Turning around in neighbor's driveway
sinister
neighbor's driveway.
The neighbor apparently isn't happy with this. Instead of politely
expressing her desire I not use her driveway to turn my car around, he
behaved in an extremely uncivil fashion.
Which raises the following question: does a homeowner have a right not to
allow you to pull into their driveway with the purpose of turning around?
In my case, I'm using very little of her driveway to do so. (Meaning the
front of my car never gets past the sidewalk in front of the property.)
TIA
foaddoc
"sinister" <sini...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:7fednb5PnMqzz6vb...@comcast.com...
Could the homeowner put up a gate to keep you out? Would you get pissed if
the neighbor used "very little" of your front lawn to make a u turn? If you
answered yes to any of these questions, then you have answered your own in
the affirmative as well.
br...@sybase.com
This may hinge on where the property line actually is. The neighbor's
property may only go to the edge of the sidewalk, with the city owning
everything from that point to the edge of the sidewalk on the far side
of the street. Or it may extend to the curb of the street. Or it may
extend to the center of the street and the city has an easement for
the road. (or a few other possible variations). The terms of the
easement may make a difference.
sinister
"foaddoc" <fo...@bitchslap.org> wrote in message
news:4636553e$0$19466$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
LOL!
Turning in the front lawn is equivalent to turning in the driveway apron?
Sure...
>
>
sinister
<br...@sybase.com> wrote in message
news:1177967079.4...@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Thanks for your helpful reply.
Cheers.
>
>
• UltraMan •
> Because of the layout of our street, I often turn my car around using
> the neighbor's driveway.
Trespassing.
>
> The neighbor apparently isn't happy with this. Instead of politely
> expressing her desire I not use her driveway to turn my car around, he
> behaved in an extremely uncivil fashion.
You are trespassing.
>
> Which raises the following question: does a homeowner have a right
> not to allow you to pull into their driveway with the purpose of
> turning around?
Just how pig-ignorant are you?
>
> In my case, I'm using very little of her driveway to do so. (Meaning
> the front of my car never gets past the sidewalk in front of the
> property.)
What part of Trespassing don't you comprehend?
>
> TIA
East
wrote:
This is considered a trespass notice in many States, check your local and
State laws, and you should not trespass on private property after
notification.
If you have further questions please consult a criminal defense lawyer.
jo...@phred.org
before you aggravate the situation further, think seriously about how
seriously you want to antagonize your neighbor.
That said, check with your local building officials to see what the
legal status of the driveway apron part of the sidewalk is. Is it
legally a public right-of-way?
Does your city have restrictions on driving across public sidewalks
other than for access to the property?
--
jo...@phred.org is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Updated Infrared Photography Gallery:
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/ir.html>
GeekBoy
"East" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:f15mu...@news1.newsguy.com...
Tresspassing on city public street property?
C. E. White
"• UltraMan •" <ul...@man.jp> wrote in message
news:59n4tuF...@mid.individual.net...
It might depend on how far into the driveway you pull. For my old
house, my property line was inside the edge of the sidewalk. The
city's right of way therefore extended at least four feet from the
edge of the street. The state claims either a 30 or a 40 foot right of
way from the centerline of all the county roads. This puts the edge of
the state's right as much as 10 feet into some of my fields (depending
on the road layout). I am not sure I can call someone using the
claimed right of way a trespasser. I think this is a case where you'd
need to consult the property maps and check the state right of way
rules before you start shooting. I'd guess as long as you don't go
past the line formed by the telephone poles or boxes, you are likely
still on the city/state right of way. A sub-division map would be your
best way of checking.
Ed
• UltraMan •
> "Ą UltraMan Ą" <ul...@man.jp> wrote in message
Nope. If as you claim your "property line" ended at the inside edge of
the sidewalk, then the rest of the property was *owned* by the city,
and not an "easement" as you erroneously assert.
If that driveway entrance and sidewalk was an easement to the city,
they YOU were/are the owner, and as such are responsible financially
for repairs/damage to that property.
>The state claims either a 30 or a 40 foot right of
> way from the centerline of all the county roads. This puts the edge of
> the state's right as much as 10 feet into some of my fields (depending
> on the road layout).
Yep.
> I am not sure I can call someone using the
> claimed right of way a trespasser.
If they are causing damage to it, you can hold them liable, as you
are liable financially when the city demands that you repair the
sidewalks/driveways
inside that easement.
> I think this is a case where you'd
> need to consult the property maps and check the state right of way
> rules before you start shooting. I'd guess as long as you don't go
> past the line formed by the telephone poles or boxes, you are likely
> still on the city/state right of way
Bullshit. Unless he is a Phone Co employee, he has no right to the Phone
Company's easement
on your property.
>. A sub-division map would be your best way of checking.
Or just stop using the neighbors driveway, eh?
>
> Ed
• UltraMan •
Yep. Go stand in the middle and refuse to move and see what happens.
Dave
"C. E. White" <cewh...@removemindspring.com> wrote in message
news:46366567$1@kcnews01...
>
> "• UltraMan •" <ul...@man.jp> wrote in message
> news:59n4tuF...@mid.individual.net...
>> sinister wrote:
>>> Because of the layout of our street, I often turn my car around using
>>> the neighbor's driveway.
>>
>> Trespassing.
>>
>>>
>>> The neighbor apparently isn't happy with this. Instead of politely
>>> expressing her desire I not use her driveway to turn my car around, he
>>> behaved in an extremely uncivil fashion.
>>
>> You are trespassing.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Which raises the following question: does a homeowner have a right
>>> not to allow you to pull into their driveway with the purpose of
>>> turning around?
>>
>> Just how pig-ignorant are you?
>>
>>>
>>> In my case, I'm using very little of her driveway to do so. (Meaning
>>> the front of my car never gets past the sidewalk in front of the
>>> property.)
>>
>> What part of Trespassing don't you comprehend?
>>
>>>
>>> TIA
>
> It might depend on how far into the driveway you pull. For my old house,
> my property line was inside the edge of the sidewalk. The city's right of
> way therefore extended at least four feet from the edge of the street.
Good point. Where I live, if there was a sidewalk, the closest edge of it
would be at least 10 feet from my property line. I suspect that the
neighbor is getting upset about someone using public property to turn around
in. -Dave
sinister
Thanks for the informative reply.
Cheers.
> Ed
>
>
>
Dan...@gmail.com
allow you to pull into their driveway with the purpose of turning
around?
It's interesting how people seem to think they are somehow entitled to
other people's property. I recently had some issues with neighbors
thinking they could park in my driveway at will to make access to
their cars more convient, even if this made access to our cars on our
land next to impossible. The problem has since been handled, but the
responses I got during the episode were amazing.
> The state claims either a 30 or a 40 foot right of
way from the centerline of all the county roads
My living room is within 30 feet of the center of the road I live on.
Rest assured, that *is* my property and trespassers will be handled
accordingly.
