• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Adverse possession in trailer park

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

minnesota007

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Minnesota

Sorry this is a long post.

In 1991 we bought purchased a 40 x100 lot with a trailer located on the lot in a mobile home park in northern Minnesota. All utilities were hooked up and operational and the trailer had been placed on that lot in 1989. The lot was part of a landowner coop association consisting of 50 members with the coop holding the deeds for each lot and the members held 1/50th share of the coop. When we purchased the sellers and coop advised us the side lot lines were electric meter box to electric meter box north of and south of the trailer. In 1997 we opted out of the coop and received title to the lot. In 2005 we applied for a variance to replace the existing structure with a 5 foot setback from the lot south of us. We replaced the trailer using the property lines given to us at purchase plus we went off a survey stake on the property north of us that had a survey done in 1996 as a result of property line dispute north of us. We did not do a survey because the trailer had been there since 1989 and there was no question we owned the land it sat on and the land the utilities occupied.

In 2007 the lot south of us was sold. The sellers had a survey done prior to the sale and it showed our all our utilites and 3 feet of our trailer on their property. The survey has a skew to it that places the just part of our trailer on the their lot but all our water, gas and electric utilities fully on their property. The sellers never showed us the survey or advised us there was a problem. The new owners went and got a variance, poured a cement slab, pulled in a mobile home and then sued us for tresspass and 50,000 in compensation. We counter sued for adverse possesion. After agreeing to mediation the day before the mediation meeting the plaintiffs amended their complaint to include 50,000 in punative damages based on a advadavit given by a disgruntled neighbor who is a former friend that my husband owns 252 acres of hunting land with near by. What we understand is it says we willfully and intentionally placed the new trailer encroaching on that lot in 2005. We have plenty of witness's to discredit him. We met all adverse possesion requirements for the state of Minnesota having owned the property for 16 years at the time the suit was filed. Is it not an important fact the utilties have been there since at least 1964 per the plat ? They want use to move the trailer 8 feet. We are heading to court soon. The good thing is we have the same judge who ruled in favor of the lot north of us that was encroching on the back end of the lot behind them.

I'm looking for advice and opinions on the outcome.
 
Last edited:


HuAi

Member
So lets see....you plopped your trailor down on your neighbor's property because you were too cheap to get a survey done, and now they want back what's theirs, and they're the evil ones?
 

HomeGuru

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Minnesota

Sorry this is a long post.

In 1991 we bought purchased a 40 x100 lot with a trailer located on the lot in a mobile home park in northern Minnesota. All utilities were hooked up and operational and the trailer had been placed on that lot in 1989. The lot was part of a landowner coop association consisting of 50 members with the coop holding the deeds for each lot and the members held 1/50th share of the coop. When we purchased the sellers and coop advised us the side lot lines were electric meter box to electric meter box north of and south of the trailer. In 1997 we opted out of the coop and received title to the lot. In 2005 we applied for a variance to replace the existing structure with a 5 foot setback from the lot south of us. We replaced the trailer using the property lines given to us at purchase plus we went off a survey stake on the property north of us that had a survey done in 1996 as a result of property line dispute north of us. We did not do a survey because the trailer had been there since 1989 and there was no question we owned the land it sat on and the land the utilities occupied.

In 2007 the lot south of us was sold. The sellers had a survey done prior to the sale and it showed our all our utilites and 3 feet of our trailer on their property. The survey has a skew to it that places the just part of our trailer on the their lot but all our water, gas and electric utilities fully on their property. The sellers never showed us the survey or advised us there was a problem. The new owners went and got a variance, poured a cement slab, pulled in a mobile home and then sued us for tresspass and 50,000 in compensation. We counter sued for adverse possesion. After agreeing to mediation the day before the mediation meeting the plaintiffs amended their complaint to include 50,000 in punative damages based on a advadavit given by another neighbor who is a former friend that my husband owns 252 acres of hunting land with near by. What we understand is it says we willfully and intentionally placed the new trailer encroaching on that lot in 2005. We have plenty of witness's to discredit him. We met all adverse possesion requirements for the state of Minnesota having owned the property for 16 years at the time the suit was filed. The plaintiffs claim since we replaced the trailer 14 years into ownership the clock stopped, ignoring the fact the utilties have been there since at least 1964 per the plat and they want use to move the trailer 8 feet. We are heading to court soon. The good thing is we have the same judge who ruled in favor of the lot north of us that was encroching on the back end of the lot behind them.

