Well, I looked at the property today (using Google Earth). BevAngel isn't the only one who knows how to dig stuff up.

Unfortunately, the image is from 2003, so the new house doesn't show up. But from the existing houses on the road and the fact that we are talking five acre lots, it looks like there would have been only two adjacent unbuilt lots on that side of the street. One is pretty flat, and the other does indeed have ravines.

So my question is, what did the original survey show? Kindell says she got a copy of it up front. Subdivision surveys typically have legal descriptions and/or lot numbers on them. If this one had lot or tract numbers, and the real estate listing mentioned the (correct) lot or tract number, which they typically do, everyone, including the buyers should have spotted the error.

Besides the suing of an innocent party, what bothers me in all this is the OP's claim that everyone is at fault, except the buyers. Unless that survey did not show the roads or any lot numbers, it should have been obvious that there was some sort of serious discrepancy.

There is another clue that someone should have spotted, if Google is correct. By the way the mailing addresses increment, according to Google Earth (not always correct), the property is located down the street from the built on lot adjacent to the ravined lot. Looking at the mail boxes for the existing houses should have at least triggered some sort of curiosity.

"There is another clue that someone should have spotted, if Google is correct. By the way the mailing addresses increment, according to Google Earth (not always correct), the property is located down the street from the built on lot adjacent to the ravined lot. Looking at the mail boxes for the existing houses should have at least triggered some sort of curiosity. '

Very seldom are the street numbers on a plat or survey.. Subdivisions are platted and then when the first house is built the county assigns a number.

Very seldom are the street numbers on a plat or survey.. Subdivisions are platted and then when the first house is built the county assigns a number.

True, but that's not the point at all. There were existing mailboxes on the street, and therefore a numbering scheme, at least as far back as 2003, probably much earlier. At some point, the OP got a house number. It should have been obvious that the number didn't follow the normal sequence on the street, which really should have raised a red flag.

Real estate listings for unimproved property sometimes include the street number, if it has been assigned. If the listing included the street number, and it didn't match the existing sequence, then that should have been an earlier red flag.

shoulda, coulda, woulda

An address has nothing to do with the legal description of a piece of land. You do not buy an address! In Texas it is the builder that requests the address, from either the power company, the 911 service providers or the city. The address is spray painted on a piece of wood until construction is complete.

With the excitement of construction, how many people do you know that would do an analysis of the address to make sure it is in the right sequence? Most people just accept it as fact, as does the builder, the banker, etc.

In subdivisions with acreage lots, the address scheme can, and does, skip several numbers due to the size of the lots and if the owners have combined several lots into one composite lot.

Again the Op relied on so called professionals for guidance and got screwed.

What really sucks is that the OP MUST now sue, or be sued, by the land owner so that a judgement and damages are awarded. Then the OP can sue the professionals that she paid to help and protect her for her losses and damages.

What really sucks is that the OP MUST now sue, or be sued, by the land owner so that a judgement and damages are awarded. Then the OP can sue the professionals that she paid to help and protect her for her losses and damages.

Read the thread. She has already filed suit against everyone remotely involved.

"True, but that's not the point at all. There were existing mailboxes on the street, and therefore a numbering scheme, at least as far back as 2003, probably much earlier. At some point, the OP got a house number. It should have been obvious that the number didn't follow the normal sequence on the street, which really should have raised a red flag.

Real estate listings for unimproved property sometimes include the street number, if it has been assigned. If the listing included the street number, and it didn't match the existing sequence, then that should have been an earlier red flag.:

Picking on these details has no bearing on the state of things now. I had no address until 3 months after my own house was finished. No mail boxes in our area and most homes do not have numbers on the homes.

Well the addresses on the street are not in sequence nor are the plot numbers. The street is numbered quite strangely. We did receive a survey, and it shows no steep grades on the property, even though it is the survey for the correct lot. And to make it clear, when this first started we called everyone involved to work something out. The land owners filed suit against all parties and we filed a counter claim and cross claim. There are 6 parties involved and the only way to work this out was to name all parties. The land owners are not against us nor are we against them. We all have our eyes on the responsible parties. Some things we decide may tick them off and some things they decide tick us off, but in the end we are all looking for the same out come. They are willing to sell the land, we want the land, and we all agree we should be compensated by the other parties. The other parties are making it quite difficult because they won't give the land owners what they want for the land, nor are they willing to make us whole for our damages. That is where the problem lies. I know it seems crazy that this could happen and no one catch it, but there were about 30 people that could have caught the problem and not one did. That should show how confusing it all was. Knowing what we know now, we can clearly see which property is ours, but it wasn't that easy a year ago.

