adverse possesion

[debpair]

What is the name of your state? Georgia

I inherited 50% of a home along with another party in 1993. Since that time, I have paid all the property taxes, all the maintenance & upkeep, and have had family members living in the home for various periods throughout this time. Not once during this 12 years has the other party attempted to contact myself about the property. When I first inherited, I spoke to her about the taxes for the property and she said she couldn't afford to pay them, so I've assumed 100% responsibility for it. The house was appraised at $14,000 in 1993 and in 2000 it appraised at $140,000. I do not want to buy her out since I don't think she deserves to get 50% of the current property value.

I would like to know if I have a case for adverse possession to take over 100% ownership of the property. I need to understand what criteria exist in Georgia for such a case and what steps I would have to take.

[shortbus]

You can't get adverse possession against a legal co-tenant unless you've 'ousted' that tenant, ie. explicitly made it clear that you are kicking them off the property and taking control of their share.

However, you can file a contribution action against the other tenant demanding 50% contribution for mandatory upkeep costs (taxes & insurance, but probably not repairs) during this time. Since she can't afford it, she will likely be induced to sell her share to you at a reduced rate.

[BelizeBreeze]

Originally Posted by shortbus

You can't get adverse possession against a legal co-tenant unless you've 'ousted' that tenant, ie. explicitly made it clear that you are kicking them off the property and taking control of their share.

However, you can file a contribution action against the other tenant demanding 50% contribution for mandatory upkeep costs (taxes & insurance, but probably not repairs) during this time. Since she can't afford it, she will likely be induced to sell her share to you at a reduced rate.

WHOA PARDNER.....I think you'd better retink this answer.

Look at the post again. And this time VERY CLOSELY.

Originally Posted by debpair

I inherited 50% of a home along with another party in 1993. Since that time, I have paid all the property taxes, all the maintenance & upkeep, and have had family members living in the home for various periods throughout this time.

And did you charge them rent so that your co-owner could reap the benefits of your 'illegal conversion'?

Originally Posted by debpair

Not once during this 12 years has the other party attempted to contact myself about the property.

And that is not required under the law.

Originally Posted by debpair

When I first inherited, I spoke to her about the taxes for the property and she said she couldn't afford to pay them, so I've assumed 100% responsibility for it.

Irrelevant to ownership. It MIGHT be relevant to a portion of the proceeds of the sale when that happens but on a prorated basis.
[quote-debpair]
The house was appraised at $14,000 in 1993 and in 2000 it appraised at $140,000. I do not want to buy her out since I don't think she deserves to get 50% of the current property value.
[/quote]
And that's tough crap. Because it's not your business what she deserves. It's up to the law and the courts.

debar]
I would like to know if I have a case for adverse possession to take over 100% ownership of the property.

NOPE. What you HAVE is a case of PARTITION and nothing more. Everything you've given here as reasons to take possession of another's property are excuses that you've 'assummed the responsibility for' (your own words).

So, file partition and get ready to explain to a judge why you think your co-owner should retain a full 50% while your 'family members' recieved the benefit of the home. And if they paid rent then be ready to explain to that same judge why 50% of the monies collected were not credited to the co-owner's share of the taxes, why the co-owner did not receive 1/2 of the tax benefits and ....awww hell, you get the idea.

Originally Posted by debpair

What is the name of your state? Georgia

I inherited 50% of a home along with another party in 1993. Since that time, I have paid all the property taxes, all the maintenance & upkeep, and have had family members living in the home for various periods throughout this time. Not once during this 12 years has the other party attempted to contact myself about the property. When I first inherited, I spoke to her about the taxes for the property and she said she couldn't afford to pay them, so I've assumed 100% responsibility for it. The house was appraised at $14,000 in 1993 and in 2000 it appraised at $140,000. I do not want to buy her out since I don't think she deserves to get 50% of the current property value.

I would like to know if I have a case for adverse possession to take over 100% ownership of the property. I need to understand what criteria exist in Georgia for such a case and what steps I would have to take.

Permissive possession never ripens into adverse possession...even if it's a hundred years.

[shortbus]

Belize, I did read the original question, and your advice is bad.

If the OP files for partition, the court will order a sale of the property. The OP may or may not be able to buy it during that proceeding, and may end up kicked out. That's bad for him. In partition the sister will get 50% of the proceeds (adjusted for her share of tax, insurance etc). That's also bad (according to the OP)

The OP wants to stay in the house and put the squeeze on the non-paying sister. That's why contribution actions exist.

[BelizeBreeze]

Originally Posted by shortbus

Belize, I did read the original question, and your advice is bad.

If the OP files for partition, the court will order a sale of the property. The OP may or may not be able to buy it during that proceeding, and may end up kicked out. That's bad for him. In partition the sister will get 50% of the proceeds (adjusted for her share of tax, insurance etc). That's also bad (according to the OP)

The OP wants to stay in the house and put the squeeze on the non-paying sister. That's why contribution actions exist.

Well that's too bad what the OP wants because the other party can bring the partition suit and then where is he? Out on his ass.

You are telling this person that they CAN convert a co-ownership into their own property which is downright FALSE.

You can't get adverse possession against a legal co-tenant unless you've 'ousted' that tenant, ie. explicitly made it clear that you are kicking them off the property and taking control of their share.

The above is not only wrong but dangerous. You are giving this person false hope.

I don't know where you got your information, but it sure as hell wasn't in any law school in this country.

[shortbus]

Originally Posted by BelizeBreeze

Well that's too bad what the OP wants because the other party can bring the partition suit and then where is he? Out on his ass.

Yes, the other party can bring partition. But the other party wasn't asking for advice. There will still be a contribution/accounting action as part of the partition.

You are telling this person that they CAN convert a co-ownership into their own property which is downright FALSE.

No, I'm not. I'm saying the contribution action could be used as negotiating leverage against the other party to get her to sell out at a favorable price, since clearly she owes her share of many years of costs. This is legal. These disputes usually get settled before going to court.

The above is not only wrong but dangerous. You are giving this person false hope.

I don't know where you got your information, but it sure as hell wasn't in any law school in this country.

Uh, whatever you say, Belize. It is definitely possible for a co-tenant to take the other co-tenants' shares by adverse possession in Georgia. The Georgia supreme court decided exactly this issue in 1999: Wright v. Wright, 512 S.E.2d 618. But I'm sure you knew that.

[HomeGuru]

this is going to be interesting. breezy v. shortbrain.

[John Se]

Offer to buy her out (for whatever you think is fair), otherwise they will end up in a partition suit.

[debpair]

Thanks, for all the advice, I think I will take the simpler approach and attempt to buy her out.

[HomeGuru]

[quote=shortbus]You can't get adverse possession against a legal co-tenant unless you've 'ousted' that tenant, ie. explicitly made it clear that you are kicking them off the property and taking control of their share.

**A: please provide the cite that proves that the writer's issue is even close to an adverse possession case.
If you can't do that, please stop posting incorrect information.