Lot next to my house

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? West Virginia

I have a 20' wide by 60' deep lot next to my house. I have had a fence around it for 25 years and have kept the grass cut and even have had a shed on it for 15 years. There are close to 20 owners of the lot, as the original owner died and it has been willed on for close to 20 years. I have been unable to track all of these people down. Do I have any legal right to the property as I have kept it up for 25+ years? With the exception of just paying the personal property taxes when it comes up and hoping noone pays them, how would I go about getting a title for it, as I am looking to build onto my house now.

Your best option is to use the links above and speak to a real estate atty , most who come here are seeking information on how to prevent adverse possession wich is easier to prevent than it is to do it the other way and take someone elses property from them. One thing you can do is learn from your city/ county zoning dept just how much land one must have to build a home or any other kind of structure on now , If the lot is not buildable size for anything then it may well be easier to contact the person who gets that lots property tax statements and send to them a copy of the ord that shows it is not buildable and offer to buy it, yeah I know not what you were really looking to hear but this is not a do it your self deal , you will need to consult with a atty.

the requirement of time for adverse possession appears to be 10 years.

Do I have any legal right to the property as I have kept it up for 25+ years?

Click to expand...

it sounds possible

With the exception of just paying the personal property taxes when it comes up and hoping noone pays them, how would I go about getting a title for it, as I am looking to build onto my house now.

Click to expand...

you file, in the courts, what is called an action to quiet title. The problem is; you must sue the owner(s) of the property.

Have you checked the register of deeds office to see who is the current title holder?

how would I go about getting a title ?

Click to expand...

I will give you a summary of what is needed, but only for informational purposes as if you intend to prove up on the property under the doctrine of adverse possession you will definitely need the services of an attorney well experienced in this field of law. It is a complicated, lengthy, time consuming and expensive process and far beyond the capabilities of a layman. So don’t even think about doing this pro per.
___________________________

To gain marketable title under the doctrine of adverse possession will require you to file an action quieting title to the tract of land . In other words, to secure a court decree quieting title in your name and permanently enjoining any and all record owners, their heirs descendants or assigns and all unknown claimants from asserting any right, title, claim or interest in the property.

There are just no other options.

Who needs to be named as the defendants?

Someone has suggested that it is just a matter of checking with the county register of deeds to find the names of the recorded owners. Well, that is not going to give you the information needed because those county records are indexed by name and not by the tract of property.

The first order of business is for the attorney to order from a local title company what is known as a Litigation Report. That report will give you the names of all of the recorded owners who must be named as defendants and upon whom service of process must be made.

And that means that all of the individuals named in the Litigation Report in some legal manner or other MUST BE SERVED WITH PROCESS. Either personally, where their addresses are known – or if out of state, the attorney you will need to move for and secure an order for personal service out of state - or by publication of summons.

Fortunately for your sake, West Virginia is not of the states that requires that the adverse claimant must prove that he or she has paid all the real property taxes assessed against the tract for the statutory period of ten years.

But you will need to establish these elements: *

What will be required of you is to establish the following elements: *

(1) That the property has been held adversely
(2) That the possession has been actual;
(3) That it has been open, visible and notorious;
(4) That possession has been exclusive;
(5) That possession has been continuous for not less than ten years;
(6) That possession has been under claim of title or color of title.

Again this is just an outline of what is needed. Rely on the advice of your attorney. But keep in mind that it is a meticulous undertaking to make sure that all of the necessary party defendants are named and served with process. Miss just one and you are not going to acquire marketable title. That is why the Litigation Report is so absolutely necessary.

Good luck


[*] See West Virginia case of: Somon v. Murphy Fabrication & Erection Co. , 160 W.Va. 84, 232 S.E.2d 524 (1977).

=latigo;2520977]I

Someone has suggested that it is just a matter of checking with the county register of deeds to find the names of the recorded owners. Well, that is not going to give you the information needed because those county records are indexed by name and not by the tract of property.

Click to expand...

My mistake. I applied the methods of my state to the OP's state.