I also agree that the only innocent party here is the land owners and hope that
they will atleast recoup the money they are having to expend in legal fees .
Kindell , what do you plan to do with the lot you actually own ? Are you expecting somebody else to pay for lot you built on and keep the other lot
too ? I think there was alot of blame to go around and someone should have
caught it . Have you , the builder and the real estate agent considered splitting the damages ? For instance - if you owe 100k for the lot and you sell your lot for 50k , then you could each chip in 1/3 of the other 50k . That would seem the fairest quickest way to settle the dispute . Especially for
you since you are getting the benefit of a much nicer , more valuable lot than
you paid for . I agree the land owners should be compensated but I don't
understand why you should profit from not knowing which property you
purchased .

We did receive a survey, and it shows no steep grades on the property, even though it is the survey for the correct lot.

It wouldn't expect it to show any. You would have received a boundary survey. They usually don't show elevations.

But what about the listing? Did it list the lot/tract number, and were there lot/tract numbers on that survey?

Kindell, here's one more person who thinks you're doing everything you should and I hope you can get the situation resolved sooner rather than later.

Mistakes happen. Both the sellers and buyers of the land relied on professionals. Those professionals let them both down. Those professionals have liability insurance and/or guarantee bonds to stay licensed, and in the event of a 1 in a million mistake (like this one), that the insurance company uses the money they've received in premiums to make the damaged parties (buyer and seller) as whole as possible.

No one is a villian in this, and no one has filed a frivilous lawsuit. It takes time for the courts to sort out degrees of blame, agree on how much monetary damage has been done, and settle the whole messy thing.

I really hope that before the end of this year, Kindell is writing us about her family having their first T-day and Christmas in their house.

BDPECK

I'm curious how much the landowners are willing to sell the land to you for.

County appraisal records show it appraised at $33K so true market value is probably somewhere between $35K and $50K. If the landowners are asking a reasonable amount (and I would consider any amount up to 2X the market value to be reasonable given the circumstances), I would think the four professionals involved (and their insurance companies) would quickly figure out that 1/4th of even $100K is a whole less than it is going to cost them in attorney fees to fight this thing all the way to the court house.

Besides, there is still the piece of property that you do own and it too is appraised at $33K. By rights, that should be sold and the money used to pay a part of whatever price the landowners are asking for the lot your house is sitting on. Of course, it might take awhile to sell or, to get a quicker sale, you might have to let it go for less than the appraised value. Still, I would imagine you could find a buyer at $25K. (Not everybody needs a full five acre lot with no ravines)

If so, that would only leave $75K to be split among the responsible parties (the professionals) and their insurance companies. Would they rather spend 2 or 3 times that much on attorney fees with the risk that they might also wind up having to compensate you for the loss of your home?

If this thing isn't settling, it is because there are either some very stupid or some very greedy people in the mix.

I'd say the legitimate property owners are being extremely reasonable in agreeing to a sale.

For one thing, all gains on the sale will be fully taxable. (Remember, they bought it for the benefit of their daughters.) By contrast, if the land passed as part of their estate under current law, there would be no federal estate taxes, unless the decedents' total estate exceeded $3.5 million. I hope the Owens took this calculation into consideration in setting their price.

"I'd say the legitimate property owners are being extremely reasonable in agreeing to a sale.

For one thing, all gains on the sale will be fully taxable. (Remember, they bought it for the benefit of their daughters.) By contrast, if the land passed as part of their estate under current law, there would be no federal estate taxes, unless the decedents' total estate exceeded $3.5 million. I hope the Owens took this calculation into consideration in setting their price. "

That would be part of the increase above the base value of the land in the sale price.

Why don't they just swap lots and the insurance *(^(*% folks pay the diff. to the owners of the org. lot that was built on. As Worthy said, this would benefit them the most for taxes. How much diff. are the lots worth...in today's world?? This has gotta be a hellava lot less than what lawyers are going to walk away with.

Kindell - If the landowners are willing to sell the land, and you are willing to buy it, would it be possible for you and the landowners to come to an agreement whereby you buy the land from them? And possibly whereby you also buy our their rights and interests in the various lawsuits?

That way, you could move into your dream house.
They could step away from the legal fray.
And your claims against the professionals upon whom you relied would be more straight-forward.
You'd also have a relatively simple and straight-forward amount of monetary damages to sue (or settle) for.

