Does an Easement Protect a Portion of My Building Built Before the Easement

[facilities]

My question involves real estate located in the State of: Washington
My question involves real estate located in the State of: Washington
The previous owner of my land sold a section of land to another developer 20 years ago. That developer then subdivided the land and built four homes. A portion of one of my buildings sits on the section of land that was sold, but at the time of the sale the previous owner of my land retained a 12 foot easement that runs the entire length of the property line. Now one of the owners of the homes built on this sub divided land that was sold 20 years ago, is claiming my building is on his property and he wants to be compensated in some way.

The easement states that it is for "maintenance and repair purposes only" of my building. I understand that the easement allows me to enter this other persons property to maintain my building, but does it also protect the footprint of the portion of my building built into the easement?

I have told the neighbor there is an easement but I do not believe he has seen it or that it turned up in his title search. I recently had a survey performed and an ROS filed that does include this easement.

[jk]

I understand that the easement allows me to enter this other persons property to maintain my building, but does it also protect the footprint of the portion of my building built into the easement?

If all the easement is described as being for is maintenance and repair purposes only, no, it doesn't.

I'm not sure about your timeline. Was the land split as it is that causes the building to encroach onto another lot before or after the house was built?

[facilities]

If all the easement is described as being for is maintenance and repair purposes only, no, it doesn't.

I'm not sure about your timeline. Was the land split as it is that causes the building to encroach onto another lot before or after the house was built?

The building existed first then the land was sold to a developer that split the land into four parcels and built houses. My building runs straight about 6 feet off the property line but then bumps out for an emergency exit and encroaches 3.1 feet for approximately 15 feet into the area covered by the easement. I believe the intent of the previous owner of my land was to provide a straight property line but retain the easement for this bump out and maintenance to the backside of the building.

It looks like there were a few easements filed that cover this area over a years period. I quoted one of the earlier easements. The most recent easement reads "Grantor reserves to itself a twelve foot (12') Easement over the East Boundary of the Property described herein for the XXXX building stairwell and also for access to Grantor's XXXX building for maintenance and repair purposes."

The earlier record did not mention the stairwell. This seems like it covers it no problem.

[jk]

even if there wasn't a specific easement, you would likely have a valid argument that there was an implied easement due to the building being preexisting. Of course it costs more to fight for such than having something in writing to just stick in their face but you would likely win in either case.

This should have been discovered when you purchased the land though when you had a survey done.

Oh, what's that? You didn't have a survey? Did you pay cash for your place? If not, most mortgages have what we call in my area a "mortgage survey". It's like a survey light where there are no stakes or markers place. It is intended only to find encroachments such as your house would be. You might want to check your title insurance policy (if you purchased such) for exclusions and anomalies such as your encroachment.

tell your neighbor to check his documents provided to him when he purchased his lot. The encroachment would likely be addressed in his purchase as well.


Beyond that, it is likely that if there was no easement or approved encroachment, it is likely you would have a prescriptive easement due to the passage of time of the encroachment.

I really don't see the neighbor winning anything and do not see any right to demand compensation. At this point, I would simply rebuff his demands until he gets serious and takes some official action. That is, unless you can convince him of his error before then.