How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask wingrovebuyer Your Own Question
wingrovebuyer
wingrovebuyer, Senior Solicitor
Category: Property Law
Satisfied Customers: 737
Experience:  Bachelor of Laws (Honours); PG Diploma in Law; Member of ALA; 9 years' experience
22732369
Type Your Property Law Question Here...
wingrovebuyer is online now

Can a homeowner acquire part of their neighbours property through

Resolved Question:

Can a homeowner acquire part of their neighbours property through adverse possession as a result of the previous homeowners tenants use of that property assuming the limitation period has been successfully completed?
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Property Law
Expert:  wingrovebuyer replied 1 year ago.
Hello. Yes, adverse occupation by a tenant would benefit his landlord, as the landlord has been in receipt of the rents and profits. For example, the period for unregistered land is 12 years (10 for registered land). If the homeowner occupied the land with their own land for (say) 4 years, then let the house to a tenant who occupied the house and extra land for (say) 4 years, then the homeowner moved back in and has occupied for a further 5 years, then cumulatively they have had the required length of occupation. Best, WB
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Thanks. It's a little difficult to explain.....
Mr A owns a house that he bought from Mr B.
While he owned it Mr B rented the house to Mr C.
Mr C's tenancy ended when Mr B sold the house to Mr A.
So, is Mr A allowed to make an adverse possession claim based on Mr C's use of a third party's property?It's my understanding that the precedent was set in Adams v Batt that any land acquired by a tenant is enured for the benefit of the landlord at the time the tenancy came to an end. Thus, in my example, because Mr A wasn't the landlord at the time the tenancy came to an end he is not able to make a claim.Is that the case?
Expert:  wingrovebuyer replied 1 year ago.
Hello. Following your example, A can use C's use of the land as the basis of adverse possession. This is because the benefit passed to B, C's landlord, and from B to A when he bought the land. This is because as C's landlord, B was in receipt of the rents and profits of the house and land. Best, WB.
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
The following is copied from a website. Doesn't it contradict what you are saying?Adams v Batt, 11 May, 2001 (High Court).
In this case, the claimant was claiming adverse possession under the presumption in Kingsmill v Millard [1855] 11 Exch 313, that where a tenant encroaches on a third party's land, that encroachment enures for the benefit of the tenant's landlord, in the absence of evidence of contrary intention.
The High Court declined to decide on whether the scope of the Kingsmill presumption should be qualified but decided that not only did the tenant not have the requisite intention to possess the land to establish adverse possession, but that the operation of the presumption would have meant that any land acquired would have enured for the benefit of the landlord at the time the tenancy came to an end. The claimant had not been the landlord then and therefore had no claim.
Expert:  wingrovebuyer replied 1 year ago.
No, there is no contradiction. The case decided that the land would be owned by the landlord at the time. My understanding of your question is that the qualifying period arose after B took possession back from C. B can use C's use and occupation of the land to add to his own use and occupation, as can A (if it is required) to reach the relevant 10 or 12 year period. As above, this is because B was in receipt of the rents and profits. If the relevant time period arose whilst C was tenant, then the new title (by adverse possession) would arise in favour of B, as landlord. For A to now claim ownership, B would have to have included his interest in the possessed land in the conveyance of the property. Please leave a rating. Best,WB
wingrovebuyer and other Property Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Thanks.