The downside is that you'd have to come up with the cash. (unless the land-owners would owner-finance something privately with you.), and you'd risk not coming out whole, or paying more for the land than you get in damages.

But it is good news that we aren't talking about a $500K lot...

I believe it could put Kindel at a disadvantage if she buys the land and then tries to settle with the defendants. Right now Kindel and the land owner have claims against the defendants. If she settles she would be going it alone without the advantage of the completely innocent land owner being in the picture.

"Right now Kindel and the land owner have claims against the defendants."

Kindel has a claim against whomever can be held liable.

The landowner has a free house.

This is Kindells fiance OP2. brickeyee, when are you gonna realize that the owners do not have a free house? This is called unjust inrichment. At the very least the courts will order the house sold. Currently the Bank has said that they were prepared not to let the land owners claim this. Also when this happened all the landowners saw was $$$. Also if it was that easy, how come they havent moved in. I felt the same way as you when this all started, but once I put myself in the landowners shoes , and saw that there was a family with 7 children, with way bad things that had already happened to them all, I changed my mind. Of course Im biased but thats the way I see it.

If the landowners are thinking $$$, why is that bad anyway? I'd be pretty irritated if someone (even a family with 7 kids who had "way bad things already happen to them") came along and destroyed a long term investment of mine. I feel for you all, I really do. But regardless of how many professionals dropped the ball, you are FAR more at fault that the landowners are...implying anything else is beyond ridiculous.

I am not a lawyer, but as far as I know, brickeyee is correct. The house belongs to the landowners. I talked with a real estate pro from SC. The liability will ultimately depend upon the laws of the State. In SC, the lawyer and the real estate agent in the initial land purchase would (or their insurance) be liable for financial damages.

I am horribly sorry for the pickle everyone is in. I don't think that either the op and her family or the older couple who owned the lot she built on intended any harm. As an aside, the idea that people must "visit" their empty lots to have a legitimate vested interest in the value of them amuses me. Does anyone "visit" their money at the bank? Of course not. Anyway, unless I am missing something--such as, did the op have a buyers' agent? If so, then maybe make that person share the cost of the mistake; otherwise, so far it does seem that no one is asserting fraud on the part of the agents so the couple that built the house may actually be pretty much solely responsible for not knowing what they were buying. How that shakes out for them and what is "equitable," I don't know as I am not Solomon. I am not convinced that it is either a slam dunk that they lose all or that it is a slam dunk that giving the whole house over to the people on whose land it appeared is "unjust enrichment."

I can very much sympathize with the op's feelings that such a huge thing couldn't be their mistake, but I am afraid that it really might be. I don't think that the lesson is to "blame the professionals" who actually had quite different duties than ensuring the buyer followed through on building on her own land. I think the lesson is to take responsibility for knowing what you are buying.

Let's look at the players:

The bank. The op asked for and got the bank to loan her money to buy land and build a house. She showed the bank the survey and title of the lot she promised to buy and build on using the bank loan. Why would or should the bank have any clue as to whether or not the op proceeded to build on the lot the op bought and promised the bank she would build on? Is it not the responsibility of the person getting the loan to use it for the purpose it was given? I would think the bank would consider itself injured by the op, not the other way around?

Title Company. The op hired the title company to research the title to the land that she said she was going to buy, as identified by the survey. The title company did exactly that and presumably found that the title for the land she ultimately bought was clear and no one seems to disupute that. How is it the title company's fault that the op did not then build on the lot she asked it to research?

The builder. If the op took the builder to the wrong lot claiming to own it, I don't know what responsibility in TX the builder has to verify that fact. The house site could easily be located off frontage. I don't know, but I doubt there is anything specifically requiring a builder to verify siting against all bounds and markers.

The permit-granting authority. The permit-granting authority would look at locations given on the plan which was drawn on the lot the op actually bought and held title to. If setbacks were followed and wetlands weren't crossed, etc., those were its concerns...it is not charged with making sure that the applicant doesn't turn around and build on a different lot than it was legally permitted to. That the town has not brought any action against her for violating the terms of her permits is to her good.

Septic-well-utility etc. I would have to assume they also located things by working off measurements from the frontage without regard to corners and bounds. Again, I don't know but doubt that they are required to verify all locations off all bounds and markers.

The buyers. The buyers saw a real estate sign on a nice lot. Before signing the P&S, they should have and apparently did obtain the survey, which appears to have been correct regardless of its age. They then should have walked the bounds against the survey to ensure that what they were buying on paper was what they were seeing in the real world. That is the point of walking the bounds.

