Adverse posession and hostile?

[jannie123]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Illinois
I understand one of the requirements to be an adverse posession it has to be "hostile"; for legal purposes what does that mean. If the owner had knowledge that you were using the land as yours and ok with it -- but no longer ok with it? The situation has been over 7 years. I don't understand the term hostile in in regard to adverse posession situations. Thanks

 

[justalayman]

It is really pretty simple. Hostile possession means that the claimant must occupy the land in opposition to the true owner's rights. In other words: adverse. They are synonyms in this situation.

. If the owner had knowledge that you were using the land as yours and ok with it -- but no longer ok with it?

depending on facts not presented, that "ok with it" may or may not be adequate to remove that period of time from the cumulative time required for adverse possession. If that "ok with it" was ever some expression of permission, then there was no adverse possession during that time.

In Illinois, the time period for AP would be 7 years if under color of title (for some reason you believed you had title to the land in question) or 20 years otherwise.

For a claim of a prescriptive easement to ripen, the time of use is 20 years.

 

[jannie123]

I'm going to have to look up prescriptive easement.

The ok is yes we had a verbal contract with their premission to be there, stay as long as you want to. Now, it's, we changed our mind and we want you gone. Thanks for the info.

 

[nextwife]

If by permission, there is anothing "adverse" or hostile about the use. You were given permission and got the benefit of that permission for a number of years. Now the owner has reason to withdraw that permission.

 

[justalayman]

I'm going to have to look up prescriptive easement.

The ok is yes we had a verbal contract with their premission to be there, stay as long as you want to. Now, it's, we changed our mind and we want you gone. Thanks for the info.

prescriptive easement is a claimable right to continue some hostile use of the true owners property less than an actual claim to title of the land. In other words: if I walked across some part of your property for the requisite period of time, I could sue to allow me to continue to walk across that pathway forever more but I would not take actual title to the property.

since there was permission, there was no adverse possession. If the demand to vacate the property more recent than 20 years ago, you have no claim of adverse possession. You simply must vacate the property or be considered a trespasser and dealt with as such.

 

[jannie123]

Yes I see. It is actually over 20 years. It was not what would have been considered "hostile" since we had permission to build there. Thank you

 

[HomeGuru]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Illinois
I understand one of the requirements to be an adverse posession it has to be "hostile"; for legal purposes what does that mean. If the owner had knowledge that you were using the land as yours and ok with it -- but no longer ok with it? The situation has been over 7 years. I don't understand the term hostile in in regard to adverse posession situations. Thanks

**A: did you look up the word?

 

[jannie123]

justalayman and nextwife you have been quite helpful with explaining adverse posession and prescriptive easement a little better. Thank you for your assistance.

 

[divona2000]

...It is actually over 20 years. It was not what would have been considered "hostile" since we had permission to build there. Thank you

Is the same building you wrote about here, where you made substantial improvements to the property?
"Our private group was asked to build a tourist attraction on land owned by a public body...verbal lease agreement when building was built...30 years ago tourist attraction asked public body for a written agreement...10 years ago public body wanted written lease – their lawyer wrote it up – tourist attraction found error in lease where it stated public body had built and owned the building; tourist attraction sent back lease with that correction...Lease never returned to sign..."

https://forum.freeadvice.com/other-real-estate-law-questions-11/there-legal-term-569087.html

 

[FlyingRon]

Hostile and permissive are opposites. The fact that a use is permissive is a direct counter to a claim of adverse possession.

 

[jannie123]

divona2000: yes it is the same and I understand that the verbal contract is probably as good as the "paper it's written on",
Seriously, I understand that an oral contract would have some standing.

flyingron: Someone had metioned adverse possession to me, but I understand that because there was permission given the situation doesn't fit in this situation.

 

[HomeGuru]

divona2000: yes it is the same and I understand that the verbal contract is probably as good as the "paper it's written on",
Seriously, I understand that an oral contract would have some standing.

flyingron: Someone had metioned adverse possession to me, but I understand that because there was permission given the situation doesn't fit in this situation.

**A: oral contracts have no standing in real property issues such as this due to the statute of frauds.