Also, if you continue to agitate your neighbor by entering their
property after notice not to do so, they're likely to return the
love. What will you do when you run over the nails they just happened
to drop in the driveway? It's their land, they have no requirement to
keep their driveway up to your standards.
I'd suggest that by continuing to trespass on private land you've been
told to stay off you are going to escalate an unnecessary situation.
I'd recommend staying off of this persons land. I'd also be willing
to wager that you have no legal right do drive on their private
property, putting you in a situation where you run the risk of not
only creating a larger battle where said battle need not be but one
that you'll lose as well.
If nothing else, it's certainly not neighborly to disregard your
neighbor's wishes about trespassing on their land.
By any chance, is one of the parties in question renting while the
other is a homeowner?
John
For answers to questions such as these and other Legal Questions, you
may go to this WebSite..
Free Legal FAQs and Legal Forms - PPL Online Legal Resource Center
http://www.lawsmart.com/prepaidmain.cgi?Assoc=jvenezia
Be sure to indicate your state of residence for accurate information.
There is absolutely no cost or obligation of any kind to get this
information.
John C. Venezia, CLU, ChFC, CITRMS
ADRS Group Security Specialist
www.prepaidlegal.com/hub/jvenezia
Kent Wills
<sini...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
Your neighbor is being rude in her expressing his desire that
you cease using her drive, but that's it.
I suggest you either use someone else's drive, or try
traveling from the other direction whenever possible.
--
Kent
Vegetarian: Indian word for lousy hunter.
Kent Wills
<fo...@bitchslap.org> wrote:
There's a BIG difference between doing a three point turn
(which I presume is the case with the OP) in a driveway and a U-turn
on the lawn.
--
Kent
"I'm a ten gov a day guy. It's all I know, and it's all
you need to know, gov!"
- Shouting George
Fred G. Mackey
>
> If nothing else, it's certainly not neighborly to disregard your
> neighbor's wishes about trespassing on their land.
I'm not sure if this can be defined as trespassing - perhaps it can be -
the private property arguments are convincing, but nonetheless, if the
guy is mereley using a few feet of driveway to turn around, it's not
very neighborly of his neighbor to get their panties in such a twist
over it.
I've used neighbors drivers before, and they've used ours - NOT to park
in, but to ease turning around or pulling out when there are multiple
vehicles blocking one that needed to get out.
Unless the neighbor wants to put up a gate (which is probably prohibited
by the HOA), there's no way to stop a stray vehicle from doing exactly
the same thing.
Some people just need to relax a little and deal with the
inconsequential things that happen in life.
steve
> C. E. White wrote:
>> "Ą UltraMan Ą" <ul...@man.jp> wrote in message
>> news:59n4tuF...@mid.individual.net...
>> It might depend on how far into the driveway you pull. For my old
>> house, my property line was inside the edge of the sidewalk. The
>> city's right of way therefore extended at least four feet from the
>> edge of the street.
>
> Nope. If as you claim your "property line" ended at the inside edge of
> the sidewalk, then the rest of the property was *owned* by the city,
> and not an "easement" as you erroneously assert.
In some localities the sidewalk including curbs and curb cuts are required
to be open to the public and the property owner is still required to
maintain them. BTDT.
The crux of this issue would seem to be if the OP is using the curb cut or
if he is going beyond the sidewalk. The former IME is quite legal.
I have neighbors who were really touchy about that. I would accommodate
them but would be amused when they would gibber about others who "invaded
their space" while turning around or walking/jogging.
Harry K
Yep. And if the neighbor does get her panties in a bunch about it, it
is much better to just go along with her vice starting a neighbor
feud.
Harry K
Nate Nagel
I laugh at people that turn around in my driveway. The crunching sound
of their air dams hitting the ground amuses me.
nate
(it's not so funny when you're trying to get your own car into the
driveway...)
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
foaddoc
"Kent Wills" <comp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8vvc33h5nmerrg2et...@4ax.com...
Big difference to those who are particular about their lawns. In this case
however the neighbor's evidently particular about her driveway. It's her
prerogative to be as particular about her driveway, since she owns it. Which
is the point I ws making, which point you failed to understand because
you're a muttonhead.
BTR1701
"• UltraMan •" <ul...@man.jp> wrote:
> sinister wrote:
> > Because of the layout of our street, I often turn my car around using
> > the neighbor's driveway.
>
> Trespassing.
>
> >
> > The neighbor apparently isn't happy with this. Instead of politely
> > expressing her desire I not use her driveway to turn my car around, he
> > behaved in an extremely uncivil fashion.
>
> You are trespassing.
>
>
> >
> > Which raises the following question: does a homeowner have a right
> > not to allow you to pull into their driveway with the purpose of
> > turning around?
>
> Just how pig-ignorant are you?
Apparently no more ignorant than you. You can't say for sure whether
this is trespassing or not because in many jurisdictions, the property
lines only extend to the public-right-of-way (i.e. the sidewalk). The
two or three feet between the sidewalk and the street is public
property, just as the street itself is public property. And if this guy
isn't crossing over the sidewalk, then his actions *aren't* trespassing.
Without knowing for sure the laws and particulars in effect where he
lives, your bald-faced declaration that his actions are trespassing are
nothing but your own ill-informed opinion.
BTR1701
"Dan...@gmail.com" <Dan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Which raises the following question: does a homeowner have a right not to
> allow you to pull into their driveway with the purpose of turning
> around?
>
> It's interesting how people seem to think they are somehow entitled to
> other people's property. I recently had some issues with neighbors
> thinking they could park in my driveway at will to make access to
> their cars more convient, even if this made access to our cars on our
> land next to impossible. The problem has since been handled, but the
> responses I got during the episode were amazing.
That is indeed pretty arrogant behavior.
• UltraMan •
> In article <59n4tuF...@mid.individual.net>,
> "• UltraMan •" <ul...@man.jp> wrote:
>
>> sinister wrote:
>>> Because of the layout of our street, I often turn my car around
>>> using the neighbor's driveway.
>>
>> Trespassing.
>>
>>>
>>> The neighbor apparently isn't happy with this. Instead of politely
>>> expressing her desire I not use her driveway to turn my car around,
>>> he behaved in an extremely uncivil fashion.
>>
>> You are trespassing.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Which raises the following question: does a homeowner have a right
>>> not to allow you to pull into their driveway with the purpose of
>>> turning around?
>>
>> Just how pig-ignorant are you?
>
> Apparently no more ignorant than you. You can't say for sure whether
> this is trespassing or not because in many jurisdictions, the property
> lines only extend to the public-right-of-way (i.e. the sidewalk). The
> two or three feet between the sidewalk and the street is public
> property, just as the street itself is public property. And if this
> guy isn't crossing over the sidewalk, then his actions *aren't*
> trespassing.
And you know this for certain?
Many jurisdictions mark the property lines to the centerline
of the street, with owners financially responsible for the maintenance
and repair of the sidewalks and driveway cuts.
