neighbor's fence partially on my property

Page 7 of 12  
On 06-29-2013 09:41, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote: <snip> Since you don't like to snip, could you consider finding a newsreader that doesn't quadruple the length of what you quote?
--
Wes Groleau

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Damn straight, that sucked!
--
Dan Espen

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/29/2013 06:51 PM, Dan Espen wrote:

One fellow in this thread added one sentence to a post with 912 lines; yikes!
Jon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It was a very important sentence that needed the other 912 lines to give it context. ;-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And it needed to be quadruple spaced because text needs breathing room.
No smiley included, figure it out.
--
Dan Espen

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In wrote:

the problem lies with trader4. using google groups, replies are double spaced and make ya dizzy scrolling to find the reply
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
ChairMan wrote:

There are about five or six google groupers contributing to the problem, of which he is but one, and he is not the one with the whopper I mentioned above.
I specifically did not single out any members of that subset, because those who give a rat's ass will get the message and trim their posts, and any that remain will have proven themselves as beyond repair. YMMV.
Jon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yeah I know, didn't mean to single him out. Let me rephrase it to google groupers, then<g> Especially when replying to another googler<sheeze>

I don't understand why so many tolerate google with the recent events. There are many free news servers to use, but folks don't use 'em. I'm not sure they can do much about the way google formats their post, but then I don't know much about what options if any they give you. I much prefer a NNTP server over web based anyday
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/30/2013 11:29 PM, ChairMan wrote:

I think it's like anything, really; once a person becomes accustomed to something it becomes ingrained, and more difficult to change. Then there are also some people who might use, say, a work computer, or someone else's computer, so for them having a consistent HTML interface makes sense.
My guess is that those users either don't know what they are doing, because google hides all of the quoted content behind a "Show quoted text" link, or they just don't care. Perhaps we should remind them about etiquette more often, as those who came before us were more wont to do.
Unfortunately, google doesn't care about usenet, and from their behavior since taking over deja, most likely would prefer that it went away entirely. Otherwise they might put up a prompt stating, "Your message is quoting a lot of lines, are you sure about that?", among numerous other things.
Jon
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 06:41:20 -0700 (PDT), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

FTR, 20 years is the maiximum and only true in some states.
I think it's as little as 7 years in other states.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/28/2013 6:00 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
...Major Snippage Occurred...

There's a huge, huge, huge (that's 3 x huge) difference between a dispute involving the incorrect placement of a fence by a contractor when the fence is entirely on the property of the individual that signed the contract and the incorrect placement of a fence onto the property of someone who is in no way involved in the contract.
I seriously doubt that even the same judge would consider an encroachment onto a third party's property equivalent to the fence between placed inside the property line of the land owner whocontracted the fence.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 13:11:41 -0400, DerbyDad03

Well, we have opposite viewpoints on what a judge will due. I'm sure this isn't the first time two people reach different views based on the same facts.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday, June 27, 2013 9:42:38 PM UTC-4, Ashton Crusher wrote:

xpert witness over land issues. Consider the following:

verify that the block is 300 feet in total and find that the first propert y is sitting on 26 feet width and everyone in between has exactly 25 feet. Subdivision is about 90 years old. All houses are about the same age. A judge would find it very inequitable to have every one of the owners mover their improvements by one (1) foot. All 10 of the interior lots are encroa ching on their neighbor by one foot. Fairness and equity are a big part of the law.

What you keep missing is the law says you can't build something on another man's property. The remedy for that is simple. The fence gets moved. This isn't some innocent mistake. It's an overt act of the neighbor or his workmen, not giving a damn and deliberately putting a fence on another man's property, even after being told by the owner not to. You want to now believe that a court is going to get into what is "fair", to make the guy infringed prove that he's really harmed. This is absurd. The court will order the fence to be moved. And it's not that it's impossible to do, it's a tiny backyard with what, 40ft of fence? Good grief.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 6/29/2013 9:14 AM, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

...Major Snippage Occurred...

