What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? AZ
I recently moved to TX, but the issue in question is in AZ where our other house is still for sale. We bought the house five years ago and were told that there were two easements for our neighbors up the hill for ingress and egress. We all use the same driveway and it goes right in front of my house, but not a big deal. It was a dirt road and I paved it and I put in speed bumps at the same time (to keep speeding down in front of my house because I had a 1 year old at the time and a dog), all done by a professional contractor and certainly nothing out of the ordinary. Turns out that the neighbors don't like the speed bumps and in May (over 4 years after the paving was done) hired an attorney and demanded that they be removed or they would do it themselves. I called their attorney and concluded they were bluffing (he wouldn't tell me which laws I had violated and claimed the speed bumps were dangerous and in impediment to safety vehicles - yeah right). Well, on Saturday, I got a call from my realtor that there were workers on my property removing the speed bumps. I left a message with one neighbor and called then called the police. The cop said the two neighbors were both on the scene and were claiming that they jointly owned the property, which they don't. I tried to explain to the cop the difference between an easement and joint ownership, but he said he couldn't do anything without me there with some documentation that the property was actually mine. Very frustrating, but I couldn't do anything from here in TX at the time. I am in the process of looking for an attorney in AZ, but I wanted to find out if the neighbors actually have the right in AZ to alter my driveway. Their attorney is claimng that I have no right to impede their use of the easement. I find that hard to believe, especially since I wasn't doing anything out of the ordinary. Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to be clear about my situation so that someone may be able to respond with some advice specific to my situation.
Here is what I want, so let me know if I am being reasonable:
I want the speed bumps replaced at their expense and my legal fees paid.
In the course of my research, I discovered that I also have an easement across their properties to another street. One of these two problem neighbors has a private gate that he is very picky about. If their attorney is actually correct that I can't impede access with speed bumps, it seems like an electronically operated gate is no dice as well.
Finally, one of the neighbor's easement was granted with the following language:
"The Grantor and the Grantees by the acceptance of this deed, hereby covenant, each with the other, that the locations of the easements over Lot 211 described herein, may be relocated by the owner of the servient tenement, at the expense of the owner of the servient tenement, so long as the easement as relocated is reasonably passable by passenger automobile traffic. This covenant shall run with the land."
A prior owner of my appears to have moved the easement for this property to an adjacent property that he also owned. Should it be a problem to enforce this new easement? There is one complicating factor here - the easement was moved for both neighbors' properties, but only one of them had the language quoted above. I am assuming that the Grant is valid for one and not the other - am I correct?
Thanks in advance for any help!!
Tod
I recently moved to TX, but the issue in question is in AZ where our other house is still for sale. We bought the house five years ago and were told that there were two easements for our neighbors up the hill for ingress and egress. We all use the same driveway and it goes right in front of my house, but not a big deal. It was a dirt road and I paved it and I put in speed bumps at the same time (to keep speeding down in front of my house because I had a 1 year old at the time and a dog), all done by a professional contractor and certainly nothing out of the ordinary. Turns out that the neighbors don't like the speed bumps and in May (over 4 years after the paving was done) hired an attorney and demanded that they be removed or they would do it themselves. I called their attorney and concluded they were bluffing (he wouldn't tell me which laws I had violated and claimed the speed bumps were dangerous and in impediment to safety vehicles - yeah right). Well, on Saturday, I got a call from my realtor that there were workers on my property removing the speed bumps. I left a message with one neighbor and called then called the police. The cop said the two neighbors were both on the scene and were claiming that they jointly owned the property, which they don't. I tried to explain to the cop the difference between an easement and joint ownership, but he said he couldn't do anything without me there with some documentation that the property was actually mine. Very frustrating, but I couldn't do anything from here in TX at the time. I am in the process of looking for an attorney in AZ, but I wanted to find out if the neighbors actually have the right in AZ to alter my driveway. Their attorney is claimng that I have no right to impede their use of the easement. I find that hard to believe, especially since I wasn't doing anything out of the ordinary. Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to be clear about my situation so that someone may be able to respond with some advice specific to my situation.
Here is what I want, so let me know if I am being reasonable:
I want the speed bumps replaced at their expense and my legal fees paid.
In the course of my research, I discovered that I also have an easement across their properties to another street. One of these two problem neighbors has a private gate that he is very picky about. If their attorney is actually correct that I can't impede access with speed bumps, it seems like an electronically operated gate is no dice as well.
Finally, one of the neighbor's easement was granted with the following language:
"The Grantor and the Grantees by the acceptance of this deed, hereby covenant, each with the other, that the locations of the easements over Lot 211 described herein, may be relocated by the owner of the servient tenement, at the expense of the owner of the servient tenement, so long as the easement as relocated is reasonably passable by passenger automobile traffic. This covenant shall run with the land."
A prior owner of my appears to have moved the easement for this property to an adjacent property that he also owned. Should it be a problem to enforce this new easement? There is one complicating factor here - the easement was moved for both neighbors' properties, but only one of them had the language quoted above. I am assuming that the Grant is valid for one and not the other - am I correct?
Thanks in advance for any help!!
Tod