>
> Without knowing for sure the laws and particulars in effect where he
> lives, your bald-faced declaration that his actions are trespassing
> are nothing but your own ill-informed opinion.
This from the SS man who repeatedly aids and abets the willful violation of
Texas
underage drinking laws.
Gordon Burditt
>>>> using the neighbor's driveway.
>>>
>>> Trespassing.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The neighbor apparently isn't happy with this. Instead of politely
>>>> expressing her desire I not use her driveway to turn my car around,
>>>> he behaved in an extremely uncivil fashion.
>>>
>>> You are trespassing.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which raises the following question: does a homeowner have a right
>>>> not to allow you to pull into their driveway with the purpose of
>>>> turning around?
>>>
>>> Just how pig-ignorant are you?
>>
>> Apparently no more ignorant than you. You can't say for sure whether
>> this is trespassing or not because in many jurisdictions, the property
>> lines only extend to the public-right-of-way (i.e. the sidewalk). The
>> two or three feet between the sidewalk and the street is public
>> property, just as the street itself is public property. And if this
>> guy isn't crossing over the sidewalk, then his actions *aren't*
>> trespassing.
>
>And you know this for certain?
>
>Many jurisdictions mark the property lines to the centerline
>of the street, with owners financially responsible for the maintenance
>and repair of the sidewalks and driveway cuts.
And does this give the owner right to exclude other people from using
their side of the street? I doubt it.
Fred G. Mackey
> "Ą UltraMan Ą" <ul...@man.jp> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>
>>sinister wrote:
>>
>>>Because of the layout of our street, I often turn my car around using
>>>the neighbor's driveway.
>>
>>Trespassing.
>>
>>
>>>The neighbor apparently isn't happy with this. Instead of politely
>>>expressing her desire I not use her driveway to turn my car around, he
>>>behaved in an extremely uncivil fashion.
>>
>>You are trespassing.
>
>
> this when you get to their house?
>
> http://i18.tinypic.com/4dwun42.jpg
I thought we established they were just doing that to piss you off :-)
• UltraMan •
Does it give the public the right to park in front of, or in, the driveway
cut? I doubt it.
Gordon Burditt
The owner probably doesn't have that right either. At least in
many areas, a homeowner can get a ticket for blocking his own
driveway, and his ownership is not a defense.
Whether or not you are financially responsible for maintenance and
repair of sidewalks has nothing to do with whether you are allowed
to prevent people walking on them.
Kent Wills
<fo...@bitchslap.org> wrote:
Maybe yes, maybe no. In some jurisdictions the area from the
sidewalk to the street is city property.
>Which
>is the point I ws making,
It's a shame you lack the intellectual skill to make a valid
point.
>which point you failed to understand because
>you're a muttonhead.
>
And yet I'm your social and intellectual superior. If I am a
mutton head, you honestly have my sympathies. It can't be easy going
through life being several levels below a muttonhead.
--
Kent
"I most stonger than Darth Vapor!"
-- Zladko "Zlad" Vladcik
BTR1701
"¥ UltraMan ¥" <ul...@man.jp> wrote:
> BTR1701 wrote:
> > In article <59n4tuF...@mid.individual.net>,
> > "¥ UltraMan ¥" <ul...@man.jp> wrote:
> >
> >> sinister wrote:
> >>> Because of the layout of our street, I often turn my car around
> >>> using the neighbor's driveway.
> >>
> >> Trespassing.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> The neighbor apparently isn't happy with this. Instead of politely
> >>> expressing her desire I not use her driveway to turn my car around,
> >>> he behaved in an extremely uncivil fashion.
> >>
> >> You are trespassing.
> >>> Which raises the following question: does a homeowner have a right
> >>> not to allow you to pull into their driveway with the purpose of
> >>> turning around?
> >>
> >> Just how pig-ignorant are you?
> >
> > Apparently no more ignorant than you. You can't say for sure whether
> > this is trespassing or not because in many jurisdictions, the property
> > lines only extend to the public-right-of-way (i.e. the sidewalk). The
> > two or three feet between the sidewalk and the street is public
> > property, just as the street itself is public property. And if this
> > guy isn't crossing over the sidewalk, then his actions *aren't*
> > trespassing.
>
> And you know this for certain?
That's the point. Without knowing the actual laws in effect where he
lives, NO ONE can say for certain what the legal status is in this case.
Well, no one but you, apparently. You know everything about everything.
You're pig-psychic or something.
> Many jurisdictions mark the property lines to the centerline
> of the street,
And many jurisdictions do things differently. How do you know which kind
we're dealing with here?
> > Without knowing for sure the laws and particulars in effect where he
> > lives, your bald-faced declaration that his actions are trespassing
> > are nothing but your own ill-informed opinion.
>
> This from the SS man who repeatedly aids and abets
> the willful violation of Texas underage drinking laws.
Ah, yes. Your typical refrain when you're backed into a corner and know
you have no response of substance to offer. Of course that doesn't
change the fact that without knowing for sure the laws and particulars
in effect where this guy lives, your bald-faced declaration that his
foaddoc
> I am a mutton head
Donna
<Dan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177975131.6...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> If nothing else, it's certainly not neighborly to disregard your
> neighbor's wishes about trespassing on their land.
Absolutely.
Jesus Christ. How hard is it for the OP to turn around someplace else????
Whether you can split hairs about whether the OP is legally allowed to be on
what might or might not be an easement, why is the OP determined to be an
asshole?
OP: Turn your damn car around someplace else. Stop being a dick. How hard
was that to figure out?
Donna
Old Wolf
> > In my case, I'm using very little of her driveway to do so. (Meaning
> > the front of my car never gets past the sidewalk in front of the
> > property.)
>
In my area , the sidewalk (and the vehicle crossings over it), as well
as the grass verge, are owned by the city council, i.e. are public
land.
Larry Bud
> > Which raises the following question: does a homeowner have a right not to
>
> allow you to pull into their driveway with the purpose of turning
> around?
>
> It's interesting how people seem to think they are somehow entitled to
> other people's property. I recently had some issues with neighbors
> thinking they could park in my driveway at will to make access to
> their cars more convient, even if this made access to our cars on our
> land next to impossible. The problem has since been handled, but the
> responses I got during the episode were amazing.
I hardly think taking 10 seconds to turn around in someone's driveway
is equivalent to parking your car there.
While it technically might be "trespassing", people (his neighbor)
needs to relax.
> Also, if you continue to agitate your neighbor by entering their
> property after notice not to do so, they're likely to return the
> love. What will you do when you run over the nails they just happened
> to drop in the driveway? It's their land, they have no requirement to
> keep their driveway up to your standards.
Setting booby traps may be illegal, and probably is, in his state.
Dan...@gmail.com
> I hardly think taking 10 seconds to turn around in someone's driveway
> is equivalent to parking your car there.
I agree. They only become similar when someone decides that they have
a "right" to someone else's property, and refuses to comply with
requests not to use said property in a certain fashion.
