Land ISSUES - Lawyers advise

[NWOhioChevyGuy]

UnionWelder; Doing that would probably get me atleast one night in the county "hotel" .
I will force his hand in the legal arena once my lawyer has exhausted all "easy" resolutions.

 

[Question]

Round-Up is on sale this time of year, a few gallons might help kill all those nasty weeds that have been growing back there.....

 

[NWOhioChevyGuy]

They plant round-up ready beans so that won't help me any.

However my father mentioned a farm chemical that makes ground void of any vegatation for upto 5 years.

But that would make a yard or cover grass impossible also.

 

[ddawg16]

This might be of interest....I had a brief email conversation with a real estate lawyer that I bought my M/C from....here is his response to my first explination of the issue..

I have no idea about MI, (I'm not licensed there) but in CA, a buyer is bound to the terms of a lease ONLY ONLY ONLY if the lease is properly recorded with the county recorder. If not, no lease. So let's assume the lease was properly recorded. There are only 2 reasons that our buyer had no knowledge of the lease:

(A) The title company "missed it" and didn't disclose it to our buyer. This is rare, but it happens. In that case, the title company has to compensate our buyer for the difference in the value of the land WITH the burdening lease and the value of the land without it (or what he paid for it).

(B) The only other possibility is that the title company DID disclose the lease in our buyer's preliminary title report and the BUYER AND HIS BROKER didn't catch it (which is almost ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS the case). The only way I would know is by examining the "prelim," which I don't even know if they have such a thing in MI.

I should tell you that almost ALWAYS in these cases, when the client brings in his prelim and I show him where the title company listed the exception, they get all red-faced and embarrassed for missing it; however, if the guy had a real estate broker (note the word IF), then even if our buyer missed it, the r/e broker should have caught it and should have brought it to our buyer's attention. Not to do so would be negligent here in CA.

Furthermore, here in CA we have a thing called a Seller's Transfer Disclosure Statement (TDS). In that document, the Seller has to list everything that materially affects the price of the property. Such a lease would be required to be disclosed; however, that would be no excuse for a broker missing it in a properly prepared preliminary title report.

Then I mentioned about the 3 previous foreclosures...

You didn't ADD the part about the foreclosures. HERE IN CA, most foreclosures wipe out existing leases.

Not that this helps much...but to some extent there is a lot of commonality between states....especially with real estate....

I have not heard back from him when I asked about options for getting out of the lease....

But I once again want to point out that I think one of the key issues in this matter is why is the farmer so attached to that piece of land.....I still think you should do some research and see what you can find out about the history of events....talk to some of the neighbors....take beer when you do....

 

[ky-mike]

But I once again want to point out that I think one of the key issues in this matter is why is the farmer so attached to that piece of land.......

He must have something buried there that he doesn't want anyone to find.

I am following this thread because I am in the process of finding that right piece of property here in Kentucky and I want to ensure that I have all of my bases covered prior to closing a deal. While acquiring a piece of property that is subject to a lease is probably a low risk, we can see from this thread that while the risk may be low, the issues can be great to overcome.

Chevyguy - I wish you the best in getting this settled.

 

[UnionWelder]

Is this the way that law abiding civilized people act where you live?

Im not saying to ruin his crop let him harvest and cash in but let him make up his mind as to which way to go. This is HIS land not the farmers. I had a land dispute upstate ny one farmer built a cabin and 4 tree stands on my property. I gave similar options and he picked the best one for him. But he didnt have a contract. contracts are broken everyday Cellphone rental car leases contruction etc.

 

[tdkkart]

I am following this thread because I am in the process of finding that right piece of property here in Kentucky and I want to ensure that I have all of my bases covered prior to closing a deal. While acquiring a piece of property that is subject to a lease is probably a low risk, we can see from this thread that while the risk may be low, the issues can be great to overcome.

I mentioned this in another thread a couple days ago:
If you are searching properties, do your own research as much as possible. Many counties and states now have a ton of info available through their websites, Assessors, recorder etc. If you are in a county with a major city, your county probably has a decent website.

Look for a GIS "geographic information systems" website for your county. Much like the Google maps, in fact I think some use the same pictures, the GIS websites not only have aerial pictures but can also overlay lot lines, parcel numbers, easements, zoning areas etc on the maps.
While not entirely accurate they area huge help in identifying just what properties consist of, how they lay etc. If the neighbor's barn looks to be on the property you're researching you'd better look into it.

