Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 d-usa wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
If Canada's laws are similar to ours, my main question would be "is his building on your land", but rather "am I being sold land that the owner doesn't own anymore".

Lots of talk about vigilante justice, but the garage may actually be on his land and you wouldn't have any claim to it. That's why lawyers should straighten this stuff out before final contracts are signed, and why Internet help is useless.

I believe the OP noted it had been surveyed and legally reviewed already, but that is indeed a good question.

*Disclaimer: I don't know nothing about birthing no babies property laws*

I wonder what kind of legal review it might have been.

Did somebody just come by and stake the lot based on the old title, was it a title review, did the people who did the survey know that the garage belonged to somebody else or would they even care, would a change in property ownership due to adverse possession even show up in any survey or title paperwork if it hasn't been pursued in court yet, etc?

And that's just my questions based on the tiny bit of "property law" knowledge that I have, which is pretty much none. Situations like that just always seem to be a clusterfeth...

Again good questions. I think the OP said he already consulted a bloodsucker...er barrister. But we don't know really.
PS: I find your new avatar strangely disturbing.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Smacks wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:
So now it is up to me my wife says dont start a fight and be nice I say GET OFF MY LAWN!!!!

Your wife sounds smart. The "get off my lawn" guy was way more badass than you, and he still died, and the people close to him got raped and shot. Back in the real world, you don't want to start some ridiculous feud that drags on for years, pouring money into court battles, and not being able to trust your neighbours because they hate you, you don't need that anxiety. I suggest you work something out with the guy, especially if you're not using the land at the moment. Just make sure you're covered regarding the squatters rights thing.

If the deal is not closed I certainly wouldn't close. This will never be well even if you "play nice." You don't play nice when someone steals your money, which is what he has done, or inversely as DUSA noted, you're been cheated by the property owner into buying property he doesn't own.
Based on this fact pattern, a clown suit, machete, and pigs seem to be your only option.

When I bought my house 5 years ago, everything had to be researched and surveyed to make sure everything was free and clear.

Is this not something done...everywhere else?

 Frazzled wrote:

If the deal is not closed I certainly wouldn't close. This will never be well even if you "play nice."

Agree with this!

And even if it is closed, I'm sure a good lawyer can get you out of this mess.

 Alpharius wrote:
When I bought my house 5 years ago, everything had to be researched and surveyed to make sure everything was free and clear.

Is this not something done...everywhere else?

 Frazzled wrote:

If the deal is not closed I certainly wouldn't close. This will never be well even if you "play nice."

Agree with this!

And even if it is closed, I'm sure a good lawyer can get you out of this mess.

I would never ever agree with guy who's proposing murder over something as trivial as this. Violence is never solution to anything. Or at least good one.

tneva82 wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
When I bought my house 5 years ago, everything had to be researched and surveyed to make sure everything was free and clear.

Is this not something done...everywhere else?

 Frazzled wrote:

If the deal is not closed I certainly wouldn't close. This will never be well even if you "play nice."

Agree with this!

And even if it is closed, I'm sure a good lawyer can get you out of this mess.

I would never ever agree with guy who's proposing murder over something as trivial as this. Violence is never solution to anything. Or at least good one.

No one is actually proposing murder.

tneva82 wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
When I bought my house 5 years ago, everything had to be researched and surveyed to make sure everything was free and clear.

Is this not something done...everywhere else?

 Frazzled wrote:

If the deal is not closed I certainly wouldn't close. This will never be well even if you "play nice."

Agree with this!

And even if it is closed, I'm sure a good lawyer can get you out of this mess.

I would never ever agree with guy who's proposing murder over something as trivial as this. Violence is never solution to anything. Or at least good one.

Do you have something against pigs and clowns with machetes?

Agreed with Alphy this needs to go toa lawyer. Someone has been ed. It might be you. it might be the neighbor.
And remember Home Depot has a "Deep woods machete" that is perfect for...clearing deep woods.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kronk wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
When I bought my house 5 years ago, everything had to be researched and surveyed to make sure everything was free and clear.

Is this not something done...everywhere else?