No argument from me, but just from a practical point of view, moving 40' of fence 1.5 *feet* would probably be easier to do than moving 40' of fence 1.5 inches.
If the post holes had the typical 80 lb bag of cement dumped into each hole, moving them 1.5" is going to be kind of hard - I agree: not impossible, but kind of hard.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, June 29, 2013 11:25:22 AM UTC-6, DerbyDad03 wrote:

An awful lot of bullshit over 1 1/2 inches of space which WILL NEVER BE USED BY ANYONE. This guy watches the contractor build the fence where it now is and THEN complains. Why didn't he say something BEFORE it was completed? He KNEW that it was going AROUND that power pole...by letting the building continue he was by his inaction OKAYING the whole shebang.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

IIRC, he did make it known at the time. Should he have gotten a gun and stopped them?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'll tell you what he should have done based on what I've seen happen OVER AND OVER again on major highway construction projects. IF it was all that important to him that it NOT encroach he should have sent an "inspector" out as the work was being done to protect his interests. In court it would go like this...
Defense Counsel to Plaintiff - So you knew the fence was in the wrong spot and told them not to put it there. Plaintiff: Yes Defense Counsel to Plaintiff - so it was of some importance to you? Plaintiff: Yes Defense Counsel to Plaintiff - Did you tell the contractor why it was important? Plaintiff - I just told him it was in the wrong place, that's all he needed to know. Defense Counsel to Plaintiff - And when the contractor started over building the fence at the second line, did you go check that line? Plaintiff - No. Defense Counsel to Plaintiff - Why not if the location was so important to you? Plaintiff - I didn't think it was my job to inspect his work. Defense Counsel to Plaintiff - So it was important enough to check on the first day, but not important enough to check on the second day when he started over? Plaintiff - no, it was still important. Defense Counsel to Plaintiff - yet you didn't check. Why was it important? Plaintiff - it's my property. Defense Counsel to Plaintiff - And how will the loss of that 1.5" affect your use of the property? Plaintiff - it will just irritate me. Defense Counsel to Plaintiff - - but will it affect where you can park your car or where you can grow flowers, or does it affect the drainage or what? Plaintiff - no, it doesn't affect any of those things, it just bothers me. Defense Counsel to Plaintiff - So except for your hurt feelings, this error has no actual impact to your continued use and enjoyment of your property? Plaintiff - That's right . . . Closing arguments by Defense Counsel - Your honor, plaintiff has admitted that this 1.5" error in no way affects his continued use and enjoyment of his property nor will it affect the value of the property. It may even raise the value since there is now a fence where there was none before. Inasmuch as the plaintiff has demonstrated no actual damages I move for dismissal.
Judge: There has been no evidence presented showing any actual damage to the plaintiff. Therefore I rule in favor of the defense and award them court costs and attorneys fees to be paid by the plaintiff. Perhaps that will send a message that the courts time should not be wasted on these trivial matters.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Not quite the way I see it. To a point I agree the yard is still usable. My conclusion is different.
Judge: For ignoring the law, the contractor must pay damages of $xxx.xx for loss of land use and court costs and attorney's fees. Perhaps in the future you will pay more attention and respect the laws and neighbor's property.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What law did the contractor ignore? Please be specific.
the contractor must pay damages of

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, June 29, 2013 7:48:23 PM UTC-4, Ashton Crusher wrote:

Yawn.... This is like the a defense counsel for a rape case blaming the victim for walking in the wrong neighborhood at night.
And the plaintiff could just say they were not home when it was being done. And then you conveniently assume that plaintiff is going to be so dumb to just agree it's about his "hurt feelings"? Of course he's going to say, my back yard is tiny, I want that 1.5" instead of my neighbor stealing it from me. I paid for it. It's mine. I pay real estate taxes on it, and over the years it's amounted to $500. Pretty weak strawman.

Lame strawman!
It may even raise the value since there is now a fence

Strawman!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.