One of the properties we looked at last winter had a deck on the back of the house that appeared to overhang the neighbor's lot line, judging by the aerial pictures, which meant the whole house was too close to the line. We passed on that property for other reasons, but heard later that the lot line issue reared it's head at sale time.

Had the subject of this thread had looked at aerial pics with lot lines over-layed, the fact that 1/3 of the lot was being farmed would have been obvious.

 

[billspit]

However my father mentioned a farm chemical that makes ground void of any vegatation for upto 5 years.

One of them is Pramitol.

 

[NWOhioChevyGuy]

Billspit-
That's the one he mentioned, not planning on it but it was discussed.

ddawg16-
Yes the Lease was filed with the county and the title company missed it! They have agreed that I have a case but the settlement of paying me the difference does not give me what I purchased! I am still short the 2 acres for another 21 years! No shop where I wanted it, No Pond where it was planned to be dug, etc...etc...
It might play out like this; A) Settle with Title Company for value of 2 acres then B) Kick the farmer off the land and recind the lease paying him back the full $4600 and let him sue me, that way the Lease will make it into court and be settled legally.
I see it as possibly two seperate things, as the farmer had nothing to do with the Title Company missing the lease. He's just being a ***** about selling the lease back.

Slow and steady will hopefully win this race.

 

[Brad54]

Billspit-
That's the one he mentioned, not planning on it but it was discussed.

ddawg16-
Yes the Lease was filed with the county and the title company missed it! They have agreed that I have a case but the settlement of paying me the difference does not give me what I purchased! I am still short the 2 acres for another 21 years! No shop where I wanted it, No Pond where it was planned to be dug, etc...etc...
It might play out like this; A) Settle with Title Company for value of 2 acres then B) Kick the farmer off the land and recind the lease paying him back the full $4600 and let him sue me, that way the Lease will make it into court and be settled legally.
I see it as possibly two seperate things, as the farmer had nothing to do with the Title Company missing the lease. He's just being a ***** about selling the lease back.

Slow and steady will hopefully win this race.

I'm very glad you're taking this approach.
If it were me, I'd got after the title company for a little more than the value of two plain acres...at the very least, get your lawyer fees and court costs covered (past, present and future) that will be incurred to fully clear this matter up.
-Brad

 

[Junkman]

What happens if after you kick him off the land, and he sues you, the court awards him the use of the land back, and hits you with paying his legal fees and court costs? Do you think that the money that the Title Company is going to be enough to pay off his legal fees, loss of use while this is litigated, etc.? What is the Judge going to be thinking when he learns that the title company paid you for your loss?

 

[palsor1]

One of them is Pramitol.

Keep in mind that, while unlikely, it's possible the farmer is in some other forum discussing whether to spread Pramitol all over your yard if you kick him out of the land ....

Always best to settle things if possible, though it doesn't sound like it in this case.

 

[billspit]

I'm not farmer although I've worked with many over the years. I've never heard of one signing a 30 year lease on two acres of land or aany mount of acreage. Something about the whole situation smells like old fish.

 

[Junkman]

Keep in mind that, while unlikely, it's possible the farmer is in some other forum discussing whether to spread Pramitol all over your yard if you kick him out of the land ....

Always best to settle things if possible, though it doesn't sound like it in this case.

If either the farmer, or the land owner were to do this while the lease is in force, either one would be guilty of an illegal act. Even if the farmer continues to control the lease, he doesn't have the right to do anything other than to farm the land. If he were to make the land sterile, he would be guilty of deliberately destroying someone else's property. The lease gives him the right to use, not the right to destroy.

 

[NWOhioChevyGuy]

I guess that's why I'm not a lawyer.

I will be doing all this through and with my lawyers advise, if their is another way it will be done that way.

Junkman; I understand your words of caution and I will have to see what my lawyer says about that.

If I were to have it my way the Title Company will settle this all and I will have my 2 acres after it's all done. But the legallity of that happening is not looking good from what my Laywer is telling me. At this point neither I nor the Title Company has any way to force the farmers hand. The lease is binding from what I have been told.

From what my lawyer stated the lease was due to some state program that the owner signed up for. This would be the owner that signed the lease with the farmer.

 

[JB740i]

If it was a state program, wouldn't the lease have been much more specific, detailed and full of a great deal of legalease?

 

[UnionWelder]

breaking a lease is not illegal its done everyday their are fees and other issues im sure the lawyer could find out what the penalty would be. I agree with what was said something doesnt sound right at all why would a farmer with over 3000 acres want to go thur this much for 2 acres? you sure theirs no oil gold silver bodies etc their?

