Latest news with #propertydispute
Irish Times
2 days ago
- General
- Irish Times
My neighbour has been dumping their rubbish in my back garden and trespassing. What can I do?
I have recently inherited my parents' property, which includes some land bordering the west and south sides of a neighbour's property . The land has grown wild over time and a lot of it, particularly the boundary area with this neighbour, is obscured from vision. In the past couple of months, I have worked my way through the overgrowth to inspect the boundary and found a number of issues relating to the neighbour. They have been actively dumping over the boundary wall for some time. This includes loose ashes, loose organic waste and plastic bags of same, as well as old gutter pipes, other building and gardening scrap items. Additionally, I noticed that a Ring camera with a very wide viewing angle is installed on the neighbour's gable end. The camera is obviously directed over the boundary wall into my property. I have evidence that this camera is actively detecting motion on my property from quite a distance away. At some point, the neighbour also employed someone to go onto my property and cut away a large swathe of the overgrowth. Presumably they felt they had a right because a hedge may have been growing over to their side, but the cleared area is approximately seven metres back from the boundary and is easily more than 10 metres in length. The neighbour also has a long-standing shed built up against the boundary which has, more recently, had a waste pipe extended out the back wall across the boundary. It is hanging in mid-air within my property, excreting what I presume is water vapour from an oil burner in the shed. READ MORE I have approached the neighbour directly, but she doesn't really seem to care. The waste pipe has been cut and is now downturned on to the boundary. There are now a large number of waste bags piled on the corner of her site, ready to tip over into mine. I will not be surprised if local wildlife tear these bags to bits. I have approached the council, which has 'suggested' to her that she use the local waste collection service, which she shares with a sibling a few houses over. She has not shown any inclination to do this. I'm worried that the only way I can force her hand into rectifying these issues is to contact a solicitor to take a civil case against her. If at all possible, I do not want to go down this road. Are there any other actions I can take that might motivate this neighbour to get herself back into a legally correct position regarding these issues? Thank you. The dumping of domestic waste on adjoining properties is, unfortunately, quite a widespread practice, but one which is generally confined to locations that are overgrown or out of sight of the property owner concerned. The perpetrators can dump conveniently and undetected for some time. This is what has happened in your case. You are fortunate that the boundary is clearly defined by a wall, otherwise a contentious dumping issue could develop into a boundary location dispute. You are right to be concerned about taking a civil case. However, it is prudent to deal with it as if you were preparing the groundwork for a civil case. This means you should document all relevant data, including the nature of the dumping, trespassing, damage and dates of events including details of conversations etc. Check to see if the dumped material contains any item that directly links your neighbour to it. Your evidence should include photographs. You should also monitor the situation as frequently as possible. Patrick Shine is a chartered geomatics surveyor, a chartered civil engineer and a member of the Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland Your best course of action would be to approach your neighbour again, restate your concerns and, without accusing her directly, put the situation in context by explaining to her that the dumping is in breach of the 1996 Waste Management Act and that you will be obliged to make a formal report to the local council. You should also point out that the cutting of overgrowth on your land is an issue of trespass and damage that you will have to report to the gardai. You should explain that the Ring camera position is in breach of the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) and is a matter for the Data Protection Commissioner. Despite the seriousness of the situation, your approach should be conciliatory and expressed in a tone that seeks an amicable resolution. In effect, you would be asking her to consider the situation and giving her an opportunity to see what she can do to resolve the issue. As your land borders the west and south sides of her property, your overgrown hedge is likely to be preventing direct sunshine to her property from late morning to late evening. This may be an issue and if so, you could consider offering to cut back or reduce the height of some of the hedge, as part of building a cooperative relationship with her. [ I'm worried about our home being devalued because our neighbour's trees block light. What can we do? Opens in new window ] [ My son lives abroad and wants to sell his house here but the tenant won't move out. What can he do? Opens in new window ] You may feel that this approach is too conciliatory, but this issue can go one of two ways. Either your neighbour is persuaded to cooperate and remove the dumped material, or she ignores you and leaves you with little option but to get legal advice, which risks escalating the situation into litigation. This is the route you said you want to avoid. Another reason for avoiding litigation is that your evidence is largely circumstantial. You do not have direct evidence of her dumping, trespassing or damaging your hedge. An option you could consider, if your neighbour refuses to cooperate, is to clear the overgrowth. This action is undesirable from an environmental perspective and subject to seasonal restrictions. However, as people are unlikely to dump waste across their boundary on property that is open to view and well maintained, it may transpire to be your only option. Patrick Shine is a chartered geomatics surveyor, a chartered civil engineer and a member of the Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland Do you have a query? Email propertyquestions@ This column is a readers' service. The content of the Property Clinic is provided for general information only. It is not intended as advice on which readers should rely. Professional or specialist advice should be obtained before persons take or refrain from any action on the basis of the content. The Irish Times and its contributors will not be liable for any loss or damage arising from reliance on any content.
