# Retaining Wall Responsibility



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

I'll try to keep this short and sweet. With an embankment between two neighbors, who is responsible for holding back the embankment if 1. the upper neighbor has a driveway on edge of the embankment and used a "cut and fill" method to build the driveweay. 2.The bottom neighbor has a current retaining wall but it only holds back up to the buried root collars of the trees on the embankment. 3. All the trees on the embankment have either been cut down or in the process of dying because their roots have been buried under fill used to make the upper driveway. 4. Most of the embankment is owned by the upper neighbor. 

As you can see from the photo, the root collar on the, now dead and cut down, white oak, the fill from the upper driveway is at least 18" above the root collar. Once these trees died, the lower earth gave way. 

I'm the lower neighbor and they are trying to get me to pay for half the total project to fix it. I'm saying that I'm only responsible to build a retainer up to the original grade which, I feel, is the height of the root collars of the trees.


----------



## TarheelTerp (Jan 6, 2009)

crowneagle said:


> With an embankment between two neighbors, who is responsible for holding back the embankment


I'm not a lawyer (and don't even play one on TV) but absent some other specific agreement the structure belongs to the land being retained.



> I'm the lower neighbor and they are trying to get me to pay for half the total project to fix it.


If they don't fix it... how will that impact your property?


----------



## NegativeTen (Mar 29, 2013)

Things like this are always a tricky situation. Legally, I have no idea who is obligated to pay for what.. but I would think the neighbor in this case is probably responsible. Cordially, I would offer to pay for half for the sake of keeping good relations with my neighbor.


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

My background is that I'm a semi-retired third generation mason. I have a big problem with splitting the cost 50-50 because most of the cost involves the upper part. If building up to the root collars cost $2000, then building up to the driveway may cost $7000. Building a 6' wall may require it to be up to 8 times stronger than building a 4' wall because the failure plane will be much bigger. Besides, here in Massachusetts, you go over 4' and you need a building permit and if you go over 6', then you need it to stamped by an engineer. I believe it to be foolish to pay for something that I don't think I am responsible for. Besides, I helped pay to take down that white oak last year and there is a much bigger red oak to the right that is not even close to the property line that they were trying to get me to help pay for as well (See Photo). As you can clearly see, the trees have died or are dying from having their roots buried by the fill for the driveway. They've had multiple contractors out to look at it and I truly believe they are just trying to find people that would agree with their position. We get along all right but I can feel the tension building. At some point, I'm going to refuse to do anything about it and let their driveway spill onto my property. I told them I'm willing to contribute towards a final solution but It's not going to be a 50-50 deal. I know a lot about walls but I guess it's always different when it's your own property you're talking about. I included another picture that clearly shows the fill that buried the trees that have since died and have been cut down. You also can see the attempt by a previous owner to use loose concrete blocks to hold back the filled driveway. They had the property line surveyed and I think they were bummed out the survey showed the trees are clearly their trees. None of the trees shown in these pictures are on my property. Another problem is that once the trees died, the roots started to let go of the soil making it seem like it's my problem more than it should be.


----------



## Daniel Holzman (Mar 10, 2009)

This is the type of problem that King Solomon might have worked on. Or maybe it is more of an Old Testament type of issue. While it is certainly interesting to hear about, I kind of doubt you are going to get any useful advice from a Do It Yourself Chat Forum. Unless of course you are interested in Do It Yourself Ways To Fix The Wall.


----------



## Fix'n it (Mar 12, 2012)

call the building department. looks like your neighbors property is spilling over onto yours.
that is their problem. let the city handle it.


----------



## wkearney99 (Apr 8, 2009)

Who put up the wall in the first place? Whose property is it located upon?

And, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the wall only aid the upper neighbor's use of the property? There's no 'benefit' gained by the lower neighbor, so why would they be expected to pay anything? 

Was the work properly permitted and inspected?