I think we can agree that there is nothing tricky to reading a survey. It is a very simple form of map. One locates a reference point and from there finds a bound, around here an iron stake driven into a granite post flush to the ground and sunk below the frost line. From there one follows the line at the angle drawn for the distance noted, usually in feet, nothing tricky, to the next marker, and so on. Unless the two lots have EXACTLY the same footprint and bounds placed in EXACTLY the same places, it would quickly become evident if there was a mismatch of land to survey.

We actually did this several times, on 32 acres of undeveloped, raw, wooded, uneven land (think "hill and dale") as we negotiated changes in lot lines. Five acres would not be that hard to do.

This is the step at which the mistake occurred. Even if there had been a new survey done at the beginning, it wouldn't have helped the op. The only reason the mistake was apparent to the surveyors at the end was because they tried to match the lot they saw the house on to the property bought and couldn't. If the house hadn't been there, they would have surveyed the lot she bought. Then she would have still built on the wrong lot because she didn't walk the bounds against the survey or didn't do it properly somehow. So no help there.

Real estate signs can and do get misposted and moved. At the end of the day, the buyer needs to know what they are buying unless they have specifically hired someone else to do that for them. I haven't seen mention of a someone else who was hired to do that or had a duty to do that. It would be nice for the op if there was a negligent "someone" out there who can make this right for everyone. Or if some measure can be put on the agents, depending on how their duties are defined in TX.

Finally, I don't see how or why the landowners could or should be forced, either legally or by emotional pressure, to sell if that was not their plan. I understand, though, that the op probably does not have enough money to buy another buildable lot, move the house, and try to sell the lesser lot for whatever she can get. Still, I am having a hard time figuring out why that would or should be anyone else's problem.

Can anyone point to any reason that any of these professionals--other than the surveyors who did match things up or perhaps REAs--have a legal duty to match physical property to the title and lot? I am genuinely curious as to whether that is the case or not.

i havent read through all of this thread but has anybody mentioned moving the house? in my part of the country moving houses is done all the time.
it would be costly but probably not much more than legal fees. in addition if the land owner thought that you were going to move the house they may decide to sell if offered a high enough price.

"when are you gonna realize that the owners do not have a free house? This is called unjust inrichment."

Putting an improvement on someone elses land makes it theirs.

Period.

No court is going to allow the land owners to be forced to give up their land for someone else's mistake they had no part in.

They did nothing to unjustly enrich themselves, the person building screwed up with no involvement of the land owner.

At the very least expect a very expensive lot after taxes on the sale are rolled in.

The bank is also likely going to yell and scream, but has no claim on the land or the structure.

If the land owners get a decent attorney (and they probably will if they think they might have their land taken through no action on their part) they are very liable to prevail in court.

vhehn - re: moving the house. OP hasn't indicated what kind of foundation her home has but, in central Texas about 99.9% of homes are built on a monolithic concrete slab so I suspect hers is too. I'm not sure that it is impossible to move a home built on a slab but I'm absolutely sure doing so would be a lot more difficult than moving a house built on a pier and beam foundation.

Someone built a home on my property(survey last week confirms is totally within my property) rather than theirs just down the street. I just found this out.
Prev owner moved out leaving big time Mortgage Co holding a 95% mortgage.
House Vacant.
Do I have a new house?
Happening as I speak. The Mort Co is selling the unimproved lot thinking they have a house on it.
Lawyer says pretty clear.

It's not like this is the first time such a mixup has happened. Here's an instance from 1905.

And another more recent one.

And a more complicated case on which the appeal Court judges couldn't agree.

IF you could steal land by building on it 'by accident' it would happen even more frequently.

Just think about the consequences.

Build on the lot you like, claim a horrible error, then force the land owner out.

The OP needs to hire the best RE attorney they can find, and be very gentle with the land owner if they do not want a nasty counter suit.

Actually, to summarize from reading this entire thread - Kindell & the neighbor have an agreement. insurance co. has to pay. theres no where to move the house to - the actual property Kindell built on is unbuildable.

In reality, shes needs an INSURANCE lawyer to settle this. Alternately, she can file a claim against the RE agent and say she was falsely lead to purchase property "A" while being shown property "B" - The RE agents E&O insurance should cover it.

Doesnt sound unbuildable if theres a house on it! To me a piece of land with ravines would be interesting.Sounds like a kids wonderland, wouldnt bother me. Matter a fact we almost bough6 acres with a big ravine but the owner decided not to sell.

"the actual property Kindell built on is unbuildable"

I think you mean the actual property Kindell purchased is unbuildable.

