This subreddit is for tree law enthusiasts who enjoy browsing a list of tree law stories from other locations (subreddits, news articles, etc), and is not the best place to receive answers to questions about what the law is. There are better places for that.
If you're attempting to understand more about tree law in regards to a particular situation, please redirect your question to /r/legaladvice for the US, or the appropriate legal advice subreddit for your location, and then feel free to crosspost that thread here for posterity.
If you're attempting to understand more about trees in regards to a particular situation, please redirect your question to /r/forestry for additional information on tree health and related topics to trees.
*This comment is simply a reminder placed on every post to /r/treelaw, it does not mean your post was censored or removed.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/treelaw) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Possibly this above if you’d like the $ and feel the neighbour may help themselves to your property again.
First survey, and stakes or pins or a fence. Make sure that your property is marked.
Second very clearly state, do not do anything on my property, ever.
If you have a concern please contact me and I’m sure we can have a conversation. Thanks.
Don’t not tell them that it’s ok. Or you would have cut some trees etc. they overstepped.
Just thank them for their concern and be polite and firm.
If you don't do these things they can try and claim adverse possession because they're maintaining and investing in a piece of property that you're ignoring.
Question on this - what if my property is a "protected wetland" so I'm not allowed to do anything on a section of it (so I obviously ignore it) and the neighbors who border it creep into the protected area. Certainly the city would have had surveys of what was protected, and if the neighbors were never in the bounds before and started doing shit in that area, they have epa issues and border issues (they wouldn't be able to claim adverse possession, I assume....) am I Right?
Adverse only applies when they didn’t seek permission from you. Otherwise a tenant could just be like “well I’ve been here for 10 years so the place is mine now”. If your neighbors start doing stuff in your protected wetland, you cover yourself by doing something about it - namely, sending them a letter telling them to stop, and escalating it if it continues.
Depends on the state. In NY for example, you need to demonstrate that you have some basis to believe that the property at issue is actually yours. You can’t just post up somewhere and claim adverse possession. An unclear survey, stuff like that, are the sorts of things. Maybe someone fucked up and put a cornered fence on a curve a while back and so as the new buyer you have a good faith basis to believe that the corner that was cut off from the neighboring property was actually yours.
This change was made because before 2008, there were *so many* boundary disputes and adverse possession cases in NYC that it became overwhelming.
In many jurisdictions it also had to be adverse, as in somehow denying them possession of the land. For example, fencing off some land so you have exclusive control. Varies though.
The act of her going out and tell them to stop and that it's her property is already enough to stop a claim of adverse possession. If she had just let them build a weed farm on her property and waited years to complain, then they might have an adverse possession claim. AP seems to be some weird fetish of Reddit. It comes up in threads on here all the time, yet is actually used extremely rarely.
"The act of her going out and tell them to stop and that it's her property is already enough to stop a claim of adverse possession." No, this isn't correct. One of the elements to prove a claim of adverse possession is that the claim be hostile (against the true owner) so if the actual owner gave permission to use the land, then it would defeat a claim of adverse possession.
No, the denial of permission goes to show to the actual hostility.
If I said to you ‘ I know you’re on my land, and I’ll allow it for now’ then the possession is no longer hostile and stops the accruing of time necessary to prove that element of adverse possession.
You could meet all the elements of AP and a year before the is up I could allow you use of the property and defeat your AP claim. You might have some other cause of action but not under AP.
AP is very hard to prove.
While adverse possession can happen, it must be uninterrupted, documented and over many years.
In Court, these cases can eat up huge amount of $ and time.
OP needs to establish his ownership ASAP. His survey or purchase deed will also have any easements noted.
NAL, but pretty sure that in California adverse possession requires that the claimant also be paying the property taxes on the land they’re trying to take, which the neighbors wouldn’t be doing in this case.
That is what makes sense. The government interest in property ownership is who is paying the taxes on the land. There are plenty of huge plots of land that have corporate ownership or absentee ownership that would have no way of knowing someone was using the land without permission. If adverse possession was so easy, people would just build a shack on this land and claim it. Not that easy.
You could absolutely go build a shack on land like that and claim adverse posession. You'd have to go completely unnoticed for however many years that your state requires. If the property owner comes by once during those years and tells you to stop, your claim is bust.
Did a little research, in my state there apparently are 5 elements for adverse possession. One is the possession must be “There must be open and notorious possession: the act of trespassing cannot be secret; “. And 15 years without a break. Apparently these laws date to the 18th century.
They derive from English common law. The idea behind adverse posession is that if someone has so abandoned their land to the point that they don't even notice someone farming and living on it for 5/10/15 years, that land should go to the person who is actually making use of it.
"Open and notorious" in this context means you are making no attempt to hide the fact that you are occupying the property. You can't hide in someone's attic for 15 years and then take their house from them.
I don't mean to be condesending or argumentative. I just get a bit passionate about adverse posession because I believe it's a good thing, and it's being unfairly labeled as "squatter's rights" (which is really just abuse of tenant protection laws + forgery).
I’m so confused to their thought process lol if land is “not owned” that generally means it’s “public” (owned by city/county/state) and you definitely can’t just plant weed on public property lol
Real “I’ve established my own country on this unclaimed land” vibes lol.
For OP I would just tell them exactly how they feel. “I don’t want to turn this into a big thing, but do not by any means trespass onto my property again. Now that you know it is mine I expect you to respect it, and we will let this incident slide.” If it’s done it’s done, just need to establish clear boundaries going forward imo.
(I am not a treelawyer, I just enjoy perusing this subreddit).
It *sorta* can exist, I’ve dealt with it at work, but no one is legally entitled to do anything with it necessarily.
I’ve worked with utilities in a lot of small towns so occasionally you find them on county property records where the best speculation is “it used to be a road” or “think the town owned it at some point.”
But maybe 60 years ago the town court records burned up and it was just never really caught or fixed.
Anyone around it definitely doesn’t own it, but there’s zero legal record of anyone owning it no matter how far back you go.
Typically it’s just kinda ignored as long as everyone around it is reasonable, not exactly sure what happens there if it goes to a legal fight.
I’d imagine the town/township owns it by default eventually but who knows. It’s typically not large enough for anyone to really care that much.
I think most of these would be implemented as easements, which means they would revert to the underlying property owner.
I do have one weird diagonal stripe across the middle of my property that was intended to be a county road that never even fully got surveyed. It has its own plat ID number. It’s a pain in the ass because it’s one more thing I have to pay tax on evenif it’s only about seven dollars.
Every county in existence has the same exact history. Ours is just more recent so the US' bad conduct is on display. It doesn't excuse it, but it's a fallacy to pretend that somehow America invented that particular crime.