I'd be inclined to think you need to talk with your local permitting department to see what they have on file for it. Then talk with a local lawyer specializing in real estate issues like this. 

That you paid to deal with the mess they made of their own trees isn't the same thing as contributing to their wall. You had a vested interest in seeing the trees removed to avoid damage to your property. 

The way it comes across to me is they've probably got an improperly constructed wall, as well as driveway, quite likely done without proper permits, and they've made it worse. Other than the hassle of it collapsing onto your property I'm not sure where I'd see you bear any responsibility at all for it (given the limited info posted).


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

Let me explain a little further. It wasn't so long ago that both of these properties were owned by the same person and/or families for a long period of time. It was only recently that the properties were divided and sold separately. It's hard to have a problem with yourself. Only after the properties were segregated did it become a problem. There is a rubble wall on my side and I'm including a photo of that. I "WAS" willing to rebuild that wall. I was getting prepared to do it but the neighbor suggested that I wait because rebuilding that wall wouldn't exactly fix their problem because it only goes up to the root crowns. Even though that wall is substandard, it's not falling over. The white line roughly denotes the property line. 

I seriously doubt that the building department would have a file on this situation. When I bought the property, I tried researching past building permits and you'd think I was asking for their first born. "Oh, we don't have have that information currently available. If we have anything, it would be in storage somewhere. Yada, Yada Yada". 

Anyways, even though I have a lot of experience building walls, this problem is more a legal problem more than a technical one. This could get very expensive and like I said, I'm semi-retired. My position is that "the party that changes the grade becomes responsible for holding back that grade". They are trying to transfer a lot of that responsibility to me and I'm not happy about it. The following was quoted from the online "Legal Dictionary" for adjoining landowners. "Property owners have the right to grade or change the level of their land or to build foundations or embankments as long as proper precautions are taken, such as building a retaining wall to prevent soil from spilling upon adjoining land." 

I'm willing to contribute to the total project what it would cost me to rebuild the rubble wall on my land. I'm trying to be fair but they are squeezing me. Being semi-retired, I'm in no position to be volunteering for things just to keep the peace. I appreciate any and all opinions because in the end, I want to do what's fair without screwing myself big time.


----------



## wkearney99 (Apr 8, 2009)

You need to be talking to a real estate lawyer on this. If only just to get out in front of the possibility that the other neighbor is already doing just that. There's enough money and risks involved here that it would be unwise to proceed without assistance.

I'd be inclined to move that wall off your land. Get it out of your realm of responsibility. Either by moving the wall or selling them that sliver on which it's built.

Meanwhile it would seem smart for them to get equipment in to remove those tree stumps before any additional work gets done. That should have been done BEFORE the soil level was raised, and killed them.


----------



## NegativeTen (Mar 29, 2013)

crowneagle said:


> I'm willing to contribute to the total project what it would cost me to rebuild the rubble wall on my land. I'm trying to be fair but they are squeezing me. Being semi-retired, I'm in no position to be volunteering for things just to keep the peace. I appreciate any and all opinions because in the end, I want to do what's fair without screwing myself big time.


Your last couple of posts have put things into perspective for me. From the initial post, I was thinking we were talking about maybe a 3' retaining wall that would cost a few hundred dollars, not a project of this magnitude. It's not worth keeping a happy neighbor if they're trying to take you for a few grand. 

I would absolutely seek out professional advice, but I think most people here are in agreement that the burden should fall on your neighbor's shoulders.


----------



## wkearney99 (Apr 8, 2009)

My father was a real estate lawyer and used to handle this sort of complicated hassle (he's since passed). Subdivided properties with existing issues can be more complicated than you might think. All sorts of nonsense may or may not have been involved, you never know and it does honestly benefit from having an experienced real estate lawyer involved. Not just a lawyer than does other work, one that focuses on real estate in THIS particular legal jurisdiction. This kind of law can vary a fair bit from one jurisdiction to another. So local advice is best.