> While it technically might be "trespassing", people (his neighbor)
> needs to relax.
It would be nice if people were more relaxed. I have no problem at
all with people using my driveway to turn around, and it does happen
as I live on a narrow, dead end street at the intersection with a one-
way.
There are two sides to every story, and we're only getting one side.
The neighbor most likely has his reasons for not wanting the OP to use
his driveway. I could think of *several* legitimate potential
reasons.
Even on the off chance the neighbor is a nut, it's best not to
instigate them by insisting on using their property in a way they've
made clear is not acceptable to them. Use a different driveway if you
must, or just learn to handle your vehicle (even if it means putting
down the coffee, cell phone and cigarette for a minute). There's
something to be said for choosing your battles, and not making a
mountain of a molehill.
> > Also, if you continue to agitate your neighbor by entering their
> > property after notice not to do so, they're likely to return the
> > love. What will you do when you run over the nails they just happened
> > to drop in the driveway? It's their land, they have no requirement to
> > keep their driveway up to your standards.
>
> Setting booby traps may be illegal, and probably is, in his state.
Booby traps, sure. However, nails can end up in the driveway, if
nothing else as a byproduct of home improvement. I'm sure a good
search of my drive would turn up a couple nails with all the work
that's been done lately. It could be a nail, a staple, a tack or an
iron stake marking the spot he was going to have the no trespassing
sign installed.
TNKev
That is the case at my house too,but I maintain that 10 feet of property,
cut the grass,fertilize,aerate and overseed every year and my neighbor
drives through the corner of my yard pulling into his driveway, I asked him
to
stop because he was wearing a path in my yard. he still does it and
it has been 5 years, but I don't care to battle with them so every year
I put a little dirt in to fill the path and spread on some straw and stake
it out
so he doesn't run over it and as soon as the grass grows and the stakes are
gone he goes right back to running it over. I figure he is the one being an
asshole, I don't care to be an asshole. I will be the nice guy with the
nice lawn!
Brent P
> it has been 5 years, but I don't care to battle with them so every year
> I put a little dirt in to fill the path and spread on some straw and stake
> it out
> so he doesn't run over it and as soon as the grass grows and the stakes are
> gone he goes right back to running it over. I figure he is the one being an
> asshole, I don't care to be an asshole. I will be the nice guy with the
> nice lawn!
I'm sure if you think long enough you can come with a hazard to his tires
that seems like it was just dumb luck.... ;)
C. E. White
"• UltraMan •" <ul...@man.jp> wrote in message
news:59n7egF...@mid.individual.net...
>> It might depend on how far into the driveway you pull. For my old
>> house, my property line was inside the edge of the sidewalk. The
>> city's right of way therefore extended at least four feet from the
>> edge of the street.
>
> Nope. If as you claim your "property line" ended at the inside edge
> of
> the sidewalk, then the rest of the property was *owned* by the city,
> and not an "easement" as you erroneously assert.
My deed showed that I only owned up to the edge of the sidewalk. The
sidewalk, park strip, and street itself were not my property. However,
I was required by the city to maintain the park strip (the grassy
arear between the sidewalk and street) even though I clearly did not
own it. In my subdivision we only had sidewalks on my side of the
street. The houses across the street did not have them. Yet, they got
the benefit of using the sidewalk the city claimed I needed to
maintain. Seemed unfair. Strangely, like me, the people on the
otherside of the street also did not own to the edge of the street.
The city (or at least the property owners association - not sure who)
actually owned a strip comparable in width to the park strip and
sidewalk.
> If that driveway entrance and sidewalk was an easement to the city,
> they YOU were/are the owner, and as such are responsible financially
> for repairs/damage to that property.
As I said, my deed showed my property line ending at the inside edge
of the sidewalk. The city still claimed I was responsible for
maintaing the park strip, even though it was not part of my property.
>>The state claims either a 30 or a 40 foot right of
>> way from the centerline of all the county roads. This puts the edge
>> of
>> the state's right as much as 10 feet into some of my fields
>> (depending
>> on the road layout).
>
> Yep.
>
>> I am not sure I can call someone using the
>> claimed right of way a trespasser.
>
> If they are causing damage to it, you can hold them liable, as you
> are liable financially when the city demands that you repair the
> sidewalks/driveways
> inside that easement.
>
>
>> I think this is a case where you'd
>> need to consult the property maps and check the state right of way
>> rules before you start shooting. I'd guess as long as you don't go
>> past the line formed by the telephone poles or boxes, you are
>> likely
>> still on the city/state right of way
>
> Bullshit. Unless he is a Phone Co employee, he has no right to the
> Phone Company's easement
> on your property.
I did not say they could use the phone company's easment. I said if
you did not go past the line formed by the poles, etc. I was implying
as long as you stayed on the city's/state's right of way you were OK.
>>. A sub-division map would be your best way of checking.
>
> Or just stop using the neighbors driveway, eh?
I think the whole point is, where does the neighbors property
begin.....that is why you should check a map before pulling out the
guns.
Ed
Dan...@gmail.com
Or build a flower box. Build with PT 4x4's. Predrill, then lash with
8" spikes and 20lb sledge. Placed on the corner (or edge, in my case)
of the property, it's adds a nice touch while firmly enforcing the
property line. Filled with soil, mine is solid enough to total a
passenger car if push comes to shove. Given my location that day
should never come, but the box is solid enough.
Since flowers are such a nice addition to the neighborhood, it conveys
a marvelously diplomatic "you'll no longer be putting your vehicle
here". It leaves the normally confrontational and ignorant neighbors
at a loss for a reply. (That, or it was the 20lb sledge in my
hand).
TNKev
I believe what comes around goes around ten fold. I f I stick spikes in the
yard
or nails and cause him a flat or worse cause an accident that hurts or kills
somebody it will come back to me one way or another.
TNKev
The wife and I have thought of a rose garden made of RR cross ties
running the length of the front yard.
Dan...@gmail.com
wrote:
> The wife and I have thought of a rose garden made of RR cross ties
>
> - Show quoted text -
That would look nice as well. I favor that style of reply. My
initial response in my situation was going to be a fence around the
entire yard, but after I cooled off I didn't think the look would add
to the house, or the neighborhood. It would also require spending my
time and money on a counterattack to their lack of respect. Something
like a flower box or a rose garden allows you to improve your property
and do something you'd enjoy anyway, with the added benefit of
countering the neighbors' lack of respect.
Depending on his vehicle and level of arrogance or carelessness, the
RR ties may or may not be enough. Let us know what you do and how it
works out, I'd be curious to hear!
BTR1701
Larry Bud <larryb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Only in the sense that the booby trap could hurt someone. Setting a
booby trap that merely annoys or inconveniences a trespasser isn't a
crime.
Kent Wills
Mackey" <nos...@dont.spam> wrote:
>Dan...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> If nothing else, it's certainly not neighborly to disregard your
>> neighbor's wishes about trespassing on their land.
