Part-time neighbor trouble, stealing signs

FOr the people who have been twisting words and misunderstanding--NO, it's NOT ok for people to steal apples. The OP has a RIGHT to fence off her prop and keep it locked up.

BUT the sign game/war is a natural consequence of the way she moated off her prop(coulda ben done in a more postive manner). I was just trying to say there is a way to build a RELATIONSHIP with new neighbors without having it devolve into an us-them situation(which it obviously has). It's a game to them, they probably could care less now about working things out--that is a dangerous place to be. Just sayin you better face up to that and live accordingly.

__________________
THE BEGINNING IS NEAR
5-star double-rated astronavagatrix earth girl

Thank you Kathleen and Foxy Gram, you actually read what I said!

The Forest Ranger had sent an email to the cabin owners last week, and no more signs were stolen this wee. Because of this, we had a great weekend! And we still have plenty of apples to allow us to stay open for several more weekends. Several of the local summer camps have begun sending their campers to our place and I have offered them a discount. I ask folks how they found out about us and about half saw our sign on the highway. The rest are there because they found us on the internet either on our own website, or localharvest.org or pickyourown.org. Most of our customers from previous years come back again and again, so we saw some familiar faces this weekend.

I keep the house locked up tight while I am down in the orchard, but folks need a potty break after the long drive to get there. I bought a small used travel trailer with a bathroom and set up a canopy in front of it with my table for my sales area. That has worked out well. I ordered a waste transfer tank on wheels that hubby can tow behind his ATV so we can empty the waste tank on the trailer and transfer it to one of the septic tanks on the property.

Foxygram, your story about those folks pushing their way into your house is scary! Have you considered getting security screen doors? I have them at the ranch, and they have doorknobs with locks and deadbolts just like a regular exterior door. If you lock yourself in, and someone comes to the door, you can open your solid door and talk to them, and they can't come in unless you unlock the security screen door to let them in.

__________________
I yam what I yam and that's all what I yam.

Popeye

I appreciate your concern about my safety. My problem with the doors is that most of them need repair, screen and inside door both front and back. So I don't have actual locks that work right now. Also, family members live in a trailer and use the indoor facilities, washing clothes and eat inside most of the time. It got to be such a hassle with the locks that eventually everyone just quit locking up. Yes, it bothers me greatly but have so many things needing fixing right now that it is not getting done. No one else will help me in any way to do the fix and repair so it takes a very long time for me to finish a project such as replacing a door because of my physical limitations. When I lived in the city I always had storm doors that needed a key to open.

How those guys got in the house was very slick. One man comes to the door and asks about the place across the street for sale saying he could not see a house. I replied that I did not see how that was possible as I could see it out of my dining room window. He then pushed by me and asked me to show it to him out the window. The next thing I know another man is pounding on my window holding a small child saying can you let me in my daughter has to go to the bathroom and then walked right by me. Had I not kept my cool I believe I would have ended up like the woman and child they knifed. By some miracle my granddaughter and great grandson who were upstairs at the time never made a single sound until they were out of the house or the result might have been entirely different. I joked around, treated them like they were neighbors who had just stopped in to visit. Told outrageous stories about my dog attacking night prowlers, none of which were true. Then when there was no sign they were leaving I got out of my chair and said my husband is due home and walked toward them and herded them out the door. Funny, they never even slowed down at the driveway of the house that was for sale.

Now the rest of the story. The very nice man who owned the property and we kept an eye on it for him as he lived in the city lost it to tax delinquency. He was very sick and dying so I don't think he even cared anymore. The property was so primitive, hand pump, outhouse and log cabin, that it had flowers growing on it that are not even listed as still wild in our state. It was a haven for deer and wildlife of all kinds. We live on a 1 mile stretch of gravel road so was very quiet back here. The new people from the city bought it and tore it up completely, putting in campsites for their friends and 4 wheeler/motorcycle trails throughout the entire property. Weekends are like motorcycle racing events from early morning till late evening. I sat by my window one Saturday morning reading and counted 47 cars and about 30 motorcycles driving into the property. We are still good neighbors. They are over here constantly borrowing equiptment, tools, etc. But in my opinion, my nice quiet farm has turned into weekends from hell. According to some posters above you brought this problem on yourself. I do not for one minute believe that. I think you have gone overboard in your attempts to find a peacable solution and retain your rights to use your ranch for what it was intended to be. I hope you have another nice weedend. Foxy

Maybe those people finally had a light bulb moment and realized that the traffic to your farm is way better than herds of campers. I hope things improve now.

Since you have gone to great lengths to be friendly and meet your neighbors, I'm not sure what else you should be expected to do. Being neighborly is one thing, being a doormat is an entirely different matter.