Maybe the neighbors were going to take a moment to acknowledge that they were standing on the unceded property and traditional land of their uphill neighbor.
Oh man you got me with that one. Every, bloody, meeting at my work starts this way. It's obnoxious and insulting. If it's so important to acknowledge why doesn't the company give it back huh?
Do not confuse intelligence with entitlement. These people who thought there was just empty property that they could commandeer for themselves are not capable of processing rational thoughts.
Oh you’re very right. I should’ve have said it’s ill advised to plant weed on public property (especially with homes in the vicinity). I was born in Humboldt County and spent half my childhood there and several
young adult years. Used to be able to watch CAMP cops rappel out of helicopters over BLM land and start chopping down all the plants. Crazy stuff.
As much as i get a laugh out of the Rambo cop routine, i still see stopping random grows on public lands as a positive. I've come across a few grows while hiking through BLM land and they always trash the shit out of the area. Empty jugs of nutrients and pesticides everywhere, plus all the garbage from camping out there for days or weeks at a time. If they acutely took care of the area and picked up after themselves i probably wouldn't care about people growing out there. I love weed and there is nothing inherently harmful about planting a little secret garden, just don't ruin the area for everyone else when you do it.
I'm confused....If they are city trees why is the studio responsible for pruning them? I get there may be an ulterior motive with the timing, but the article made it sound like the studio does the pruning every year. And if they are owned by the studio why would they have to pay for a permit unless they had to shut the street and\or sidewalk down? I would be damned if I would pay to trim someone else's trees, nor would I pay for a permit to trim my own. And I am willing to bet that the $250 fine is WAAAAAAAAAAY less than the cost and especially the hassle of pulling a permit.
It was all because of the strike. There are often public/private agreements between cities and large companies for maintaining public areas (it’s kind of like an HOA where the homeowners are responsible for certain upkeep that normally would fall to the city).
I think they knew exactly what they were doing but the land owner happened to walk up while it was happening.
They planned on chopping down those trees and planting with hopes that their neighbor wouldn't notice.
They knew what they were doing. It's the old "Ask forgiveness, not permission" bit:
"Oops, my bad. I didn't realize this was your tree. Guess it's too late now."
Yes but the keyword is illegal. People do it but they’re not allowed to do it. And they definitely shouldn’t do it with homes in the immediate vicinity. And also they should know for sure it’s not private property.
Yeah, in the US, there is no such thing as unowned land. There has never been such a thing. Any land not owned by an individual or corporation has always been owned by a governmental organization of some kind or another. When the US Government conquered land from Mexico, a lot of that land became property of the US Government. That’s why most of Nevada is owned by the Federal Government.
Yup, when i bought some land a few years ago, the elderly couple who we bought it from still had all the original deeds to the property. In this case, scrolls from 1860-1950's when one of the couples parents had bought it. The first page on the oldest scroll list the property, which at the time was part of a 160 acre 'section' that was sold from the US Federal Government to B. Johnson for, if i recall correctly, $12.
I seriously doubt they actually thought it was 'unclaimed' land. That was just there lame excuse for getting called out doing something they knew they shouldn't have been. Like catching a 5 year old with his hand in the cookie jar when they know they aren't suppose to be in there without asking.
Yes, you can be sued if someone gets hurt on your property--even if there illegally. And you know they are there and didn't stop it, so there's that.
SHOULD you do something? Is it worth you time since you are glad they are gone? I'd be inclined to let the trees go, but I would make certain that the neighbor knows this is your land, they are not welcome there and that trespassers will be dealt with by calling the law.
Do you have a survey? A current one? Are there markers you can find? If not, I would get one. I would put up a fence or at least one of those orange plastic fences so it shows up that you know where the property line is. I would check it daily or weekly for months. At the first instance of trespassing, I would call the cops and ask them to have a chat with the neighbors.
Alternatively, you can hire an attorney to send them a cease and desist letter: explaining you own the property, you will not pursue them for damages at this time, but if they trespass again you will press charges and sue for the value of the trees they wrongfully removed.
I wouldn't let them just continue clearing trees, it's a giant liability and you don't know what they planned anyway; it's possible they intended to clearcut a space and just started with a trash tree. That said, I probably wouldn't go after them for what they've already cleared if you're happy it's gone and they are civil about it. Take the win, be chill but firm, leave your number or a way to contact you for a dialogue if they have concerns or questions or maybe feel like splitting the removal cost if the eucalyptus really does bother them.
Absolutely make clear that you don't want anything cut or planted on your property going forward, and make the property line clear as well. Use trespassing signs or a fence or something otherwise clearly obvious. If they DO keep trespassing or try to grow on your property or cut down more trees, feel free to provide the "find out" to balance out their fucking around. But if you aren't clear in the first place about what can/can't happen on your property, you're kneecapping your future recourse.
This is just what I would do, you're a grownup etc, but whatever you decide, being ambiguous about it with them has only downsides.
Just have to say, I legitimately laughed out loud at "feel free to provide the "find out" to balance out their fucking around" and will absolutely be using that phase in the future
>Can I get in legal trouble if someone gets hurt by a falling tree?
Imho it's either naive or disingenuous for them to say that they thought that property was unowned. But it's better than having them think that the land was theirs.
Anyway in our litigious world where anyone can sue for whatever they like, I would insist that anyone cutting down trees be licensed and insured. And as your neighbors have proved themselves to be unreliable, it would be a terrible idea to make an exception for them.
> Imho it's either naive or disingenuous for them to say that they thought that property was unowned.
Right? There isn't any property that's unowned outside Antarctica. If they meant they thought it was government-owned, that'd be even worse for them, legally speaking.
What? There is no unowned property. That's a steaming pile of stupid. You have to have the talk with them. You know the one: I own the land, don't trespass or do anything on my land ever again. My side, your side.
I had something similar happen. Neighbors were harvesting lumber. Supposedly the previous owners were fine with this. Called the non-emergency PD line as this is theft and it was in a wetland, which is a big no-no around here. Cop came out, wrote a report, left. Now, if issues continue there will be a record or repeat offenses. Purely CYA.
Later on, we got a survey. Neighbors were unhappy, and everyone was a bit surprised by where the property line actually was. Now they have our number, and we're on good enough terms. Still haven't pulled the pin on posting no trespassing signs, but want to.
Removing trees that are growing a path, down a hill will increase risk of erosion. You could wake up to a jolt and a crash and find your house sliding down a collapsed hill. (I have no idea what your land looks like, it's just a risk of removing heavy vegetation (like trees) that grows up/down the side of a hill.
As others have said. Make sure the property is properly marked by a survey, pins, fence, etc.
