Insurance doesn’t always work the way people expect it to - my insurance policy has an obligation to me, not anyone else and their obligation to me is to cover damages I’m legally liable for. It doesn’t matter if I want to “make things right” , if I’m not legally liable, the insurance won’t pay and if I’m not very clearly liable, it takes a lawsuit to determine if I’m liable. I’m not automatically liable just because someone was injured at my house.
States also have different regulations about who is covered by whose municipal laws. My information on this is almost entirely re New York.
Common enough that it has a specific term:
When my grandpa died in 1979, there was a problem with selling the house, because grandma (also dead by then) had let the neighbours use a strip of their land for building a garage on (‘because she liked them’) and it was never documented. This was the example I cited when warning my uncle.
The bakery might just buy the place anyway - they already own the houses on either side.
If a title insurance company does their job right, they never have to pay claims. Their primary job is to make sure the title is clean before you buy.
As I understand it there are three levels to the title assurance work a title insurance company will do.
Paper research where they are checking that the seller has unencumbered title to convey, or if there are encumbrances (like a utility easement) the buyer is aware of them.
A “drive by” survey where someone has a map (25 years ago when we bought the house where we had the issue, it was a paper map, I assume it’s all electronic now) and goes to the house and visually verified that the house and any improvements appear to be on the parcel of land being conveyed. They may be relying, for example, on the road being where the map says it is and look at the lot in relation to the road.
A stakeout survey where a surveyor comes out and locates the boundary markers of the property. As I understand it 25 years ago this cost about $1000. Our title insurance policy was $2400.
It’s a reasonable business decision to forgo the stakeout and even the drive-by if 99.9% of the time they would not uncover any issues. Even if the 0.01% is a claim of tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands.
When we bought a house in 2004, there turned out to be a problem with a small piece of the lot. Much of the town was laid out as 20ft x 100 ft parcels, and a deed would essentially refer back to the original map and list which parcels made up the full lot. Some 80 years previously, one parcel was transferred between 2 adjacent properties. Both deeds showed the transfer the next time each property was sold, but the original record showing that the transfer occurred could not be found. This turned out to be a huge problem, both in getting a mortgage and in title insurance. The bank eventually agreed that the LTV was still acceptable even if that parcel wasn’t part of the property (it was on a back corner, with no buildings or anything), and the title insurance company wound up writing the policy such that that parcel was specifically excluded from coverage - if someone sued us that that they actually owned that parcel, the title insurance co wouldn’t defend it. We honestly didn’t care if the parcel wound up not being ours, so we were willing to proceed.
I think i paid less than that 10 years ago when the lot next door was redeveloped. It was purchased by a builder who tore everything down, leveled the sloped lot, and built a giant new house.
It was ~$800 very well spent. It turned out there was an old fence between our houses, and it started in the right place at the street, but meandered onto my property, and was 10 feet over the line in the back. I had the surveyor put “lots of yellow ribbon along the property line”. When the blaster showed up, i was home, and he asked me where the property line was. He said the builder had told him to blast to the fence. I told him the property line, according to my surveyor, was where all that yellow ribbon was. He decided he didn’t want legal hassles, and only blasted to the property line, even though the builder had cut down all the trees up to the fence. And so i kept a sizable chunk of back yard, which gives me some separation from the pit that is my neighbor’s back yard.
Is this garage to be for commercial use or strictly personal space? It might greatly affect what you ask AND what the local zoning laws permit.
Almost certainly personal use.
He seems to have lost interest. We hired him to clear a bunch of thick brush from our land last week, which was when he initially brought up the idea of buying some of our plot, and we were going to discuss it the next day. But we haven’t heard from him since.
Problem solved, perhaps.
I wonder if he lurks here? 
Likely he chatted with others, who gave a similar reality check.