Page 2 of 2

Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 7:04 pm
by Dave Karoly, PLS
Jim Frame wrote:"If it wasn't intentionally created then it doesn't exist."

I'm aware of at least on instance to the contrary. It's in Rancho Del Paso, in Sacramento. The overview, in simplified terms:

In the '40s an owner deeded the "east 70 feet of the west 140 feet" to the occupant of the house that existed at the time, the parents of my client. I believe he meant "the east 80 feet"; call it a "scrivener's error" if you like, but "east 70 feet" is what got recorded. He then deeded "the west 60 feet of the west 140 feet" to the occupant of the other house on the parcel, leaving a 10-foot gap. I believe he then moved from the area, not realizing that he still held title to a 10-foot strip between the two parcels.

The County Assessor noticed the gap, and carried the gap parcel on the rolls until the taxes got far enough delinquent to sell to the state. The gap parcel got sold to an unrelated party, who held if for a few decades, but eventually realized that it had no value and stopped paying taxes on it. Another tax sale was arranged. My client was notified of the auction, but her lack of familiarity with parcel descriptions led her to believe it had nothing to do with her land. Her neighbor, however, saw an opportunity to expand his lot and acted on it, buying the strip. When he attempted to move his fence over 10 feet -- consuming my client's driveway and leaving only about 1.5 feet clearance between the acquired parcel and her house -- she entered the fray. Lots of lawyers, at least 3 surveyors, at least one court ruling, and a whole lot of grief has resulted in a standoff. Her neighbor owns the strip, but she has (last time I checked) kept him from moving the fence by parking cars in the driveway.

I believe the subdivider had no intention of creating a gap, but it got created and transferred at least a couple of times. It's plenty real; just ask my beleaguered client.

Footnote: I guess she's not actually my client any more. Although she signed a contract, I was never able to deliver anything of value to her, so I never billed a nickel on the job. I have about $1,700.00 in research, field work and meetings, but she's of very modest means and I saw no reason to take her money.

.
Jim-
I remember that case. There was a newspaper story about it. Unfortunately litigation is very expensive and I've seen more than one case drag on for years with no resolution. It shouldn't be that way but money or lack of money seems to be the prime driver of the results or lack of results. -Dave