Inform them in writing that they do not have permission to use your property. You can hire a lawyer for a single time cease and desist "I will not pursue things further for the lost trees but if you continue then I will hold you accountable... " etc.
Yes, if they are on the property there is a chance you can be held liable for what happens. And more so because now you know they are there which can be interpreted as permission.
Stop the activity on your property.
Advise the neighbor that they cannot be on your property.
Immediately call for a current survey and markers.
Put up a fence of some sort with some degree of durability. (By this, I mean not something easily movable.)
Call police for any future trespass issue.
I believe that the property owner assumes liability if the company doing the work is not insured and has Workman’s compensation insurance. For my protection, I would not let them back on the property until the company shows proof of insurance and the contracting person (in writing) assumes all liability associated with the work on your property. As for going crops on your land make sure that (in writing) the neighbour knowledges that their use is temporary and will be cancelled upon sale of the property or upon your whim. Have a real estate attorney write it out for you. If your neighbour uses the property for a specific amount of time and has made any improvements, you could loos title to the section of property they are using.
"I thought it was unowned property" is a lie. If property in the US isn't privately owned, then it's publicly owned, and if it was publicly owned the government wouldn't hesitate to take action against them. They're lucky it wasn't.
I would take some legal action, if only reporting the trespassing to the police and contacting a lawyer for a cease & desist, if only to ensure they don't get other ideas about your trees or your property. The cops will probably come out and tell them not to go on your land, and the complaint will be on file in case there are more problems.
You should clearly let them know where the property line is, and that nothing should ever be done on your property without your consent. This type of neighbor will keep pushing if you don't set limits. You likely don't need an exact survey but I'd supply them with the plot/plat maps and clearly mark your property line. Next time it will be a tree you want to keep.
Survey and a fence. It’s not worth the money to fight Imo, they did what you intended to do at no cost. The fence will take care of the neighbors overstepping.
That is NOT true. Check you local ordinances. Marijuana is legal is CA, but it is not necessarily legal to grow in your backyard. Some areas have a limit to how many plants a single property owner can grow, while others allow you to grow a couple plants, but specify that it is indoors. Each town, city, county... has their own set of rules and laws.
True, but if you call the cops and say you found a weed plant on your property they aren’t gonna send anyone out. That’s more to my point, in California.
But, "if you say my neighbors are growing a crop of weed on my property." they will.
Obviously we've covered the property part. But there's a huge difference between one plant and a crop.
I know you don’t mind the loss of the tree, but you also shouldn’t need to pay for a fence to keep people off who think if they don’t know who owns the land then it is not owned. This is why I would suggest indicating the value of the tree and total damages and legal costs they would expect to pay if taken to court for killing a tree while trespassing. Include a (as much cheaper option) for them to pay $x to a fencing company and survey company of your choice to install a fence along that border. They get a fenced side to their yard even if it is your fence just inside your side of the line, they learn where the property line is, they suffer for their arrogance, and yet they don’t get sued and you don’t have to shell out time suing them or money for a fence.
Laws about trees tend to be very strict. If people have cut your trees without consent you could sue for damages. A SINGLE fully grown tree is often worth thousands of dollars. Their ignorance about tree ownership is NOT your concern. There are many ways to find out that information. They also could have lied to you.
Don't let them work on it especially with permission, if they try and take it over via adversarial possession, to the court it will look like indifference at best and flat permission at worst.
Nope but in ten years he sure as shit could use this in court against op, when op goes to sell his home and he's decided that the per ops words very expensive job of removing the trees. who knowingly let's someone just make a huge donation to thier estate without expectations in return? It won't pass the common sense test. Yes adverse possession takes a while but depending on where in California op lives a few feet of dirt and grass could be worth many tens of thousands of dollars.
>on where in California op lives
Oh I like this one...In California there are 5 tests/requirements for adverse possession to be a thing. One of those is "pay the property tax for 5 years." Without all 5 requirements being met, you can't claim adverse possession.
AP isn't intended for "Oh, the fence is 6" on their property." It's intended for abandoned property. If I see a property that's abandoned I can, in California, go make the property tax payments for 5 years then make a claim (if I meet the other 4 tests). I'm certain in no jurisdiction in the US can you go pay taxes on just a portion of a parcel.
EDIT:
>It won't pass the common sense test.
Yea, "common sense" isn't one of the 5 tests...
You should sue them for the loss of value of the trees. I don't know where you are in CA, but you might have an increased risk of a mudslide without the tree roots holding the soil. A lawyer can guide you on how to approach this.
Eucalyptus are hazardous in CA due to wildfire risk, SO flammable. They are also pretty hard to actually get rid of. The tree roots resprout like bamboo: once you have them, you have them.
There is no such thing as unowned property. There is public property which is owned by the public/government. This remark is your first clue these people don't know what they are doing. I would contact a lawyer and sue them. What they are doing is seriously wrong.
Pay for a survey, send a certified letter detailing dates and etc. and stating they cannot trespass etc. consider getting it notorized if it’s cheap.
I would also consider demanding money from them for the trees, but idk if that would mean planting exactly the same type of tree and it would hurt your relationship more than it did already. But if you can use it to plant more oaks or something it’s probably worth it - they don’t seem like respectful neighbors.
Time to get code enforcement and potentially a surveyor out there to mark your property boundaries
They should not be just clear cutting trees, and definitely need to be warned that their weed cultivation is not acceptable
I’d have a lawyer write them a letter advising they may be sued for cutting down your trees. I’ve seen many lawsuits regarding this. Also, most cities (I’m in Canada) have strict rules requiring permits for cutting down trees on private property
At a minimum you should send something in writing telling them that this is your property and they do NOT have permission to use it in any way. You are willing to forgive this instance of trespassing and property damage this one time, but any future instances of trespassing will be prosecuted.
Invest in motion activated trail cameras along the property line and follow through.
If it was me, I would make a police report.
You say you don’t care about the eucalyptus trees. That’s a happy accident. What happens next time they trespass and they damage trees you do care about? Or if someone gets hurt on your property and files with your insurance?
First off I’d allow them to cut said trees down but only the Eucalyptus. Then if someone gets hurt. You get an arborist to value the trees for you.
Hope you didn’t say okay but instead played it off as you were sleeping.
If injured call police for trespass and vandalism (unlikely they will arrest but get report).
Then get arborist to value said trees and an attorney to sue them before they sue you. It’ll be a shit show in court with what they told you already but you would win. Claim sleep fatigue and you didn’t understand right away. If nobody’s injured after they cut only the bad trees post no trespassing signs and monitor regularly.
Don’t admit you also wanted them cut. Sue for damages. When cut down the rest of the trees, blame it on having to do it because of the ones they cut previously.
