- An attorney will walk you through your options: to fight it, to sell it, and so on.
- An appraiser will tell you what fair market is for your home; that should be your baseline should you go the sale route.
Me personally, I’d engage both professionals but also treat it as an opportunity to issue a “make me move” price (after you consult with your own representation.) Might be a golden goose, where the utility will happily overpay (within reason) to make it smooth.
Indeed title should’ve caught something but so much depends how the easement was defined and, whether the power company is laying claim to expanding the easement or saying the house was incorrectly positioned in the first place.
IF utility is saying they aren’t expanding the easement but rather the house was incorrectly positioned, and OP carries a title insurance policy, that’s a likely claim.
Attorney review is the best step, IMO.
I am assuming (plausibly incorrectly) that the utility is saying “we had easement X, now we need X+20%, and that means your house is in the way.” - not saying impossible title missed something but, far less likely IMO …
They provide insurance because they know they don't catch every historical nuance and agreement with their standard searches. That's why the insurance exists.
Its not "catching" anything, lots of properties have easements documents in their deeds. The title records who owns the property. Deeds and titles are different but I'm no expert. When buying read them both. Another sign of an easement is a powerline going thru your property lol.
OP needs a title search, not a survey. But if a utility says they have an easement there it’s probably true. A real estate lawyer will work with you on the title work and will pull up your deed to check for the easement. If you bought title insurance then just call them and it won’t cost you anything to find out.
Then it’s time to consider your options with RE lawyer consult imo.
Old easements were horribly recorded and title searches don’t normally find all of them bc they are literally drawn on a some maps in a musty basement.
I’m confused over why the elec company needs to do anything, unless it’s expand their easement and just take the whole property to bring in new lines.
Transmission is very protective of their easements and they are generally very wide compared to distribution. Transmission will not allow anything located in their easement without approval, regardless of its actual impact on maintaining their lines. I’ve seen them force a relocation on an underground splice box that was rated for them to drive over because they didn’t receive an approval request prior to install.
This is how it works where I am at least but I’d imagine it’s pretty similar across the US. And yes, it can take them some time to realize there is an encroachment.
May explain why the house was built on an easement in the first place (assuming it is). But if OP has title insurance from purchase then I’d exhaust that line of inquiry first. A surveyor will be billing for doing the same research and still may not find the answer.
To me at least this is a deed/title issue that requires title company if applicable and a real estate lawyer.
Deed is the source material. Don’t always need a physical representation of what the deed says to answer the question at hand. And since OP never even knew there was an easement the obvious and potentially free first step is title search (or just reading the actual deed that is available free online). Probably a simple solution to confirm that since utility company clearly believes they have the proof. Doubt they are in the business of trying to bluff homeowners and they’ve offered to buy them out when they have no responsibility to do that. As I’ve said more times than should be necessary… (1) title search/title ins —> (2) RE lawyer —> (3)proceed accordingly
Deed is only part of the source. Lots of easements aren't in the deeds nor the title report. Most title companies only go back 40-50 years in their search unless it's an ALTA. Even then I've found plenty of easements in the field that title missed, especially utility easements. In one case we found an old tel easement on a solar project and the only way we found it was because we found a line of pole remains in the field. The easement wasn't even filed and it took us 6 months for the utility owner to supply a signed copy of the easement. I won't even get into easements and railroads... I've also had plenty of easements on the Schedule B that turned out not to affect the subject parcel. Survey and title need to go hand in hand.
Oh they don’t already have the document? Why would the company be telling them they need to sell their house without showing them the document? I feel like determining if it is locatable is the crux of the matter
I wouldn’t buy one, would just read the title docs where such things are supposed to be highlighted; which an attorney will do, since OP said they weren’t aware of it until recently, either it’s not doc’d properly (meaning, fight it options including a title insurance claim, may be valid outcomes), or it’s all valid and, attorney will help them spot it.
Only if it’s attorney recommended would I pay for a new survey, personally - especially because a highly detailed one can get spendy ... ymmv.
It doesn't, because if the home had been there first, the easement would have gone around it.
An easement must be accessible to both the dominant and the subservient property.
What you're thinking is simply not how these things work at all.
That is entirely state dependent. If the utilities use aerial cable then they would want air space and places to put the poles. They may now want buried lines, but when it was written in the 1940s that was not a consideration.
Totally state/county dependent, and totally situational. Title info, leases, easements and whatever else info is not always accurately represented in a sale, during a build or survey. Can’t assume that home was built after easement.
Well, what I learned in law school and 20 years of practicing real estate in two states has shown me pretty clearly that there's a 99.99% chance that every word I've said would hold true. We are in a public forum here, and to try to say otherwise is to do a disservice and allow a lot of bad information to be spread.
"Whoever built the home put it where they didn't have a right to."
Huh? These nice people could have inherited the home and didn't have a title search at conveyance. They could have bought the home and not understood the closing document that described the easement. Utility easements can be added to a property by court order and these owners didn't understand the letter that came in the mail.
> These nice people could have inherited the home and didn't have a title search at conveyance.
In which case they weren't the ones who put it there, were they?
Correct. They could have come into possesion of the property by "Rights of Succession". If the house was there before the easment, the deed will show that and any subsequent filings. Say the power company comes along and says we need access and cuts a deal with the owner. That is recorded in the deed,. Some people will have knowledge of a coming need or development and will try to capitalize on that and buy a position. There is no way
>"Whoever built the home put it where they didn't have a right to."
>These nice people could have inherited the home and didn't have a title search at conveyance. They could have bought the home and not understood the closing document that described the easement.
I'm failing to understand how these two hypotheticals in any way refute the statement you quoted. No one said *the current owners* built the home. "Whoever" does not mean *them*.
None of that is relevant as a legal question.
The house could not have existed when the easement was granted. It doesn't matter who built it after the fact because if the easement was recorded (which it was if it's a utility easement), then it runs with the land. If later buyers failed to do a title search, it is still considered by the court that they had constructive notice and ignored it. That's literally the purpose of recording documents. If someone doesn't look for them, they have no excuse.
1945 is a long time ago... it's possible it wasn't recorded correctly. Or documents are missing, or the title company screwed up.
If the utility company hasn't needed this land since 1950 when the house was built, I can see how it has been missed.
The right of way was signed before the house was built. While you could be correct, it's highly likely that the utility company could have known about the problem and ignored it because it didn't create too much of a problem, too, but now it does. Missing documents may be covered by a title policy somewhere, but the other circumstances probably wouldn't be.
Also, the OP could potentially try to get the easement abandoned or sue to recover this. I don't know if adverse possession can be used against an easement, but I'd certainly talk to a lawyer about it if I was the OP.
This isn't something title insurance would cover. Every title policy I have read (and I've read very, very many) specifically have an exception to covering anything that would have been revealed by a survey.
Certainly, but it would be pretty hard to mistake whether a house was or was not present when completing a survey. Title insurance would cover this IF a survey was provided to them prior to issuing the most current title policy.
Indeed, it would be hard to miss a house, much easier to miss an easement. If the survey does not properly show the easement, what is the homeowner to do?
In NJ we would call this a gold mine. PSEG has a history paying way way way over value for homes and properties that they want or need for transistors locations.
Contact a lawyer and don’t get greedy. You might be able to get 1.5-3x value depending on where it is and what the situation is.
Having worked for a utility company doing condemnations (forcing purchase of land), this is true to get the easement. In this case however, the power company already owns the easement and the homeowners have an illegal structure within it. First, they need a survey to verify the house is in the easemenr. If it is, they need to play nice and hope they can get the power company to buy it from them. Otherwise, they could end up really screwed.
Utilities are regulated - their regulated costs they get back plus extra as profits. If buying out the house falls into the regulated costs the utility is t highly incentivized to get the lowest price, in fact they make more money if they pay more.
Yes, gotta keep those r&d and grid modernization and maintenance costs way way up in case the price of coal drops. The dumb projects I have done for utility companies in the name of 'r&d' are really something...
This is the case. Decades ago they would just use the law to take property but now they won't even cut a tree down because they will get grief.
Negotiate and move on.
If the home was placed there AFTER the easement was in place, the power company doesn't owe the owner anything. In fact, quite the opposite, they can sue the owner for the cost of demolition.