The insured in this case are the parties being sued. The OP must prevail against the sued parties before the insurance companies will be forced to pay. The insurance companies' policies undoubtedly have terms that dictate that they can determine if a settlement should be made or if the claims against their clients should be litigated.

From what I can tell from the thread, the OP does not have a claim against the title insurance company.

Since the OP has not seen fit to post any details on the lot or tract numbers included in the original offer of sale and/or contract attached to the property she purchased, nor the lot or tract numbers on the survey she received at time of purchase, it is hard to guess how all this will play out.

However, if the offer of sale and/or the contract had the correct legal description, including lot/tract number, and she was provided with a survey, however old, that also had the correct legal description including lot/tract numbers, then I doubt seriously that she will be able to fully prevail in a court of law.

She may get something for the sign being on the wrong lot, but not the nearly the full amount she is seeking.

Just came across this thread and was intrigued as we are currently looking for land ourselves. We were curious as to what the final outcome was or if it had even been reached yet. Did some quick searching and I believe the house is currently on the market - MLS 159804 in Belton, TX. It would be interesting to know what the final agreement or settlement was.

Interesting thread. I wonder how it all turned out. When it comes down to it, the OP is the one who is responsible for this mistake. If I had been that land owner, that house would have been long gone....a long time ago.

According to the county property records, a bank now owns the home. The OP no longer owns any property on the street. Their old unbuilt-on lot is now owned by a Mr. Guzman. The Owens, the owners of the land that the house was built on, also no longer own any land on that street.

The current tax appraisal on the house and property is $502,451.

I read this whole thread in horror and fascination. What a horrible mess!

Right after we bought our 14 acres (that had never been on the market; we approached the owners and they agreed to sell), we discovered on a visit one day that there was a for sale sign sitting on it from a local real estate agency. We got on the RE company's website and looked up what was for sale and it was the 40 acres to our N and W, but they had pictures of our land representing it. The land we bought was a much better piece with road access (I had previously grown wheat and soybeans on it for the former owners and knew the land well). Much of the 40 acres actually for sale was very low with poor drainage and was land-locked, and yet was being advertised as having road access (our access) because the agent was *that* clueless. We moved the sign to the correct boundary and gave the RE agent a call. She first tried to argue with us, so we showed her our survey and she had to back off.

That was 5 years ago and the land is still for sale. haha

I can't imagine if I lived further away and discovered too late that someone had thought they'd bought it and built a house on it!

V

I, like the above poster, read through the whole thread with "horror and fascination. I hope the OP comes back and lets us know how it turned out for her and her family. I would say that I am surprised that nobody walked the land with survey in hand, but we had two of our neighbors clear their land (and part of ours) without doing a survey. We approached both of them and asked that they get a survey before they actually put up any fences and they both agreed to do so. We were not happy losing some of our trees, but it both cases it was a small area and we would rather have good neighbors than rich lawyers.

What some of you fail to understand is that law and the implementation and practice of law are very, very complicated and nuanced. I read that several of you decided to criticise the OP for two things: 1. Relying on the real estate agent, original lawyer, etc. for determining the correct area of the land and 2. suing the "correct" land owner.

Regarding number one, I am in training to be a CPA, and this applies to other professionals too (doctors, lawyers, real estate agents, etc.). Professionals of the above nature have a duty to do their job properly (duty of care). Conversely, when they do not do their job as expected, they can be expected to be sued. This is the normal course of business. This is not the OP's fault; she relied on several professionals for the details and that is not wrong. Most people would not know how to determine what land is whose. If there is a failure here, it is on several of the professionals and organizations that allowed the building to start/occur. If no survey was done, as should have been done, it falls on whatever organization or individual should have done, or arranged, for the survey. When people rely on professionals for service, they should expect those professionals to act on their behalf and out their duty of care. Mistakes happen, thats why every professional, organization, and individual has various insurance policies.

Secondly, the question of including the landowner in the suit is not one of "morals", "ethics", "antagonizing the landowner", etc. They most likely had to be included in the suit, regardless of how the OP felt about the landowners. And anyhow, her lawyer would know better about who to sue than any of us!!!

Things like this happen more than you would think. The city demolished an incorrect house a few years back. Needless to say, they were compensated!

Be sure to use the nuanced and complicated defense if you are ever charged with a crime.

The OP dodged all the pointed questions about whether or not they received a copy of the original subdivision survey. Land doesn't move. The old survey should have had all the details necessary to show which lot was which. Someone didn't read it or take the time to understand it.