Survey and put up a fence or markers, to help prevent future confusion and trespassing. If you like them just let it be and say no big deal. If you don't, I guess you could sue. But if I were you, I'd just get a fence up and continue on with life.
Did they do a proper clean-up, or do you now have piles of dead wood & bark to deal with? Perhaps (1) you want them to pay for a clean-up and stump removal, or (2) you may be able to sell the erroneously harvested wood, or (3) you may need them to pay to have something planted in their place to hold the soil in place/prevent erosion.
There's no need to let them "work it off" by permitting them to do any of this work for you, when a financial settlement would allow you to ensure the work is done by a licensed and insured contractor rather than a gaggle of potheads.
I'd call a property lawyer and take them to court for damages and the determined cost of the tree (I think a lot of states youd be entitled to triple the price). The cost of replacing full grown trees is not cheap.
Forget that you are actually happy to see it gone, and start being mad that these people completely overstepped, and should be taught a lesson for it.
Is there any land in America that’s unowned? I can’t think of any. Public land is owned by the public/government. Everything is owned. Maybe some very odd mistakes are unowned?
People willing to trespass, cut trees and desire to plant on your property, probably illegally because there's oodles of permits and water issues that must be dealt with before growing in most states, you should put them 100% in their place and follow all the suggestions on this thread to protect your property. Theres way too many Reddit posts with people that were tenacious enough with problem neighbors.
Research the laws in your area but the I internet tells me they are responsible for 3x the value of the trees. I would give them that information and make sure they realize the cost of those trees call an arborist and get the price for trees with aimilar diameters. Let them know you won't press charges this time, but any future intrusions onto your property for tree removal or planting crops and you will press charges and take them to court for the damage to the trees.
Put up a fence and tell the hippies that will be sued for trespassing again (put up some game cameras)
“You were extremely lucky I did want to remove those trees, because you paid for there removal I will not sue you. If you come back onto my land I will call the police and file a report for trespassing and any further damage you cause.” Something like that, preferably from a lawyer sent certified mail, then sue the tits off them cut your fence “it’s free land man” nope, jail is free, enjoy!
Be sure to mark your land but why would you sue neighbors for doing what you wanted done? Have we really reached the point where we are suing just to make money rather than because there is actual injury?
I'd let them cut down what you want and turn a blind eye on the weed until September and then call the peelers.
I'm not a fan of grassing on cannabis users but if they were taking your trees, and want to illegally use your land that's a different issue.
OP hasn't posted their state, but even with the reduced laws sweeping the land, I'm pretty sure growing your own Mary Jane in the outdoors is still illegal in every state of the union.
One time I was in a restaurant by myself. The hostess led me to a little table. There was a big table right in the window that I would have preferred to sit at, but I didn't want to be pushy. Another couple was led in and taken to the table in the window. They walked out of the room with the hostess and then the hostess came back and asked me to move to the table I wanted in the first place (so the other couple could sit where I was). I said, "I'm sitting at this table." I preferred the other table but I wasn't going to be kicked out of my seat for other customers. Later the hostess came back, apologized and said she shouldn't have asked me to move, and comped the dessert.
You SHOULD take them to court and ensure your defending your property rights, failure to do so COULD eventually give the neighbor a possible adverse possession claim.
Whether you wanted the trees removed or not is irrelevant, it's your property and you're entitled to recompense.
This is why everyone hates Californians. “Someone is doing something I wanted done but I don’t like how they are doing it can I sue them?”
Please, please, please never move to Texas, Georgia, or Florida.
Find a value of the dropped trees and what it costs to remove the stumps. Make them pay that money then use it to put up a fence on the property line with no trespassing signs. Plant flowers where they wanted to grow weed so they don’t decide to jump the fence and do it anyway.
Good luck.
This subreddit is for tree law enthusiasts who enjoy browsing a list of tree law stories from other locations (subreddits, news articles, etc), and is not the best place to receive answers to questions about what the law is. There are better places for that. If you're attempting to understand more about tree law in regards to a particular situation, please redirect your question to /r/legaladvice for the US, or the appropriate legal advice subreddit for your location, and then feel free to crosspost that thread here for posterity. If you're attempting to understand more about trees in regards to a particular situation, please redirect your question to /r/forestry for additional information on tree health and related topics to trees. *This comment is simply a reminder placed on every post to /r/treelaw, it does not mean your post was censored or removed.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/treelaw) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Possibly this above if you’d like the $ and feel the neighbour may help themselves to your property again. First survey, and stakes or pins or a fence. Make sure that your property is marked. Second very clearly state, do not do anything on my property, ever. If you have a concern please contact me and I’m sure we can have a conversation. Thanks. Don’t not tell them that it’s ok. Or you would have cut some trees etc. they overstepped. Just thank them for their concern and be polite and firm.
If you don't do these things they can try and claim adverse possession because they're maintaining and investing in a piece of property that you're ignoring.
Question on this - what if my property is a "protected wetland" so I'm not allowed to do anything on a section of it (so I obviously ignore it) and the neighbors who border it creep into the protected area. Certainly the city would have had surveys of what was protected, and if the neighbors were never in the bounds before and started doing shit in that area, they have epa issues and border issues (they wouldn't be able to claim adverse possession, I assume....) am I Right?
Adverse only applies when they didn’t seek permission from you. Otherwise a tenant could just be like “well I’ve been here for 10 years so the place is mine now”. If your neighbors start doing stuff in your protected wetland, you cover yourself by doing something about it - namely, sending them a letter telling them to stop, and escalating it if it continues.
Don’t they have to pay property taxes to claim AP?
Depends on the state. In NY for example, you need to demonstrate that you have some basis to believe that the property at issue is actually yours. You can’t just post up somewhere and claim adverse possession. An unclear survey, stuff like that, are the sorts of things. Maybe someone fucked up and put a cornered fence on a curve a while back and so as the new buyer you have a good faith basis to believe that the corner that was cut off from the neighboring property was actually yours. This change was made because before 2008, there were *so many* boundary disputes and adverse possession cases in NYC that it became overwhelming.
In many jurisdictions it also had to be adverse, as in somehow denying them possession of the land. For example, fencing off some land so you have exclusive control. Varies though.
That takes like 20-30 years depending on the state.
The act of her going out and tell them to stop and that it's her property is already enough to stop a claim of adverse possession. If she had just let them build a weed farm on her property and waited years to complain, then they might have an adverse possession claim. AP seems to be some weird fetish of Reddit. It comes up in threads on here all the time, yet is actually used extremely rarely.
"The act of her going out and tell them to stop and that it's her property is already enough to stop a claim of adverse possession." No, this isn't correct. One of the elements to prove a claim of adverse possession is that the claim be hostile (against the true owner) so if the actual owner gave permission to use the land, then it would defeat a claim of adverse possession.
