So I've been reading up on adverse possession, and I get that we have a lot of common law artifacts in our laws. But why does this one stay around. I mean, what problem does it solve? The only answer I can think of, is to have yet another reason to hire a lawyer.
I understand that property lines sometimes are disputed, and sometimes there are grey areas, clerical mistakes, whatnot. But adverse possession is mostly about gaining title to property you know isn't yours. I just don't see that as a solution to any real problem.
And while reading about it, I see where in some states if you have Title Insurance one can't adversely possess land. WTF is that? Somehow buying a product from a private company can make it so someone can't use a law against you? I'm all for evening out the whole mess and giving property owners at least some tool to use against squatters, but I just don't see how that follows. It's like listening to kids try to explain the very arbitrary rules to a game they've just made up. Even the requirement that the adverse possessor must pay taxes on the land during the time the land was adversely possessed, isn't actually followed.
I just don't get the need. Maybe someone can explain.
I understand that property lines sometimes are disputed, and sometimes there are grey areas, clerical mistakes, whatnot. But adverse possession is mostly about gaining title to property you know isn't yours. I just don't see that as a solution to any real problem.
And while reading about it, I see where in some states if you have Title Insurance one can't adversely possess land. WTF is that? Somehow buying a product from a private company can make it so someone can't use a law against you? I'm all for evening out the whole mess and giving property owners at least some tool to use against squatters, but I just don't see how that follows. It's like listening to kids try to explain the very arbitrary rules to a game they've just made up. Even the requirement that the adverse possessor must pay taxes on the land during the time the land was adversely possessed, isn't actually followed.
I just don't get the need. Maybe someone can explain.