 

[Junkman]

A lease is a legal contract, and if breaking the lease without penalty was common, then there would be no sense in having a contract at all. If you break the contract, then the injured party has a right to sue in civil court, and the court has the right to award monetary damages. Sometimes, depending on the circumstances, the court can also give relief in the way of punitive damages, which sometimes can be 10 / 20 / 30 / or more times the actual damages. This is done to punish the person that broke the lease, and serves as a warning to others as to what can happen when they break a contract.
I can't believe the number of people here that have given advise that was tantamount to doing illegal acts. I often wonder if the people that give this type of advise would actually follow their own advice in a similar situation. I would like to believe that all that are on these forums are law abiding citizens, however, after reading what they post, I am very suspect of them. You can pick your friends, but you can't pick your neighbors, and I am thankful that some of you are not my neighbors.

 

[gunguy]

If it was a state program, wouldn't the lease have been much more specific, detailed and full of a great deal of legalease?

Maybe, maybe not. If the farmer needs the two acres to meet some sort of minimum in order to participate in a state program, it may explain a lot of things.

It may be worth exploring the state program issue though. Maybe there are another two acres available elsewhere that the farmer could substitute in order to maintain the minimum acerage to participate in the state program. Of course it may be that once the farmer started with ChevyGuy's land, he has to stay with it for the duration of the program.

What can be lost by looking into this?

Jim

 

[gunguy]

A lease is a legal contract, and if breaking the lease without penalty was common, then there would be no sense in having a contract at all. If you break the contract, then the injured party has a right to sue in civil court, and the court has the right to award monetary damages. Sometimes, depending on the circumstances, the court can also give relief in the way of punitive damages, which sometimes can be 10 / 20 / 30 / or more times the actual damages. This is done to punish the person that broke the lease, and serves as a warning to others as to what can happen when they break a contract.
I can't believe the number of people here that have given advise that was tantamount to doing illegal acts. I often wonder if the people that give this type of advise would actually follow their own advice in a similar situation. I would like to believe that all that are on these forums are law abiding citizens, however, after reading what they post, I am very suspect of them. You can pick your friends, but you can't pick your neighbors, and I am thankful that some of you are not my neighbors.

Junk - Thanks for bringing some sanity to this. Agree 100%

I can only hope that some of these "suggestions" were made to vent some of the frustrations that ChevyGuy must be feeling. Not productive though.

Jim

 

[blkhonda1991]

A lease is a legal contract, and if breaking the lease without penalty was common, then there would be no sense in having a contract at all. If you break the contract, then the injured party has a right to sue in civil court, and the court has the right to award monetary damages. Sometimes, depending on the circumstances, the court can also give relief in the way of punitive damages, which sometimes can be 10 / 20 / 30 / or more times the actual damages. This is done to punish the person that broke the lease, and serves as a warning to others as to what can happen when they break a contract.
I can't believe the number of people here that have given advise that was tantamount to doing illegal acts. I often wonder if the people that give this type of advise would actually follow their own advice in a similar situation. I would like to believe that all that are on these forums are law abiding citizens, however, after reading what they post, I am very suspect of them. You can pick your friends, but you can't pick your neighbors, and I am thankful that some of you are not my neighbors.

i doubt he'll get hit with much if he breaks the lease and gets dragged into court, especially if there is proof of good faith attempts to buyout the lease or come to some sort of agreement in which the land is returned to the owner. The lease was posted quite a few pages back and was very vague and had little legalise in it so im sure its pretty easy to break it without huge penalties

 

[Junkman]

i doubt he'll get hit with much if he breaks the lease and gets dragged into court, especially if there is proof of good faith attempts to buyout the lease or come to some sort of agreement in which the land is returned to the owner. The lease was posted quite a few pages back and was very vague and had little legalise in it so im sure its pretty easy to break it without huge penalties

This is more reason that the courts will look unfavorable on his breaking the lease. If he couldn't negotiate a price to buy out the lease, then the court will not look very favorable on the farmer being thrown off the land. You need to consider that the farmer has been there a lot longer than the guy from out of town that suddenly shows up trying to push his weight around. Small farming communities don't take to new comers very well, and if you do something to get the hair on there necks standing on end, you will not fare well. The last thing that I would want to do is to anger my neighbors that I have to depend on for volunteer fire protection, etc. There is more to this than we know about. I would love to hear the other side of this coin. In the meantime, I would be very careful as to not anger any of the towns folks. There is an old saying........ Revenge is a desert best eaten cold.... He might even win the fight, but I doubt that he will win the battle.