One news story published on line mentioned Jacobsen, the OP's husband or SO, as being on the property with the builder with a survey in hand, so it seems to exist and have been available to them.

Choosing to sue someone is always a moral judgment. Even if circumstances make the suit inevitable, It takes a callous soul to proceed without thinking about the effect on the defendants, especially if they are totally without blame in the issue.

I wish I had the guts to get on facebook and friend Kindell to maybe ask her to get on and tell us all what happened....

She sure sounds like a "callous soul" to me. From Kindell 5 minutes ago:

"Thanks so much for still thinking about us. I will get on today and update, the battle still continues and has gotten really old. I will put the whole story there so I don't have to write it twice. :). Again thanks for still caring!"

Too bad life isn't as black and white as we make it out to be on this board sometimes. It would make passing judgement on other people SO much easier.

Hello everyone. Sorry its been so long, but a special thanks to mdev for finding me on facebook. I read and caught up on the post, some are quite disheartening, but I know everyone has their own opinion, and who am I to judge. This is a very complicated case, and I appreciate everyones honesty. Things are moving quite slowly these days, and to be honest we are quite burned out on the whole case. It is very stressful and a tough situation to deal with everyday. But what doesnt kill you will only make you stronger!

Now with the update:

The land owners did settle behind our backs and I see the land information has been previously posted. We have signed a "gag" type order and cannot discuss and settlements. But I can assure you all, we havent received one penny from anyone. The land owners have moved on with their lives and we wish them the best. We no longer are fighting for the house as our court date was moved to January 2011, because one of the Realtors is now pregnant, and we couldnt keep our family waiting any longer. We sold our land (for MUCH less then what we bought it for) and the new owners havent quite figured out what to do with it. But we did have it surveyed and the whole property line staked before we sold it, so there was no questions as to the property lines. We are now looking to buy an existing house and move on with our lives. We are still in a law suit with the Realtors and the builder. The Realtors goal is to run us out of money. They use stall tactic after stall tactic and make stupid motions to the court so that our attorney will have to travel and run up our expenses. Our attorney is out of Houston and we are near Austin. If it was legal to smack one, I am sure I would. Their tactics to run up a bill is taking a toll on us, but we will not give up. To date we have paid approximately $65,000 to our attorney, and we havent even finished depositions and of course the week of court will be outrageous. The only ones who win are the attorneys. The Realtor attorneys want mediation, even though there have had 2 failed mediations already that cost us about 6 grand apiece. They set date after date only to cancel a week beforehand. There are lots of ups and downs, because we get our hopes up something is going to happen only to have it cancel a few days before. If we deny going to mediation they set a court date for the judge to make us. We finally agreed to try one more time so that we didnt have to pay the attorney to fight it and the maybe still go to mediation. We will eventually have our day in court and in front of a jury, and until then all we can do is wait.

It was such a sad emotional day when we walked away from the house. That house meant so much to me and my family and it really broke our hearts. Andy (my fiancé) would drive by and look at the progress, but it was just too hard and finally I convinced him he had to stop. This isnt just a case of who was wrong and who gets what. This is our life, and our dreams going down the drain. I know to everyone else its just a story, but please remember there is a family behind this story who is living it every day. Thanks for caring.

-Kindell

creek_side:

Even in criminal cases, law can be extremely complicated and "nuanced". As mdev said, a lot of people have the tendency to look at things in black and white. In civil and business law, there often is no black and white. In criminal law, it is often more clear cut, but not always. There is a reason lawyers have to go to school so long.

And the decision to sue is not always a moral one. Some people have this idea that suing for any reason is bad and frivolous. It is not. In a lot of civil suits, there are no morals involved; a bad decision, failure of duty of care of a professional, or an organization/company acting negligently are not moral issues, they are ethical and business issues.

Even if the OP had a survey in her/his hands, it doesn't necessarily matter. They relied on professionals to carry out the details of the business transaction. When the professionals do not do so, they can be expected to be sued.

I figured that a bank now had the land and the house. I am sorry that this happened to you and your family Kindell, but the bulk of the responsibility of this whole mess still lays with you. You should have had a survey done and double checked it by either being present when the surveyor surveyed the land, and/or followed up with walking the property with the survey in hand. If you were unknowledgable about purchasing land, as this whole situation shows, you should have hired a real estate attorney to handle the transaction.