CNA
2 days ago
- Business
- CNA
Money Talks Podcast: Protecting yourself from property disputes
Property disputes – especially among family members can lead to painful and costly legal battles. What can be done to avoid these conflicts before they escalate? Andrea Heng sits down with Lim Fung Peen, director and head of family and private wealth practice group at Yuen Law LLC. Here is an excerpt from the conversation: Andrea Heng, host: Let's go into the technical aspects of a property dispute. How are they first raised? What are the key steps you would take once that case lands on your desk? Lim Fung Peen, from Yuen Law LLC: So typically how things go in Singapore, mostly people will make inquiries at the law firm. They will write in an email and then say: 'This is the problem.' … So whatever the inquiry is, the proper thing to do is have a meetup and have a discussion, and discuss with the client their objectives. And also, what I would do is propose certain options. One of the first options is not to go to court … (but) … to advise the client of their rights. Because some people come with misconceptions of what they're entitled to. So some people need a reality check. So the first step is always to get advice and (an) assessment, and then your legal adviser can just tell you: 'This is the score. This is where you stand.' … So the first thing (would be) assessment, given the kind of options, one of the options could be to strengthen their case, gather more evidence. But finally, you reach a stage where again it's not go to court. It's to write a letter to the other side and … make a proposal. Say: 'Look, this is the situation. This is my stand. I think this is a fair proposal. I pay you this, or you pay me this, and we do this.' Andrea: So it's essentially mediation, up to a degree. So at what point then, does it end up in court? Fung Peen: It's not quite mediation. What we call it is negotiation. So you write a proposal letter and wait for the other side to respond. Most lawyers will actually go through this process of negotiation by letter. At least one round, two rounds. When that doesn't work and then we have to see. You mentioned mediation. In Family Justice Court and in the State Courts, there are court mediations which are free, which is very good. That means the court doesn't charge for it, but that's because I think our courts really believe in mediation. And since I've been in practice for 28 years, there's always been this, and it's been going from strength to strength. So I'm a firm believer in mediation because I think mediation is also a way for the mediator to give parties a reality check, because everyone thinks their case is bound to win.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
VIP pool party promoted by alleged squatters doesn't happen at DeKalb home
A DeKalb County family is fighting to reclaim their late parents' home after alleged squatters moved in just one day before they were scheduled to close the sale with new buyers, and planned a VIP pool party at the property. The property, located on Crestknoll Circle, was under increased patrol this weekend after a flyer circulated on social media promoting a Saturday pool party at the residence. The family told Channel 2's Eryn Rogers that DeKalb County Sheriff's Office deputies will be stationed outside the home to prevent further unauthorized activity while the legal process unfolds. The flyer promised an 'indoor pool party,' but the party never materialized, likely due to the sheriff's presence. [DOWNLOAD: Free WSB-TV News app for alerts as news breaks] 'It's just the audacity to promote it,' said neighbor Myles Willis. 'Early in the morning, I saw a stream of people coming out, loud music, people all over the place — very abnormal for this neighborhood.' Kevin Oliver and his three siblings say they had just lost their father Wednesday when, on Thursday, individuals unlawfully entered and began occupying the property. The siblings said they haven't been able to fully grieve. 'Hopefully, this will all be over soon, and we can go back to being a nice, quiet neighborhood,' Oliver said. Over the weekend, deputies and code enforcement officials were seen at the property, along with a U-Haul truck. Although no party occurred at the Crestknoll address, one of the alleged squatters posted photos of a new location for the event. Social media videos showed a pool party taking place at a different, upscale residence on Saturday. One of those alleged squatters, Dontarious Issac, turned himself in to DeKalb County police on Friday afternoon in an unrelated case. In 2024, Issac was charged after using a drone to deliver contraband to inmates in Georgia prisons. He was sentenced to serve five years. He received credit for time served for 180 of those days. Some of the conditions for his probation include not being around drugs, alcohol, or weapons. The Olivers say some of the squatters approached them with weapons. 