I'm looking for advice how to handle these evil neighbors and opinions on the outcome.
**A: how have you met all AP requirements? Was the Plaintiffs land properly registered per 508.02? If so, you have no AP rights? Did you pay taxes on the land pursuant to 541.01-02? My opinion is that you have no AP case.
 

minnesota007

Junior Member
We have met all AP requirements. Their lot is abstract title not Torrens. We paid taxes
on that land since purchase. In 1991 the county assessor measured our lot using the same property line we have observed for 17 years. The county assessor is very surprised their survey has the skew in it and even more surprised all our utilties would be on their lot since 1964. Is that not an important detail? Their survey has the back lot line correct, the trailer is not encroaching on the back, just a few feet in the front due to the skew. Their lot had been bought and sold 3 times before we put in the new trailer and we were never once approached by any of the previous owners questioning the lot lines with the old trailer. New trailer is in the same foot print with a 5 foot set back from the utilities. The lot north of us has already been thru this with same issue and the judge ruled in favor of that non survyed property to establish a boundry line by practical location.
 

HomeGuru

Senior Member
We have met all AP requirements. Their lot is abstract title not Torrens. We paid taxes
on that land since purchase. In 1991 the county assessor measured our lot using the same property line we have observed for 17 years. The county assessor is very surprised their survey has the skew in it and even more surprised all our utilties would be on their lot since 1964. Is that not an important detail? Their survey has the back lot line correct, the trailer is not encroaching on the back, just a few feet in the front due to the skew. Their lot had been bought and sold 3 times before we put in the new trailer and we were never once approached by any of the previous owners questioning the lot lines with the old trailer. New trailer is in the same foot print with a 5 foot set back from the utilities. The lot north of us has already been thru this with same issue and the judge ruled in favor of that non survyed property to establish a boundry line by practical location.
**A: ok, good. Now where is your attorney?
 

minnesota007

Junior Member
Our attorney only handles real estate, trusts, wills & sits on a zoning board the Twin Cities. Theirs is a local small town criminal defense lawyer who just got the mayor off a felony assult charge against a police officer during a fight at a beer garden. The plaintiffs requested ADR when their only intention was to intimidate us to force a settlment by filing a motion to amend the complaint & add punitive damages at 5pm the day before the ADR meeting. It was tempting to get up and leave but would have looked very bad to the judge so we sat thru it. There is a motion hearing coming up and our attorney will argue for dismissal. It is a fraudulent claim made by a disgruntled former friend who has grudge with my husband over hunting land they co own. He got a felony after they bought the land, can't legally hunt, wants to log the land because he can't hunt and thats not what we want. He is violent, a liar and a thief. We have had the sheriff out twice to recover an atv plow and tools he stole from us. He told the sheriff said he was "storing" them for us, under his trailer & the sheriff didn't buy that. He is giving plaintiffs false information which can be discredited by several of our neighbors who border our lot and helped us stake the lot once the old trailer was removed. We are headed trial in December. We did not intentionally or willfully disregard their property rights, didn't know there was a skew that would cause a survey to place our electric meter box, gas meter, water pump and a corner of our trailer on someone elses property.
 

HomeGuru

Senior Member
Our attorney only handles real estate, trusts, wills & sits on a zoning board the Twin Cities. Theirs is a local small town criminal defense lawyer who just got the mayor off a felony assult charge against a police officer during a fight at a beer garden. The plaintiffs requested ADR when their only intention was to intimidate us to force a settlment by filing a motion to amend the complaint & add punitive damages at 5pm the day before the ADR meeting. It was tempting to get up and leave but would have looked very bad to the judge so we sat thru it. There is a motion hearing coming up and our attorney will argue for dismissal. It is a fraudulent claim made by a disgruntled former friend who has grudge with my husband over hunting land they co own. He got a felony after they bought the land, can't legally hunt, wants to log the land because he can't hunt and thats not what we want. He is violent, a liar and a thief. We have had the sheriff out twice to recover an atv plow and tools he stole from us. He told the sheriff said he was "storing" them for us, under his trailer & the sheriff didn't buy that. He is giving plaintiffs false information which can be discredited by several of our neighbors who border our lot and helped us stake the lot once the old trailer was removed. We are headed trial in December. We did not intentionally or willfully disregard their property rights, didn't know there was a skew that would cause a survey to place our electric meter box, gas meter, water pump and a corner of our trailer on someone elses property.
**A: ok, good luck to you.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top