Undisclosed easement on newly-bought house

[Lightnin]

Contacted a lawyer to deal with the insurance company- he finds the whole thing fascinating. He sent the title insurance company our bid for the valuation, based on how much of the yard the pipe affects. As part of the paperwork I gave him, I took the proposed plat and overlaid the Google Earth view of my yard- that pipe actually affects so much of my yard that we can’t build *anything *other than a shed back there. No garage, no nothing. I actually got pissed off when I really saw how much it affects our yard.

They responded with an incredible lowball estimate- less than a tenth of what we asked for. They’ve decided to contract the inspector our neighbors used, the one who has the most experience with the situation, at their own expense.

[davidm]

Fascinating thread. I hope that you’ll be able to continue to keep us informed.

[Northern_Piper]

Thanks for the update. I was wondering just the other day how it was going. Sorry to hear it’s having more of an effect than you had originally thought.

[Northern_Piper]

@Lightnin

Contacted a lawyer to deal with the insurance company- he finds the whole thing fascinating.

Oh, that isn’t good. That means research. Billable research.

[Mama_Zappa]

What about the legalities of this not having been recorded on the public records? Any chance you can force them to move the damn pipe?

[Lightnin]

@Mama_Zappa

What about the legalities of this not having been recorded on the public records? Any chance you can force them to move the damn pipe?

Dunno. The whole thing is skeevy as hell. Someone hid the existence of the pipe. Whether that means we can force it to be moved, though, who knows? I don’t think this will be fully resolved for years.

Huh. I wonder if we could charge the golf course rent… nah, they’d just say that it’s the city’s. The city would say that they’re not responsible for making the plats up-to-date, so it’s the previous owner’s fault. The previous owner… well, I don’t know what kind of excuse they can have, but they probably don’t have deep pockets.

[drachillix]

@Northern_Piper

So Lightnin’ could bring an action against the golf course, telling them to remove their pipe and stop trespassing on his land, as they would have no legal right to keep the pipe there.

If the golf course waved the unregistered easement at him in court, he could just say, “that’s of no legal effect. You don’t have an easement on my land. Now get your pipe out and cap it so it doesn’t flood my land.”

Is that how a lawyer says “Stick that in your pipe and smoke it”

[Dendarii_Dame]

@drachillix

Is that how a lawyer says “Stick that in your pipe and smoke it”

Almost. I’m pretty sure a “whereas” is required in there somewhere, though.

[Lightnin]

Big developments.

The appraiser we suggested the title insurance company use to appraise the impact of the easement on our property, the guy our neighbors used, came out to look at the property. He sent in his estimate.

A bit of backstory: We’d originally guesstimated the impact at about $40k. At our lawyer’s suggestion, we proposed $60k to the insurance company, fully expecting them to negotiate us down to our $40k. They responded, instead, with “Oh, we were thinking less than $5,000.”

Unacceptable, of course- so instead, they had the appraiser come out. Based on his estimation, they’ve said they’ll give us $56,000.

Woot!

Since we can’t build a garage- like, at all, apparently- we’re going to build the basement (since in these parts, extra bedrooms are the best property improvement you can do, according to our real estate agent).

Additionally, we intend to put in a shed, so I have a place to park my motorcycle and store my lawn stuff.

I also intend to landscape the back yard so that any potential buyers won’t be bothered so much by the easement.

Now… the pipe is still undisclosed. I intend to track down someone and make them officially record the thing… but if they won’t, I guess we’ll just have to disclose it as an encroachment. And since it’s unrecorded, even by the county, it seems to me that if the county needs to work on the pipe (or whatever), they’ll have to repair any damage they do to my yard while doing so. Does that sound reasonable to you guys?

[Northern_Piper]

Congrats. That sounds good.

But on the bit about the county coming into your land - do they have any right to do that, if the easement is not recorded?

[Lightnin]

@Northern_Piper

Congrats. That sounds good.

But on the bit about the county coming into your land - do they have any right to do that, if the easement is not recorded?

I have no idea.

Actually, it’s probably the city- I think that’s who was supposed to file the plat, originally. Somehow it disappeared.