'That person came to the door with a rifle,' Kevin Oliver said. RELATED STORIES: DeKalb family says childhood home taken over by squatters planning VIP pool party Alleged squatter turns himself in after Channel 2 investigation Issac was also supposed to let his probation officer know that his address had changed. Documents list a Marietta apartment complex as his last known address. Dekalb County confirmed with Channel 2 Action News that Issac is currently in the Greene County Jail. Under the Squatter Reform Act, the Olivers filed a squatters affidavit. The act was recently passed, allowing law enforcement to cite suspected squatters criminally for trespassing. A DeKalb County incident report reveals the alleged squatters were cited in this case. Lincoln learned that several of the squatters at this property have criminal records, specifically crimes related to squatting. The alleged squatters have until Monday to answer to this affidavit. There will be a court day next week on the matter. Until then, the sheriff's office said they will continue patrols, and the family said there will be a deputy stationed outside until further notice. [SIGN UP: WSB-TV Daily Headlines Newsletter]
Daily Mail
28-05-2025
- General
- Daily Mail
Merciless Martha's Vineyard homeowner wages war against elderly locals who 'cross into her $5M land to get to beach'
A homeowner on Martha's Vineyard has sparked a legal war against her elderly neighbors, who she says are trespassing on her land to gain access to the beach. Melinda Loberg, a longtime resident of the famed Massachusetts island, filed a lawsuit against Havenside, a non-profit that provides housing for seniors, on May 12. Loberg, who works as a secretary for a local elderly support group, claimed Havenside's senior living tenants were illegally crossing her ritzy waterfront land to get to Vineyard Haven Harbor. She has lived at her $5 million idyllic home on Crocker Avenue with her husband since July 1992, and now, more than three decades later, Havenside has told Loberg its residents have a right to use a small path on her property to get to the water. The independent living facility first informed Loberg of its easement to the property in June 2024 after sending her a letter detailing that they would be allowing its residents to use the 13-foot corridor on the north side of her land to gain access to the beach, according to the lawsuit obtained by The 16-page lawsuit, which goes over a detailed history of the beachfront property, claimed that when she and her husband Michael first purchased the home on the luxurious island, the deed did not at all reference any access easements. It went on to state that any access rights were taken away before Havenside took over its property. Loberg also emphasized that she has been using the land for 30 years which voids the corporation's past claims to it. In response, Havenside said that information is false and that it has had an easement there since 1890, the Vineyard Gazette reported. The specific area that the senior center is claiming to control is a space that the Loberg's 'cleared the existing vegetation' from, along with 'removed tires, bottles, car mats, and large chunks of macadam and then planted Parcel 2A with grass,' the documents read. Following the cleanup, the couple decided to install a 170-foot fence along the area in question - cutting off access for more than two decades, the lawsuit stated. Havenside said they planned to gain access to the beach by cutting the grass between the fence and garden beds to construct an entry gate, the filing continued. After informing Loberg of its plans, the corporation sent a tenant by the name of Frank Rapoza over to the property, 'carrying tools,' so he could 'install' the fence, per the lawsuit. Tensions quickly rose when Loberg saw him standing in her driveway ready to get to work, so much so that she threatened to call the police if he attempted to install the gate. With that, Rapoza fled the property, but soon after Loberg received a phone call from him 'threatening to return and install the gate,' the lawsuit detailed. 'In response to this phone call, Plaintiff installed a "No Trespass" sign on the Property line near the Havenside Property,' it added. A manager with Havenside then reached out to Loberg and stated that Rapoza 'was not an agent of Havenside or its Board. Any representation otherwise has never been authorized.' Loberg, a former Tisbury select board member, chose to sit down with Havenside on July 14, 2024 to talk about the issue, but 'representatives were not inclined to discuss alternative solutions and instead insisted upon the existence of the purported access easement,' her lawsuit read. Later that month, the corporation offered to 'remove' the easement in exchange for 'a cash payment,' but Loberg denied the 'extortive offer.' By October of that year, Havenside filed a Wetlands Protection Act Notice of Intent (NOI) with the local Conservation Commission 'seeking approval to make improvements on Plaintiff's Property within the alleged Access Easement,' the lawsuit said. In that filing, 'Havenside falsely claimed to be the owner of the Property, failing to accurately fill out Section 3 requiring them to list the Property Owner if different from the applicant,' it went on. In February, the Loberg's said they 'discovered a group from Havenside, including Mr. Rapoza, trespassing on Plaintiff's Property and in the process of cutting Plaintiff's Fence in order to install a gate.' Loberg then called the police who asked the group to vacate, but 'declined' to forcibly remove them, noting that it was a 'civil matter.' The lawsuit also included an image of Rapoza, an alleged 'manager of Havenside,' and unknown person 'destroying a section of Plaintiff's Fence and installing the gate.' A police report was also filed in relation to the incident. 