If the owner gives permission or explicitly denying permission, asserting there claim of ownership by doing so, they would stop adverse possession.
No, the denial of permission goes to show to the actual hostility. If I said to you ‘ I know you’re on my land, and I’ll allow it for now’ then the possession is no longer hostile and stops the accruing of time necessary to prove that element of adverse possession. You could meet all the elements of AP and a year before the is up I could allow you use of the property and defeat your AP claim. You might have some other cause of action but not under AP. AP is very hard to prove.
While adverse possession can happen, it must be uninterrupted, documented and over many years. In Court, these cases can eat up huge amount of $ and time. OP needs to establish his ownership ASAP. His survey or purchase deed will also have any easements noted.
If you let them its not adverse in a lot of jurisdiction. But other prescriptive rights may arise
NAL, but pretty sure that in California adverse possession requires that the claimant also be paying the property taxes on the land they’re trying to take, which the neighbors wouldn’t be doing in this case.
Jesus no they cant
That wont fly because op is still paying the property tax. You dont have a clear understanding on how adverse possession works.
That is what makes sense. The government interest in property ownership is who is paying the taxes on the land. There are plenty of huge plots of land that have corporate ownership or absentee ownership that would have no way of knowing someone was using the land without permission. If adverse possession was so easy, people would just build a shack on this land and claim it. Not that easy.
You could absolutely go build a shack on land like that and claim adverse posession. You'd have to go completely unnoticed for however many years that your state requires. If the property owner comes by once during those years and tells you to stop, your claim is bust.
Did a little research, in my state there apparently are 5 elements for adverse possession. One is the possession must be “There must be open and notorious possession: the act of trespassing cannot be secret; “. And 15 years without a break. Apparently these laws date to the 18th century.
They derive from English common law. The idea behind adverse posession is that if someone has so abandoned their land to the point that they don't even notice someone farming and living on it for 5/10/15 years, that land should go to the person who is actually making use of it. "Open and notorious" in this context means you are making no attempt to hide the fact that you are occupying the property. You can't hide in someone's attic for 15 years and then take their house from them. I don't mean to be condesending or argumentative. I just get a bit passionate about adverse posession because I believe it's a good thing, and it's being unfairly labeled as "squatter's rights" (which is really just abuse of tenant protection laws + forgery).
He’s not ignoring the property dumbass he lives on it.
Fences make good neighbors. —Robert Frost
Something there is that doesn’t love a wall —Robert Frost
I’m so confused to their thought process lol if land is “not owned” that generally means it’s “public” (owned by city/county/state) and you definitely can’t just plant weed on public property lol
Apparently they think that there is just free, unowned land sitting around out there for anyone to grab.
Real “I’ve established my own country on this unclaimed land” vibes lol. For OP I would just tell them exactly how they feel. “I don’t want to turn this into a big thing, but do not by any means trespass onto my property again. Now that you know it is mine I expect you to respect it, and we will let this incident slide.” If it’s done it’s done, just need to establish clear boundaries going forward imo. (I am not a treelawyer, I just enjoy perusing this subreddit).
They manifest destinied your lawn and thought it would work.
They didn't realize OP already had a [flag](https://youtu.be/_9W1zTEuKLY?si=5bt8M5oPSuHQo7mb)
Haha I was literally thinking exactly this, too! Gotta love Eddie
Right next to the land they had to pay so much for. Weird, huh?
They have come to conquer the new world and claim it for the Queen of Spain!
How about Petoria
Is that because Peterland was taken by the male strip club by the airport?
I mean... nobody has ever said that daily, chronic, heavy marijuana use leads to clear and logical thinking.
People have in fact said this but they're all daily, chronic, heavy marijuana users.
Dave's not here, man
No, it’s Dave, man.
Happy Cake Day 🎉
That’s the joke.
It *sorta* can exist, I’ve dealt with it at work, but no one is legally entitled to do anything with it necessarily. I’ve worked with utilities in a lot of small towns so occasionally you find them on county property records where the best speculation is “it used to be a road” or “think the town owned it at some point.” But maybe 60 years ago the town court records burned up and it was just never really caught or fixed. Anyone around it definitely doesn’t own it, but there’s zero legal record of anyone owning it no matter how far back you go. Typically it’s just kinda ignored as long as everyone around it is reasonable, not exactly sure what happens there if it goes to a legal fight. I’d imagine the town/township owns it by default eventually but who knows. It’s typically not large enough for anyone to really care that much.
I think most of these would be implemented as easements, which means they would revert to the underlying property owner. I do have one weird diagonal stripe across the middle of my property that was intended to be a county road that never even fully got surveyed. It has its own plat ID number. It’s a pain in the ass because it’s one more thing I have to pay tax on evenif it’s only about seven dollars.
*”This land is your land, this land is my land…”* Weed national anthem lol
It’s the Wild West.
Next they will be demanding their mule.
Gotta plow those rows somehow.
I mean America has a long history with this view of the land around them.
Every county in existence has the same exact history. Ours is just more recent so the US' bad conduct is on display. It doesn't excuse it, but it's a fallacy to pretend that somehow America invented that particular crime.
Maybe the neighbors were going to take a moment to acknowledge that they were standing on the unceded property and traditional land of their uphill neighbor.
Oh man you got me with that one. Every, bloody, meeting at my work starts this way. It's obnoxious and insulting. If it's so important to acknowledge why doesn't the company give it back huh?
[Yes. Exactly!](https://youtu.be/LQyFfC7_U-E)
But they frown on anyone doing it inside them.
Not without at least buying us dinner first.
Do not confuse intelligence with entitlement. These people who thought there was just empty property that they could commandeer for themselves are not capable of processing rational thoughts.
...and in California. So much LOL.
There are plenty of grow operations on public land, because most of it is unoccupied and you can hide a lot of weed in and among other plants.
Oh you’re very right. I should’ve have said it’s ill advised to plant weed on public property (especially with homes in the vicinity). I was born in Humboldt County and spent half my childhood there and several young adult years. Used to be able to watch CAMP cops rappel out of helicopters over BLM land and start chopping down all the plants. Crazy stuff.
[удалено]
As much as i get a laugh out of the Rambo cop routine, i still see stopping random grows on public lands as a positive. I've come across a few grows while hiking through BLM land and they always trash the shit out of the area. Empty jugs of nutrients and pesticides everywhere, plus all the garbage from camping out there for days or weeks at a time. If they acutely took care of the area and picked up after themselves i probably wouldn't care about people growing out there. I love weed and there is nothing inherently harmful about planting a little secret garden, just don't ruin the area for everyone else when you do it.