[davidm]

@Lightnin

…
And since it’s unrecorded, even by the county, it seems to me that if the county needs to work on the pipe (or whatever), they’ll have to repair any damage they do to my yard while doing so. Does that sound reasonable to you guys?

Wouldn’t it be the golf course that’s responsible for working on the pipe, rather than the county? Maybe I’m missing something.

Also, suppose that pipe cracks and, unbeknownst to you, starts leaking underground, and eventually undermines your yard, or maybe even damages your house somehow; who’s responsible for that?

[Lightnin]

@davidm

Wouldn’t it be the golf course that’s responsible for working on the pipe, rather than the county? Maybe I’m missing something.

Also, suppose that pipe cracks and, unbeknownst to you, starts leaking underground, and eventually undermines your yard, or maybe even damages your house somehow; who’s responsible for that?

It’s all very unclear, but it looks like the pipe is owned by the city, but it exclusively (almost exclusively?) serves to drain the golf course’s ponds. The last time the pipe damaged the house (when it flooded the basement just after the previous owners moved in), the city paid for it. I imagine that’s what would happen again.

[CannyDan]

@Lightnin

… I imagine that’s what would happen again.

Be careful about the terms in that settlement! For $56k they may be shifting all future responsibility for that pipe, and any consequences of hosting that pipe, onto you.

Be certain your agreement spells out that:
[ul]
[li]you are being paid only for the loss of use you suffer from the presence of the pipe.[/li][li]you do not offer or agree to maintain the pipe.[/li][li]any future maintenance of the pipe or property damage caused by hosting or maintaining the pipe will be entirely covered by some other party named and agreed to in the same document (presumably the city). Be sure that a competent entity executes that part. It isn’t enough for you to assert this, they must agree to it.[/li][/ul]

[Enginerd]

And CannyDan lives up to his name!

[Dinsdale]

Yeah - definitely pay the few hundred $ to have a GODD real estate lawyer look it over, and point out to you all the potential pros and cons of signing/not signing. You have to know what the implications will be when you wish to sell.

But it looks like you are already working with a lawyer, and the offer exceeded what you expected. Sorry you had to deal with this, and sorry your property is encumbered, but congrats on as good a resolution as you received.

Gotta say, I woulda bet a large sum that you would not have received anywhere NEAR this size of an offer, anywhere near this quickly. As a lawyer, I gotta observe that legal matters just aren’t supposed to work this quickly and this well. Who do I complain to?

[davidm]

@Lightnin

It’s all very unclear…
…
I imagine…

:eek: I’m not a lawyer but as long as you can say things like “very unclear” and “I imagine” you are not done with this! Make sure about what the agreement says and who exactly is responsible for upkeep and repairs.

[Lightnin]

@CannyDan

Be careful about the terms in that settlement! For $56k they may be shifting all future responsibility for that pipe, and any consequences of hosting that pipe, onto you.

Be certain your agreement spells out that:
[ul]
[li]you are being paid only for the loss of use you suffer from the presence of the pipe.[/li][li]you do not offer or agree to maintain the pipe.[/li][li]any future maintenance of the pipe or property damage caused by hosting or maintaining the pipe will be entirely covered by some other party named and agreed to in the same document (presumably the city). Be sure that a competent entity executes that part. It isn’t enough for you to assert this, they must agree to it.[/li][/ul]

Yep- that’s exactly what I’ve got the lawyer looking into.

Spoke with my neighbors last night about this- when they got the settlement from their title company, they didn’t have to sign anything. They thought it was weird- they just got a check.

[Barrett_Bonden]

@Lightnin

Spoke with my neighbors last night about this- when they got the settlement from their title company, they didn’t have to sign anything. They thought it was weird- they just got a check.

It’s possible that the check itself contained language saying that signing it constituted some sort of agreement waiving future claims. IANAL, just have seen such things done.

[davidm]

I imagine that the difficulty may be that the title company is essentially just paying off an insurance claim (if I’m not mistaken). If that’s correct then they likely have no say whatsoever about who’s responsible for future maintenance and repairs. Hopefully the lawyer can straighten it all out.