Our neighbors have requested permission to build a fence between our property and theirs. Due to existing concrete, the fence would actually be over the property line, on our property. We are considering their request.

One owner in our building has said that by New York law, after 7 years, the small amount of property that is on their side of the fence would legally become theirs. Is that true?


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

  1. Snappy and Parklife are right about the new law and also about checking with an attorney. It would be difficult for the current owners to claim adverse possession of the inches of concrete. However, a subsequent owner might be confused.

    Fire Alarm Guy’s advice about sending a letter is on the right track in my (non-legal) opinion. If you want to cross your i’s and dot your t’s, you can make explicit in a letter that you are permitting them only a license that can be revoked at any time, and not an easement or any other encumbrance.

    In addition, one could put up a sign to the same effect — some buildings in New York with public plazas will have signs (sometimes embedded in the sidewalk) stating that access can be revoked at will (or something like that).

  2. My advice: say no, no, no. Concrete is easy to penetrate with the right tool. It is probably 4″ thick, the standard dimension for a patio or sidewalk. Be nice about it though, they are your neighbors 🙂
    Also, you may want to talk to them about how it is going to look once the fence is up on BOTH sides.

  3. Adverse possession needs to “open and notorious”. Asking to put up a fence would qualify. If you want to allow the fence. You should write and send them a certified letter allowing them to maintain their fence on your property. This maintains your possession claim. It is more of a pain in the ass than I would be willing to tolerate.

  4. Below is a nice blurb that explains a lot of the new law. The bottom line is that fences don’t create automatic rights, and there are things that one can do to defeat claims by encroaching neighbors. Such as sign a simple agreement that allows the neighbor to have the fence but allows you to request its removal after a certain period (say mayve 3 years). Plenty of solutions here that would allow neighborly behavior without any unwanted results.

    Governor signed Chapter 269 of the Session Laws of 2008, which significantly amends the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law in New York State. What does that mean for the average homeowner and neighbor embroiled in a dispute over property lines or boundariesr? Only time will tell, but it appears that it may become more difficult to prove that you own a portion of your neighbor’s property if you do not have a “good faith” claim of right to such property.

    Under the new law (effective July 2008), which actually changes various parts of other laws, the Legislature seems to have expressed the view that the existence of minor, non-structural encroachments such as fences, hedges, shrubbery, plantings, sheds and non-structural walls are deemed, as a matter of law, to be permissive and non-adverse. In every day terms, the existence of fences, planters, hedges, shrubbs, and similar objects often placed on or close to your property line will not change who actually owns that slice of property, and will not give rise to a claim for adverse possession. Just because you put your fence on a piece of your neighbor’s property, does not mean you own the property– there are various other facts and conduct required.

    The new legislation specifically provides that the acts of lawn mowing or similar maintenance across boundary lines by your neighbor are deemed “permissive and non-adverse”– that is, neighborly. Such language should be a breath of fresh air for some people who are not quite sure whether they are mowing their own property or helping their neighbors. The Legislature is erring on the side of neighborly accommodation.

    By enacting the law, the Legislature tries to insert some “certainty” by defining for the residents of New York that an “adverse possessor” of real property is a person or entity that ‘occupies real property of another person or entity with or without knowledge of the other’s superior ownership rights, in a manner that would give the owner a cause of action for ejectment.’

    If that “adverse possessor” holds its status for ten (10) years, he can apply to the court for title to that portion of land provided that the “occupancy” was “adverse, under claim of right, open and notorious, continuous, exclusive, and actual. “Claim of right” is no defined by the statute to mean that the person claiming possession and title had “a reasonable basis for the belief that the property belongs to [that property owner].”

    The most significant change for homeowners and the courts is the wholly new section of law, RPAPL, Section 543, which specifically states that “the existence of de minimus non-structural encroachments including, but not limited to, fences, hedges, shrubbery, plantings, sheds and non-structural walls . . . ‘shall be deemed to be permissive and non-adverse.” This means that you can’t simply claim another’s property by mowing a part of their lawn.

    Stated in easy to understand terms, the legislative history of this law suggests that when considering whether someone has actually taken over possession of property “adversely” the courts will consider whether such claim was in “good faith,” recognizing that the legal tool known as “adverse possession” should be used to settle good faith disputes over who owns land, and should not be used offensively to deprive a landowner of title to the real property.

  5. **this is not to be taken as official legal advice**

    Adverse Possession takes 10 years in New York. You should also note that in 2008, Gov. Patterson signed off on an amendment to NY’s AP law that included a “good faith” provision.

    “This legislation is all about good faith. A person who attempts to possess land that they know all too well does not belong to them should not be encouraged. If a person desires land, they can buy it. However, if they have a reasonable basis to believe that it is their land then that is exactly the good faith dispute over title to real property for which the adverse possession doctrine was established. Adverse possession should be used to settle good faith disputes over who owns land. It should not be a doctrine which can be used offensively to deprive a landowner of their real property. That only encourages mischief between neighbors and even between families. No good can come of it. This is an incentive which must be curtailed.”

    But, still, consult with an attorney who has expertise in this areas.

    **this is not to be taken as official legal advice**

  6. Not sure about in the city but when one property’s boundary encroaches onto an adjacent property and it goes unresolved for more than seven years it becomes part of the other property. This is why surveys are required on purchase transactions along with your title report. This usually isn’t a huge thing in the city since lots are pretty well defined and row houses are abundant. This happens quite often in the suburbs and across the country.

    Your fellow owner is right to be concerned but a few inches isn’t a huge deal. Being an owner he does have justification for bringing it up.

  7. Your fellow unit owner is worried about what is known as “adverse possession.” S/he is right to be concerned, but adverse possession can be avoided if an appropriate agreement is drawn up in advance. Definitely consult a real estate lawyer — preferably one who also deals with land use and easement type issues (not one who mostly just transacts residential sales).

  8. Also, my understanding is the NY law does not care about a few inches. I had a simlar situation come up and that is what my real estate lawyer said. It the end it was not worth fighting about.

  9. Just say no. They can saw cut the concrete back to the property line. Let them take you to court.