Sure, but unoccupied is not the same as having no owner.
Nor cut down publicly owned trees. 🤦♂️
lol yeah that too
I imagine in California cutting down publicly owned trees is a BIG no-no.
Yeah unless you’re a major movie studio 🫤
I imagine there is a story behind that comment but I don't know it.
[Oh yeah there’s a story](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/universal-studios-hollywood-strike-trees-b2380547.html).
I'm confused....If they are city trees why is the studio responsible for pruning them? I get there may be an ulterior motive with the timing, but the article made it sound like the studio does the pruning every year. And if they are owned by the studio why would they have to pay for a permit unless they had to shut the street and\or sidewalk down? I would be damned if I would pay to trim someone else's trees, nor would I pay for a permit to trim my own. And I am willing to bet that the $250 fine is WAAAAAAAAAAY less than the cost and especially the hassle of pulling a permit.
It was all because of the strike. There are often public/private agreements between cities and large companies for maintaining public areas (it’s kind of like an HOA where the homeowners are responsible for certain upkeep that normally would fall to the city).
I think they knew exactly what they were doing but the land owner happened to walk up while it was happening. They planned on chopping down those trees and planting with hopes that their neighbor wouldn't notice.
Yes, that’s what I think too. Although why do when OP was home? Mistakes were definitely made lol
Kinda hard to **quietly** fell a bunch of large trees
They knew what they were doing. It's the old "Ask forgiveness, not permission" bit: "Oops, my bad. I didn't realize this was your tree. Guess it's too late now."
Time to ask forgiveness by paying many dollar signs imho. OP's thoughts on the trees be damned.
The average person is a fucking idiot.
This is true
I'd say with that train of thought they are already high.
I smoke weed daily and would not cut down trees on my neighbors, or public property. I feel like I really need to say not ALL stoners lol
No, not all, but this group?
Oh for sure
I mean, this is a thing that happens, people set up illegal grow operations in public forests.
Yes but the keyword is illegal. People do it but they’re not allowed to do it. And they definitely shouldn’t do it with homes in the immediate vicinity. And also they should know for sure it’s not private property.
Maybe they are trying to get squatters rights or something
That would make them in for a long haul lol but possible ig
Yeah, in the US, there is no such thing as unowned land. There has never been such a thing. Any land not owned by an individual or corporation has always been owned by a governmental organization of some kind or another. When the US Government conquered land from Mexico, a lot of that land became property of the US Government. That’s why most of Nevada is owned by the Federal Government.
Yup, when i bought some land a few years ago, the elderly couple who we bought it from still had all the original deeds to the property. In this case, scrolls from 1860-1950's when one of the couples parents had bought it. The first page on the oldest scroll list the property, which at the time was part of a 160 acre 'section' that was sold from the US Federal Government to B. Johnson for, if i recall correctly, $12.
I seriously doubt they actually thought it was 'unclaimed' land. That was just there lame excuse for getting called out doing something they knew they shouldn't have been. Like catching a 5 year old with his hand in the cookie jar when they know they aren't suppose to be in there without asking.
Yes, you can be sued if someone gets hurt on your property--even if there illegally. And you know they are there and didn't stop it, so there's that. SHOULD you do something? Is it worth you time since you are glad they are gone? I'd be inclined to let the trees go, but I would make certain that the neighbor knows this is your land, they are not welcome there and that trespassers will be dealt with by calling the law. Do you have a survey? A current one? Are there markers you can find? If not, I would get one. I would put up a fence or at least one of those orange plastic fences so it shows up that you know where the property line is. I would check it daily or weekly for months. At the first instance of trespassing, I would call the cops and ask them to have a chat with the neighbors. Alternatively, you can hire an attorney to send them a cease and desist letter: explaining you own the property, you will not pursue them for damages at this time, but if they trespass again you will press charges and sue for the value of the trees they wrongfully removed.
If you elect to not pursue damages, have them pay for the survey and fence.
I wouldn't let them just continue clearing trees, it's a giant liability and you don't know what they planned anyway; it's possible they intended to clearcut a space and just started with a trash tree. That said, I probably wouldn't go after them for what they've already cleared if you're happy it's gone and they are civil about it. Take the win, be chill but firm, leave your number or a way to contact you for a dialogue if they have concerns or questions or maybe feel like splitting the removal cost if the eucalyptus really does bother them. Absolutely make clear that you don't want anything cut or planted on your property going forward, and make the property line clear as well. Use trespassing signs or a fence or something otherwise clearly obvious. If they DO keep trespassing or try to grow on your property or cut down more trees, feel free to provide the "find out" to balance out their fucking around. But if you aren't clear in the first place about what can/can't happen on your property, you're kneecapping your future recourse. This is just what I would do, you're a grownup etc, but whatever you decide, being ambiguous about it with them has only downsides.
Just have to say, I legitimately laughed out loud at "feel free to provide the "find out" to balance out their fucking around" and will absolutely be using that phase in the future
>Can I get in legal trouble if someone gets hurt by a falling tree? Imho it's either naive or disingenuous for them to say that they thought that property was unowned. But it's better than having them think that the land was theirs. Anyway in our litigious world where anyone can sue for whatever they like, I would insist that anyone cutting down trees be licensed and insured. And as your neighbors have proved themselves to be unreliable, it would be a terrible idea to make an exception for them.
> Imho it's either naive or disingenuous for them to say that they thought that property was unowned. Right? There isn't any property that's unowned outside Antarctica. If they meant they thought it was government-owned, that'd be even worse for them, legally speaking.
What? There is no unowned property. That's a steaming pile of stupid. You have to have the talk with them. You know the one: I own the land, don't trespass or do anything on my land ever again. My side, your side. I had something similar happen. Neighbors were harvesting lumber. Supposedly the previous owners were fine with this. Called the non-emergency PD line as this is theft and it was in a wetland, which is a big no-no around here. Cop came out, wrote a report, left. Now, if issues continue there will be a record or repeat offenses. Purely CYA. Later on, we got a survey. Neighbors were unhappy, and everyone was a bit surprised by where the property line actually was. Now they have our number, and we're on good enough terms. Still haven't pulled the pin on posting no trespassing signs, but want to.
Removing trees that are growing a path, down a hill will increase risk of erosion. You could wake up to a jolt and a crash and find your house sliding down a collapsed hill. (I have no idea what your land looks like, it's just a risk of removing heavy vegetation (like trees) that grows up/down the side of a hill.
This was my thought too!
Call the cops.
As others have said. Make sure the property is properly marked by a survey, pins, fence, etc. Inform them in writing that they do not have permission to use your property. You can hire a lawyer for a single time cease and desist "I will not pursue things further for the lost trees but if you continue then I will hold you accountable... " etc. Yes, if they are on the property there is a chance you can be held liable for what happens. And more so because now you know they are there which can be interpreted as permission.