Eventually it comes down to someone wants to use property in a way that imposes upon the neighbor. That they "want to" doesn't mean they have the legal right to do so. Unless other factors are at play, like adverse possession and such. This is a problem that can leave people caught unaware, and you can end up losing property as a result. So I'd be very careful about improving that wall without a very clear (and documented) understanding of the ownership of the affected area FIRST. 

One scenario a neighbor went through involved a fence. They wanted to install a fence to help keep their puppy in their back yard. There were some shrubs a bit too close to where they wanted to install the fence. They asked the neighbor about trimming them (volunteering to pay a contractor to properly do the work). The neighbor was very uncooperative. So the property owner paid to have a boundary survey done. Lo and behold the survey revealed the shrubs were already ON HIS LAND. End result was he removed what were legally his shrubs and installed the fence as per county regulations. So instead of cooperating and keeping the shrubs in front of the fence, the neighbor lost them AND the 2' of property they'd unknowingly been occupying with them.


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

Just got off the phone with my attorney and it appears that my state law is vague as to responsibility of adjoining landowners. The responsibilities of adjoining landowners as stated in the legal dictionary mean very little in my case. She suggested that we work it out to avoid any litigation. In this case, since the damage was done before any us bought the properties, causation of the problems are hard to prove. Another option is not to do anything and wait until they lose their driveway onto my land. Hopefully, we can work things out. I appreciate all the views and opinions you all gave me.


----------



## wkearney99 (Apr 8, 2009)

Law may be vague, but there's no doubt been situations like this in your jurisdiction. It may be that your attorney just doesn't know about them. Dad ran into more than a few situations like that. Specific expertise goes a long way for stuff like this.

What's the realistic likelihood of getting the wall totally off your land? Cut back the soil so the wall is entirely off your property? Is the adjacent driveway going to prevent than from being possible? And do they have a fence on top preventing anyone from falling over it? Most places require a railing of sorts when you get above a certain height.

If anything you'd do well to legally clarify the ownership of the land on which the wall is situated. If just to avoid the neighbor coming back and making an adverse possession claim on it and taking ownership. It can and does happen.


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

Actually, that's one thing I tried to sell them on; putting the entire wall on their land,. But, I don't think they were sold on that idea. One problem I've been dealing with is they are married couple that can't even agree with each other; never mind with me. Every time I think we are on the same page, they change their minds. It makes it very difficult to bargain in good faith. The main sticking point seems to be the previous owners of their property changed the grade and they want me to share in the cost of holding back that higher grade. How would anybody feel if you built a small retaining wall and your neighbor just built the land up higher and that put too much stress on your wall? You'd be pissed to say the least. It's the principle of it. I know that doesn't mean nothing in court but it's unsettling none the less.


----------



## TarheelTerp (Jan 6, 2009)

crowneagle said:


> Actually, that's one thing I tried to sell them on; putting the entire wall on their land. But, I don't think they were sold on that idea.


Have you found a lawyer yet?


----------



## wkearney99 (Apr 8, 2009)

They bought the property that way, end of that argument. Then they deliberately raised it, one could argue improperly, and essentially ruined what was on your side. You've had enough and want an end to their shenanigans with it. You no longer want to put up with what could be argued as a potential threat to your property value. 

Now, how to get there from here. One would be to make sure any work going forward is properly engineered and permitted. Presumably it might be worth something to you to help this along, as in paying for some portion of it. I would not say half, as you get no benefit from the result of it being built, especially not since they wrecked how the old one had been fulfilling its purpose. I'd say it has to start with a properly engineered plan. And from that an estimate could be solicited. Then decide what amount of that you'd feel would be appropriate.

Otherwise your option is to raise a stink with the mess THEY made. This may lead to fines, and then they'd STILL need to go the plans/estimate route. Better for them to start playing the game properly while they can, not after they pay fines forcing them to do it.