I hope you don't have anymore problems and can enjoy a successful season.

Im sorry I wasnt clear their right to continued use isnt about when it was stopped its about how long they used it and the law in Cali.

Wow that sounds like the attitude of the NPS and Forest service in Alaska towards those on the land in the 70's and 80's
You wouldnt have had anything to do with that would ya?

Were they squatters or did they have title? Makes all the difference in the world. Those with title were bought out... those without, I don't know what they did... Some, with titles, retained their inholdings.

Some of the inholders were saints, some were cancerous demons... don't know of any one that got burnt out... at least by the govt. Course, I could be wrong... I lost my all seeing/all knowing abilities a few years back.

I 'was' in AK in the early and late 80's... don't recollect lighting any matches or wreaking havoc.

--------------
Some people love people... more power to them... I wish them all the love in the world... and hope they all congregate together in one great big lovefest... in those environs we call cities.

__________________
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity. Seneca
Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival. W. Edwards Deming

Makes me wonder .... Are some of the vandals actually dope growers?

So they have the right to continued use even if the property has new owners? That doesn't make sense to me. If the previous owners were aware and didn't care, that's up to them. But new owners shouldn't be responsible for the previous owners' choices.

I thought the law was in regard to continued use that the owners knew about and allowed. New owners neither know about what the previous owners allowed or have any responsibility for those choices. It would seem like the time would have to "start over" once a new owner takes over.

If I bought land that neighbors were using for their own purposes previously, I certainly wouldn't be legally required to allow it to continue just because I now own the property. What is the point of owning something if you cannot do what you want and are restricted by what the previous owners did? (the exception is if the land has written, legal covenants, of course)

Maybe I'm just not getting something here because it just makes no sense at all. Either that or California is weirder than I thought it was. In either case, it is very strange.

Perhaps Fantasymaker is a lawyer and can explain her statement better. Or perhaps she doesn't realize that the neighbors live elsewhere and seldom visit their cabins. None of them have any claim to our property, and couldn't win an adverse posession case here if they tried.

From Findlaw:

The doctrine of "adverse possession" is one of the most interesting in the field of real property law. The character of the law reflects the pioneer spirit of a growing world in both North America and Europe over the last few centuries.

If a person moves into possession of property, improves it and possesses it in a public manner, then after a certain amount of time he will acquire title to the property even though it is actually owned by someone else. The idea for adverse possession has at its root that land should not lie idle. If it does, it is wasted to the community. Therefore, if someone moves onto the land and makes it productive, that person may earn the right to claim it as his or her own. It is also reflective of the imprecise nature of ancient land sales: a person who believes he owns land, establishes himself on it in public, and is not hindered after a period of time, should be entitled to own the land.

Requirements

The basic requirement for adverse possession is that the claiming party must take exclusive possession of the property. This type of possession is called "open and notorious" or proactive and absolutely not secretive possession. Some states require that the possession be "under color of title," or that the person must believe that he has the right to possess it and has some form of document or is relying on some fact that while not actually conveying title, appears to do so. In addition, many states require concurrent the payment of property taxes for a specified period of time, and a few states also require that improvements be made upon the land. Eventually, the possessor is required to file for title with the county recorder. The actual owner then has a limited amount of time in which to challenge the newcomer's title. Essentially, the owner's only argument is to claim some sort of disability; such as age, mental instability, or imprisonment. The owner is not required to do much in order to stop the possessor from acquiring title; merely sending the possessor a note granting permission to be there will usually suffice. Various rules exist regarding the continuousness of the possession and the ability to "tack" various periods of possession together in order to satisfy the time of possession requirement; see your state codes or the code of the state in which you are interested for more detailed information.

None of the cabin owners have any kind of possession of our land. We have sole possession. None could claim continuous use when they only visit infrequently.

The highlighted section about sending them a note giving them permission to be there happened when I sent the email to the cabin owners telling them the dates I was open for You Pick and offering them a discount on the apples. Two of the cabin owners have already taken me up on my offer. It was a nice gesture on my part and fulfilled this requirement of California law. It also specified the times and dates they could be there.

Their presence on the property can't be "open and notorious" if they have permission to be there.

__________________
I yam what I yam and that's all what I yam.

Popeye

I live on a century farm that was homesteaded and owned by one family for over 100 years. A few weeks ago, I was just sitting down to a big dinner with compnay when a car pulled in at the end of the lane. A woman and her kids got out and went into the orchard. I walked down to see if there was a problem (maybe the sheep were out or she'd hit a chicken) Nope, she just told me she was here to pick apples since it was her grampa's place. I thought about it for a minute. Those apples were mostly going to be eaten by the critters anyways, so I told her to go ahead and went back to my dinner.
It wasn't long before she drove all the way up and started picking my good apples behind the house. Then she knocked on the door and asked if her kids could have a look thru grandpas house. I guess she got me on a good day because I did show the young kids thru quickly. I also quizzed her on her life and she did apologize for interrupting our dinner.
Where I live, no one ever locks their doors or vehicles. I knew many folks that this lady is related with and felt comfortable with her story. However, I still think she had some nerve asking me for more bags so she could pick more of my apples....

