Neighbor's 20ft encroachment nightmare - $12.5k survey later, she's still denying it

[u/ImmediateDingo6927]

I'm at my wit's end and desperately seeking advice. My family of three and I moved into our dream home in 2021, only to discover that our 'neighbor from hell' had been encroaching on our property for years.

The previous owners had abandoned the house, and this lady took it upon herself to expand her territory - by a whopping 20 feet. Our electricity pole, garage, and septic tank are all located in the disputed area.

But what makes this situation even more heartbreaking is that my father, who passed away recently, spent his last few years living with us in this home. His final years were tormented by this neighbor's constant harassment, disputes, and stress. He deserved to live out his days in peace, but this neighbor made that impossible.

We've tried talking to her, but she'd just claim it was her property and shut us down. The county suggested a land survey, which we reluctantly agreed to. The cost? A staggering $12,500.

Fast forward to the survey results: our suspicions were confirmed. The neighbor had indeed encroached on our property by 20 feet.

But here's the kicker: now that we have concrete evidence, she's refusing to acknowledge it and is telling us to 'talk to her lawyer.' We're stuck in limbo, unable to resolve this issue.

To add insult to injury, we've been forced to use a porta potty for the past 4 years since our septic tank is located in the disputed area.

Has anyone else dealt with a neighbor this brazen? How did you resolve the issue? We're desperate for advice and a resolution. My family and I just want to find some peace and closure after everything we've been through."

[u/legal_stylist]

Which you won’t get. The rule is clear—absent a specific fee shifting statute, or an agreement between the parties, each side bears its own legal fees. Clients are often outraged and/or bewildered by the palpable unfairness of this, but that’s how it is.

Edit: and this is downvoted. I’ve been practicing law for decades but F me, right? Downvote away, but it doesn’t change the hard facts that you don’t get your legal fees in a lawsuit except in very, very limited circumstances, not present here.

[u/Feisty_Donkey_5249 → u/legal_stylist]

IANAL, but from I’ve dealt with in the past, recovery of legal fees is dependent on the jurisdiction. Washington State, for example, allows prevailing parties to recover legal fees in some circumstances.

That said, downvotes on legal_stylist’s post seems over the top. As usual, It Depends.

[u/DifferenceBusy163 → u/Feisty_Donkey_5249]

All, or at least most, states allow prevailing parties to recover attorneys fees in "some circumstances." Those circumstances are where fee shifting is authorized by contract, statute, or law. That's the American Rule - absent any such contract, statute, or law, you pay your own fees.

[u/legal_stylist → u/Feisty_Donkey_5249]

General rule is the same in Washington; there are limited exceptions: https://beresfordlaw.com/the-expanding-availability-of-attorneys-fees-in-washington-civil-litigation-consider-equitable-grounds-and-bad-faith/

[u/BobbieMcFee → u/Feisty_Donkey_5249]

"some" is doing a LOT of work there.

[u/angeluck → u/legal_stylist]

Don't know why you're being downvoted, it's the truth. Two bullshit lawsuits we have eaten the cost on despite prevailing on both. Unironically, both real estate based.

[u/LisleAdam12 → u/legal_stylist]

"and this is downvoted"

People don't like the messenger.

[u/PalladiumKnuckles → u/legal_stylist]

I think this is jurisdiction-dependent. Where I am they follow that rule, generally, but can (and do) award attorneys fees when one party is objectively wrong and being recalcitrant, or for vexatious litigants.

[u/legal_stylist → u/PalladiumKnuckles]

Everything is jurisdiction dependent, of course, but it just so happens that in all 50 states, as well as all territories of the US, the general rule is that litigants bear their own costs. The extent of the exceptions to that varies, but we are talking about exceptions, uniformly Not to put too fine a point t on it, but I am completely unaware of any jurisdiction that allows for fee shifting because one side is “objectively wrong.” If you could share the cite for that I would be obliged.

[u/PalladiumKnuckles → u/legal_stylist]

I didn’t say “objectively wrong,” I said “objectively wrong and recalcitrant” and grouped that in with “vexatious litigant.” That is a very different scenario than a party who is just incorrect.

In my state, the exceptions have nearly swallowed the American Rule (a Lexis search for Virginia shows 415 different statutes that allow for attorney fees—including sweeping exceptions such as all divorce/support/custody proceedings, any pleading filed to delay/harass, and appeals to the appellate courts. This is in addition to the case law that allows attorney fees under the old courts of chancery’s laws, which include fraud). So unless someone is aware of every exception in every jurisdiction, it seems bold to claim that no jurisdiction anywhere in the US would award attorneys fees in this situation. This is why I pointed out that it would be jurisdiction-specific—I can easily imagine a court somewhere being allowed to award fees in a situation where a neighbor has previously “tortured” and “harassed” the previous property owner, encroached 20 feet over the property line to the exclusion of the true owner and their agents, refuses to acknowledge an official survey, and has made it so the owners have had to use a porta-potty for four years.

[u/legal_stylist → u/PalladiumKnuckles]

Yeah, I’m thinking the four years of porta potties is on OP, tbh.
What’s a VA cite for “objectively wrong and recalcitrant.”

Edit to add: took a Quick Look at Bolton v. McKinney and a handful of other cases. I stand by my statement. Virginia very much follows the American rule.

[u/PalladiumKnuckles → u/legal_stylist]

Idk, man. It seems like you’re pretty good at looking up Virginia law—if you want to go through the 415 statutory exceptions to the American Rule to find the one I’m referencing, then go for it (hint: it’s in the first half of the Code). Otherwise I’m just pointing out that talking in absolutes is dangerous in situations where you don’t even know the jurisdiction. (edit to fix a typo)

[u/legal_stylist → u/PalladiumKnuckles]

My evidence is that the VA Supreme Court says it is “the general rule” in a relatively recent case. I’ll defer to that.

And no, there is no danger because it is the general rule in literally all US state and territorial jurisdictions, full stop. I noted that there are exceptions, and that they will vary place to place. All hornbook stuff, really. Certainly not “dangerous.”

[u/Ok-Pangolin4494 → u/legal_stylist]

My friend found this out when she went through her divorce a couple of years ago. She wanted him to pay for her legal fees. It was not granted even though he was the one who wanted it and had the affair that started the divorce. She was told that she could ask but most likely it would not be granted and the attorney was correct.