Your bank and your builder went forward with the documents that YOU supplied them with. Professionals and agencies only know the paperwork they are supplied with. Sad to say, but true. This was a tough lesson in life, and I hope that when you move on that you seek out a good real estate attorney to handle any future property transactions. No, I am not an attorney, but I have owned, and currently own property. I have never purchased any land without a fresh survey, and title insurance.

I do feel that the bank was stupid for not double checking before granting a loan to you, as it would have been in their best interests to do so, but again, you supplied the documents. You agreed to make payments on money they loaned you to build a house, and essentially the bank owns the house and land until it is all paid for.

In NO way at all was this any of the correct land owner's fault, and for someone to blame them in any way is outrageous. It does not matter what their intent for their land was. It was THEIR land, and as such they had rights. Just because they were not going to build a house on it tomorrow does not give anyone else a right to move in and take it. It is their land. Period. If it had been my land this never would have been a long dragged out case. If things were not settled (quickly) to my satisfaction,I would have had a bulldoser in there. Period. No, I don't give a rat's patooty about courts and such. It is not their land and they have no say. My constitution says so.

Again, I am sorry that this happened to you. However, it is time to stop feeling sorry for yourself and move on. It was only a house. You still have your family, and are still able to participate in life. You have wasted $65,000. This would have gone a long way towards another home. It sounds like it's time to walk away, turn your back on it, accept your responsibility in this, and start a new beginning. If you don't this is going to eat you alive.

mdev -- Kindell wasn't really the target of my barb. Read my post carefully and you will figure out what I was really saying.

krycek1984 -- If you are a lawyer, say so. If you are not, stop lecturing us on the law. And stop twisting people's words. Nobody said the suit was frivolous.

And you might also note that Kindell still has not stated one way or another if she or Jacobsen had access to or possession of a copy of the original subdivision survey. Sometimes what isn't said is as important as what is said.

Lastly, I have no idea why they hired a Houston attorney to represent them in Bell County or Austin, if that is where the case is being heard. That sounds like really bad judgment to me.

Why do so many posters on this forum think that attorneys should do all their work pro bono? Drive up the bill, rather have good neighbors than rich lawyers, the only ones who win are the attorneys...good grief. Those are some of the most ridiculous, ignorant and untrue statements ever. For every single bad attorney out there (which there are...as there are in any profession), there are literally thousands of fantastic, extremely hardworking, dedicated attorneys who are completely RULED by a class of ethics that 99% of posters on this forum would find almost impossible to abide by. I am not an attorney, but I am married to one and have many, many close friends who are and not one of them would ever do anything to deliberately run up a bill. My husband regularly works 100 hour weeks, sacrifices time with our family, neglects his own health for his clients and does it all without receiving a penny more than his regular corporate salary. The potshots at attorneys who are, I'm sure, working their tails off to assist Kindell out of the crap situation that she and her family allowed themselves to fall into because of their own lack of due diligence prior to their land purchase, is getting old.

This is the way I look at it...a realtor marked a lot for sale and represented that lot as being for sale. That was incorrect. Then a builder built on a lot that didn't match the boundary survey (I am assuming it was only a boundary survey since the ravines were not shown on it). I would assume the contract to build gave direction on where the house was to be built (book and page is typical)? Kindel? They are both negligent, IMO, it is just a matter of how much each.

I was telling my DH about this earlier tonight and he said this could easily happen (he has been both a real estate agent and builder) if a topo survey isn't used (or if the parties involved don't know how to read one). He also said a builder should never rely on a real estate sign because kids have been known to pick them up and move them. He placed all the blame on the builder. I don't feel so generous towards the REA.

I admit, I now don't feel bad about the $400 or so we had to pay the surveyor to mark the foundation location (in addition to everything else we paid him). The town required it (before allowing the footings to be poured, and then required a letter from the surveyor verifying the footing was placed where they marked it) and the bank required it (before the foundation disbursement).

The level of incompetence in this case is amazing. There are almost TOO many people at fault to figure it out. That makes for a very expensive lawsuit.

What a cluster.

I'm not a lawyer, but like I said, I'm training to be a CPA, so I have taken several business law courses and have had to understand the importance of professional certification and what this means and both the benefits, and responsibilities, of being a professional.

This thread could go on forever between people who find fault with the various organizations and professionals in the transaction, or the individual. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but the essential fact of the matter is that there was negligence by several professionals in this transaction.

I suggest those who are so quick to blame the OP attempt to put themselves in her position (I know, when you see the world in black and white, this is real tough). In your mind, you may do everything perfectly. And maybe in real life, you think you do everything perfectly. If the tables were turned, would you be so adamant that it was your own fault?