 

[UnionWelder]

Junkman I see your point these people are who you live with but I had a problem upstate NY over my land and let me tell you I thought the same as you untill I was jerked around for 5 years and after countless court days lawyers etc I finished it myself. I had land about 25 acres the shape of a L the house was up top and I never went to the lower part due to trees etc. I didnt live there and only visited about 4 times a year. One day I notice people hunting my land so I say ok no posted signs whatever my fault next weekend I take quad and post signs while on the lower part of my land I notice a cabin which I think is on my land. I call a buddy who came and marked my property lines and this cabin is on my land big cabin to not a shed. I find someone in it one day and they tell me the old owner gave them permission to build it and live in it. after 5 years of courts and lawyers I was getting no where. I told him he had 5 days to remove his cabin or I will do it for him and I also told him that all the electric poles he installed on my property are being removed tomorrow. The next day I cut all the electric poles. after I cut the first one he was taking down his cabin he is since gone. I wouldnt have done this it he was living their full time he owned a house 2 miles away which didnt have land to hunt. Lesons learned NICE GUYS FINISH LAST...

 

[Junkman]

Your situation is nothing like his. You had a trespass issue, not a contract issue. As for spending 5 years dealing with lawyers, that was your mistake. You should have just leveled the building if you knew without a doubt that it was on your land, or you could have just taken possession of it. If he had been living there full time, that would have been another matter, since you would have had to evict him. As you said, he had a place elsewhere, so that wasn't an issue. If someone builds a structure on your property, with or without your permission, the structure belongs to you. Once it is built on the property, it becomes "real" property, and ownership is with the land owner, unless there is a contract that says otherwise. If I had been in your situation, I would have cleaned out all personal possessions of the squatter, and just secured the building for my own use. I also would have left the electric poles to service the building. Depending on the type of electrical service that was there, the poles might have belonged to the power company, and even though you own the land, the power company never conveys ownership of the poles to the land owner. If the power company charges you to install poles, the charge is just for the installation, not the poles themselves. Didn't it worry you a little bit knowing that you were cutting electrical poles with live wires strung on them, or had the service been interrupted ????

 

[billspit]

Any programs that the farmer is signed up with should be on file at your local USDA Farm Services Agency. I'm not sure they would give out information about the farmer though. There could possibly a state program, but not very likely.

 

[NWOhioChevyGuy]

It was not the farmer that took part in the Gov't program but the previous land owner. I will get some more details on that when I meet with my laywer next, but the farmer has nothing more into this property than farming it.

2 acres with his equipment he works, plants, sprays and harvests in about 5 mins TOTAL!

 

[volvo]

.
What type of crop is planted. I could run this by the brother in laws that farm?...H

 

[wantedabiggergarage]

I wonder if after the lease is no more, if the farmer is going to list those two acres as part of his land for some of those crops they pay them NOT to grow.

 

[billspit]

It was not the farmer that took part in the Gov't program but the previous land owner. I will get some more details on that when I meet with my laywer next, but the farmer has nothing more into this property than farming it.

2 acres with his equipment he works, plants, sprays and harvests in about 5 mins TOTAL!

I don't think the govt would allow someone to be in a program with only 2 acres of soybeans, corn or wheat. It would have to be the farmer.

 

[UnionWelder]

See their was a contract it was verbal with the past owner and it was recorded on a liber and binder page in the local town but no one would do anything about evicting him because their wasnt enought information to get him to leave. As per the power it was a 50 amp service and the poles were the utility companys after talking with them they told me all service poles on private land can not be removed except by the land owner which was me. As per the power I pulled the meter out of the pan at the street and locked the pan with a meter blank and went to town on the poles. I did only cut 2 but the area its in I wouldnt need power in and If i did I would need more them 50 amp single phase....

Your situation is nothing like his. You had a trespass issue, not a contract issue. As for spending 5 years dealing with lawyers, that was your mistake. You should have just leveled the building if you knew without a doubt that it was on your land, or you could have just taken possession of it. If he had been living there full time, that would have been another matter, since you would have had to evict him. As you said, he had a place elsewhere, so that wasn't an issue. If someone builds a structure on your property, with or without your permission, the structure belongs to you. Once it is built on the property, it becomes "real" property, and ownership is with the land owner, unless there is a contract that says otherwise. If I had been in your situation, I would have cleaned out all personal possessions of the squatter, and just secured the building for my own use. I also would have left the electric poles to service the building. Depending on the type of electrical service that was there, the poles might have belonged to the power company, and even though you own the land, the power company never conveys ownership of the poles to the land owner. If the power company charges you to install poles, the charge is just for the installation, not the poles themselves. Didn't it worry you a little bit knowing that you were cutting electrical poles with live wires strung on them, or had the service been interrupted ????