----------



## Bondo (Dec 8, 2007)

crowneagle said:


> Actually, that's one thing I tried to sell them on; putting the entire wall on their land,. But, I don't think they were sold on that idea. One problem I've been dealing with is they are married couple that can't even agree with each other; never mind with me. Every time I think we are on the same page, they change their minds. It makes it very difficult to bargain in good faith. *The main sticking point seems to be the previous owners of their property changed the grade and they want me to share in the cost of holding back that higher grade. How would anybody feel if you built a small retaining wall and your neighbor just built the land up higher and that put too much stress on your wall? You'd be pissed to say the least. It's the principle of it.* I know that doesn't mean nothing in court but it's unsettling none the less.


Ayuh,.... In yer position, I think I'd just wait for it to collapse, 'n then tell 'em to get Their driveway outa yer yard,....

* It's the principle of it.

*


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

I just want to make one thing clear. They didn't raise the driveway. A previous owner did. From the pictures I've provided on this forum, is it obvious the trees were buried under fill? My whole argument hinges on that. One of my tenants is a state forester with a masters degree. I'm thinking of having him write a brief report and showing it to them. That would seem to carry more weight in this case than a civil engineer. 

One of the problems in this case is that this is just the tip of the iceberg for them. They have severe retaining problems farther up the hill. Multiple large oak trees were allowed to grow too close to other retaining walls and many of the walls themselves are substandard and falling over. Their driveway is too steep; thus washing out on a regular basis and undermining a retaining wall. See Photos. 

Plus, this driveway was originally installed so the original property owner could access land they don't even own. The state does. This is a total mess for them. The fact is they are really nice people and I like them a lot. But, the only people I might even consider falling on my sword for would be my own family and even some of them wouldn't deserve my martyrdom. 

One of the perennial problems in my area is that lake properties were built and maintained as an after thought. They, commonly, did the least amount possible to these homes. My own property has been a maintenance nightmare. It's taken me the last two years to get shoddy maintenance under control and my budget has been stretched to the breaking point. A laundry list would include no rain gutters-had to replace many feet of rim joists and gutters, Wiring that was spliced inside the walls without junction boxes-had to rewire the whole house, lot graded towards the house-had to dig up the foundation and repair and waterproof foundation and regrade the lot. The difference between I and my neighbors is that I've done all the work myself and they have had to hire people. That's the whole point of DIY.


----------



## PoleCat (Sep 2, 2009)

You ( they) can go after the previous owner too.


----------



## wkearney99 (Apr 8, 2009)

PoleCat said:


> You ( they) can go after the previous owner too.


Based on what? I doubt there's much to be done on that front. Caveat Emptor.

Meanwhile, I'm curious about what you mean by the driveway providing access to state land. That and what the rest of the grade problems are. 

The immediate problem is the wall, but might there be some other longer-term issues that could be solved more effectively? In ways that would help resolve your wall problem also?

The forester tenant could be helpful in this regard. If just to look at how the plants and trees are situated on the lot and what's going on with them.

I'm still inclined to think you need to find a real estate attorney with specific experience dealing with lots in that area and problems like that.


----------



## Fix'n it (Mar 12, 2012)

does your property fall under "permit" jurisdiction ?

if it does, get them involved !!! they know what the codes are. and most likely they will be unbiased = a fair resolution to both parties (but that doesn't mean that both/either/or will be happy with it).

is this situation close to, or away from the house/garage ?


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

I don't think polecat was being serious; especially since both of these properties were owned by the same man and he lost them in foreclosure. He's probably living in a cheap flat somewhere.


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

Well, the state owns the back of our properties in the form of wetlands and surrounding woods. Pretty much all of our yards infringe on the state land in the form of yards, fences, extended driveways, and small sheds, etc. MY own fence in my back yard is half on state land. My neighbors home has a driveway, small shed and boat storage on state land. From what I've been told by long time residents, the state doesn't care as long as we don't build any permanent structures. But, your comment brings up a very good point. They are trying to prevent the hill from caving in to have access to an area they don't even own. In a way, anything they do will add absolutely little value to their property. No wonder they are balking at spending money.