>
>I'm not sure if this can be defined as trespassing - perhaps it can be -
>the private property arguments are convincing, but nonetheless, if the
>guy is mereley using a few feet of driveway to turn around, it's not
>very neighborly of his neighbor to get their panties in such a twist
>over it.
It's pretty rude, IMO. There isn't much that can done about
that.
>
>I've used neighbors drivers before, and they've used ours - NOT to park
>in, but to ease turning around or pulling out when there are multiple
>vehicles blocking one that needed to get out.
I've had people drive all the way down to our house, turn
around and leave. Usually with a bit of a confused look on their
faces.
>
>Unless the neighbor wants to put up a gate (which is probably prohibited
>by the HOA), there's no way to stop a stray vehicle from doing exactly
>the same thing.
>
>Some people just need to relax a little and deal with the
>inconsequential things that happen in life.
It's not something worth getting upset over. At the same
time, the OP can use a different driveway. Maybe the owner(s) of the
house next to it won't care.
--
Kent
Take too many pictures, laugh too much, and love like you've never
been hurt because every sixty seconds you spend upset is a minute of
happiness you'll never get back
Kent Wills
<fo...@bitchslap.org> wrote:
>
>"Kent Wills" <comp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1r3e339c2ugi1ak88...@4ax.com...
>
>> And yet I'm your social and intellectual superior. If I am a
>>mutton head, you honestly have my sympathies. It can't be easy going
>>through life being several levels below a muttonhead.
>
Did you have a point? You didn't reply.
--
Kent
Aspire to inspire before you expire.
Larry Bud
> Larry Bud <larrybud2...@yahoo.com> said in rec.autos.driving:
>
> >> It's interesting how people seem to think they are somehow entitled to
> >> other people's property.
>
> >is equivalent to parking your car there.
>
>
> IBJAM thinking at its finest.
If you think pulling your front wheels on someone's driveway is
equivalent to parking your car there without their permission, you've
lost your mind.
Is it OK? Well, if for some reason I had to do this turnaround, and
someone asked me to stop, I'd certainly respect their request. And I
would also think that they're a fucking asshole cunt too that has
nothing better to do and looks for things to bitch and moan about.
>
> >While it technically might be "trespassing", people (his neighbor)
> >needs to relax.
>
> May 1000 of your neighbors find your driveway to be the most
> convenient place in which to turn their vehicles around.
Just ridiculous Scott. To equate the two is absurd. I'll tell you
what, you'll die when you're 50 if you let such trivial things bother
you so much.
Larry Bud
> > > > Which raises the following question: does a homeowner have a right not to
>
> > > allow you to pull into their driveway with the purpose of turning
> > > around?
>
> > > It's interesting how people seem to think they are somehow entitled to
> > > other people's property. I recently had some issues with neighbors
> > > thinking they could park in my driveway at will to make access to
> > > their cars more convient, even if this made access to our cars on our
> > > land next to impossible. The problem has since been handled, but the
> > > responses I got during the episode were amazing.
>
> > I hardly think taking 10 seconds to turn around in someone's driveway
> > is equivalent to parking your car there.
>
> > While it technically might be "trespassing", people (his neighbor)
> > needs to relax.
>
> > > Also, if you continue to agitate your neighbor by entering their
> > > property after notice not to do so, they're likely to return the
> > > love. What will you do when you run over the nails they just happened
> > > to drop in the driveway? It's their land, they have no requirement to
> > > keep their driveway up to your standards.
>
> > Setting booby traps may be illegal, and probably is, in his state.
>
> Only in the sense that the booby trap could hurt someone. Setting a
> booby trap that merely annoys or inconveniences a trespasser isn't a
> crime.
Possibly. However do you want to be "inconvenienced" when the guy
sues your ass? A lot of "right" people spend a lot of money showing
how "right" they are.
Larry Bud
> > is equivalent to parking your car there.
>
> I agree. They only become similar when someone decides that they have
> a "right" to someone else's property, and refuses to comply with
> requests not to use said property in a certain fashion.
Fair enough.
> Even on the off chance the neighbor is a nut, it's best not to
> instigate them by insisting on using their property in a way they've
> made clear is not acceptable to them. Use a different driveway if you
> must, or just learn to handle your vehicle (even if it means putting
> down the coffee, cell phone and cigarette for a minute). There's
> something to be said for choosing your battles, and not making a
> mountain of a molehill.
Sure, but that goes for his neighbor as well.
steve
"BTR1701" <btr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:btr1702-7BD976...@news.giganews.com...
> Only in the sense that the booby trap could hurt someone. Setting a
> booby trap that merely annoys or inconveniences a trespasser isn't a
> crime.
Once upon a time there was the pissant neighbor kid who thought he was GI
Joe and would do hurdles or dive and rolls over the short hedges in our
front yard onto the lawn. On more than on occasion my parents and I asked
him to knock it off. He of course ignored us, as did his parents when my
dad spoke to them about it.
One day he did it again and found out that the lawn on the other side had a
freshly applied layer of steer manure top dressing. He was pissed as was
his mother who thought we should launder or replace his clothes and shoes.
She came over and yelled at me about it. I pointed out that we did it
every year and had asked him to stop in the past. He did after that, and
the lawn looked great that year.
BTR1701
Larry Bud <larryb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
If I molded my life around what might or might not get me sued, I'd
never leave my home.
Besides, despite common perception, a lawsuit has to state a valid cause
of action in order to proceed. One need not spend a lot of money getting
one dismissed at summary judgment for failure to meet that burden.
jo...@phred.org
fo...@bitchslap.org says...
> Big difference to those who are particular about their lawns. In this case
> however the neighbor's evidently particular about her driveway. It's her
> prerogative to be as particular about her driveway, since she owns it.
If, in fact, she does own it, and has the right to control access to it.
Neither of which is something that can be assumed, and neither are
stated in the original posing.
--
jo...@phred.org is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Updated Infrared Photography Gallery:
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/photo/ir.html>
foaddoc
> I am a mutton head
--
"There will be NO change in CO2 levels since we exhale carbon
monoxide, not carbon dioxide, stupid."
-- Kent Wills, geenious
jo...@phred.org
Dan...@gmail.com says...
> On May 1, 9:39 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
> > In article <46373bcc$0$97233$892e7...@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net>, TNKev wrote:
> > > it has been 5 years, but I don't care to battle with them so every year
> > > I put a little dirt in to fill the path and spread on some straw and stake
> > > it out
> > > so he doesn't run over it and as soon as the grass grows and the stakes are
> > > gone he goes right back to running it over. I figure he is the one being an
> > > asshole, I don't care to be an asshole. I will be the nice guy with the
> > > nice lawn!
> >
> > I'm sure if you think long enough you can come with a hazard to his tires
> > that seems like it was just dumb luck.... ;)
>
> Or build a flower box. Build with PT 4x4's. Predrill, then lash with
> 8" spikes and 20lb sledge. Placed on the corner (or edge, in my case)
> of the property, it's adds a nice touch while firmly enforcing the
> property line. Filled with soil, mine is solid enough to total a
> passenger car if push comes to shove. Given my location that day
> should never come, but the box is solid enough.
