What is this land survey telling me?

SV reX said:

I hate to say this openly, but there is very little she can do once the trees are cut down. 
 

I owned a property once. Really loved the little wooded area on one side. The builder on the next lot bulldozed them down without my permission. He was almost 50' onto my property. I was furious. 
 

The reality was there was very little I could do. The trees were gone. I could have sued him (and probably won some damages), but the trees were still gone. And the truth was, I had no desire to go through the aggravation of dragging him into court. So, he got away with it. 
 

You are on much safer ground. 

You would be absolutely shocked how much money they would have been liable for had you sued. On the order of Tens of thousands of dollars per mature tree. I read one case where an entire row of mature trees was removed illegally and the guilty party paid over $200k to replant new mature trees. The judgement was such that the victim could have requested cash or trees and they requested trees. 

In reply to mtn :

The issue was that I didn't take the time to look at the whole the survey before I asked.  The rest is a side story that I said in the original post was probably already resolved.

Once I'd taken my measurements, I went there with the intention of explaining the problem, my rights, and a willingness to work with her to resolve the issue so everybody was reasonably happy - there was no good reason that couldn't happen. She was not at all interested in a compromise.  At that point a lot of people would have said berkeley you, and cut them down just to piss her off. I didn't do that.

After reading all this it sounds like Mr Peabody is trying to take the high road , 

But it tells me if I ever buy a property out in the country I will get a land survey and make sure the "Corners" are well known.  

In reply to californiamilleghia :

It's weird, I think people think that since it's the country and the lots/acerage are big that no one will notice. Literally every single person that moves in up here and never lived in the country assumes it's all theirs, frustrating for those of us here really

Mr Peabody. I'm not sure of the laws in Ontario so just an FYI here. Some jurisdictions in the US have tree ordinances that specifically address trees within a specified distance of a property line as "boundary  trees". Where I live these can't be removed even if they are on your side without additional permitting steps that include input from adjoining neighbors. You may want to check to see if your jurisdiction does this too.

dculberson said:

SV reX said:

I hate to say this openly, but there is very little she can do once the trees are cut down. 
 

I owned a property once. Really loved the little wooded area on one side. The builder on the next lot bulldozed them down without my permission. He was almost 50' onto my property. I was furious. 
 

The reality was there was very little I could do. The trees were gone. I could have sued him (and probably won some damages), but the trees were still gone. And the truth was, I had no desire to go through the aggravation of dragging him into court. So, he got away with it. 
 

You are on much safer ground. 

You would be absolutely shocked how much money they would have been liable for had you sued. On the order of Tens of thousands of dollars per mature tree. I read one case where an entire row of mature trees was removed illegally and the guilty party paid over $200k to replant new mature trees. The judgement was such that the victim could have requested cash or trees and they requested trees. 

I'm sure that's true in Columbus OH. 
 

Not the case in Americus GA. Especially when the builder is the mayor's brother. 
 

You're right, but things vary a lot by location. 

In reply to Mr. Peabody :

Would there be an opportunity here for you to sell here the extra land and reduce your buddy's leased area? Would she be willing or able to cough up the value of an acre of land in your area?

You tried the reasonable approach and she doesn't seem interested in being reasonable.

I'd cut the trees so that the buddy who leases from you is being looked after and gets what he's paying for.

She failed to do her due diligence and now she's sore that things aren't what she thought. If she isn't willing to compromise, that's on her.  You can't please all of the people all of the time, so in this instance, please the bloke who's paying you money.

itsarebuild said:

Mr Peabody. I'm not sure of the laws in Ontario so just an FYI here. Some jurisdictions in the US have tree ordinances that specifically address trees within a specified distance of a property line as "boundary  trees". Where I live these can't be removed even if they are on your side without additional permitting steps that include input from adjoining neighbors. You may want to check to see if your jurisdiction does this too.

I looked into that here (Ontario) after a new neighbour in a brand new house that had all the mature trees cut to build it complained about the 100+ year old walnut tree in the back corner of our property and the worries he had about a nut falling on his 3 year old daughter (think of the children!). Boundary trees exist here but the base of the tree needs to be on the property line, at that point neither neighbour can do anything even on their side without the permission of the other. However, a tree with the base on one side of a property line but overhanging it belongs to the property it is on, the neighbour that does not own it though can trim any branches (or roots if they are digging) on their side up to the property line even to the detriment of the tree (seems a little screwed up).

So does this mean I can send my 2.0 out with a metal detector to find the corner rebar markers on the property line? Partly because I'm curious if the pins are even there, and partly because it would keep him entertained for a while. 

In reply to daeman :

You, my friend, are the voice of reason.