 Frazzled wrote:

If the deal is not closed I certainly wouldn't close. This will never be well even if you "play nice."

Agree with this!

And even if it is closed, I'm sure a good lawyer can get you out of this mess.

I would never ever agree with guy who's proposing murder over something as trivial as this. Violence is never solution to anything. Or at least good one.

No one is actually proposing murder.

Hey if growing good bacon is a crime, color me GUILTY baby.

tneva82 wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
When I bought my house 5 years ago, everything had to be researched and surveyed to make sure everything was free and clear.

Is this not something done...everywhere else?

 Frazzled wrote:

If the deal is not closed I certainly wouldn't close. This will never be well even if you "play nice."

Agree with this!

And even if it is closed, I'm sure a good lawyer can get you out of this mess.

I would never ever agree with guy who's proposing murder over something as trivial as this. Violence is never solution to anything. Or at least good one.

Good thing I only quoted the part I actually agreed with, and not the over the top for comedic effect only portion of Frazz's rant then, right?

I work for Home Depot and can confirm we stock brush-clearing "tools" that are definitely not the type of thing you'd see in a zombie apocalypse.

Especially not the Fisker ones that may or may not be in the same aisle as the weed wackers.

 Frazzled wrote:
This will never be well even if you "play nice." You don't play nice when someone steals your money, which is what he has done, or inversely as DUSA noted, you're been cheated by the property owner into buying property he doesn't own.

The details of the dispute weren't really clear from what the OP posted. It could be a misunderstanding, and no one is stealing from anyone. He really needs to contact a lawyer and get all his ducks in a row. The OP needs to protect his interests, but the whole "get off my lawn" thing, it sounds like he's getting his ego involved and looking for some drama. That's probably not going to be the best way to handle it, drama is expensive.

 Smacks wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
This will never be well even if you "play nice." You don't play nice when someone steals your money, which is what he has done, or inversely as DUSA noted, you're been cheated by the property owner into buying property he doesn't own.

The details of the dispute weren't really clear from what the OP posted. It could be a misunderstanding, and no one is stealing from anyone. He really needs to contact a lawyer and get all his ducks in a row. The OP needs to protect his interests, but the whole "get off my lawn" thing, it sounds like he's getting his ego involved and looking for some drama. That's probably not going to be the best way to handle it, drama is expensive.

Get fething real.
If the OP bought the property and the neighbor has appropriated that property for his garage that is stealing.
If the OP bought the property thinking it was his but the prior owner already granted it that is stealing.

Do they still sell the big bush axes- aka medieval polearms- used to chop brush. Every time I see one I think how good it would be and chopping zombie heads from a safe distance.

Col. Dash wrote:
Do they still sell the big bush axes- aka medieval polearms- used to chop brush. Every time I see one I think how good it would be and chopping zombie heads from a safe distance.

Last time I was in, I saw splitting mauls as well as woodaxes (I didn't look, but I don't recall seeing wedges present... but then again, I wasn't looking)

 Frazzled wrote:
Get fething real.
If the OP bought the property and the neighbor has appropriated that property for his garage that is stealing.
If the OP bought the property thinking it was his but the prior owner already granted it that is stealing.

Chill the feth out!

The guy said "he had a deal with the last homeowner that it is ok". You can't say anyone is stealing when you don't know the nature of that deal. The OP didn't say whether he was offered the same deal, all he's told us, is that he told the guy to get rid of it. Since the OP seems more interested in making jokes about "get of my lawn", it's possible that he skipped over, in his account (or hasn't even made himself aware of), important details.

 Smacks wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Get fething real.
If the OP bought the property and the neighbor has appropriated that property for his garage that is stealing.
If the OP bought the property thinking it was his but the prior owner already granted it that is stealing.

Chill the feth out!

The guy said "he had a deal with the last homeowner that it is ok". You can't say anyone is stealing when you don't know the nature of that deal. The OP didn't say whether he was offered the same deal, all he's told us, is that he told the guy to get rid of it. Since the OP seems more interested in making jokes about "get of my lawn", it's possible that he skipped over, in his account (or hasn't even made himself aware of), important details.