Just beware that "dumb luck" is not a reliable defense if it turns out
you weren't legally allowed to build an obstruction there. Check local
codes for required clear space near roadways and driveway cuts just in
case.
Kent Wills
<fo...@bitchslap.org> wrote:
>>"Kent Wills" <comp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> Kent has again proved me wrong.
Looks right to me.
_ Prof. Jonez _
> Brent P wrote:
>> In article
>> <46373bcc$0$97233$892e...@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net>, TNKev
>> wrote:
>>
>>> it has been 5 years, but I don't care to battle with them so every
>>> year
>>> I put a little dirt in to fill the path and spread on some straw and
>>> stake it out
>>> so he doesn't run over it and as soon as the grass grows and the
>>> stakes are gone he goes right back to running it over. I figure he
>>> is the one being an asshole, I don't care to be an asshole. I will
>>> be the nice guy with the nice lawn!
>>
>> I'm sure if you think long enough you can come with a hazard to his
>> tires
>> that seems like it was just dumb luck.... ;)
>
> I believe what comes around goes around ten fold.
Really? Any actual examples to back it up, say Iraq for instance?
• UltraMan •
monoxide, not carbon dioxide, stupid."
-- Kent Wills, geenious
ROTFLMAO !!
Pure Wills.
• UltraMan •
Bullshit.
Dan...@gmail.com
> Is it OK? Well, if for some reason I had to do this turnaround, and
> someone asked me to stop, I'd certainly respect their request. And I
> would also think that they're a fucking asshole cunt too that has
> nothing better to do and looks for things to bitch and moan about.
regarding their property.
Maybe they think your car is a POS and that a smaller version of that
oil puddle under your normal spot would not look good on the brick
drive they just paid a few grand to get laid.
Maybe they think you're a "f*****g a*****e c**t for the way you
recklessly tear about the neighborhood, and don't want you hitting one
of their pets or children.
Maybe, since you clearly can't handle your vehicle and need their
drive to turn around, you've come off the edge of their drive and
disrupted their lawn or garden bordering the driveway.
Maybe they find the window rattling music you bump annoying, and don't
want it any closer than it needs to be (i.e. their driveway).
Maybe they just don't like you because in the past you've shown you
think you're entitled to things that are not yours, and they don't
want you developing the idea you're entitled to their driveway.
> > >While it technically might be "trespassing", people (his neighbor)
> > >needs to relax.
>
> > May 1000 of your neighbors find your driveway to be the most
> > convenient place in which to turn their vehicles around.
>
> Just ridiculous Scott. To equate the two is absurd. I'll tell you
> what, you'll die when you're 50 if you let such trivial things bother
> you so much.
Scott handled the absurd comment, but I'd like to point out that I
know quite a few people well over 50 who are bothered by less. I
think such anal retentiveness may actually increase chances of living
long enough to become a salty old bugger.
Dan...@gmail.com
> > Or build a flower box. Build with PT 4x4's. Predrill, then lash with
> > 8" spikes and 20lb sledge. Placed on the corner (or edge, in my case)
> > of the property, it's adds a nice touch while firmly enforcing the
> > property line. Filled with soil, mine is solid enough to total a
> > passenger car if push comes to shove. Given my location that day
> > should never come, but the box is solid enough.
>
> Just beware that "dumb luck" is not a reliable defense if it turns out
> you weren't legally allowed to build an obstruction there. Check local
> codes for required clear space near roadways and driveway cuts just in
> case.
Good point, though this will matter more in a designed community with
a HOA & the associated brats keeping tabs on lawn height. In my area
you can restore a pickup truck and a tractor side by side in your
lawn, but it is rare to find a place you can't build a flowerbox or
bed within the limits of your own property. The wording usually keeps
your structure from protruding past your property line into the
roadway or neighbors driveway. Be warned in your planning, this
includes the plants or flowers.
The nice side to this is that anyone who wants to tell you to move it
needs to prove that it's impeding onto their property. This can only
be done with a full survey, costing $4-8K in my area.
My box is built a fair safety margin onto my side of the property
line, and built with the blessing of the BI & LEO - both of whom were
included in the ordeal. If you don't have a homeowners association, a
quick visit to the BI can be a good idea. He'll almost certainly tell
you no permit is required and give you a couple pointers and leads to
keep your project problem free, and it's nice to have checked and
established that relationship. Much like the police when you're
pulled over, the BI is something of a god in matters of your home.
Knowing him and having paid the proper respect beforehand is nice in
both instances.
Larry Bud
> >equivalent to parking your car there without their permission, you've
> >lost your mind.
>
> not tresspassing, you've lost yours.
Never said it might not be trespassing. But to get your undies in a
bunch borders on insanity.
> >Is it OK? Well, if for some reason I had to do this turnaround, and
> >someone asked me to stop, I'd certainly respect their request.
>
> I would never do it in the first place. I have my own driveway if I
> need to turn around.
Really? So you've never turned around in someone's driveway, after
making a wrong turn, or passing up their house in their neighborhood?
What do you do, drive around the block? Please.
> >And I
> >would also think that they're a fucking asshole cunt too that has
> >nothing better to do and looks for things to bitch and moan about.
>
> What about the fucking asshole cunt that uses things that don't belong
> to him without the owner's permission? Presumptuous and downright
> rude.
Nah, you're only a fucking asshole cunt when you do things that are
unreasonable.
> >> >While it technically might be "trespassing", people (his neighbor)
> >> >needs to relax.
>
> >> May 1000 of your neighbors find your driveway to be the most
> >> convenient place in which to turn their vehicles around.
>
> >Just ridiculous Scott. To equate the two is absurd.
>
> Huh? If doing it once is A-OK, then what's wrong with doing it 1000
> times? Or 1000 different people doing it?
Because I live in the land of reality, and your example isn't
realistic. Just like when your neighbor asks to borrow a
screwdriver, it doesn't mean that it's realistic that 1000 of your
neighbors or strangers will ask. Of course, you'd probably call the
cops before they ever got to your front door.
You're quite the neighbor.
Larry Bud
> On May 1, 9:02 pm, Larry Bud <larrybud2...@yahoo.com> wrote:> Is it OK? Well, if for some reason I had to do this turnaround, and
> > someone asked me to stop, I'd certainly respect their request. And I
> > would also think that they're a fucking asshole cunt too that has
> > nothing better to do and looks for things to bitch and moan about.
>
> You can think what you'd like, as long as you respect their request
> regarding their property.
Like I said, I would respect their property. And I'd walk away hoping
I'd never turn into such an anal retentive asshole.
I'm sure you guys bitch and moan when the neighborhood kid's ball
lands in your yard too. Maybe you and Scott could live next to each
other. We could watch you together on the People Court, complaining
how one person's tree limb creeped over your fence by two feet and
that you want Scott to rake up HIS leaves.