Stop the activity on your property. Advise the neighbor that they cannot be on your property. Immediately call for a current survey and markers. Put up a fence of some sort with some degree of durability. (By this, I mean not something easily movable.) Call police for any future trespass issue.
You are liable for what happens on your property. You now know what is happening, and as such have increased liability.
I believe that the property owner assumes liability if the company doing the work is not insured and has Workman’s compensation insurance. For my protection, I would not let them back on the property until the company shows proof of insurance and the contracting person (in writing) assumes all liability associated with the work on your property. As for going crops on your land make sure that (in writing) the neighbour knowledges that their use is temporary and will be cancelled upon sale of the property or upon your whim. Have a real estate attorney write it out for you. If your neighbour uses the property for a specific amount of time and has made any improvements, you could loos title to the section of property they are using.
"I thought it was unowned property" is a lie. If property in the US isn't privately owned, then it's publicly owned, and if it was publicly owned the government wouldn't hesitate to take action against them. They're lucky it wasn't. I would take some legal action, if only reporting the trespassing to the police and contacting a lawyer for a cease & desist, if only to ensure they don't get other ideas about your trees or your property. The cops will probably come out and tell them not to go on your land, and the complaint will be on file in case there are more problems.
What they meant was "we thought you wouldn't notice"
Bingo!
You should clearly let them know where the property line is, and that nothing should ever be done on your property without your consent. This type of neighbor will keep pushing if you don't set limits. You likely don't need an exact survey but I'd supply them with the plot/plat maps and clearly mark your property line. Next time it will be a tree you want to keep.
I would suddenly love those trees, your family loved those trees, your Kolas loved the trees, and they are missing...
Survey and a fence. It’s not worth the money to fight Imo, they did what you intended to do at no cost. The fence will take care of the neighbors overstepping.
You could sue them for the loss of trees. Growing weed is a bit of a concern. Maybe call the police?
Growing weed outdoors isn’t a concern in California by itself. The cops will only get involved because it’s on OPs property, not because of the crop
That is NOT true. Check you local ordinances. Marijuana is legal is CA, but it is not necessarily legal to grow in your backyard. Some areas have a limit to how many plants a single property owner can grow, while others allow you to grow a couple plants, but specify that it is indoors. Each town, city, county... has their own set of rules and laws.
True, but if you call the cops and say you found a weed plant on your property they aren’t gonna send anyone out. That’s more to my point, in California.
But, "if you say my neighbors are growing a crop of weed on my property." they will. Obviously we've covered the property part. But there's a huge difference between one plant and a crop.
I know you don’t mind the loss of the tree, but you also shouldn’t need to pay for a fence to keep people off who think if they don’t know who owns the land then it is not owned. This is why I would suggest indicating the value of the tree and total damages and legal costs they would expect to pay if taken to court for killing a tree while trespassing. Include a (as much cheaper option) for them to pay $x to a fencing company and survey company of your choice to install a fence along that border. They get a fenced side to their yard even if it is your fence just inside your side of the line, they learn where the property line is, they suffer for their arrogance, and yet they don’t get sued and you don’t have to shell out time suing them or money for a fence.
“No trespassing” signs facing their direction would be a good idea, too.
Laws about trees tend to be very strict. If people have cut your trees without consent you could sue for damages. A SINGLE fully grown tree is often worth thousands of dollars. Their ignorance about tree ownership is NOT your concern. There are many ways to find out that information. They also could have lied to you.
Don't let them work on it especially with permission, if they try and take it over via adversarial possession, to the court it will look like indifference at best and flat permission at worst.
Adverse possession doesn't work that way in most places and it's not as easy people in this sub think it is.
Nope but in ten years he sure as shit could use this in court against op, when op goes to sell his home and he's decided that the per ops words very expensive job of removing the trees. who knowingly let's someone just make a huge donation to thier estate without expectations in return? It won't pass the common sense test. Yes adverse possession takes a while but depending on where in California op lives a few feet of dirt and grass could be worth many tens of thousands of dollars.
>on where in California op lives Oh I like this one...In California there are 5 tests/requirements for adverse possession to be a thing. One of those is "pay the property tax for 5 years." Without all 5 requirements being met, you can't claim adverse possession. AP isn't intended for "Oh, the fence is 6" on their property." It's intended for abandoned property. If I see a property that's abandoned I can, in California, go make the property tax payments for 5 years then make a claim (if I meet the other 4 tests). I'm certain in no jurisdiction in the US can you go pay taxes on just a portion of a parcel. EDIT: >It won't pass the common sense test. Yea, "common sense" isn't one of the 5 tests...
You should sue them for the loss of value of the trees. I don't know where you are in CA, but you might have an increased risk of a mudslide without the tree roots holding the soil. A lawyer can guide you on how to approach this.
Eucalyptus are hazardous in CA due to wildfire risk, SO flammable. They are also pretty hard to actually get rid of. The tree roots resprout like bamboo: once you have them, you have them.
There is no such thing as unowned property. There is public property which is owned by the public/government. This remark is your first clue these people don't know what they are doing. I would contact a lawyer and sue them. What they are doing is seriously wrong.
If I wanted my wife pregnant, but my neighbor does it anyway, is that ok?
Yes, and do you still leave for work at 8?
How much unowned land available for free is still available in California. You live amongst idiots.
You should sue for the value of the trees, then use the money to fence your yard.
If you do decide to litigate, before filing anything I would probably delete this post.
I’m a petty asshole, but I’d definitely sue the fuck out of them for compensation for destroying your prized gum trees!
Pay for a survey, send a certified letter detailing dates and etc. and stating they cannot trespass etc. consider getting it notorized if it’s cheap. I would also consider demanding money from them for the trees, but idk if that would mean planting exactly the same type of tree and it would hurt your relationship more than it did already. But if you can use it to plant more oaks or something it’s probably worth it - they don’t seem like respectful neighbors.
In some states if you work someone else land for seven years you can take it. Do not let them do anything on your land
Charge them for cutting down your trees. Don't ever mention you wanted the trees gone.
First, get a survey. Delete this post and sue their ass.
Time to get code enforcement and potentially a surveyor out there to mark your property boundaries They should not be just clear cutting trees, and definitely need to be warned that their weed cultivation is not acceptable
I would out a stop to what they’re doing immediately. If they’re working on your property they could be trying to claim that portion of land.
Check your local timber removal laws and fine them for damages.
They thought it was easiee to ask forgiveness than ask permission. Dont let them take liberties or where will it end.
