Here in the suburbs, I think the fences are common. When I replaced the old wood and chain-link fence back in 2000 in my back yard, I just did it. My south neighbor had some privacy fence bolted to my/his/our dividing fence. I said, “Hey, I’m going to replace this fence. How’s it affect yours?” He told me just to have the fence company not haul it away. When they were done, he put it back up himself, and actually did it nicely with U-bolts and such so as not to screw up my new chain link fence. However, the ugly side is definitely facing me. And since my fence is in the way, I can’t even paint it. Now there’s a new owner – I should see if there’s a code for maintaining the appearance of it facing my side.
Oh, but I didn’t ask my neighbors to contribute at all. If I were in a higher-class neighborhood, I might consider it. In my case, let’s see – I pay half, and the other half among three neighbors – that’s asking them each for $190. It doesn’t seem like much, and all of a sudden I’m disappointed in myself for not having asked! Dang, it’s only $190!! And it would have saved me 50% on my fence!
As for taking care of things, we kind of do this in relation to driveways. My south neighbor actually owns about 3" of “my” front and side lawn along the driveway, and we own about 3" of my north neighbor’s on their side, and so on. But we pretty much just use the driveway as the demarkation point. If I refuse to cut my south neighbor’s grass, it’s my yard that looks like crap! Then of course there’s the point at the ends of the driveways where they flare out. They actually flare out enough that we extend into each others property lines. But since this is the “city” part of our yard (the easement) I guess it doesn’t matter.
Of course the fencing I’m talking about is suburban fencing, you know, where we live like rats (not as ratty as city rats, though) and every house is close to every other house*. In spacious areas – not necessarily rural or country, and not necessarily rich neighborhoods – I would expect fences more akin to what Duckster describes, and fewer (ugly) chain link fences.
*actually for some reason the new modern subdivisions are worse. The houses are huge but the lots tiny; literally separated by nothing but the width of their driveways! And they have ugly chain link fences (as do I).
Adverse possession is certainly more complicated than chap suggests. But I stand by my initial observation. Think of it this way - if he uses it with your permission, how is it “adverse”?
For whatever it’s worth, IAAL, tho, of course, not yours … Property law classes were many years ago.
Good to hear. Have you all agreed on a design yet? White picket, chain link, or what?
I ask, because you could try a little reverse psychology: “Okay, I’ve talked to the builder, and we’ve got it narrowed down to three designs. Design A is forty inches tall, cedar, generic but tasteful. Design B is three layers of chicken coop enclosure, twenty feet tall, topped with razor wire. Design C is mortared-together skulls. Which do you prefer?”
I’m engaging in humorous hyperbole (obviously), but there’s a point. If you say “what do you want” without offering options, you will force people to make a choice based on an open-ended inquiry, and human nature being what it is people tend to feel the obligation to stick with original choices and get resentful when these choices aren’t honored, irrational as it may be. If you let them choose from a limited set of options, you reduce the likelihood of conflict.
DS-
I wasn’t implying that people don’t have a right to keep others off their property; they clearly do. I’m sure most, if not all, communities require setbacks from property lines so folks don’t put structures right next to property lines, thus avoiding the situation you describe.
Obviously you would want to get permission so you wouldn’t be tresspassing to maintain your own property, especially if the owner is a prick. If you are denied access then you figure out another way.