I would have said something to the lady. The family sold "Grandpa's place" and his apple trees and the fruit of those trees. I would have given her my phone number and told her that in the future she could call and ask permission to pick apples. And I wold have told her that she was fortunate that you were in a good mood!

__________________
I yam what I yam and that's all what I yam.

Popeye

I hope you enlightened her to the fact that it was no longer "grandpa's" place and that in the future, if she wanted some apples, that she needed to stop by and ask FIRST. If you didn't do this then she probably feels like she has the right to just drop by any time and help herself. This could be very problematic in the future.


.

__________________
If your presence can't add value to my life your absence will make no difference...

玉

(名)三位一體; 三個一組; 三人一組
.

I am a practicing attorney who lives in California, and you couldn't be more wrong about adverse possession under California law. In addition to the fact that CT's situation doesn't meet the basic elements of adverse possession, the California Legislature effectively eliminated adverse possession several years ago by adding a requirement that any party seeking to claim an interest in land by adverse possession must show they paid property taxes on the land for the entire statutory period. Needless to say, the person attempting adverse possession won't receive the property tax bill, and most counties wouldn't permit the adverse possesser to pay taxes on another individual's property.

Your post indicates you live in Illinois. If you're going to make comments about the law in other states, perhaps you should read the statute first.

Perhaps you should read the other persons comment first before you comment yourself? The part of my comments you yourself quoted should have made it clear to anyone that adverse possession depends on a LOT of things ,including As for it not meeting the basic elements of adverse possession , she didnt fill in the details but where she was going certainly hinted at what might be a valid adverse claim in some places. Please remember the entire world isnt about cali and that many who read these pages will apply the knowlage gained here to their own situation in other places.
So to be perfectly clear as to where I was going.
In some places if you allow someone to use something long enough they then have the right to keep useing that thing. It takes a certon period in most places and once that period is perfected the claim is valid even though as time might pass others might try to cut of the claim.
For instance lets say that in the state of Wittier the claim period was 400 days and in 1921 and 1922 for a continuous period of 400 days the local gas station in this frontier place allowed local residents to get water from their faucet. At that point the claim was perfected and valid. Even though the station was sold in 1940 and no one agin tried to use the water till 1958 even then at that point 36 years later the local residents still have the right to that water. EVEN though the current owner might know nothing of the claim.
Might be sorta hard to prove though....................

fantasymaker, you clearly misread my posts. I never implied that anyone was laying he groundwork for an adverse possession claim.

I also never said the entire world is about California, however that is where my ranch is located, and the laws of California do apply to my ranch. I listed my location, and others who read my posts know what State I am from.

__________________
I yam what I yam and that's all what I yam.

Popeye

I read the entire thread before I posted, and I stand by my comments. The world doesn't revolve around "cali," but this thread certainly does because CT lives in California. Your posts made it very clear you believed adverse possession could apply in CT's case. In fact, you even made a comment about her "admitting" to adverse possession by posting on this board.

I'm sure you were trying to help when you made your comments, but comments that misstate the law are neither helpful nor constructive. It's been said that a little knoweldge is a dangerous thing, and this is particularly true when it comes to the law. You may be generally familiar with the notion of adverse possession, but your most recent post makes it clear you don't understand the common law elements of an adverse possession claim, let alone the elements necessary to make a claim under California law. Adverse possession is an attack on title to real property. You can't aquire the right to continue picking apples by adverse possession. For that, you would need another common law remedy, proscriptive easement, and for reasons I won't get into here, that remedy also wouldn't apply to CT's situation. Your "state of Wittier" hypothetical would be another example of proscriptive easement.

I'm not trying to nit-pick or single you out for criticism. I chimed in because your comments on adverse possession were very off base, and people here at HT aren't going to be able to constructively apply "the knowlage gained here to their own situation in other places" if they receive bad information.

Thank you Mo-Town. I appreciate your input!

__________________
I yam what I yam and that's all what I yam.

Popeye

If you want to educate people here about the law, all I can say is, "Good Luck."

I've tried to reduce the sum total of ignorance regarding the law on this board. It's like trying to bail out Lake Superior.

Huh The original post I'ld say plant poison ivy or some other skin irritant. Maybe brambles or prickly shrubery to discourage going near your signs.