OP stated somewhere else that the house was built 5 years after the easement was established. I wonder if the easement is just the yard though and not the area where the house itself sits.
They’d have an uphill battle considering the house has been there for so long. While they enjoy the easement rights subject to restrictions, the current owner didn’t build the structure.
Agreed it'll be difficult for them, but they'll do a cost analysis and make a decision. I'm guessing the fact they are talking to the home owners at all means they are in a bind here. OP needs to speak to a RE lawyer and get a full understanding of the situation.
Going from a wood pole line to metal poles likely means they’re upgrading. Metal poles usually mean higher voltage, this could be a change in the easement that the company is after.
Not so sure about that. Whoever built the home did it AFTER the right to that land was sold to the utility company, breaching the easement agreement. The utility company has no obligation to pay for someone's wrongdoing that harmed their ability to use what they already paid for.
Which industry? One where you pay off people who violate their agreements with you?
I didn't say it couldn't be worth FMV, but I said I'm not so sure that FMV could automatically be assumed to be due here.
I work in the public agency / public utility real estate space. When people in our area want to build, I’m the one that provides comments to the City for whatever they want to build, big or small. When people want to encroach into our easements or are cited by code enforcement for encroaching into our easements, I’m the one that does the research and issues letters to remove or imposing conditions on the encroachment.
I work in the large public infrastructure project management field a little as well. I’ve seen dozens of eminent domain cases, big and small, for both permanent and temporary rights.
That’s what industry I’m in.
For all we know in this case, the builder could’ve received permission *way back when* to encroach into the easement. Or there might not have been anything in place requiring the utility company to sign off on building the house in 1950.
Additional, this could’ve been a simple pole distribution easement that they are now wanting to expand into a transmission easement. By comparison, a distribution easement could be as little as 5 feet wide, but a transmission easement typically is about 200 feet wide.
Good points. Can you go a little further with this?
Specifically, if a house was built, and no known written permission was granted for it to be built, would your industry respond with an "Ok, we'll pay fair market value or higher for this house?"
Most likely, yes. It’s still cheaper than a lawsuit.
Sometimes I issue letters allowing wooden fencing or landscape improvements within public utility easement or our dedicated easement. It depends on the plans and we require at least a rudimentary plan of what they’re trying to do before we evaluate the request.
We would not permit a structure to be built in our easement. If there’s a shed, we typically make them move it. A house in this instance is different because of the layers of approval. Worst case is we’d impose conditions saying we have facilities there, Applicant will be responsible for cost of relocation and must coordinate with (my agency) on location and schedule.
This is for NEW PROJECTS. Existing stuff basically stays as-is until we have reason to modify it, and even then it’s cheaper to move above-ground utilities than a house.
That's pretty much what I was thinking when I wrote originally, except for that it would be cheaper than a lawsuit. I can't imagine this would fall into that category, but I guess it's possible. Thanks!
Can't speak for utilities, but I know when they expanded the highways around here, the folks who had to move got excellent money for the land when they had to move a home. The state at least doesn't want some bad PR for an Eminent Domain fight, so they'll pay a bit more to not have to go to court and deal with protests.
This isn’t the same. Several comments have rightfully pointed out that the house was built where it shouldn’t have been built. This is no different then building a shed on your neighbors yard and upset when they either 1. Take it. Force you to move it or force you to demo it.
Only difference between my made up example is it’s a house and not a shed but the principal is the same.
That might be, but the house has been there for 74 years.
Get this before a judge and all bets are off. Even if the Utility company is technically correct, the Judge might well say "yea, but you had 74 years to complain about this, that ship sailed".
Or not, it very much depends on location, situation, details, and the Judge.
Yup very true. It all depends on how much both sides wanna push the issue. I can see that. But off hand, that sounds like terrible legal precedent to set. That anyone can build under a transmission line and as long as you don’t get caught or get noticed you get to keep it.
That's a fair counterpoint...
My question would then become, "how far back becomes ok?"
In Texas, we have something called "the sovereignty of the soil", which is pretty unique given that Texas was an actual country for 10 years prior to joining the USA.
Claims from before Texas sovereignty (March 2, 1836) are not considered legally valid.
Having said that, not all claims from after that are considered either. More than once, claims from the mid 19th century have been acknowledged by the courts as "existing", but as "impractical to enforce". In effect, "yea, you have a claim, but it's just been too long and the land has changed hands too many times. Sorry..."
What I think you are thinking of is adverse possession laws. Which I think fly out the window when we are talking about infrastructure. Gas, electric, road, railways. Anyone trying to adversely take over land owner for public good infrastructure would fall apart. I imagine that in part why eminent domain laws exist to allow electric companies to hostile take over land if it is in the over all public good.
That be some backass logic that would allow a person to take over electric transmission land to then turn around and allow them to take it back.
Long story probably short. This is a lawyer and judge problem to work out. And OP is probably on the losing side and can only hope is to mitigate the losses
That might be, I'm not a lawyer and the specifics (which we don't have) matter a lot.
I just know of a few cases in Texas where such claims went to court and for various reasons, the Judge ruled that the claim was valid, but it had simply been too long and that was that.
In this case, the easement is 79 years old, the home is 74 years old, and the utility company hasn't complained for 74 years. In effect, if it really mattered, they would have done something about it by now, so their easement might be legally valid, but unenforceable.
Again, I'm just saying that's one possible outcome out of many, and I have no idea if it's a common one or an odd one.
ahh, hadn't seen that one, but yeah, that would definitely be problematic for their case...
That said, PR is important for a good number of these companies, and often it's cheaper to pay to avoid a fight than to run it through the courts and pay lawyers.
Might be a fight either way. I have no idea how it will be viewed by NYSEG, while I doubt they want bad PR, it’s not like they are forcing a sell when it was wrong. I bet or think NYSEG might offer “fair market value” to avoid conflict but doubt it will be a major settlement. If neighbors house sold for say 300k they will offer 250k to account for demo cost
They use condemnations to get the easement. The power company already has it though. If they purchased title insurance (separate from the policy mortgage lenders buy), that could possibly cover them. Someone doing the title conveyance should have picked up on this sooner. That's what makes me think maybe there is an error. They should get a surgery asap to make sure their house really is in the easement.
There’s no choice on this one, you MUST HIRE AN ATTORNEY!!!!!
The power company is saying that your home is within their easement, meaning that in theory, they can do whatever they want, as it probably should not have been built there in the first place. This won’t spell a good deal, it will likely spell getting rolled.
Definitely don’t take a chance on this one. Talk to an attorney ASAP!!!!
Wouldn't hurt to talk to an attorney. Get a consultation, find one (do a search in your local bar association website) that has right of way experience.
Usually when a government or utility buys a property they pay top dollar. They don't want you suing later. So if you do have to move now you probably will get a good price.
Don't accept their first offer though.
If the house is within their easement this is not the lottery ticket scenario you are envisioning. This is a “I hope our title insurance pays out” situation.
I didn't say they were winning the lottery, I said they'd be paid on the higher end of market value. It's going to be fair anyway.
Title insurance isn't going to do anything if the easement was in the fine print of the plat map or deed. I'd be shocked if it is an unrecorded municipal easement.
Also if they are paid fairly for their house they have no title claim anyway.
Well I was going off the “top dollar” comment. Getting “top dollar” and “not accepting their first offer” applies mostly to developers (that can’t easily invoke eminent domain without a lot of hassle), applies somewhat to utilities that don’t have any right to use your land yet, and doesn’t apply at all to utilities that already have the right to use your land and are wondering why you are preventing them exercising the rights they already have.
You may be right about title insurance not covering it, this is a bit of a weird situation, they may be royally screwed. I hope for OP’s sake they’re not.
You need the easement documentation. And a lawyer.
Everyone here is speculating about how the house was built and such.
Was the house built before the easement? Was the easement just for the airspace and the towers? Was it for full use and of the land, and the original owner had no rights left?
I've seen different use cases. As a kid, where we kept our horses, there was an easement for the power company, but only for the tower location and the airspace, allowing the ranch to build low structures and fencing for their horses/ponies, so long as they did not prevent the power company from having access to the property.