----------



## Fix'n it (Mar 12, 2012)

so. you don't want to answer my questions ?


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

Well, the state owns the back of our properties in the form of wetlands and surrounding woods. Pretty much all of our yards infringe on the state land in the form of yards, fences, extended driveways, and small sheds, etc. MY own fence in my back yard is half on state land. My neighbors home has a driveway, small shed and boat storage on state land. From what I've been told by long time residents, the state doesn't care as long as we don't build any permanent structures. But, your comment brings up a very good point. They are trying to prevent the hill from caving in to have access to an area they don't even own. In a way, anything they do will add absolutely little value to their property. No wonder they are balking at spending money.

As far s the question about "permit jurisdiction" , towns here have building inspectors. I really don't want to go down that route unless absolutely necessary. Some towns around here enforce building codes to the letter and others take a laissez fair attitude to them. This town falls into latter. Let's put it this way. I am confident that I know more than a small town building inspector when it comes to retaining walls. Beside, they usually don't get too involved in disputes such as this. Being a lake community, this neighborhood is riddled with issues such as this. Most of these lake cottages were built in the 1950's as weekend getaways and summer residences. It's only been within the last 15-20 years that people turned them into full time homes. I doubt the town would want to open up a can of worms by cracking down on all these property issues. Then, all of a sudden, you've got people filing for property tax abatements because of perceived reduction in home values.


----------



## wkearney99 (Apr 8, 2009)

The issue isn't ever about knowing "more" than the inspectors. The issue is knowing what the inspectors will or won't take issue with. When it's your work you want approved it's important to know what they will or won't notice. When it's someone else's screwups you absolutely want to know what they'll notice.

Framing a complaint in a way that helps your goal is assisted by knowing how the inspectors would approach it. As in, it's better to complain knowing their specific hot-button issues and heavily focus on those. Not just going in blind. Not saying you should take that step now. It's one of many possible bargaining chips to consider.

The state lands and wetlands issue is another hot button. Start screwing around with loosening soil and raising the possibility of increased runoff and the wetlands folks are likely to get their shorts in a bunch too. Depending on how you want the situation to play out this is a powerful card to play (or merely raise the spectre of it...) As in, if your neighbors aren't willing to fix it to your liking, are they willing to suffer the possibility of MUCH larger expenses of full environmental compliance costs?

As for town gov't 'cans or worms' that too can be exploited. As in, help me solve this problem now and simply. Otherwise it would appear there are others having similar problems and I'll just have to get their help in raising awareness... One lone guy asking for help is a lot less trouble than a mob of villagers with pitchforks...

These scenarios, again, are why having a knowledgeable attorney on your side, early in the game, is valuable. There are a lot of ways to lean on the various hot buttons. But how to safely play those cards definitely benefits from local counsel. Remember there are always jurisdictions above their heads (state & federal). 

Do not overthink the larger issues, pay someone else to consider those. What you want is your problem solved to your satisfaction. The rest of the situations aren't your issue here and now. Sure, they may be important, for any number of reasons, but you don't want to lose yourself in worrying about them. At least not until your problem gets solved first.

Me, I'd wonder what it would really take to "solve" the whole grading situation on their property. In a way that would take it out of ever becoming your concern again. Just how much regrading would it take? Assuming it could just 'get done' without navigating the whole environmental and permitting process. Because presenting that in a cooperative "let's do it now before things get really complicated" kind of way might be a route to consider.


----------



## ddawg16 (Aug 15, 2011)

I have to agree with Daniel H....we are not the ones to be asking on this....it certainly is an interesting situation and would like to see updates....but...don't take any advice from us....as you already found out from your lawyer...it's a vague area.....