 

[Junkman]

See their was a contract it was verbal with the past owner and it was recorded on a liber and binder page in the local town but no one would do anything about evicting him because their wasnt enought information to get him to leave. As per the power it was a 50 amp service and the poles were the utility companys after talking with them they told me all service poles on private land can not be removed except by the land owner which was me. As per the power I pulled the meter out of the pan at the street and locked the pan with a meter blank and went to town on the poles. I did only cut 2 but the area its in I wouldnt need power in and If i did I would need more them 50 amp single phase....

You cannot make a binding contract on real estate by a verbal contract. I know of no state that allows for this. I have no idea what a "liber and binder page" is. The only place that you can record a real estate contract is in either the town, county, or state records, depending on what your state uses. A unrecorded real estate document must be recorded to be in effect if it grants rights to someone that wants those rights to survive a real estate transactions. That is why the words "assignees and heirs" is inserted into real estate contracts. Otherwise, the contract wouldn't survive past the signers life.

 

[cgriffin12]

I got an idea, sneak out there one night and Pramitol that ****, nothing will grow there for a year, then next year pramitol it again, and ask if he wants to settle, the next year pramitol about 10 acres of his land then ask him if he wants to settle. there is more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[jake00]

damage his own property, great 1st post!

 

[Junkman]

I got an idea, sneak out there one night and Pramitol that ****, nothing will grow there for a year, then next year pramitol it again, and ask if he wants to settle, the next year pramitol about 10 acres of his land then ask him if he wants to settle. there is more than one way to skin a cat.

My I suggest that if you want to help this person resolve the problem, that you do the deed for him, and never tell him about it. That way, when you get caught and go to jail for an extended time and become Bubba's long time lover, the owner can enjoy the full 6 acres with a clear conscience, knowing that he had nothing to do with this illegal and immoral act.

 

[prd2hnt]

Any update Chevyguy?

 

[NWOhioChevyGuy]

Some Highlights
A) Lease is not going to get bought out!
B) The acres that are being farmed under the lease will remain under contract with the farmer as the lease states.
C) I have plenty of room to build just not where I wanted to.
D) I have decided to go after the Title Company for the $ / damages.

Well, yesterday my lawyer and I drafted a letter to the Title Company with what we expect the settlement to include.

Basically it will be the value of the land + the lossed use of the land over the next 21 years.

I have also requested that the whole parcel and the leased parcel be surveyed and staked to ensure the farmer is on the land under contract ONLY.

 

[bluesman2a]

Some Highlights
A) Lease is not going to get bought out!
B) The acres that are being farmed under the lease will remain under contract with the farmer as the lease states.

Sorry to hear that. I know it's not the solution you were looking for. I've been following this since it started, would you mind me asking why this was the outcome? It would seem less than optimal and I would think financially, even if the entire value of the lease was paid out on buy-out it would be preferable to this.

 

[amt]

Should the settlement also include any property taxes and insurance you have to pay for that part of the land?

 

[NWOhioChevyGuy]

amt: That is why we are asking for the rental amount for the remaining lease in the settlement. This would take into account the taxes and fees on the land as if I had rented it to the farmer for that period of time.

bluesman2a: Well here in MI the lease is binding and the only way to break it is to go to court and fight it out with the next door neighbor. A) it would cost me more in court and legal fees than the land is worth and B) it would not make for a good relationship with the neighbor who can make my life more miserable than this situation is. (Example: the field is 200 feet out my bedroom window and he could spread cow manure there ever other week if he so desired)

Plus I still have 4.5 acres in addition to these 2.2 so space is not an issue is just the management of the space that changes. A) Building will not be behind the house it will be south of the house with a seperate drive & B) Windbreak on the west edge of the property is not going to be 120 feet behind the garage more like 40 if it even gets put in, it will determine where the exact seperation between the lease and other parcel is. In addition to that I'm not sure if I want 20 year old trees 80' from the edge of my property when I do get it back in 2029.

Now it's just the battle of getting the Title Company to settle and hand me over some $ for all the BS. If it works out it should be enough to buy the material for a 28' x 34' attached garage with bonus room above.

 

[JB740i]

amt:

Now it's just the battle of getting the Title Company to settle and hand me over some $ for all the BS. If it works out it should be enough to buy the material for a 28' x 34' attached garage with bonus room above.

Well, that sounds okay. But would buying 4 acres instead of the 6 somewhere else given you enough money for the same thing?