Eminent Domain

SPIKER · Sep 5, 2004

JUNKMAN:

CAN YOU SAY HIGH VOLTAGE HIGH TENSIL FENCE!?!? I would fire up a 9+ mile charger to MAX and LEAVE it there even if it is only a 1/4 mile! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif electric fence is CHEAP!!!...

Solar charger and fence can be put in in just about ANY property for a few hundred bucks total... they WILL get the point that it is private property! NOT much you can do to them during the night other than camera survelance. (make sure signs are posted about that then you can legally use the video in court, if it is not under notice then you may not be able to use it, (not sure of laws in N east) IF stuff gets DUMPED on you're place BY campers that are IN the camp ground the camp ground can be held lialable... send them bills certified 500.00 per items for clean up. if they don't PAY in 30 days then you can file a CLAIM aginst their property and any account they have (bank accounts credit cards ect.!) treat them just like a buisness YOU CAN DO THIS make sure the BILLS are copies and are sent requiring a signature...
BILL can be a LEASE for weekend, Bill for clean up or more... they WILL get the point eventually, the video tape can be stated on such & such a date persons from YOU'RE property did this that or the other and damaged my fence/property or un-lawfull use of property..

the ELEC fence WILL provide proof of boundry, and make sure there is a proper survey and clear the line, for a good 20+ feet if possable...

AS for taking property by "Squaters Rights" it can be done, but you WOULD have to do more than JUST MOW it i belive... or else they could claim you MOWED their crop of expensive what nots and YOU would be one paying... remember todays courts you do not have to tell truth to get rich quick... big artical in paper this past week about IMMINATE DOMAIN for a local school... FAMILY of people owned a bunch of acres, school made an ofer 3~4 years back they said yes. THEN they said NO after some of them bought out the rest of the family. then the NEW full owners didn't want to sell, school took them to court and won, now court is trying to decide how much $ they will get for the (less than total amount 130 of 400 acres) (the new owners wanted 375K for the 130 acres) when the school disc already had an agreement (although 3~4 years old) for 323K for all 400 acres.... NOW judge has to decide what the land is worth... something similar happend a few years back for my local school, they ended up having to PAY 30K/acre for land! yes 300 K for 10 acres! well I should say WE (the tax payers) had to pay 30K/acre!

anyhow there were/is a few reasons for the squaters rights laws. (say you invest a lot of time, money and such into developeing some swamp land for many years, you made it nice good and clean land. then the rightfull owner shows up see's it's all worth some $ and wantes to SELL it or USE it for their own ATV use...
well, grass is not a big improvement, it keeps the bugfs down sure but it is not a BIG improvement or major cost to KEEP UP. you have already admitted to using the property for dumping some fill you had to get rid of, with the owners permission no less. sounds to ME like HE has been nice, but his KID with the ATV is like MOST kids today not very considerate!...

BUT a friend of mine, has old property abutting his, it is in bad shpe, he takes care of it, it was taken by the courts many years ago and not sold, as the owner is not dead but in a nursing home... 4 wheelers have been INVADING it and tearing it to shreads, but courts will not prevent it so he has taken it on ihm self to FIX & FENCE it to stop the destruction... this will/can put him into the means of possable getting it at bid price when owner finally dies or perhaps squaters rights... Owner does not have any family that is KNOWN to be alive and the township does not seem very interested in trying to find any of them... old guy is basically a ward of the state for last 5+ years...

anyhow not sure what will happen, one way or the other, just my 2 cents worth...

Mark M /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

RICHARDG · Sep 5, 2004

Well,,it goes without saying that I am not as civilized as most,,and poor,,,so lawyers are generally out of the question,,so that just leaves the uncivilized part,,,,this is fact,,if you try to steal something off me,,,by whatever means,,you may have just made the worst mistake of your life,,,I would go to jail,before I would let a person steal off me,,,,that person wants to turn it up a notch,,well,I'll turn it up one also,,,and we can keep going untill the bitter end,if thats what the other guy wants to do,,,my motto is,,don't bother me,,and I will try not to bother you,,mess with me,I mess back,,,not a bad ****,just a poor hillbilly,thingy

Bob_Skurka · Sep 5, 2004

Junkman . . . I would put up a sturdy fence if I was you.