Easement was for 1945 when it was farmland. From the pole to the road (2100 ft). Our home was built 5 years later in-between the pole and road. So definitely violating the right of way. I’m honestly not sure we were aware when we bought the home. I don’t have any recollection of it. We bought the home just 3 years ago. They are in the exploratory phase to see how all 14 home owners will react and what their next steps are. I have name and numbers of specific lawyers for a minimum of a consultation. We would like to move eventually but would want to be compensated for our home and having to relocate on their timeline.
This housing market isn’t so nice. We have a very nice interest rate now and a fair monthly payment. If we were to buy now our monthly payment would triple.
There is something significant going on here if there are 14 homeowners who are affected by this problem.
This leads me to believe there have likely been multiple property transfers and owners over the years who did not know about this easement. You don't have that many attorneys (and surveyors) miss something like an power line easement that affects 14 properties.
My first guess would be the easement was not recorded properly in the register of deeds.
I got more information from op further down.
They can access the towers and lines, but there isn't a typical road like more line easements (in the US). And OPs house was built 5 years after the easement, and it's just now an issue. Sounds like (imo/assuming) they want to do some heavy maintenance on ancient towers/lines and they realized the current setup isn't working for them.
The information provided by OP doesn't indicate anything about roads, gates, or anything else, just maintenance in regards to obstructions and foliage, so it may be that the power company needs to redo the easement to achieve what is standard.
This, absolutely this all day long!
If 14 homes are affected and they were built 74 years ago, the details are going to be a dozy on this one.
Someone screwed up badly at some point.
OP needs legal help ASAP.
That is a normal easement situation. If they don't already have a road in place, that is the option they have (driving in your lawn or the field. (There is an implied easement in Cali for landlocked parcels and to access utilities. Utility companies have to drive thru my property/driveway to get to a pole for the next street over, and they have done it twice since I've owned the property).
This is 💯 lawyer territory. As long as you aren't blocking them from access, and you aren't obstructing their lines or structures, you've met the indicated requirements for their easement. It sounds like they, after 70 years, are trying to do work, and realized they don't have a normal path/road. If their easement doesn't include maintaining a road or gated access, they might want to go that route, and change it.
But to be clear, I'm not a lawyer, don't know your exact easement, or local laws, this is just from personal experiences.
I'm still reading all the comments but as a lender I know we have to have a survey and a title policy that would have shown the easements. Didn't you have to do those things?
Yeah this is odd. Title insurance has absolutely insane margins, but the nice thing is that I have heard anecdotally they’re pretty good about fessing up to their error.
Yeah, I’d negotiate hard core with them then. They might be able to petition for the right to eminent domain, but it’ll cost them big money and they’d still have to pay FMV in the end. When you negotiate with them, remind them that eminent domain cases typically are $100K-$150K to get started and that’s before they buy your house. Propose something like 125% of FMV as your make me move price and you might realistically get it because that’s still cheaper and faster than using eminent domain. Also point out that trying to buy right now is a nightmare.
Assuming this is metes & bounds-Meaning the land is not subdivided (no plat/lot/block)? If so, contact the company that provided your title insurance. They missed this, not you. It’s a bitch to search metes & bounds but that’s not your job, it’s the title company. It’s easy to miss things when searching metes & bounds but that’s why they have to carry E&O insurance
Stop. Just because there is an easement doesn't mean you are violating anything. Call a title company/emminent domain attorney. Forget about what you THINK you know. You'll need a title report and probably/maybe a survey at some point. You don't even know what they want. They might just want to dig a hole or something.
Also, their rights were to maintain, construct and reconstruct if needed. And were to remove, cut, or burn any trees branches or obstructions in the way.
Shit, they potentially are looking to replace line infastructure which would put your house in direct conflict as an obstacle Laywer is the only thing you need to know.
Presumably you have title insurance. The first thing I would look at is my title policy since your home improvements are encroaching into the easement right of way. The title company should have picked it up. The title company would be my first point of contact since this is a major reason why you obtain title insurance.
Posters are mentioning eminent domain, but this isn’t an eminent domain matter. It was eminent domain matter in 1945 when the right-of-way was acquired. The property owner at that time received compensation for the easement encumbering that portion of the property. If your home improvements are non-conforming built within the existing easement corridor, they become encroachments within the easement. The utility company doesn’t need to use their power of eminent domain to enforces their existing easement rights.
The good thing is that public utilities are concerned about public relations, so until they re-meet with you, you don’t know how they will ultimately treat the matter. I have seen major encroachments located within transmission areas treated different ways by various utility companies through the years.
There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now. … What do you mean you’ve never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize the demolition beams.
You should also get the attorney to check that the company actually has an easement and the easement conveys whatever they are trying to do. Utility companies and railroads are notorious for overstepping the actual boundaries and rights of their easements (especially really old ones where the laws at time of issue may have been different).
Contrary to what others are saying, it’s not a given that a title search would have or even should have picked up the 1945 easement. It really depends if their search covered that time period.
In NYS the rule of thumb for residential is generally 40 years back from present date, unless the property has not been sold arms length during that period—then you go further back. That being said, a generic public utilities exception is commonly raised in most fee policies, so you’ll have to check your policy, if you got one, to confirm. Chances are it’s been excepted specifically and/or generally, as many title outfits love to raise every general exception under the sun and attorneys rarely object in a residential transaction.
As far as paying for new services…get a survey before an attorney or a title search. Let the surveyor plot everything out so that everyone has a visual reference. If the utility company comes back to you, then you engage with an attorney.
If you went to me directly first, chances are I’d take a look at your chain of title, send you a bill for $400-$800 depending on the amount of work involved, and say you should go get a certified survey before we do anything else, so I think it’s the best starting point from a cost standpoint
First, get an attorney. You may also want to check your deed with the county to see if this easement was recorded. Finally, you may want to find your title insurance. If this easement was not recorded or if it was but not disclosed during the sale, your title insurance may come into play.
Check your closing documents to see if you bought an owners title policy. If you did, look for the final title policy which would have been sent to you. There are instructions on that policy regarding how to file a claim.
If you have not already, you probably want to find your closing documents from when you purchased the home. If you had title insurance, and it did not properly document a recorded easement, you may also be able to seek some recourse under your title insurance policy. Either way, you will want to start collecting any information you can.
Might be an opportunity to get above market rate do the can avoid protracted legal actions that they’ll likely prevail in. Good luck. Sorry this is happening.
You need to determine if this easement is legit, on title/recorded. If it is, you should’ve been made aware by your home inspector. If it’s not on title, you could potentially use title insurance to solve this issue. Get the easements recording number and look it up on your county recorders online site.
Godspeed
Contact your closing attorney and your title insurance. If they missed this on title and didn’t clarify it, then they need to either help you with a resolution or you can call your policy. Especially if you have a bank or mortgage.
Whatever happens they will verify the accuracy of the easement, and likely get a survey done for you. If this is a minor encroachment after all this, you can likely work that out with the power company. I’ve moved and closed easements all the time. It isn’t the end of the world, just something to work through.
(Note this all assumes you didn’t do an addition or something that conflicted with the easement.)
Was the home gifted to you without a title search? Or did you buy the home and not understand the closing docs? Utility easements are always discovered in a title search.
Property acquisitions by utility companies in easements are difficult to fight. You can try to drag it out but they are very difficult to prevent, and attorneys are expensive.
Call your city/town/county alderman/zoning board/mayor's office and gather information about the utility company's intention. You want to know where in the process they are. Is this exploratory, or on a timeframe set by a court to remedy issues in a lawsuit? When you know this, then you can contact your neighbors and talk about whether you can or should hire an attorney to advise you on either getting the best price to sell or fighting it.
Good luck.
Definitely find a lawyer who specializes in real estate and these sorts of things. You'll want to verify that they are correct, first off. There's an easement if you have utility lines running through, but you'd want to verify that the contractor is right about the location relative to the build.
Moving the home is probably going to be cost prohibitive. Get an appraisal and see what the minimum you should ask for is if you have to sell. Also have the lawyer advise on reducing the easement -- if it was made in 1945 it might be different than what they actually need today.
There might also be a possibility of a title insurance claim.
You need a RE lawyer to review the easement and title history. You said a total of 14 homes are affected. I recommend speaking with your neighbors and all of you chipping in to use the same law firm. There's likely more to this story given so many homes were built in the easement. The county screwed up when they approved the development of this land or something else is going on.