Larry Bud
> In article <1178067939.625006.266...@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Please. The judges in this country hardly EVER throw a case out of
court.
Dan...@gmail.com
> Like I said, I would respect their property. And I'd walk away hoping
> I'd never turn into such an anal retentive asshole.
>
> I'm sure you guys bitch and moan when the neighborhood kid's ball
> lands in your yard too. Maybe you and Scott could live next to each
> other. We could watch you together on the People Court, complaining
> how one person's tree limb creeped over your fence by two feet and
> that you want Scott to rake up HIS leaves.
I said in this thread I don't mind when people turn around in my
driveway. I actually let the neighborhood kids play in my driveway
and what little yard I have, as grass is at a serious premium in my
area. Of course, this comes with needing to buy plenty of plastic
cups and the occasional couple jugs of chocolate milk, but we don't
mind.
I'm also the neighborhood mechanic. There are at least 7 kids I could
identify by name on sight on my 30 house dead-end street who come
banging on my door whenever anything goes wrong with a bike, from a
flat tire to a wheel flattened by a car. Toss their friends into the
mix, I'm the local mechanic for at least a dozen bikes, and my hose is
the summertime cooldown spot. I never turn them away, though I go
through patch kits like candy these days. There is not a kids bike on
my street I have not wrenched. New bike? Take it to Dan, he'll
adjust the seat and inflate the tires. Old bike? Take it to Dan,
he'll lube it up and fix that flat. It's to the point where I can
identify a few of them (Dillon especially) just from the knocking.
The ONLY time I have had any issues with any of my neighbors was when
they were parking in my driveway, restricting my access to my
vehicles. I tried talking to them and being diplomatic many times,
but they continued to feel they had some sort of right to my land. I
even asked LEO to talk to them instead of just towing the vehicles
when it became clear they wouldn't listen to me. LEO gave me the
choice of build a divider (i.e. flowerbox), a fence or have them towed
out. I went with the flowerbox. Considering everything leading up to
that, I think I took the more neighborly option.
The neighborhood kids balls don't land in my yard, that's where they
go to play to begin with. The leaves that fall in my yard get raked
and brought to the dump, and the branches that fall in my yard are
firewood. I don't have a single tree on my property, and yet I never
complain. It's all part of homeownership, and I enjoy it.
You're making bullshit assumptions about people you don't know without
having the facts. I'd suggest working on that. With the exception of
one arrogant college kid renting a room next door, my neighbors think
I'm quite neighborly. It's been discussed over quite a few fires,
fire-cooked snacks and beverages.
foaddoc
<jo...@phred.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.20a191dfe...@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <4636a66f$0$27098$4c36...@roadrunner.com>,
> fo...@bitchslap.org says...
>
>> Big difference to those who are particular about their lawns. In this
>> case
>> however the neighbor's evidently particular about her driveway. It's her
>> prerogative to be as particular about her driveway, since she owns it.
>
> If, in fact, she does own it, and has the right to control access to it.
> Neither of which is something that can be assumed, and neither are
> stated in the original posing.
Um, no. Ownership is implied. He said it was "her driveway." Her is the
possessive of she. Her driveway, meaning she owns the driveway. If she
doesn't own it, it's not her driveway, and she can't control its use and OP
could simply tell her to fuck off.
foaddoc
> Looks right to me.
Forge away numbskull.
jo...@phred.org
says...
I'm sorry if English is a second language for you, that would certainly
make this conversation much harder to follow.
In idomatic English, "her driveway" could as easily mean "the driveway
to her house" or "the driveway she usually uses," it does not
necessarily mean "the driveway she owns."
e.g. "my home" is on "my street" in "my home town," but that does not
mean I own the street, or the town, or even that I necessarily own the
home, merely that I live there, could just as easily be a rental.
_ Prof. Jonez _
> Dan...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On May 1, 9:39 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P)
>> wrote:
>>> In article
>>> wrote:
>>>> it has been 5 years, but I don't care to battle with them so every
>>>> year
>>>> I put a little dirt in to fill the path and spread on some straw
>>>> and stake it out
>>>> so he doesn't run over it and as soon as the grass grows and the
>>>> stakes are gone he goes right back to running it over. I figure he
>>>> is the one being an asshole, I don't care to be an asshole. I will
>>>> be the nice guy with the nice lawn!
>>>
>>> I'm sure if you think long enough you can come with a hazard to his
>>> tires
>>> that seems like it was just dumb luck.... ;)
>>
>> with 8" spikes and 20lb sledge. Placed on the corner (or edge, in
>> my case) of the property, it's adds a nice touch while firmly
>> enforcing the property line. Filled with soil, mine is solid enough
>> to total a passenger car if push comes to shove. Given my location
>> that day should never come, but the box is solid enough.
>>
>> conveys a marvelously diplomatic "you'll no longer be putting your
>> vehicle here". It leaves the normally confrontational and ignorant
>> neighbors at a loss for a reply. (That, or it was the 20lb sledge
>> in my hand).
>
> The wife and I have thought of a rose garden made of RR cross ties
> running the length of the front yard.
Good idea, thorny bushes at the sidewalk so that children running past
can get cut, bleed or scratch their eyes when they stumble ...
_ Prof. Jonez _
> On May 1, 10:10 pm, <j...@phred.org> wrote:
>>> Or build a flower box. Build with PT 4x4's. Predrill, then lash
>>> with 8" spikes and 20lb sledge. Placed on the corner (or edge, in
>>> my case) of the property, it's adds a nice touch while firmly
>>> enforcing the property line. Filled with soil, mine is solid
>>> enough to total a passenger car if push comes to shove. Given my
>>> location that day should never come, but the box is solid enough.
>>
>> Just beware that "dumb luck" is not a reliable defense if it turns
>> out you weren't legally allowed to build an obstruction there.
>> Check local codes for required clear space near roadways and
>> driveway cuts just in case.
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Good point, though this will matter more in a designed community with
> a HOA & the associated brats keeping tabs on lawn height. In my area
> you can restore a pickup truck and a tractor side by side in your
> lawn, but it is rare to find a place you can't build a flowerbox or
> bed within the limits of your own property. The wording usually keeps
> your structure from protruding past your property line into the
> roadway or neighbors driveway.
The usual wording has mandatory setbacks for structures, plants
and bushes from sidewalks.
>Be warned in your planning, this
> includes the plants or flowers.
And in many locations the TYPE of plant. Poisonous,
Thorny or Child Eating plants are often prohibited.
> The nice side to this is that anyone who wants to tell you to move it
> needs to prove that it's impeding onto their property. This can only
> be done with a full survey, costing $4-8K in my area.
LOL! What area is that exactly?
There are 1000s of surveyors who currently charge between
$200 - $800 that would love to move to such an affluent area.