Sure he can. This was a property transfer. Either the owner transferred the proper interest or he didn't. If he did than the neighbor is committing trespass (sue the bastard). If he did not transfer the proper interest then the owner is liable for fraudulent conveyance (or the Canadian version) (again sue the bastard).

Troy wrote:
Sure he can. This was a property transfer. Either the owner transferred the proper interest or he didn't. If he did than the neighbor is committing trespass (sue the bastard). If he did not transfer the proper interest then the owner is liable for fraudulent conveyance (or the Canadian version) (again sue the bastard).

That a reasonable assumption, but an assumption nontheless. Better figure out the actual facts before you go suing anyone.

 Smacks wrote:

Troy wrote:
Sure he can. This was a property transfer. Either the owner transferred the proper interest or he didn't. If he did than the neighbor is committing trespass (sue the bastard). If he did not transfer the proper interest then the owner is liable for fraudulent conveyance (or the Canadian version) (again sue the bastard).

That a reasonable assumption, but an assumption nontheless. Better figure out the actual facts before you go suing anyone.

I'm pretty sure everyone in this thread has suggested the OP get the facts, talk to lawyers and whatnot. All the other more extreme stuff is obvious jesting.

 Smacks wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Get fething real.
If the OP bought the property and the neighbor has appropriated that property for his garage that is stealing.
If the OP bought the property thinking it was his but the prior owner already granted it that is stealing.

Chill the feth out!

The guy said "he had a deal with the last homeowner that it is ok". You can't say anyone is stealing when you don't know the nature of that deal. The OP didn't say whether he was offered the same deal, all he's told us, is that he told the guy to get rid of it. Since the OP seems more interested in making jokes about "get of my lawn", it's possible that he skipped over, in his account (or hasn't even made himself aware of), important details.

You buy a car from me. The next day as your walking out of work for the day, a chap is REEEEEEEALLY giving it to his girlfriend in the driver's seat. You start to lose your marbles when the sweaty chap says " hey chill out, I had an agreement with good ol KC before you bought this car, that I can fill my lady friend up in your seat. Everything's fine!"

You're going to be completely cool with this scenario right? No?! Ok they same logic really

 KingCracker wrote:
You buy a car from me. The next day as your walking out of work for the day, a chap is REEEEEEEALLY giving it to his girlfriend in the driver's seat. You start to lose your marbles when the sweaty chap says " hey chill out, I had an agreement with good ol KC before you bought this car, that I can fill my lady friend up in your seat. Everything's fine!"

You're going to be completely cool with this scenario right? No?! Ok they same logic really

No, it's not the same logic at all. You can call it unfair all you like, but there are cases where an agreement like that is incorporated into the property and transfers to the new owner. This is why real estate disputes need to go to a lawyer, it's all a complicated mess that doesn't always align with what you think is right.

 Peregrine wrote:

 KingCracker wrote:
You buy a car from me. The next day as your walking out of work for the day, a chap is REEEEEEEALLY giving it to his girlfriend in the driver's seat. You start to lose your marbles when the sweaty chap says " hey chill out, I had an agreement with good ol KC before you bought this car, that I can fill my lady friend up in your seat. Everything's fine!"

You're going to be completely cool with this scenario right? No?! Ok they same logic really

No, it's not the same logic at all. You can call it unfair all you like, but there are cases where an agreement like that is incorporated into the property and transfers to the new owner. This is why real estate disputes need to go to a lawyer, it's all a complicated mess that doesn't always align with what you think is right.

Actually, its the correct logic for what I was making the context about. The poster I quoted didn't understand why frazz or the home owner should be getting upset about what happened. Hence why I changed the situation to my story about sex and a used car. I think the home owner is rightfully upset about the situation, and just to not leave you any chance of missing my point again, yeah lawyers. Period. Never take the free opinion over a professionals opinion.

Col. Dash wrote:
-Permitting issue could be a route to take, did he get permits from the local government plus the inspections to build it? This alone could force him to tear it down.