'Mr. Rapoza subsequently returned and finished installing the Gate,' the lawsuit said, adding that Havenside has since added signage to the entrance of Loberg's property stating that residents are allowed to use that as an access point to the beach. Loberg 'feels harassed and threatened by the conduct of Havenside's tenants and does not feel safe on her Property as a result of their conduct,' the filing concluded. She has demanded that 'Havenside, its guests, tenants and invitees' are not allowed to access her property and that it does not benefit from any easement over the Plaintiff's Property for the purpose of accessing Vineyard Haven Harbor.' An initial hearing was held on May 20 and the next is set for June 16, according to documents. Lucinda Kirk, the property manager of Havenside, told the Vineyard Gazette Loberg's claims in the lawsuit are 'bogus' and were made as a way for her to get rid of the non-profit by bringing on legal fees. 'The issue for Havenside is to provide equal access for our residents,' Kirk told the outlet. 'We have residents with limited mobility and chronic health conditions who need safe and easy access to the beach. Serenity and saltwater are important for our senior's health.' Kirk said Havenside is working on obtaining a pro bono lawyer to fight for residents to gain access to the waterfront.
Daily Mail
27-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
Pub baron's eye-watering debts get personal as he's accused of remortgaging his mother's multimillion-dollar Rose Bay home without her knowing
A playboy executive turned pub baron allegedly remortgaged his mother's luxurious Sydney mansion without her knowledge in a bid to pay off his pub empire's debts. Jon Adgemis allegedly mortgaged the Rose Bay home to pay of his business debts to La Trobe Financial, which now amount to $6.2million. The financier applied to the courts to take possession of the mansion – bought in 2018 for $4.5million – in a bid to recoup its loans. La Trobe would then look to sell it for as much as $10million. However, the financier has run into trouble trying to enforce the move. His mother is fighting to keep the property, where both her daughter and grandson live, according to court documents. Justice Stephen Rothman heard the case and made a preliminary judgement to allow it to proceed. He stated Adgemis' mother is claiming she 'does not recall and has no record of ever receiving' any legal documentation from La Trobe's endeavours to enforce a loan agreement, according to the Australian Financial Review. She denied hiring the law firm which represented her in the main dispute. A default judgement made against her was overturned and a cross-claim filed to remove the mortgage. The mortgage had been taken 'without the knowledge of the first defendant and without her authority,' Justice Rothman said in his written explanation of the claim. Adgemis 'conducted all of the meetings and arrangements in relation to the property and mortgage, none of which seems to have been explained or adequately explained,' to his mother. In a ruling on the house dispute, Justice Rothman said it could be argued the ownership between Mr Adgemis and his mother changed. In such a case, it would follow that debts could only be enforced against the businessman. Justice Rothman considered Mr Adgemis' nephew, who is disabled, needs full time care and lived in the Rose Bay home following the installation of a series of modifications made to cater to his needs. The nephew may have beneficial ownership in some of the equity in the home, the justice said, and he would need to be represented in the case to have his interests asserted. Justice Rothman granted a temporary stay on La Trobe financiers taking possession of the property given Mr Adgemis' mother had an 'arguable case'. She is set to file her defence in June. Adgemis' woes began after he left his dealmaker role at professional services heavyweight KPMG. He was the head of mergers and acquisitions at accounting giant KPMG. He founded the Public Hospitality group in 2021 and accumulated a sprawling portfolio of 20 venues and developments across Sydney. One of his companies splashed more than $50million on pubs. The portfolio included The Town Hall in Balmain, The Kurrajong in Erskineville, The Exchange in Darlinghurst and The Camelia Grove in Alexandria. He funded the rapid acquisitions and developments with borrowed money, against a low cash-rate during the pandemic. Increased financing costs sent his company to the brink of collapse in recent years, and a number of the venues went into administration in 2024. Monacobased fashion heir Richard Gazal also brought legal action against Adgemis with a personal bankruptcy claim to the tune of $26million plus interest. Public Kitchen, an entity within Public Hospitality, also faces winding-up by the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) in the Federal Court. The ATO clocked an alleged $286,175 default on the firm last week, filed to the courts on Friday. In the past, the taxation office also conducted raids on Adgemis' home and business.