Junkman · Sep 5, 2004

I would like to, but unfortunately the disputed land is a old trail. We signed quit claim deeds using the center of the trail as the boundary. They claim that I have no right on their half, but they have a right on mine. The only way to resolve this is to go to court and have the judge if they in fact do have a right on my half. All the lawyers have said that once the quit claim deeds were exchanged, that any claim that they had ended. Here is were the problem lies. If I put up a fence, they tear it down. I have already blocked my half in the past and they keep removing the obstacles. The only way now is to go to court and have the judge decide. This is going to be big $$$ again. I have filed the legal paper work that keeps them from getting adverse possession. At some time in the future, I will start the litigation, but it is like wasting money in the end if and when I win. I still won't be able to recoup the costs involved. I have tried to negotiate a settlement, but they won't negotiate in good faith. It is a co-operative campground that changes 1/2 of the directors every year, so there is no incentive for resolution. Their way of thinking is to let the next directors deal with it. Their costs of litigation are distributed over 300 members to pay. Now do you see the problem? No one person will pay very much in the end.

CountryJoe · Sep 6, 2004

( It is this ATV and his tearing up what I have fixed. )

What you have fixed makes no difference,its NOT YOUR LAND.

goodoleboy · Sep 6, 2004

I would not ever consider taking another Man's land unless he owed me money or something.
Build the fence or move away.Tolerence is a must when living in a society such as ours.

CountryJoe · Sep 6, 2004

( Having been there once, I can tell you that you both better have a lot of $$$$$$$. )

You arent telling me nothing there about the money believe me I already know !!!!
I do not think there is any dispute where the property boundry is between Danny and his 4wheeler neighbor/land owner.
If I were you I would put a chain link fence up on the property line and have them arrested for trespassing. In my state there is laws against trespassers.

heehaw · Sep 6, 2004

the local radio station here has a daily call in talk show, they made the mistake of discussing land stealing, of course they didn't say it that way, but they where covered up with calls from folks that have had land taken/stolen from them. it appears to be a very common thing, they haven't brought that subject up any more. and i'm not talking about folks that lose land to a govt agency, this was land lost to other individuals.
heehaw

Bob_Skurka · Sep 6, 2004

Their way of thinking is to let the next directors deal with it. Their costs of litigation are distributed over 300 members to pay. Now do you see the problem? No one person will pay very much in the end.


Junkman, first, I would put up a barrier. Second, since they will tear it down, I would video tape them doing that. Third, I would sue the cooperative, and I would sue the INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBERS, as well as any party who actually was involved in tearing down the barrier.

That combination will get their attention. By individually sueing the board members they will individually have to hire lawyers. So now you will have your lawyer sueing a half dozen or more people and the odds are that those people will not all get the same lawyer and that will then mean that their lawyers will be conferring at a cost of $150 an hour to each of them just to talk to each other. Eventually they may agree to consolidate lawyers, etc but all the time they are individually racking up some bills. And by sueing them individually, they are still in the lawsuit even AFTER they are off the board of directors. So now your suit has all sorts of people involved and some of them will want to back down when they see their names on the suit. Many people don't have a personal lawyer. The campground is a great shield for these people because they get to gang up on you and they get to feel important, and because it is spread out over 300 campsites then they bear little cost.

Now if you were the vindictive jerk that I am, you would sue each and every member of the campground individually claiming that their membership in the cooperative is causing you loss of use of your own property, financial expense (barriers & court costs) and emotional distress (TBN members can attest to the fact that you are cranky because of this issue).

Junkman · Sep 6, 2004

Bob..... I like your idea and may use it in the near future. I just have to get my mindset thinking that wasting $$$$$$ is worth the personal satisfaction that I will get in the end. One problem is that I believe that the court would dismiss most of the defendants and not look kindly on my methods. I wanted to do it that way the first time, but the attorney wouldn't continue the case if I insisted on naming all those people. He said the judge would get angry quickly and I could alienate the court in the end. Three different attorneys have said that it is best to be able to go into court with "clean hands" and to only name the corporation in the suite. The cost of the "service" to 300 defendants alone would cost a small fortune. The notice that was served on them this past spring cost $250 for the sheriff alone. Multiply that number by 300 and it would definitely make it an impractical situation.
As to your referring to me as "cranky", I take offense to that. I prefer that you just refer to me as an "ornery *******". /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Forgot to mention, it would be next to impossible to video tape them doing anything because I would have to stay up 24/7 to watch when they do something. They are sneaky people. When they got into a dispute on another's land, he called the State Police. They (about 18 of them) made false statements and accused the landowner of threatening them. At this point, the State Police dismissed the though of the trespass that they were called there for, and started to hassle the adjoining land owner that called them. The State Police threatened to arrest the innocent adjoining land owner on the word of the 18. I was not there, but this is what was reported to me by the ajoining land owner.