Well, that's also one of the few things I can think of that would make you build a garage on the neighbor's side instead of your own. He didn't manage to get the right permits for his own side and built one on a property where it was permitted, either with some sort of deal or not.

At least over here properties are often rated for how much you can build so one with free building square meters is obviously worth more than one that's full. You might still need to get inspections but as long as the building you want isn't too out-of-place in the neighborhood it's usually automatic, unlike trying to get permits if your rights are already full.

 KingCracker wrote:
Actually, its the correct logic for what I was making the context about. The poster I quoted didn't understand why frazz or the home owner should be getting upset about what happened. Hence why I changed the situation to my story about sex and a used car. I think the home owner is rightfully upset about the situation.

You're mistaken, I understand perfectly why the guy is "upset", but something being upsetting isn't always the same as something being unlawful, and even something being unlawful isn't always the same as something being deliberate. People were jumping to the conclusion that there is definitely some kind of stealing/scamming going on. All I was saying is that we've heard less than one side of the story. It's difficult to draw any conclusions based on such sparse information, let alone start making accusations. It was other posters who seemed not to understand.

Well that's fair enough then I guess. I keep checking back in this thread just to get an update because of essentially the same reason you mentioned, I'm curious just how the hell a guy managed to build and entire garage on the wrong property and how it was allowed to happen.

There was a story like this a couple years back. Long story short, a guy died and left parts of his farm to his two sons. He left the bulk of it (the actual farmable land) to one son, and the home, yard, and detached garage to the other son.

The problem was that the deceased father had made a little typo in the will. The Property line that divided the brother's property now ran through the side of the detached garage.

Greedy brother #1 had wanted the house, and was mad that was given to brother #2. He ended up painting the property line INSIDE AND OUT of the garage. Eventually he took a chainsaw and cut off the side of the garage that was on his property.

This ended up being ruled legal.

My garage is actually about a foot over the line on one side. When I bought the property I signed a variance agreement that stated such. My neighbor cannot tear it down but I cannot expand or alter my garage without moving it over to my side without my neighbors permission. Luckily we are on fairly good terms and it isn't an issue. We will be altering the garage next spring, hopefully we will still be on good terms.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
My garage is actually about a foot over the line on one side. When I bought the property I signed a variance agreement that stated such. My neighbor cannot tear it down but I cannot expand or alter my garage without moving it over to my side without my neighbors permission. Luckily we are on fairly good terms and it isn't an issue. We will be altering the garage next spring, hopefully we will still be on good terms.

And thats how it should be. Thats an agreed upon situation. The OP is not an agreed upon situation.

What I'm saying is, the seller should have disclosed the issue during the purchase. Sounds like they didn't.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
What I'm saying is, the seller should have disclosed the issue during the purchase. Sounds like they didn't.

Exactly. Having said that, it had to be in writing.

Does Canada have the same law as the UK that contracts involving the sale of land must be written?

I will avoid being insulted by the suggesion that Canadian property/civil law is conducted with nothing more than spit in your palm and a handshake. We definately do have to have it all written down, on the mandated 2' by 4' piece of birch bark written with a #3 piece of coal.

Less sarcastic, yes. In fact, his lawyers are supposed to investigate the deed and any easements or variances that are attached to it. If his lawyer did not inform him of any, and the issue only became apparent when it was surveyed, then either his lawyers are incompetent or there is no such legal variance/easement. I am not up on squatter's right in Canada, but I am relatively sure it does not actually exist. It may be something that people believe exists, or they assume exists because of American/British law, but without a legal agreement that the garage (or carhole, as we call it in Canada), it's illegal.

For my money, I hope he its not closed yet. This is one of those things that can break the deal over.

I'd avoid the whole situation, break the deal, and buy a different house that is not coming with this kind of baggage.

Well I told my lawyer and indeed it is on my land after talking to the neighbor about it and being told to f off. I decided to leave it up to the courts, the lawyer said on nov 1st he will be told he has 30 days to remove it or forfit it. Mostly due do to me fencing in my yard, so he will be unable to get his stuff after that.