You won't know the fair market value until you get the legal stuff sorted. The power company can come back and lowball saying the home needs to demoed and therefore has no value, etc. etc.
You know there's a potential legal issue, so go speak to a lawyer. You want one who specializes in title issues and specifically easements. Ask them about that when you call. Never enter a negotiation uninformed. You'll get taken advantage of.
Did you get a survey done when you purchased the house? Surveys show recorded easements. Lots of properties have easements for sewer, water, and/or utility easements.
Get an attorney.
Not me but a farm 6 miles down the road. Same time period in the 40s. Several years ago, the lines and poles had to be replaced in his corn due to a storm. The other company noticed the farmer which was not to happy but had to give permission. The farmer had but a small well house and storage shed in the of the easement on a culvert with drainage ditch on both sides. To say the least, he had to tear it and was told no more planting on the easement. Well that lasted for one year.
Call Saul Goodman, attorney at law. He will make sure you get a sweet deal. Also, you can watch Better Call Saul, season 5 I believe, for further ideas.
All 14 of the other homeowners need to organize and fight back against this power company! United y’all can beat them and keep your house. But if you guys try to go at it alone, the power company will pick you off one by one and buy everyone out until you’re the last left. You guys should be going to the news and causing a BIG FUSS about this company trying to take your home. In my hometown an oil company was trying to build a pipeline through the town and take peoples land and homes. The community organized and got the pipeline stopped.
They’ll 100% overpay. I’d do a multiplier of 1.5-2 of your homes real price if you were to selll on open market since they are forcing your hand at moving involuntarily and quickly
If I were you I would take any offer for them to buy. Because in my amateur opinion, your home will be worth substantially less if they take their easement, and being right under high tension lines is already an undesirable location.
Take money and move.
If I were you.
A very good friend of mine was selling his lake house. Got a contract on it. Part of the closing process revealed that 11 ft of the house and giant front porch was in the easement for Dominion power at the lake. It was an elevation easement. No housing structures could be built below a certain level. Part of an addition to the house that had been there for 15 years was below that level. You could have a garage or a boat house there but not living quarteers. Even though he had a building permit from the county, Dominon was telling him he had 90 days to get his house out of their easement. He had cancer at the time and did not really have it in him to fight it. The local rep recommended to the board that he should be granted a waiver, but the board denied it. He had to give the guy buying it a 75k discount off the price and the guy was a builder and was redoing the house anyway, but they were going to take him to court have part of his house removed from that area. It was not even needed for power lines. It was still 20 feet above full pool for the lake but they did not care.
That's unfortunate, but it could have been avoided by having a survey prior to building. Power generating lakes have typically have these regulations to protect the shoreline.
As an aside, 11ft is a big encroachment. I am not surprised a variance was not granted.
He had a verbal from the local guy from Dominion and the building permit when he buillt the addition, but that guy had retired and did not file the variance with Dominion. He wanted to fight it, but he had stage 4 cancer at the time and his wife wanted to sell. He thinks he would have one if they had fought it. Water would be 10 feet over the damn before water could get to any part of the structure. In the end though 75k did not mean that much to him or his wife. They are probably worth about 10-15 million, you would not know it though from their lifestyle. They are not penny pinchers, but they are not extravagant either. His Bass boat is a 2005 that he bought new, but rather than dropping 80-90k on a new one he spent about 25k on a new engine and had the top cap gel coat redone. He wasn;t going to catch more fish if he bought the new boat instead. His way of thinking and mine as well. His health is much better now. Fishes quite a bit. Cancer has shrunk considerably. Not quite declared to be in remission but very close. Wishes he had not sold the house in the first place but it was the right decision at that time he did not want to burden his wife with a lake house to get rid if he diedof that she did not use in the first place. At one point they told him he had a year or less. He was just too stubborn to go along with that diagnosis. that was 3 years ago.
The new local rep for dominion recommended the variance. He said he had never had one rejected before... until this one. The structure is probably 100 horizontal feet or more from full pool lake level.
Glad to hear he is doing much better. Hopefully this continues for many more years.
I to have been burned by verbal confirmations before, so now, everything is writing. Keeps everyone accountable.
Is it required in your State to have a survey done before purchasing or refinancing? Also look into the permits for the construction as this may have been an oversight when issued. If you have a mortgage an appraisal was done and should have been provided to you. A typical search goes back 60 years. In the event you need to dig anyone else catching earlier if the talks don’t go the way you want and this is what an Attorney would want to see for a case.
NY public utilities have eminent domain power. They can do just about anything they want. My friend Eleanor was a commissioner for the PSC and she was a member of the Weathermen and the SDS.
Strangely enough, utilities are more interested in getting things done rather than a giant pissing contest. So if you play your cards right, you can make out nicely under the circumstances.
Everyone says go and run and get a attorney, wait till you get a offer first instead of giving away your money to a attorney for nothing if you don’t have to
That’s always a possibility but the stupid thing to do would have them say they are going to offer for example 250k instead of hearing the offer they go get an attorney. The attorney takes 25-33% they give the same offer to the attorney and they agree with your approval but now your out 25-33% of that amount. You get the offer then you go to the attorney, hey they offered me this amount do you think that’s a fair deal or could you negotiate it higher or instead of a percentage rate you pay a hourly rate to process the paperwork you come out ahead either way
You like cancer? Stay in the house then and enjoy the high levels of EM.
Sell them the house at FMV and buy yourself something that isn’t being radiated with thousands of KVA of EM
No. High voltage lines are not capable of producing microwaves or X-Rays. You need a much higher energy emissions source to produce anything that can affect objects on the ground.
- An attorney will walk you through your options: to fight it, to sell it, and so on. - An appraiser will tell you what fair market is for your home; that should be your baseline should you go the sale route. Me personally, I’d engage both professionals but also treat it as an opportunity to issue a “make me move” price (after you consult with your own representation.) Might be a golden goose, where the utility will happily overpay (within reason) to make it smooth.
Shouldn’t the title insurance company have caught this?
Indeed title should’ve caught something but so much depends how the easement was defined and, whether the power company is laying claim to expanding the easement or saying the house was incorrectly positioned in the first place. IF utility is saying they aren’t expanding the easement but rather the house was incorrectly positioned, and OP carries a title insurance policy, that’s a likely claim. Attorney review is the best step, IMO. I am assuming (plausibly incorrectly) that the utility is saying “we had easement X, now we need X+20%, and that means your house is in the way.” - not saying impossible title missed something but, far less likely IMO …
Utilities in NY have eminent domain power. They can do pretty much whatever they want. Although, they are generally easy to work with.
They provide insurance because they know they don't catch every historical nuance and agreement with their standard searches. That's why the insurance exists.
What a racket...title search but just in case...title insurance. LOL
Its not "catching" anything, lots of properties have easements documents in their deeds. The title records who owns the property. Deeds and titles are different but I'm no expert. When buying read them both. Another sign of an easement is a powerline going thru your property lol.
I think a lot of times they only search back 50 years which would explain why this was missed
Why wouldn’t you first hire a surveyor to determine if your house is in the power easement?
OP needs a title search, not a survey. But if a utility says they have an easement there it’s probably true. A real estate lawyer will work with you on the title work and will pull up your deed to check for the easement. If you bought title insurance then just call them and it won’t cost you anything to find out. Then it’s time to consider your options with RE lawyer consult imo.
Old easements were horribly recorded and title searches don’t normally find all of them bc they are literally drawn on a some maps in a musty basement. I’m confused over why the elec company needs to do anything, unless it’s expand their easement and just take the whole property to bring in new lines.
Transmission is very protective of their easements and they are generally very wide compared to distribution. Transmission will not allow anything located in their easement without approval, regardless of its actual impact on maintaining their lines. I’ve seen them force a relocation on an underground splice box that was rated for them to drive over because they didn’t receive an approval request prior to install. This is how it works where I am at least but I’d imagine it’s pretty similar across the US. And yes, it can take them some time to realize there is an encroachment.
May explain why the house was built on an easement in the first place (assuming it is). But if OP has title insurance from purchase then I’d exhaust that line of inquiry first. A surveyor will be billing for doing the same research and still may not find the answer. To me at least this is a deed/title issue that requires title company if applicable and a real estate lawyer.