And creek_side, no one actually said the word "frivolous", but I can read between the lines. When several posters state that it is the OP's fault and no one else's, it can then be reasonably assumed that they believe the suit is frivolous, because they don't believe the lawsuit has any merit, and is therefore frivolous!

Well, here is Our very own nightmare regarding vacant land purchased in the Texas Hill Country.
Back in Nov 2016, we came across almost 1 acre of land in the Canyon Lake, Tx area online with only 3 photos and a physical address to go with.
So, based on the little given info I ctc'd the listing agent several times over to meet me at the property only to be given far too many excuses as to why "he"was unable to meet. So, after my patience wore thin, I sought out a realtor on my own based on just the address that was given by the original listing agent and went on my own based upon the physical address and using GPS I drove to what I thought was the property and later after my husband had taken a walk with me to determine if this parcel of land would meet our needs and once we both agreed that we wanted to purchase this land, I once again met with the realtor to draw up our offer to the seller.
And because we were eager to complete the sale by the year end of 2016 prior to filing of Our federal tax return we were able to close on the land by 12-30-2016. And, because we were not in any rush in which to build we just "sat" on our purchase for about 9 months until we were finally ready to meet a builder. Now mind you prior to Our closing the realtor hired a local surveyor to conduct the property survey after which we(my husband & I ) went again to get a more accurate viewing on the size of what we would be buying.
And, once we hired (selected ) a builder, they the builder hired their own different surveyor to conduct their survey prior our home loan pre-approval could be met.
Once approved, we along with the builder all met up at the location of the property once more based solely on using GPS everyone once more met up at what we All "thought" was the physical location so the home could be "staked" prior to the hiring of company to prep (clear/ make ready) the site for the build.
And, we had told our builder at the beginning and then often more times that we were in no rush with the building time line so our builder had told us because they were very busy and we were in no hurry, it would actually benefit us in add on's at no additional cost because we could be put on "the back burner" so to speak.
And this was in later Sept 2017, and we were told it would take the builder contractor 3 months from start to finish before Our home would be completed and after, we would have 3 additional months before Our 1st payment would be due and to save more we would be completing the interior painting as Well as the flooring. Come late November 2017 when nothing had been built we began once more contacting our builder and it took until 3 weeks later that we were called in for an urgent meeting with Our build team only to be floored by the news they gave us.
That the land that "EVERONE" had. believed to be ours was in fact not! Our actual property was located approximately 1 1/2 blocks further up from the location that had been prepped. And furthermore, we were told that my husband and I were in fact libel to compensate the individual who's land had been cleared and who"s sole standing Large Oak Tree had been mostly removed.
Even though two different surveyors including the home builder themselves had ALL went to the same location based on GPS, that my husband and I would have to compensate this other person.
And needless to say SO was livid!! They gave us the fabulous news the very next day after we had removed our brother from life support and yet to have time to make his burial arrangements.
So, we stressed that this was not our fault and therefore on the spot refused to accept this libel as Our own. And then while more time went by we were once again called in for an urgent meeting only to be told the actual location of property that we were sold "sight unseen" has been deemed as "UNBUILDABLE". They asked my husband and I to try and locate more land in which to purchase so our home could be built.
Now, that we are running out of money and have yet to locate suitable property and in 3 more days from now per our documentation, the original home pre-approval loan is scheduled to EXPIRE.
And over the prior two weeks SO have sent 2 emails to Our builder and have been given ZERO response.
So, I really desperately need advice we did try to get an attorney but we just do not havec the means to be able to afford one to represent us , one told me i t would cost $200 per hour to get even a simple consult, and another that was referred by the company who's own agent handled our bad land purchase ( that agent no longer works there, of course) and that particular lawyer said the retainer cost would be almost 8k and additionally a fee of
$ 100 per hour assessment.
And just the retainer fee alone is more than what we paid for the crappy land.
So, we are at a dead end have have no idea of what we can do.

The only way it appears you're going to get this resolved is to walk away having learned a painful lesson or to hire the lawyer.

@ Donna M Davis

There is a lot of missing information and the quoted attorney fees make me suspect it is important information. If the land was surveyed before purchase, it should have been staked. Was it staked improperly or did no one view the stakes to ensure the property you were buying matched the property you wanted?

If the it was improperly staked then a procedure against the surveyor's E and O insurance is something you can probably start on your own. For this little bit of money they may not even defend it. If it was properly surveyed and you just never saw it, then congratulations on your new property. May I suggest trying to sell it to the person who owns the adjoining property cheap.