----------



## Canarywood1 (May 5, 2012)

Bondo said:


> Ayuh,.... In yer position, I think I'd just wait for it to collapse, 'n then tell 'em to get Their driveway outa yer yard,....
> 
> *It's the principle of it.*


 
I'd agree with what Bondo said,wash your hands of it until it collapses in your driveway.


----------



## PoleCat (Sep 2, 2009)

crowneagle said:


> I don't think polecat was being serious; especially since both of these properties were owned by the same man and he lost them in foreclosure. He's probably living in a cheap flat somewhere.


It can be done in the state of Indiana. If it was a foreclosure then the bank was the owner.


----------



## Fix'n it (Mar 12, 2012)

when this caves in. will it be a real issue for you, as far as using your property goes ?
in other words, its caves in, 1. on your driveway. or 2. on your yard, that is away from the house/garage/sheds/whatever ?

1 = you gotta do something.
2 = forget about it. 

its their issue. don't let them make it YOUR issue.


----------



## Fix'n it (Mar 12, 2012)

how about a further back pic ?


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

I really appreciate everyone hanging in there with me on this thread. It really means a lot to have a sounding board when it comes to all these issues. 

I was thinking about it further last night. These are my facts. I really can't afford an expensive solution to this; at least until I sell my other house in a few years. I am unable to obtain any further financing and I will not have access to my retirement account for another 2.5 yrs. My attorney is reasonable and she always tries to steer me in the direction that would be the most economical. Therefore, litigation would be my last resort. Getting a court involved is not a viable option right now. 

The second major issue is that I have no idea what my neighbors official stance is on this. I've laid my case to them why I don't think I'm 50% responsible for this; including the raised grade on their property and that most of the issues are not even on my land. My problem is that they haven't laid out their case as to why I need to pay more. Until they lay out their case, this is dead in the water. I refuse to move forward until they show their hand. In poker, nobody gets the pot until they show their hand. That's how gunfights started in the old west. 

In the meantime, I'm going to document everything; including photos that include elevations and wide angle shots showing the whole picture. Actually, I'm kind of a wetlands specialist; considering I was on the board of directors for a local Watershed Association. I will have to walk the land and see if there are any violations. But, from the top of my head, I don't think there is anything serious going on there because their land is mainly uphill from the wetlands. After taking a look at the state wetlands map, their land is a good 100+ ft from a woodland swamp. However, I will explore this further. 

Since I've convinced them to put this to bed for the winter, nothing is going to be done until next spring. So, if this thread stops at some point, I will definitely start it up again next spring. You have to admit, issues such as this are interesting. I just wish I wasn't one of the parties involved.


----------



## Fix'n it (Mar 12, 2012)

i find this thread interesting. i also have a neighbor that is infringing on my property.
some day, i am going to sic the building dep on him. he will then have to remove 5' of a new deck he just built.


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

Unfortunately, a lot of politicians are attorneys. They have no incentive to legislate a clear set of guidelines. Instead, it gets all sticky by going to court and many times, nobody wins.


----------



## wkearney99 (Apr 8, 2009)

crowneagle said:


> Unfortunately, a lot of politicians are attorneys. They have no incentive to legislate a clear set of guidelines. Instead, it gets all sticky by going to court and many times, nobody wins.


Which means you should do, what? Nothing? This is how bad laws get made and stay un-amended. Make noise and things change, do nothing and get rolled over. 

Honestly, in your situation, with how you've described it, you would be much better off having effective representation and the resulting plan.


----------



## Fix'n it (Mar 12, 2012)

imo i see no need for a lawyer. its "cut-n-dried" = your stuff is falling on my stuff = get it off !


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

It's a sue happy world we live in. I tend to be in the camp that suing is a last resort. Bedsides, every state is different and you cannot make a blanket statement that a lawyer is needed. I haven't even exhausted all my negotiations. Besides, if they don't favorably respond to my attempts at negotiation, then I can always, as others have said, choose to do nothing and let nature takes it's course. Besides, I could use some extra fill and it would be delivered right to my front door.