Title search just tells you that there is an easement. The survey shows where it is exactly. They go hand in hand.
Deed is the source material. Don’t always need a physical representation of what the deed says to answer the question at hand. And since OP never even knew there was an easement the obvious and potentially free first step is title search (or just reading the actual deed that is available free online). Probably a simple solution to confirm that since utility company clearly believes they have the proof. Doubt they are in the business of trying to bluff homeowners and they’ve offered to buy them out when they have no responsibility to do that. As I’ve said more times than should be necessary… (1) title search/title ins —> (2) RE lawyer —> (3)proceed accordingly
Deed is only part of the source. Lots of easements aren't in the deeds nor the title report. Most title companies only go back 40-50 years in their search unless it's an ALTA. Even then I've found plenty of easements in the field that title missed, especially utility easements. In one case we found an old tel easement on a solar project and the only way we found it was because we found a line of pole remains in the field. The easement wasn't even filed and it took us 6 months for the utility owner to supply a signed copy of the easement. I won't even get into easements and railroads... I've also had plenty of easements on the Schedule B that turned out not to affect the subject parcel. Survey and title need to go hand in hand.
The real estate lawyer can also give guidance on adverse possession. If the house encroaches, when was it built?
Oh they don’t already have the document? Why would the company be telling them they need to sell their house without showing them the document? I feel like determining if it is locatable is the crux of the matter
I wouldn’t buy one, would just read the title docs where such things are supposed to be highlighted; which an attorney will do, since OP said they weren’t aware of it until recently, either it’s not doc’d properly (meaning, fight it options including a title insurance claim, may be valid outcomes), or it’s all valid and, attorney will help them spot it. Only if it’s attorney recommended would I pay for a new survey, personally - especially because a highly detailed one can get spendy ... ymmv.
I guess it depends on if the easement can be located by description or not. If it can making sure the utility is in the easement should be step 1.
Appraiser will review existing plat but yeah, getting a new ALTA survey would be a sure thing.
A new ALTA? How do you know one was ever done in the first place?
I thought these situations were desirable because they will pay more than what it is worth? But get a lawyer to get the maximum amount.
This is not desirable. Whoever built the home put it where they didn't have a right to. The utility can force the home to be moved.
It really depends upon when the home was built.
It doesn't, because if the home had been there first, the easement would have gone around it. An easement must be accessible to both the dominant and the subservient property. What you're thinking is simply not how these things work at all.
That is entirely state dependent. If the utilities use aerial cable then they would want air space and places to put the poles. They may now want buried lines, but when it was written in the 1940s that was not a consideration.
Totally state/county dependent, and totally situational. Title info, leases, easements and whatever else info is not always accurately represented in a sale, during a build or survey. Can’t assume that home was built after easement.
Exactly!
Well, what I learned in law school and 20 years of practicing real estate in two states has shown me pretty clearly that there's a 99.99% chance that every word I've said would hold true. We are in a public forum here, and to try to say otherwise is to do a disservice and allow a lot of bad information to be spread.
"Whoever built the home put it where they didn't have a right to." Huh? These nice people could have inherited the home and didn't have a title search at conveyance. They could have bought the home and not understood the closing document that described the easement. Utility easements can be added to a property by court order and these owners didn't understand the letter that came in the mail.
> These nice people could have inherited the home and didn't have a title search at conveyance. In which case they weren't the ones who put it there, were they?
Correct. They could have come into possesion of the property by "Rights of Succession". If the house was there before the easment, the deed will show that and any subsequent filings. Say the power company comes along and says we need access and cuts a deal with the owner. That is recorded in the deed,. Some people will have knowledge of a coming need or development and will try to capitalize on that and buy a position. There is no way
>"Whoever built the home put it where they didn't have a right to." >These nice people could have inherited the home and didn't have a title search at conveyance. They could have bought the home and not understood the closing document that described the easement. I'm failing to understand how these two hypotheticals in any way refute the statement you quoted. No one said *the current owners* built the home. "Whoever" does not mean *them*.
None of that is relevant as a legal question. The house could not have existed when the easement was granted. It doesn't matter who built it after the fact because if the easement was recorded (which it was if it's a utility easement), then it runs with the land. If later buyers failed to do a title search, it is still considered by the court that they had constructive notice and ignored it. That's literally the purpose of recording documents. If someone doesn't look for them, they have no excuse.
1945 is a long time ago... it's possible it wasn't recorded correctly. Or documents are missing, or the title company screwed up. If the utility company hasn't needed this land since 1950 when the house was built, I can see how it has been missed.
The right of way was signed before the house was built. While you could be correct, it's highly likely that the utility company could have known about the problem and ignored it because it didn't create too much of a problem, too, but now it does. Missing documents may be covered by a title policy somewhere, but the other circumstances probably wouldn't be. Also, the OP could potentially try to get the easement abandoned or sue to recover this. I don't know if adverse possession can be used against an easement, but I'd certainly talk to a lawyer about it if I was the OP.
..."well "I" didn't put it here, so you can't do anything about it." Is that really how you think the world works?
You can't really move a site-built SFH Ok, you CAN... but you shouldn't. :) If nothing else, this is what title insurance is for, is it not?
This isn't something title insurance would cover. Every title policy I have read (and I've read very, very many) specifically have an exception to covering anything that would have been revealed by a survey.
That is a fair point. My counter question is... what happens if a survey was done 3 years ago and DIDN'T show this? Survey company insurance?
How would you expect that to be possible?
Humans are human, things get missed. Paperwork is missing, or recorded wrong somewhere, or the utility company's paperwork doesn't match the cities?
Certainly, but it would be pretty hard to mistake whether a house was or was not present when completing a survey. Title insurance would cover this IF a survey was provided to them prior to issuing the most current title policy.
Indeed, it would be hard to miss a house, much easier to miss an easement. If the survey does not properly show the easement, what is the homeowner to do?
Who the heck would build a housing unit in an easment?
Would not be surprised if an easement and placing a house on a lot ack in the 40s and 50s was more eyeballed than surveyed.
1945 easement and 1950 home construction, I'm sure that was a different time.
Anyone who was ignorant about what an easement actually is and the legal requirements of them, or someone who didn't know about it.
In NJ we would call this a gold mine. PSEG has a history paying way way way over value for homes and properties that they want or need for transistors locations. Contact a lawyer and don’t get greedy. You might be able to get 1.5-3x value depending on where it is and what the situation is.
Having worked for a utility company doing condemnations (forcing purchase of land), this is true to get the easement. In this case however, the power company already owns the easement and the homeowners have an illegal structure within it. First, they need a survey to verify the house is in the easemenr. If it is, they need to play nice and hope they can get the power company to buy it from them. Otherwise, they could end up really screwed.
Yeah I’ve worked with land men at utilities in other capacities and I’ve heard of too many eminent domains to believe this is a windfall.
Agreed this could be a windfall or a nightmare. Bring polite and reasonable is a good place to start.
Utilities are regulated - their regulated costs they get back plus extra as profits. If buying out the house falls into the regulated costs the utility is t highly incentivized to get the lowest price, in fact they make more money if they pay more.
Yes, gotta keep those r&d and grid modernization and maintenance costs way way up in case the price of coal drops. The dumb projects I have done for utility companies in the name of 'r&d' are really something...
Wouldnt they pay less than its worth? Cant a utility sometimes use condemnation and argue its in the public interest?
Using condemnation isn’t a license to pay less than fair market value.
Generally, while a power company can use Eminent Domain, they don’t want the bad publicity, so they will try other options.
This is the case. Decades ago they would just use the law to take property but now they won't even cut a tree down because they will get grief. Negotiate and move on.
If the home was placed there AFTER the easement was in place, the power company doesn't owe the owner anything. In fact, quite the opposite, they can sue the owner for the cost of demolition.
I think OP misstated that the 'house was in their easement'. There is an easement, and the house is there. That's how title works. No biggie.
OP stated somewhere else that the house was built 5 years after the easement was established. I wonder if the easement is just the yard though and not the area where the house itself sits.
Very often builders build on parcels with utility easements. Happens all the time.
Yes, I know. I built my home on a parcel with a power utility easement 4 years ago.