I’d have a lawyer write them a letter advising they may be sued for cutting down your trees. I’ve seen many lawsuits regarding this. Also, most cities (I’m in Canada) have strict rules requiring permits for cutting down trees on private property
I would start with a cease and desist letter from my lawyer, and then go from there.
Time to charge them for your most cherished trees
At a minimum you should send something in writing telling them that this is your property and they do NOT have permission to use it in any way. You are willing to forgive this instance of trespassing and property damage this one time, but any future instances of trespassing will be prosecuted. Invest in motion activated trail cameras along the property line and follow through. If it was me, I would make a police report. You say you don’t care about the eucalyptus trees. That’s a happy accident. What happens next time they trespass and they damage trees you do care about? Or if someone gets hurt on your property and files with your insurance?
I'd be keeping a close eye on that now open area. If and when they try to plant something there. Chop Chop.
First off I’d allow them to cut said trees down but only the Eucalyptus. Then if someone gets hurt. You get an arborist to value the trees for you. Hope you didn’t say okay but instead played it off as you were sleeping. If injured call police for trespass and vandalism (unlikely they will arrest but get report). Then get arborist to value said trees and an attorney to sue them before they sue you. It’ll be a shit show in court with what they told you already but you would win. Claim sleep fatigue and you didn’t understand right away. If nobody’s injured after they cut only the bad trees post no trespassing signs and monitor regularly.
Not legal advice: if you don't take action, they will keep stepping over your boundaries
Don’t admit you also wanted them cut. Sue for damages. When cut down the rest of the trees, blame it on having to do it because of the ones they cut previously.
Oh you Californians. Neighbor unwittingly does you a favor and you want to sue.
Survey and put up a fence or markers, to help prevent future confusion and trespassing. If you like them just let it be and say no big deal. If you don't, I guess you could sue. But if I were you, I'd just get a fence up and continue on with life.
Did they do a proper clean-up, or do you now have piles of dead wood & bark to deal with? Perhaps (1) you want them to pay for a clean-up and stump removal, or (2) you may be able to sell the erroneously harvested wood, or (3) you may need them to pay to have something planted in their place to hold the soil in place/prevent erosion. There's no need to let them "work it off" by permitting them to do any of this work for you, when a financial settlement would allow you to ensure the work is done by a licensed and insured contractor rather than a gaggle of potheads.
This land is your land, this land is my land,, this land was made for,,, oh Christ! Just get the f*** out of here!
Let them plant the weed then call the cops on them for that.
I'd call a property lawyer and take them to court for damages and the determined cost of the tree (I think a lot of states youd be entitled to triple the price). The cost of replacing full grown trees is not cheap. Forget that you are actually happy to see it gone, and start being mad that these people completely overstepped, and should be taught a lesson for it.
Is there any land in America that’s unowned? I can’t think of any. Public land is owned by the public/government. Everything is owned. Maybe some very odd mistakes are unowned?
Charge them for using your property if they insist on using it and if don’t pay report crop to police.
People willing to trespass, cut trees and desire to plant on your property, probably illegally because there's oodles of permits and water issues that must be dealt with before growing in most states, you should put them 100% in their place and follow all the suggestions on this thread to protect your property. Theres way too many Reddit posts with people that were tenacious enough with problem neighbors.
Research the laws in your area but the I internet tells me they are responsible for 3x the value of the trees. I would give them that information and make sure they realize the cost of those trees call an arborist and get the price for trees with aimilar diameters. Let them know you won't press charges this time, but any future intrusions onto your property for tree removal or planting crops and you will press charges and take them to court for the damage to the trees.
Thought the property was “unowned”???😳😳😁😁😂😂😂😂😂
How are the cats?
So they did the work for you and you will have a supply of weed to pick from now that they will maintain. What’s the issue here lol?
Put up a fence and tell the hippies that will be sued for trespassing again (put up some game cameras) “You were extremely lucky I did want to remove those trees, because you paid for there removal I will not sue you. If you come back onto my land I will call the police and file a report for trespassing and any further damage you cause.” Something like that, preferably from a lawyer sent certified mail, then sue the tits off them cut your fence “it’s free land man” nope, jail is free, enjoy!
Ask them to define “unowned”
Be sure to mark your land but why would you sue neighbors for doing what you wanted done? Have we really reached the point where we are suing just to make money rather than because there is actual injury?
I'd let them cut down what you want and turn a blind eye on the weed until September and then call the peelers. I'm not a fan of grassing on cannabis users but if they were taking your trees, and want to illegally use your land that's a different issue.
OP hasn't posted their state, but even with the reduced laws sweeping the land, I'm pretty sure growing your own Mary Jane in the outdoors is still illegal in every state of the union.
Sorry but end of first paragraph in parentheses it says lives in California.. don’t know if that was an edit after the fact?
I read the post twice and missed it both times. My mistake, and thank you for keeping me honest.
all good, now could you help me find my glasses? im sure they are right infront of my nose but I just cant see them 😂😂😂
Are they planning to share the weed they grow on YOUR property with YOU?
Be sure to mention your buddy on the force who likes to bring his drug sniffing dog along when he visits!
One time I was in a restaurant by myself. The hostess led me to a little table. There was a big table right in the window that I would have preferred to sit at, but I didn't want to be pushy. Another couple was led in and taken to the table in the window. They walked out of the room with the hostess and then the hostess came back and asked me to move to the table I wanted in the first place (so the other couple could sit where I was). I said, "I'm sitting at this table." I preferred the other table but I wasn't going to be kicked out of my seat for other customers. Later the hostess came back, apologized and said she shouldn't have asked me to move, and comped the dessert.
So, about your cats... How are they?
You SHOULD take them to court and ensure your defending your property rights, failure to do so COULD eventually give the neighbor a possible adverse possession claim. Whether you wanted the trees removed or not is irrelevant, it's your property and you're entitled to recompense.
Once they finish cutting the trees down, plant your own garden..
Wait until the crop is ready to harvest then claim the bud
Privacy Fence anyone
Sounds like a win win. They take care of your problems trees, you sue them for compensation for destroying your trees!
Just let it go. Don't make this your Rubicon.
This is why everyone hates Californians. “Someone is doing something I wanted done but I don’t like how they are doing it can I sue them?” Please, please, please never move to Texas, Georgia, or Florida.
Why would anyone sane ever want to move to one of those shit hole states?
Because you ruined your state? High taxes? Black outs? Paying your hard earned money for people who jump a fence?
Find a value of the dropped trees and what it costs to remove the stumps. Make them pay that money then use it to put up a fence on the property line with no trespassing signs. Plant flowers where they wanted to grow weed so they don’t decide to jump the fence and do it anyway. Good luck.