----------



## wkearney99 (Apr 8, 2009)

It's not about suing anyone! It's about understanding just what the true implications are of your situation and how to see that YOUR interests are best handled. I'm only going on 20+ years of exposure to someone that handled screwy real estate situations professionally. Quite often the nonsense could have been avoided had people taken the time to understand the implications of what mishandling their situations would entail.

The law is not nature. It will not "take it's course". But, hey, you've convinced yourself you know better. Good luck.


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

Your point is well taken. But, a lot depends what state you are in. In my state, I've had personal experience seeing attorneys on both sides make money and the clients still aren't happy. My attorney, like yourself, is a child of an attorney father. She's been in the field for a very long time. I don't take her word as bible but I trust her judgement very much. If she thinks we should work it out, then that is what I'm going to try to do. She's been my attorney 20 years and she has never steered me wrong.


----------



## TarheelTerp (Jan 6, 2009)

crowneagle said:


> If she thinks we should work it out, then that is what I'm going to try to do. She's been my attorney 20 years and she has never steered me wrong.


Do so with a clear understanding of what the law there says the foul lines are. Have (find) an attorney who knows that LOCAL information is to advise you.


----------



## Fix'n it (Mar 12, 2012)

i think some of you guys are over thinking this. 

its some dirt and rocks.
its not a tree that is going to fall on someones house. 

call the building dept and let them handle it. 
your neighbors are trying to sucker you.


----------



## crowneagle (Sep 5, 2013)

Fix'n it said:


> i think some of you guys are over thinking this.
> 
> its some dirt and rocks.
> its not a tree that is going to fall on someones house.
> ...



Actually, there is a tree involved that might fall on my house. The very big red oak, as shown in one of the pictures, might fall on my house. My neighbor has already stated to me that he is taking that down next spring. He has been advised by a contractor that removing the stump might damage my home because of the large spreading roots. 

This is how screwed up this situation is. They came to me and stated that taking the tree down would cost $800 and removing some branches that overhung my house would cost $500. They decided to just trim the branches. I commented that just taking the tree down made more financial sense. The wife stated the tree was holding back the soil. Now, that tree looks like it's going to cost them $500 more than it should have. I think they were hoping that I chip in on that tree cost. I didn't bite at it because the tree isn't anywhere near my property line. I told him when he removes the stump, as I have done many times before, we can dig up and expose the roots and cut them with a chain saw or an ax. I did that on a retaining wall job about five years ago for a silver maple that was twice as big as this red oak. 

They say ignorance is bliss. I beg to differ. These people's ignorance is driving them to insanity and making them make poor decisions. By this time next year, this couple would have hired tree contractors no less than three times in a two year period and they still will have many monster oaks threatening their house and adjacent structures. This is freakin New England. Trees get big. I have no idea why people allow such trees to grow so close to their homes or even their neighbors homes. I removed a very large tree near my primary residence a few years ago. My neighbor, after the fact, said she would have helped pay for removing it. I'm of the mind that it was my tree and my responsibility and I didn't mind footing the entire cost. Like "Judge Joe Brown" famously says. "Take care of your own business".


----------



## wkearney99 (Apr 8, 2009)

TarheelTerp said:


> Do so with a clear understanding of what the law there says the foul lines are. Have (find) an attorney who knows that LOCAL information is to advise you.


This was my point. Just any old attorney is not the same as one that specifically works in a given field, known for having deep understanding of how to effectively somewhat complex situations like this. I've got friends that are fantastic at their given specialties. And, what's better, is they know there are others that practice in ones outside theirs. The trick is in finding the ones that know how to network.

I'd never expect my friend that does PI work to know real estate, hell, I know more about it and I'm not even a lawyer. But if I'm ever jammed up I know he'll get the first call. Same thing for contract, estates, benefits and the rest. 

I wish you luck dealing with their nonsense.


----------