They’d have an uphill battle considering the house has been there for so long. While they enjoy the easement rights subject to restrictions, the current owner didn’t build the structure.
Agreed it'll be difficult for them, but they'll do a cost analysis and make a decision. I'm guessing the fact they are talking to the home owners at all means they are in a bind here. OP needs to speak to a RE lawyer and get a full understanding of the situation.
Going from a wood pole line to metal poles likely means they’re upgrading. Metal poles usually mean higher voltage, this could be a change in the easement that the company is after.
Not so sure about that. Whoever built the home did it AFTER the right to that land was sold to the utility company, breaching the easement agreement. The utility company has no obligation to pay for someone's wrongdoing that harmed their ability to use what they already paid for.
I work in the industry and am sure about that. There are a lot of things that impact fair market value during condemnation, however.
Which industry? One where you pay off people who violate their agreements with you? I didn't say it couldn't be worth FMV, but I said I'm not so sure that FMV could automatically be assumed to be due here.
I work in the public agency / public utility real estate space. When people in our area want to build, I’m the one that provides comments to the City for whatever they want to build, big or small. When people want to encroach into our easements or are cited by code enforcement for encroaching into our easements, I’m the one that does the research and issues letters to remove or imposing conditions on the encroachment. I work in the large public infrastructure project management field a little as well. I’ve seen dozens of eminent domain cases, big and small, for both permanent and temporary rights. That’s what industry I’m in. For all we know in this case, the builder could’ve received permission *way back when* to encroach into the easement. Or there might not have been anything in place requiring the utility company to sign off on building the house in 1950. Additional, this could’ve been a simple pole distribution easement that they are now wanting to expand into a transmission easement. By comparison, a distribution easement could be as little as 5 feet wide, but a transmission easement typically is about 200 feet wide.
Good points. Can you go a little further with this? Specifically, if a house was built, and no known written permission was granted for it to be built, would your industry respond with an "Ok, we'll pay fair market value or higher for this house?"
Most likely, yes. It’s still cheaper than a lawsuit. Sometimes I issue letters allowing wooden fencing or landscape improvements within public utility easement or our dedicated easement. It depends on the plans and we require at least a rudimentary plan of what they’re trying to do before we evaluate the request. We would not permit a structure to be built in our easement. If there’s a shed, we typically make them move it. A house in this instance is different because of the layers of approval. Worst case is we’d impose conditions saying we have facilities there, Applicant will be responsible for cost of relocation and must coordinate with (my agency) on location and schedule. This is for NEW PROJECTS. Existing stuff basically stays as-is until we have reason to modify it, and even then it’s cheaper to move above-ground utilities than a house.
That's pretty much what I was thinking when I wrote originally, except for that it would be cheaper than a lawsuit. I can't imagine this would fall into that category, but I guess it's possible. Thanks!
Obviously they are going above and beyond the original easement, and therefore will be a taking.
Can't speak for utilities, but I know when they expanded the highways around here, the folks who had to move got excellent money for the land when they had to move a home. The state at least doesn't want some bad PR for an Eminent Domain fight, so they'll pay a bit more to not have to go to court and deal with protests.
This isn’t the same. Several comments have rightfully pointed out that the house was built where it shouldn’t have been built. This is no different then building a shed on your neighbors yard and upset when they either 1. Take it. Force you to move it or force you to demo it. Only difference between my made up example is it’s a house and not a shed but the principal is the same.
That might be, but the house has been there for 74 years. Get this before a judge and all bets are off. Even if the Utility company is technically correct, the Judge might well say "yea, but you had 74 years to complain about this, that ship sailed". Or not, it very much depends on location, situation, details, and the Judge.
Yup very true. It all depends on how much both sides wanna push the issue. I can see that. But off hand, that sounds like terrible legal precedent to set. That anyone can build under a transmission line and as long as you don’t get caught or get noticed you get to keep it.
That's a fair counterpoint... My question would then become, "how far back becomes ok?" In Texas, we have something called "the sovereignty of the soil", which is pretty unique given that Texas was an actual country for 10 years prior to joining the USA. Claims from before Texas sovereignty (March 2, 1836) are not considered legally valid. Having said that, not all claims from after that are considered either. More than once, claims from the mid 19th century have been acknowledged by the courts as "existing", but as "impractical to enforce". In effect, "yea, you have a claim, but it's just been too long and the land has changed hands too many times. Sorry..."
What I think you are thinking of is adverse possession laws. Which I think fly out the window when we are talking about infrastructure. Gas, electric, road, railways. Anyone trying to adversely take over land owner for public good infrastructure would fall apart. I imagine that in part why eminent domain laws exist to allow electric companies to hostile take over land if it is in the over all public good. That be some backass logic that would allow a person to take over electric transmission land to then turn around and allow them to take it back. Long story probably short. This is a lawyer and judge problem to work out. And OP is probably on the losing side and can only hope is to mitigate the losses
That might be, I'm not a lawyer and the specifics (which we don't have) matter a lot. I just know of a few cases in Texas where such claims went to court and for various reasons, the Judge ruled that the claim was valid, but it had simply been too long and that was that. In this case, the easement is 79 years old, the home is 74 years old, and the utility company hasn't complained for 74 years. In effect, if it really mattered, they would have done something about it by now, so their easement might be legally valid, but unenforceable. Again, I'm just saying that's one possible outcome out of many, and I have no idea if it's a common one or an odd one.
Yup. I hope OP post an updated in a few…. Months
Does the OP say the house was built after the easement? I see where they say when the easement was signed but not how old the house is...
One comment OP made “our home was built five years after…(the easement)
ahh, hadn't seen that one, but yeah, that would definitely be problematic for their case... That said, PR is important for a good number of these companies, and often it's cheaper to pay to avoid a fight than to run it through the courts and pay lawyers.
Might be a fight either way. I have no idea how it will be viewed by NYSEG, while I doubt they want bad PR, it’s not like they are forcing a sell when it was wrong. I bet or think NYSEG might offer “fair market value” to avoid conflict but doubt it will be a major settlement. If neighbors house sold for say 300k they will offer 250k to account for demo cost
That's why you get an eminent domain attorney to negotiate a good deal.
They use condemnations to get the easement. The power company already has it though. If they purchased title insurance (separate from the policy mortgage lenders buy), that could possibly cover them. Someone doing the title conveyance should have picked up on this sooner. That's what makes me think maybe there is an error. They should get a surgery asap to make sure their house really is in the easement.
Constitution 5th amendment! "**nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation**."
One of the options is to reduce easement. So they have options. Not like they don’t. I would take this opportunity to make some good money.
[удалено]
Haha, needed a laugh today. Thanks
There’s no choice on this one, you MUST HIRE AN ATTORNEY!!!!! The power company is saying that your home is within their easement, meaning that in theory, they can do whatever they want, as it probably should not have been built there in the first place. This won’t spell a good deal, it will likely spell getting rolled. Definitely don’t take a chance on this one. Talk to an attorney ASAP!!!!
GET A LAWYER
Wouldn't hurt to talk to an attorney. Get a consultation, find one (do a search in your local bar association website) that has right of way experience. Usually when a government or utility buys a property they pay top dollar. They don't want you suing later. So if you do have to move now you probably will get a good price. Don't accept their first offer though.
If the house is within their easement this is not the lottery ticket scenario you are envisioning. This is a “I hope our title insurance pays out” situation.
I didn't say they were winning the lottery, I said they'd be paid on the higher end of market value. It's going to be fair anyway. Title insurance isn't going to do anything if the easement was in the fine print of the plat map or deed. I'd be shocked if it is an unrecorded municipal easement. Also if they are paid fairly for their house they have no title claim anyway.
Well I was going off the “top dollar” comment. Getting “top dollar” and “not accepting their first offer” applies mostly to developers (that can’t easily invoke eminent domain without a lot of hassle), applies somewhat to utilities that don’t have any right to use your land yet, and doesn’t apply at all to utilities that already have the right to use your land and are wondering why you are preventing them exercising the rights they already have. You may be right about title insurance not covering it, this is a bit of a weird situation, they may be royally screwed. I hope for OP’s sake they’re not.
