlando.net/

Also remember to check out my weekly radio show - The Home Team - which airs every Sunday at Noon Eastern and if you are not in Central Florida then you can tune in on line at http://www.540wfla.com/

 
This post has been included in Florida Real Estate News Orange County, FL Real Estate News
Post is included in group: Silent Majority
Post is included in group: Newbies Again

40 Comments on This land is my land...errr....no it isn't!

20 Most Recent Comments Displayed Show All

JAN
12
2008
 Now that was an interesting case.  Thanks for bring a seldom used law to our attention.
11:48pm • #21
JAN
13
2008
125,705 Points 5 Featured Posts Attended Rain Camp
Adverse possession does have it's place.  I've seem people try to tear out other's driveways where no easement existed, and adverse possession was the only solution.  Perhaps the requirements need to be adjusted a bit, but legally they are completely within their bounds, and the law is there for a very good reason, it just seems that it was a poor instance of application here.
12:05am • #22
123,159 Points 4 Featured Posts Localism Sponsor Attended Rain Camp Called Shot Master

California -- five years.  But you have to have paid the taxes on the property.  I've never understood how you would do that if the owners are getting and paying the bill.  Perhaps someone else could explain that.  We do have prescriptive easement, which is open and unpermitted use, also five years.  That sign of yours prevents that, too. 

I hope I never get lost in North Texas.
12:14am • #23
1,550,102 Points 277 Featured Posts Localism Sponsor Outside Blog Hit Router Attended Rain Camp Called Shot Master
Simon-Great points and very important for land owners to understand. We have been involved in such cases. With our next door neighbors it was the opposite. They wanted us to pay to move our fence over to our side of the yard. Since my past broker sold me the house I knew she had built the house and that fence was in that same place since 1984. Well, their attorney told them they would lose the case. So my fence is still there. My argument was that I had a survey to show that was in fact my property not theirs. Katerina
12:52am • #24
122,017 Points 6 Featured Posts Outside Blog
I've heard of this before. We talked about it in the classes to get my license in Pennsylvania. I couldn't believe that a law like that existed. It's horrible. Your post will helpfully get others aware of this law. 
1:15am • #25
Simon, This judge should be disbarred. I'm sure he used his knowledge of the law to take advantage of this couple.  That's sad.
5:03am • #26
I recall learning about this in my early real estate training.  I believe this judge and attorney plotted this for a long time and just because it is the law does not always make it moral or ethical.  It just adds to the public distrust of attorneys in general, which may or may not be misplaced.  This is valuable land that the rightful owners (in my mind) will now have to pay dearly to retrieve, if it is possible.  I hope the public outcry against the thieves is loud and unbearable.  This isn't right.
5:19am • #27
399,140 Points Outside Blog
Simon Just another case of a law that started with good intentions being used to shaft someone. You know the judges are going to stick together. Congrats of the feature I hope your not becoming an _ _ _ kisser.
7:02am • #28
404,039 Points 16 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Bob and Carolyn -  thanks for stopping by.

Robert - interesting way of dealing with the problem!

Jennifer - apparently not, because the couple had paid the taxes.

Jimmy - you're welcome
8:51am • #29
404,039 Points 16 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Jonathan  - This is in my opinion, very poor use of the law.

Elaine - me neither!

Katerina - my understanding is that is the most common use of this law - boundary disputes.

Christy  -  I hope so!

Dan - it does seem that way

Joe - I agree entirely

Hugh - of course not!!
8:55am • #30
462,437 Points 2 Featured Posts Outside Blog
I'll have to see what the limits are here in Mich. I haven't heard of anything like this here but it could be happening as i type. The nerve of people to stael something they know is not theirs.
10:04am • #31

Simon:

Congratulations!

This post has earned featured post status on the Silent Majority group in ActiveRain.

 

 

 

 

 

 
10:10am • #32
556,672 Points 6 Featured Posts Outside Blog
I believe Florida law requires the squatter to pay the taxes for all 7 years and show "color of title" (meaning some sort of proof of ownership).  The Colorado case apparently would not have qualified under Florida law because he did not pay taxes or have color of title.
10:12am • #33
873,435 Points 167 Featured Posts Localism Sponsor Outside Blog Attended Rain Camp Called Shot Master
Simon - You always hear stories like this during real estate licensing classes, but I haven't heard of it happening in such an extreme way to actual people before.  I was familiar enough with the term "adverse possession", but to hear this story is terribly sad to me.
12:10pm • #34
882,832 Points 50 Featured Posts Localism Sponsor Outside Blog Hit Router Attended Rain Camp

Just another example of an old law that should go away.  I guess it would be like the property version of Common Law Marriage. 

Could they go after them for trespassing for holding events on the property without permission? 
12:37pm • #35

At first blush, the laws of adverse possession may seem antiquated and unfair, but they do have a certain social utility.  The doctrine of adverse possession serves to protect ownership rights by barring stale claims and to correct errors in conveyancing.  It's part of a system of checks and balances, so to speak.

I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that one could argue unjust enrichment as a bar to any claim in the instant case.

 
1:07pm • #36
193,564 Points 3 Featured Posts
Since the property is only 200 yards from their home, wouldn't they have known the judge and his wife were using the property, thus giving them permission by not stopping their use? And wouldn't that negate the "hostile use" part required for adverse possession?
2:42pm • #37
1,945,754 Points 477 Featured Posts Localism Sponsor Attended Rain Camp Called Shot Master

Maryland is 20 years and Virginia is 15. 

This law stacks up with the Immanent Domain laws used in some states. 

It stinks.
3:10pm • #38
404,039 Points 16 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Robert - I agree

Bill - thanks for the feature

Rob - I intend to bring a real estate attorney onto my radio show next week to discuss this. If it is English Common Law that is being used, paying of taxes would not - at least on the surface - have anything it do with it as indeed it didn't in this Colorado case.

Jason - truly it makes me sick that people would do this to their neighbors

Lane - it would appear not without the sign or the fence, but I am not a lawyer.

Scott - interesting perspective

Jackie - I am not familiar with the specific details to be able to answer that

Lenn- Eminent Domain is about government taking land. In Florida that is now not possible for economic gain.
9:20pm • #39
JAN
14
2008
556,672 Points 6 Featured Posts Outside Blog
There is a specific Florida Statute that addresses adverse possession.  I believe under Chapter 95.
1:31pm • #40

20 Most Recent Comments Displayed Show All


What does the graphic say?
Leave a response…

(optional)
Spam Prevention:
 
Img_1846 Rainmaker_large

Simon Conway

Orlando, FL

More about me…

Orlando Area Real Estate Services

Office Phone: (407) 876-8200

Cell Phone: (321) 624-3174

Email Me

For the best information on Orlando and Central Florida real estate - especially Windermere, Dr Phillips and the rest of south west Orlando, this is the place to be. Here you will find information on Orlando and Windermere homes for sale and general real estate information.


Listings

Links

Archives

RSS 2.0 Feed for this blog

Find FL real estate agents and Orlando real estate on ActiveRain.