Previous owner did not disclose lack of easement

House is in Northern California.
House is 30 years old.
We've owned the house for 18 months
House and all surrounding land is on 45 degree slope.
Question: We have recently had a site survey conducted for replacement of a retaining wall. The site survey shows that a 40' portion of our driveway and the only piece of flat land on the property (adjacent to the driveway), that we thought was ours, is in fact owned by our neighbours.
This information was not disclosed to us by the previous owners, and during the buying process they led us to believe the 30' square piece of flat land was part of the property. They even affectionately refered to it as "long term parking" as it is at the bottom of our steep driveway which is 240' long.
No easement has ever been applied for to address the access to our property, and our Title Insurance company says they are not in any way liable as they could not reasonably have been expected to know a portion of the driveway was not ours.
Our neighbours, who own the property in question and who have lived in their home for over 25 years, say that all previous owners have know about this issue. They are being very nice about it and say they have no issue with us using the land. However, I assume that applying for an easement will cost money, which I don't believe I should pay for. I also always intended to build a garage on the flat land to enhance the value of the house, which I obviously can't do if I don't own the land.
Can I sue the prvious owner for not disclosing all this? What proof would I need that they knew? I only have the word of our neighbour so far. Do I have any recourse to sue the Title Insurance Company?
Thanks for your help everybody.

[HomeGuru]

Please summarize in a short post.

HomeGuru,
That is a short post!! Any shorter and I would not be able to convey the salient facts of the case, and therefore any advice received would be based on generic information and rendered useless. I posted on this site in order to see if anyone would be willing to review the specific facts of my case, and to possibly recruit an attorney to act on my behalf. From your response it appears that I will not have much luck!

[HomeGuru]

Ok, your choice.

I found your response amusing and did go back and read your post. Most of what you call "salient facts" are irrelevant. Your post could have been a short paragraph. If it was, my answer would have been; you have a slim chance of any recovery due to the following:

1. you did not know exactly what you were buying because you did not order a current survey and map.

2. it is not the fault of the Seller that you chose not to order a survey prior to closing when said survey was part of your due diligence.

So you see, I did not need 97% of your post in order to arrive at #1 and 2 above. Your salient facts? I think not.



[Edited by HomeGuru on 02-23-2001 at 04:12 PM]

HomeGuru,

I have now paid my money and consulted with an attorney on this issue. It appears that your advice is in error. Apparently, under California law a seller is obliged to disclose any and all information regarding the property they are selling. If they knowingly fail to reveal information or (as in my case) attempt to decieve the buyer by covering up information regarding land ownership they are liable. Your advice would be correct if the seller had no knowledge of the issue.

[HomeGuru]

You are the one that is wrong. Read my post again and you will see that my advice is not in error.