squatters

[bystander]

Isn't there some kind of law that says you can't kick squatters off of your land if you allow them to stay there for a certain amount of time? I think it's squatter's rights or something like that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession

[pslamont]

I don't know Hawaii law but I think in general they have to live out in the open where they can be seen by anyone AND have a reason to believe they would be allowed to assume ownership of the land (example: you have a caretaker on the land in a trailer and the owner had told the caretaker "If you stay and watch the rest of my land, you will earn ownership of xx amount of land your trailer sits on after Y years". The alternate example is that just because you leased the land to live on for 25 years, you do not have any rights to that land at the end of your lease.

I could be wrong as I am not an attorney but I think that spells it out. Bottom line is, don't let someone be there with your knowledge and a tenant agreement with a term specified.

[Bob Orts]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bystander

Isn't there some kind of law that says you can't kick squatters off of your land if you allow them to stay there for a certain amount of time?

---

20 years for Hawaii (HRS §657-31.5 Adverse possession.)

[bystander]

quote:

---

Originally posted by pslamont

Bottom line is, don't let someone be there with your knowledge and a tenant agreement with a term specified.

---

The adverse possession law applies even if you didn't know squatters were living on your land. This makes me think all those lots owned by Japanese nationals and other absentee owners could be legally squatted on. Imagine if you owned a lot for over twenty years and you lived far away and didn't know squatters were living there all that time. They could claim your land under this law.

[pslamont]

How did these laws get into place anyway? It just seems wrong but maybe there is something I don't understand. What am I missing?

[Bob Orts]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bystander

This makes me think all those lots owned by Japanese nationals and other absentee owners could be legally squatted on. Imagine if you owned a lot for over twenty years and you lived far away and didn't know squatters were living there all that time. They could claim your land under this law.

---

And some entrepreneurial sole will figure out a way to open a side business of checking absentee owner properties once a year and report back anything that needs attention. Of course a small additional fee is charged to posting No Trespassing signs, or leaving a written demand to vacate property because they are illegally trespassing, or anything else that will kill an adverse possession claim. Humm, 500 properties at a yearly $25 fee equals $12,500 pocket change.

[bystander]

quote:

---

Originally posted by pslamont

How did these laws get into place anyway? It just seems wrong but maybe there is something I don't understand. What am I missing?

---

This is fromt he Wiki article:

quote:

---

Plainly stated, this means the law does not reward a person who neglects to enforce his property rights by allowing him to claim the fruit of another person's labor at a later time. Failure of a landowner to exercise and defend his property rights for a certain length of time may result in the permanent loss of the landowner's interest in the property.

---

There must be a long history behind this law because all states seem to have some version of it and it goes back to English law. Any legal types care to explain?

[Kelena]

The adverse posession laws were originally drafted when America was more rural. The goal was to encourage the fruitful use of land. If a land owner was so indifferent to their land that they didn't realize someone was on it using it, then the law, after an appropriate period of time (years), allowed the land to escheat (go to) to the party possessing adverse to the original owner. The goal was to avoid land lying fallow. Your possesion is required to be open, notorious and hostile (terms of art).

That's not what happened here, and as Bob points out, the adverse possession law in Hawaii is 20 years. That longer period than is usual (5 - 7 years) makes sense on an island where you get in your boat (or travel with the military) and do not return for some time.

This should be contrasted with a guy who trespasses, vandalizes property, and squats. He has 19 years and 11 months to go! He is just squatting. Some states also require that you pay taxes on the land that you are adversely possessing.

This is not a civil matter. It is a criminal matter and reporting it is important. It may be attempted elsewhere.

There is a pattern emerging here, and we as a community need to address it.

[John S. Rabi]

Sorry guys, I was just kidding. The mere possession of land for the prescribed period is not enough to acquire title. The other requirements for title by adverse possession are that it be:
(1) hostile or adverse; (2) actual, open and notorious; (3) exclusive; (4) continuous; and (5) under claim of right. Please note that absolute title by adverse possession is not a marketable title and owners under certain disabilities and minors are protected against adverse possession. Properties registered in Land Court are also protected and in Hawaii one can not claim title to land by adverse possession for land parcels of more than five acres.
I think I covered it all. []

Aloha,
John S. Rabi, GM,ARB,BFT,CM,CBR,FHS,PB,RB
808.989.1314
http://www.JohnRabi.com
Typically Tropical Properties
"The Next Level of Service!"

[Green]

Here's one for everyone! How about squatters telling other squatters that they own the land and then charging rent to the new squatters who really think they are tenants. They even built cabins for "their tenants", i have had to deal with this situation. The perps got away with it and a nice income for themselves for several months.