(6) That possession has been under claim of title or color of title.

Click to expand...

there is no claim under color of title in the OP's situation but then I also did not see any requirement for there to be a claim under color of title in the statutes either. Maybe I missed it.

I also did not see any requirement for there to be a claim under color of title in the statutes either. Maybe I missed it.

Click to expand...

Elder, Plaintiff/Appellant vs. Smith, MITH AND EARL DEAN SMITH, Defendants/Appellees In the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia Case No. 23171 (January 1996 Term)- Appeal from the Circuit Court of Pleasants County Civil Action No. 92-C-64

Quote:

"One who seeks to assert title to a tract of land under the doctrine of adverse possession must prove each of the following elements for the requisite statutory period: (1) That he has held the tract adversely or hostilely; (2) That the possession has been actual; (3) That it has been open and notorious (sometimes stated in the cases as visible and notorious); (4) That possession has been exclusive; (5) That possession has been continuous; (6) THAT POSSESSION HAS BEEN UNDER CLAIM OF TITLE OR COLOR OF TITLE."

(Citing: Somon v. Murphy Fabrication & Erection Co. , 160 W.Va. 84, 232 S.E.2d 524 (1977).

and?



You should realize that in the case you cited as well as the cited supporting case, there were very different facts involved. In each of them, there was in fact either a claim under color or title or right of claim. I would suggest that was why that specific statement was included in each of those cases. I can find nothing that would support such a requirement is supported by statute. I would suggest it was included in the manner it was was due to the fact it was an element in those two specific cases, not one of statutory requirement.

As such, unless a right of claim or a claim under color of title is required by statute, it is irrelevant in this OP's situation.

So, if you want to assert there is in fact a requirement there either be a claim under color of title or right of claim, then OP has no chance of claiming the lot as there is no mistake of ownership. OP is clearly aware he has no title to the property or right of claim.

I frankly don’t see wherein lies the basis for dispute.

The West Virginia courts have clearly expressed the element alternatively; to-wit:.

Possession for the prescriptive period either under “CLAIM OF TITLE” or “COLOR OF TITLE”.

Color of title generally refers to possession under the mistaken authority, often in good faith, of some form of document of title.

Whereas claim of title is frequently used to define a claim based on the doctrine of adverse possession.

I haven’t suggested, nor have the W. Va. courts implied that the OP must produce some documentary evidence of title to the adjoining lot.

Fini

I frankly don’t see wherein lies the basis for dispuite.

The West Virginia courts have clearly expressed the element alternatively; to-wit:.

Possession for the prescriptive period either under “CLAIM OF TITLE” or “COLOR OF TITLE”.

Color of title generally refers to possession under the mistaken authority, often in good faith, of some form of document of title.

Whereas claim of title is frequently used to define a claim based on the doctrine of adverse possession.

I have'nt suggested, nor have the W. Va. courts implied that the OP must produce some documentary evidence of title.

Fini

from Solomon:

They conclude that one, who by mistake enters land of another thinking such land is covered in his deed, must show actual possession in order to hold the land adversely. This is nothing more than stating that his possession in the disputed area rests upon a "claim of title" as distinguished from a "color of title."

Click to expand...

and a footnote from the opinion:

Some courts use the term "claim of right" in lieu of claim of title. Both phrases are synonymous and are distinct from the principle of "color of title." The latter phrase denotes that the disseisor possesses some type of written title paper; whereas under the concept of claim of title or right, the disseisor has no title paper but a mere naked assertion of ownership. See 5 Thompson, Real Property § 2549; 4 Tiffany, The Law of Real Property § 1147

Click to expand...

.

both claim of title and color of title are based on a belief of ownership. One being simple error on the part of the possessor. The other being based on an defective title but both on the belief possession is rightfully theirs.

There is no statutory requirement for such belief for a valid AP claim.

there also is neither in this OP's situation.

so, are you claiming the OP has no claim to AP as he has no claim under claim or color of title? If so, why did you describe the process for attempting to make a claim under AP which would tend to infer you agree there might be a viable claim under AP?