The letter was really astonishingly inept, wasn’t it?
Leaving aside the insults, the faulty logic:
You will not even notice the additional traffic and changes, BUT we can’t agree not to widen, pave, or light it–things which we would definitely notice!-- because the town might make us. (And WHY would the town make you? Because the ROW , instead of being a long driveway for one house is now a road serving TWO houses! Duh!)
You should have expected the lot to be divided. NO, because we specified in our earlier agreement that it was for ONE HOUSE only. Do you think that was an accident?
My clients are taking all of the risk and annoyance. Well, yes, as was pointed out above, this is wholly THEIR venture, not something we have any interest in at all!
And on.
I immediately looked up his law school, LOL. University of Maine. I’m sure that every school has its duds.
Did you and your neighbors each use attorneys last time? Is theirs the same one as before? Not that it matters…
Please, just have your attorney tell them to cease and desist with correspondence on this matter. It is closed.
As you said “Yes” to the original request, they now expect you to say “Yes” to every subsequent request (now more a demand). Say “Yes” again, and you will be subject to more and more demands down the road (pun intended). Nip it in the bud and, as the saying goes, “Just say no.”
Well, sometimes it’s hard to judge lawyers. The two jerks we had issues with started out very nice and seemed competent. I wonder if online reviews are helpful?
“You should have expected the lot to be divided. No…”
If I understand correctly, they bought a four acre lot. Zoning allows two acre lots. It doesn’t necessarily follow anyone buying four acre and larger lots has a legal right to subdivide. Most neighborhoods, with which I’m familiar, require getting some kind of variance to do this.
They should have understood this when they bought their property, and made an agreement with you at that point in time for a future division if it was a deal breaker for them. They never had any right to subdivide and that really isn’t your problem.
Best bet though… when (not if) you refuse permission, and they sell, they will advertise the property with “potential building lot”
Once I bid on a house with a “building lot” My lawyer presented an offer which excluded the building lot and deducted the sellers estimate of its value. Since I was the only potential buyer and they really wanted to sell, they went ahead and did all the testing to get lot approved. It did not pass.
Thanks for clarifying. Just reread the original post here. If the new neighbors didn’t check in advance to see if they could subdivide and build, oh well, caveat emptor.
It sounds like the second lot has no street frontage, which would make it unbuildable without a change to the easement.
ETA: My husband and I have a development company. We just refused to sell the next door neighbors of one of our houses a tiny, weedy sliver of land attached to one of our homes because it would give the neighbor sufficient frontage to split off a second buildable lot.
And if Consolation agrees to the change to easement, there is nothing to keep the neighbors from selling their house lot (before it has a house in the backyard with shared driveway)…and then selling the building lot and avoiding all those issues of aggravation and risk of building new home and loss of privacy. Consolation has no control over what gets built. I hope multi-family units or home businesses aren’t allowed.
^Consolation would also have no control over house placement, landscaping, security lighting, noise, traffic and the basic civility of the new neighbor.
Sometimes, you do have future feedback, via city or town building approval processes and density considerations, costs of revamping city water/sewer, etc, if it exceeds present street capacity. But it’s lengthy, uncertain, and can require an attorney to clarify laws and press your rights. My pocket (city) neighborhood fought two proposed projects. But the closest neighbor to those fronted all costs and did the admin tracking. Better to nip it now.
The bottom line is, this doesn’t serve you. Not now and possibly if/when you wish to sell your own home.
Being nice and helpful to neighbors isn’t always being nice and helpful to your own interests.
Consolation, remind your H of people who sold various land parts or deals to fracking companies and were later poisoned out of their own homes. A bit dramatic, but it seems to go along with taking money for something you hope won’t come back to bite you later. You can’t control that bite!
Basically, our lot is a 3 acre rectangle on the road. The four acre lot that our neighbor carved off sits directly behind us, and has no road frontage except through the easement, or if they can get access from the private road. If they could do that, the easement would continue to serve the existing house and the new back lot would not use it.
So, yes, there is a possibility that access through the private road could be obtained, but that would require satisfying seven different property owners and their lenders.
It sounds like they could cry necessity if they somehow get the property subdivided. But I am not a land use attorney practicing in your state; your lawyer would be the best source to confirm that.
We have a legal easement agreement. They bought the property with it in place. I cannot imagine that they could FORCE us to change it. It’s not like a private citizen can use eminent domain. They have a fully functioning property with utilities. If they have now decided they can’t or don’t want to afford it, they can sell it, like any other property owner.
There is no “necessity” to subdivide their lot. If they want access, they have the option of buying it from someone, but you can’t force someone to sell you their land.