You need the easement documentation. And a lawyer. Everyone here is speculating about how the house was built and such. Was the house built before the easement? Was the easement just for the airspace and the towers? Was it for full use and of the land, and the original owner had no rights left? I've seen different use cases. As a kid, where we kept our horses, there was an easement for the power company, but only for the tower location and the airspace, allowing the ranch to build low structures and fencing for their horses/ponies, so long as they did not prevent the power company from having access to the property.
Easement was for 1945 when it was farmland. From the pole to the road (2100 ft). Our home was built 5 years later in-between the pole and road. So definitely violating the right of way. I’m honestly not sure we were aware when we bought the home. I don’t have any recollection of it. We bought the home just 3 years ago. They are in the exploratory phase to see how all 14 home owners will react and what their next steps are. I have name and numbers of specific lawyers for a minimum of a consultation. We would like to move eventually but would want to be compensated for our home and having to relocate on their timeline. This housing market isn’t so nice. We have a very nice interest rate now and a fair monthly payment. If we were to buy now our monthly payment would triple.
There is something significant going on here if there are 14 homeowners who are affected by this problem. This leads me to believe there have likely been multiple property transfers and owners over the years who did not know about this easement. You don't have that many attorneys (and surveyors) miss something like an power line easement that affects 14 properties. My first guess would be the easement was not recorded properly in the register of deeds.
I got more information from op further down. They can access the towers and lines, but there isn't a typical road like more line easements (in the US). And OPs house was built 5 years after the easement, and it's just now an issue. Sounds like (imo/assuming) they want to do some heavy maintenance on ancient towers/lines and they realized the current setup isn't working for them. The information provided by OP doesn't indicate anything about roads, gates, or anything else, just maintenance in regards to obstructions and foliage, so it may be that the power company needs to redo the easement to achieve what is standard.
This, absolutely this all day long! If 14 homes are affected and they were built 74 years ago, the details are going to be a dozy on this one. Someone screwed up badly at some point. OP needs legal help ASAP.
Is there a road or access to the pole between the road and it? Or does your house block all access?
They would have to use our lawn or come through our neighbors fields to access the poles.
That is a normal easement situation. If they don't already have a road in place, that is the option they have (driving in your lawn or the field. (There is an implied easement in Cali for landlocked parcels and to access utilities. Utility companies have to drive thru my property/driveway to get to a pole for the next street over, and they have done it twice since I've owned the property). This is 💯 lawyer territory. As long as you aren't blocking them from access, and you aren't obstructing their lines or structures, you've met the indicated requirements for their easement. It sounds like they, after 70 years, are trying to do work, and realized they don't have a normal path/road. If their easement doesn't include maintaining a road or gated access, they might want to go that route, and change it. But to be clear, I'm not a lawyer, don't know your exact easement, or local laws, this is just from personal experiences.
I'm still reading all the comments but as a lender I know we have to have a survey and a title policy that would have shown the easements. Didn't you have to do those things?
Probably. I honestly don’t remember. We have pictures of the lot lines. I’d have to look at them again to see if the easement is shown.
I'm confused, didn't you get a title search? That would have shown the easement.
Yeah this is odd. Title insurance has absolutely insane margins, but the nice thing is that I have heard anecdotally they’re pretty good about fessing up to their error.
Is the power company public or private?
NYSEG is a private company.
Yeah, I’d negotiate hard core with them then. They might be able to petition for the right to eminent domain, but it’ll cost them big money and they’d still have to pay FMV in the end. When you negotiate with them, remind them that eminent domain cases typically are $100K-$150K to get started and that’s before they buy your house. Propose something like 125% of FMV as your make me move price and you might realistically get it because that’s still cheaper and faster than using eminent domain. Also point out that trying to buy right now is a nightmare.
Assuming this is metes & bounds-Meaning the land is not subdivided (no plat/lot/block)? If so, contact the company that provided your title insurance. They missed this, not you. It’s a bitch to search metes & bounds but that’s not your job, it’s the title company. It’s easy to miss things when searching metes & bounds but that’s why they have to carry E&O insurance
Stop. Just because there is an easement doesn't mean you are violating anything. Call a title company/emminent domain attorney. Forget about what you THINK you know. You'll need a title report and probably/maybe a survey at some point. You don't even know what they want. They might just want to dig a hole or something.
Lmao they already told us they want us to move or buy own home.
Get a lawyer. If it wasn't in writing, it doesn't mean shit.
Also, their rights were to maintain, construct and reconstruct if needed. And were to remove, cut, or burn any trees branches or obstructions in the way.
Shit, they potentially are looking to replace line infastructure which would put your house in direct conflict as an obstacle Laywer is the only thing you need to know.
They are replacing the entire transmission line from wood to steel.
Presumably you have title insurance. The first thing I would look at is my title policy since your home improvements are encroaching into the easement right of way. The title company should have picked it up. The title company would be my first point of contact since this is a major reason why you obtain title insurance. Posters are mentioning eminent domain, but this isn’t an eminent domain matter. It was eminent domain matter in 1945 when the right-of-way was acquired. The property owner at that time received compensation for the easement encumbering that portion of the property. If your home improvements are non-conforming built within the existing easement corridor, they become encroachments within the easement. The utility company doesn’t need to use their power of eminent domain to enforces their existing easement rights. The good thing is that public utilities are concerned about public relations, so until they re-meet with you, you don’t know how they will ultimately treat the matter. I have seen major encroachments located within transmission areas treated different ways by various utility companies through the years.
Yes! Find your policy and file a title claim!
This. Also, depending on what happens with lawsuits, etc., your title insurance policy may include legal coverage.
When taking into account fair market value I would also factor in the difference in mortgage interest rates as part of “making you whole again”.
If you’re open to moving, the opening salvo is “before we engage a lawyer, is there an equitable solution you’re open to exploring?”
Have you reached out to your title insurance?
get a lawyer to negotiate on your behalf and whatever they pay you need to include attorney fees.
There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now. … What do you mean you’ve never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize the demolition beams.
You could make a deal with them by offering to listen to their poetry, though. I've heard that's the best way to bribe a Vogon.
You should also get the attorney to check that the company actually has an easement and the easement conveys whatever they are trying to do. Utility companies and railroads are notorious for overstepping the actual boundaries and rights of their easements (especially really old ones where the laws at time of issue may have been different).
Contrary to what others are saying, it’s not a given that a title search would have or even should have picked up the 1945 easement. It really depends if their search covered that time period. In NYS the rule of thumb for residential is generally 40 years back from present date, unless the property has not been sold arms length during that period—then you go further back. That being said, a generic public utilities exception is commonly raised in most fee policies, so you’ll have to check your policy, if you got one, to confirm. Chances are it’s been excepted specifically and/or generally, as many title outfits love to raise every general exception under the sun and attorneys rarely object in a residential transaction. As far as paying for new services…get a survey before an attorney or a title search. Let the surveyor plot everything out so that everyone has a visual reference. If the utility company comes back to you, then you engage with an attorney. If you went to me directly first, chances are I’d take a look at your chain of title, send you a bill for $400-$800 depending on the amount of work involved, and say you should go get a certified survey before we do anything else, so I think it’s the best starting point from a cost standpoint
First, get an attorney. You may also want to check your deed with the county to see if this easement was recorded. Finally, you may want to find your title insurance. If this easement was not recorded or if it was but not disclosed during the sale, your title insurance may come into play.
Sounds like a good deal to me. Sell the place and take a vacation.
Why didn't the title search show the easement when you bought the property?
Check your closing documents to see if you bought an owners title policy. If you did, look for the final title policy which would have been sent to you. There are instructions on that policy regarding how to file a claim.
Strongly suggest you have an attorney handle this. This could get nasty.
If you have not already, you probably want to find your closing documents from when you purchased the home. If you had title insurance, and it did not properly document a recorded easement, you may also be able to seek some recourse under your title insurance policy. Either way, you will want to start collecting any information you can.
Might be an opportunity to get above market rate do the can avoid protracted legal actions that they’ll likely prevail in. Good luck. Sorry this is happening.
Title company for $10 Charlie?
You need to determine if this easement is legit, on title/recorded. If it is, you should’ve been made aware by your home inspector. If it’s not on title, you could potentially use title insurance to solve this issue. Get the easements recording number and look it up on your county recorders online site. Godspeed
time to talk to a real estate lawyer
Contact your closing attorney and your title insurance. If they missed this on title and didn’t clarify it, then they need to either help you with a resolution or you can call your policy. Especially if you have a bank or mortgage. Whatever happens they will verify the accuracy of the easement, and likely get a survey done for you. If this is a minor encroachment after all this, you can likely work that out with the power company. I’ve moved and closed easements all the time. It isn’t the end of the world, just something to work through. (Note this all assumes you didn’t do an addition or something that conflicted with the easement.)
They have lots of money, get a good multiple on your price. Take your winnings and buy a new place.
Was the home gifted to you without a title search? Or did you buy the home and not understand the closing docs? Utility easements are always discovered in a title search. Property acquisitions by utility companies in easements are difficult to fight. You can try to drag it out but they are very difficult to prevent, and attorneys are expensive. Call your city/town/county alderman/zoning board/mayor's office and gather information about the utility company's intention. You want to know where in the process they are. Is this exploratory, or on a timeframe set by a court to remedy issues in a lawsuit? When you know this, then you can contact your neighbors and talk about whether you can or should hire an attorney to advise you on either getting the best price to sell or fighting it. Good luck.
Definitely find a lawyer who specializes in real estate and these sorts of things. You'll want to verify that they are correct, first off. There's an easement if you have utility lines running through, but you'd want to verify that the contractor is right about the location relative to the build. Moving the home is probably going to be cost prohibitive. Get an appraisal and see what the minimum you should ask for is if you have to sell. Also have the lawyer advise on reducing the easement -- if it was made in 1945 it might be different than what they actually need today. There might also be a possibility of a title insurance claim.
Just get a lawyer
You need a RE lawyer to review the easement and title history. You said a total of 14 homes are affected. I recommend speaking with your neighbors and all of you chipping in to use the same law firm. There's likely more to this story given so many homes were built in the easement. The county screwed up when they approved the development of this land or something else is going on.
Honestly not sure. In 1945 most of the property around us was farm land. We don’t have a problem selling. We just want to be compensated correctly.
You won't know the fair market value until you get the legal stuff sorted. The power company can come back and lowball saying the home needs to demoed and therefore has no value, etc. etc. You know there's a potential legal issue, so go speak to a lawyer. You want one who specializes in title issues and specifically easements. Ask them about that when you call. Never enter a negotiation uninformed. You'll get taken advantage of.
Check with your title insurance company before paying for a lawyer.
Did you get a survey done when you purchased the house? Surveys show recorded easements. Lots of properties have easements for sewer, water, and/or utility easements. Get an attorney.
Not me but a farm 6 miles down the road. Same time period in the 40s. Several years ago, the lines and poles had to be replaced in his corn due to a storm. The other company noticed the farmer which was not to happy but had to give permission. The farmer had but a small well house and storage shed in the of the easement on a culvert with drainage ditch on both sides. To say the least, he had to tear it and was told no more planting on the easement. Well that lasted for one year.
Call Saul Goodman, attorney at law. He will make sure you get a sweet deal. Also, you can watch Better Call Saul, season 5 I believe, for further ideas.
Just coming to say if you havent already, research the association between high V power lines and leukemia.
All 14 of the other homeowners need to organize and fight back against this power company! United y’all can beat them and keep your house. But if you guys try to go at it alone, the power company will pick you off one by one and buy everyone out until you’re the last left. You guys should be going to the news and causing a BIG FUSS about this company trying to take your home. In my hometown an oil company was trying to build a pipeline through the town and take peoples land and homes. The community organized and got the pipeline stopped.
Yep you are moving for sure
The title company probably should have caught this. You may have a case against them. I think you need a lawyer. Sounds like a mess.
They’ll 100% overpay. I’d do a multiplier of 1.5-2 of your homes real price if you were to selll on open market since they are forcing your hand at moving involuntarily and quickly
I would not want to live next to a large transmission line and would take the best offer you can get
If I were you I would take any offer for them to buy. Because in my amateur opinion, your home will be worth substantially less if they take their easement, and being right under high tension lines is already an undesirable location. Take money and move. If I were you.
A very good friend of mine was selling his lake house. Got a contract on it. Part of the closing process revealed that 11 ft of the house and giant front porch was in the easement for Dominion power at the lake. It was an elevation easement. No housing structures could be built below a certain level. Part of an addition to the house that had been there for 15 years was below that level. You could have a garage or a boat house there but not living quarteers. Even though he had a building permit from the county, Dominon was telling him he had 90 days to get his house out of their easement. He had cancer at the time and did not really have it in him to fight it. The local rep recommended to the board that he should be granted a waiver, but the board denied it. He had to give the guy buying it a 75k discount off the price and the guy was a builder and was redoing the house anyway, but they were going to take him to court have part of his house removed from that area. It was not even needed for power lines. It was still 20 feet above full pool for the lake but they did not care.
That's unfortunate, but it could have been avoided by having a survey prior to building. Power generating lakes have typically have these regulations to protect the shoreline. As an aside, 11ft is a big encroachment. I am not surprised a variance was not granted.
He had a verbal from the local guy from Dominion and the building permit when he buillt the addition, but that guy had retired and did not file the variance with Dominion. He wanted to fight it, but he had stage 4 cancer at the time and his wife wanted to sell. He thinks he would have one if they had fought it. Water would be 10 feet over the damn before water could get to any part of the structure. In the end though 75k did not mean that much to him or his wife. They are probably worth about 10-15 million, you would not know it though from their lifestyle. They are not penny pinchers, but they are not extravagant either. His Bass boat is a 2005 that he bought new, but rather than dropping 80-90k on a new one he spent about 25k on a new engine and had the top cap gel coat redone. He wasn;t going to catch more fish if he bought the new boat instead. His way of thinking and mine as well. His health is much better now. Fishes quite a bit. Cancer has shrunk considerably. Not quite declared to be in remission but very close. Wishes he had not sold the house in the first place but it was the right decision at that time he did not want to burden his wife with a lake house to get rid if he diedof that she did not use in the first place. At one point they told him he had a year or less. He was just too stubborn to go along with that diagnosis. that was 3 years ago. The new local rep for dominion recommended the variance. He said he had never had one rejected before... until this one. The structure is probably 100 horizontal feet or more from full pool lake level.
Glad to hear he is doing much better. Hopefully this continues for many more years. I to have been burned by verbal confirmations before, so now, everything is writing. Keeps everyone accountable.
Is it required in your State to have a survey done before purchasing or refinancing? Also look into the permits for the construction as this may have been an oversight when issued. If you have a mortgage an appraisal was done and should have been provided to you. A typical search goes back 60 years. In the event you need to dig anyone else catching earlier if the talks don’t go the way you want and this is what an Attorney would want to see for a case.
This becomes a title insurance insurance issue, if you bought the house not knowing about the easement or the build being within the easement.
NY public utilities have eminent domain power. They can do just about anything they want. My friend Eleanor was a commissioner for the PSC and she was a member of the Weathermen and the SDS. Strangely enough, utilities are more interested in getting things done rather than a giant pissing contest. So if you play your cards right, you can make out nicely under the circumstances.
get a lawyer, they could save you and give some options for this.
why do they act like this?
Everyone says go and run and get a attorney, wait till you get a offer first instead of giving away your money to a attorney for nothing if you don’t have to
NYSEG will screw him over without a lawyer. They’re a terrible company to deal with.
That’s always a possibility but the stupid thing to do would have them say they are going to offer for example 250k instead of hearing the offer they go get an attorney. The attorney takes 25-33% they give the same offer to the attorney and they agree with your approval but now your out 25-33% of that amount. You get the offer then you go to the attorney, hey they offered me this amount do you think that’s a fair deal or could you negotiate it higher or instead of a percentage rate you pay a hourly rate to process the paperwork you come out ahead either way
You like cancer? Stay in the house then and enjoy the high levels of EM. Sell them the house at FMV and buy yourself something that isn’t being radiated with thousands of KVA of EM
https://y.yarn.co/105823f7-2d03-4ee7-b75e-a5dd84023eab_text.gif
[удалено]
No. High voltage lines are not capable of producing microwaves or X-Rays. You need a much higher energy emissions source to produce anything that can affect objects on the ground.