> My box is built a fair safety margin onto my side of the property
> line, and built with the blessing of the BI & LEO - both of whom were
> included in the ordeal. If you don't have a homeowners association, a
> quick visit to the BI can be a good idea. He'll almost certainly tell
> you no permit is required and give you a couple pointers and leads to
> keep your project problem free, and it's nice to have checked and
> established that relationship. Much like the police when you're
> pulled over, the BI is something of a god in matters of your home.
> Knowing him and having paid the proper respect beforehand is nice in
> both instances.
So did you swallow?
_ Prof. Jonez _
> In article <1177975131.6...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Dan...@gmail.com" <Dan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Which raises the following question: does a homeowner have a right
>>> not to
>> allow you to pull into their driveway with the purpose of turning
>> around?
>>
>> It's interesting how people seem to think they are somehow entitled
>> to other people's property. I recently had some issues with
>> neighbors thinking they could park in my driveway at will to make
>> access to their cars more convient, even if this made access to our
>> cars on our land next to impossible. The problem has since been
>> handled, but the responses I got during the episode were amazing.
>
As arrogant as aiding and abetting the drunken Bu$h Sluts
in willfully and habitually breaking Texas Criminal laws ?
foaddoc
<jo...@phred.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.20a24f7f2...@newsgroups.comcast.net...
> In article <4638a887$0$5762$4c36...@roadrunner.com>, fo...@bitchslap.org
> says...
>>
>> <jo...@phred.org> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.20a191dfe...@newsgroups.comcast.net...
>> > In article <4636a66f$0$27098$4c36...@roadrunner.com>,
>> > fo...@bitchslap.org says...
>> >
>> >> Big difference to those who are particular about their lawns. In this
>> >> case
>> >> however the neighbor's evidently particular about her driveway. It's
>> >> her
>> >> prerogative to be as particular about her driveway, since she owns it.
>> >
>> > If, in fact, she does own it, and has the right to control access to
>> > it.
>> > Neither of which is something that can be assumed, and neither are
>> > stated in the original posing.
>>
>> Um, no. Ownership is implied. He said it was "her driveway." Her is the
>> possessive of she. Her driveway, meaning she owns the driveway. If she
>> doesn't own it, it's not her driveway, and she can't control its use and
>> OP
>> could simply tell her to fuck off.
>
> I'm sorry if English is a second language for you, that would certainly
> make this conversation much harder to follow.
Say, I have an idea, how about you take your limp wristed flames and fuck
yourself in the ass with them.
> In idomatic English, "her driveway" could as easily mean "the driveway
> to her house" or "the driveway she usually uses," it does not
> necessarily mean "the driveway she owns."
>
> e.g. "my home" is on "my street" in "my home town," but that does not
> mean I own the street, or the town, or even that I necessarily own the
> home, merely that I live there, could just as easily be a rental.
It'd have been pretty fucking stupid if the OP asked whether the homeowner
could exercise control over a drive way she that "usually uses" (like the
one she frequents at the local Burger King) or a driveway located somewhere
in her hometown, or a driveway owned by the municipal government, or in fact
any other driveway than a driveway that belonged to the homeowner. Because
the answer to those questions would obviously be no, you can't exercise
control over property that you don't own: you can no sooner stop a driver
from using a driveway that you don't own than you can build your own toll
booth in the middle of the fucking interstate. So in fact the only
interesting legal issue presented is whether a homeowner can stop a driver
from using a driveway owned by the homeowner. PS Feel free to fuck yourself
with this paragraph as well.
Dan...@gmail.com
> The usual wording has mandatory setbacks for structures, plants
> and bushes from sidewalks.
what kinds of vehicles you can put in your driveway, but not in my
area.
> >Be warned in your planning, this
> > includes the plants or flowers.
>
> And in many locations the TYPE of plant. Poisonous,
> Thorny or Child Eating plants are often prohibited.
Perhaps. Where I grew up (suburb north of Boston) thorny plants
overrunning the sidewalk were common, so I must have missed the places
with such restrictions. Fortunately my flower box does not border the
street or any sidewalk, nor do my plants reach outside of the box.
> > The nice side to this is that anyone who wants to tell you to move it
> > needs to prove that it's impeding onto their property. This can only
> > be done with a full survey, costing $4-8K in my area.
>
> LOL! What area is that exactly?
Southeast NH.
> There are 1000s of surveyors who currently charge between
> $200 - $800 that would love to move to such an affluent area.
Something about it being basically downtown in a historic mill town,
there are no survey markers within any reasonable distance. Nothing
in my area was built less than 100 years ago, which apparently
complicates the process. They'll come out and measure from plot plans
(grabbed at town hall for a nominal fee) & existing driveways, but I
can (and did) do that myself. That won't hold up in court, they need
a survey marker. Not a big thing in a new development where markers
are everywhere, but an issue on my street.
> > My box is built a fair safety margin onto my side of the property
> > line, and built with the blessing of the BI & LEO - both of whom were
> > included in the ordeal. If you don't have a homeowners association, a
> > quick visit to the BI can be a good idea. He'll almost certainly tell
> > you no permit is required and give you a couple pointers and leads to
> > keep your project problem free, and it's nice to have checked and
> > established that relationship. Much like the police when you're
> > pulled over, the BI is something of a god in matters of your home.
> > Knowing him and having paid the proper respect beforehand is nice in
> > both instances.
>
> So did you swallow?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Spoken like some renting biter or spoiled brat who has no experience
on the matter. Being the son of a GC, I have picked up quite a bit.
I know that since I plan on doing tons of work to this house, I'll end
up needing him there from time to time. I know BI's tend to dislike
any structure they didn't approve, even if it didn't require their
approval. I'd rather he know about the box ahead of time than have
him interrogating me on my construction methods and measurements right
before I try to get him to sign off on a bunch of new electrical work
that I did myself. I suppose if you can get a survey that will hold
up in court for $200 you've got the money left over to pay my Dad to
take care of any work done to your house. In that case, he'll deal
with the BI. Since I do most of my own work, I need to deal with the
BI myself.
It's also faster in most cases to swing in and ask than it is to find
all of the relevant info you need (permits, size/color restrictions,
etc) on your own. For someone who's so knowledgeable about different
setbacks required for certain plants, I figured you'd know this
already.
proffsl
> TNKev wrote:
If their running past, they won't be running through. It's not the
obligation of others to compensate for your children.
_ Prof. Jonez _
Wanna bet?
_ Prof. Jonez _
> "Kent Wills" <comp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2ctf33d4tnvsrmn1v...@4ax.com...
>
>> Looks right to me.
>
> Forge away numbskull.
There will be NO change in CO2 levels since we exhale carbon
monoxide, not carbon dioxide, stupid.
-- Kent Wills, geenious
That's so typical of the profound depths of ignorance that
Kent Wills exhibits whenever he makes assertions on
usenet.
Did you catch the recent one where he claimed
that accusing someone of being pregnant - who
factually isn't pregnant - is _not_ a false accusation
in Kent's spongiform brain.
No wonder this moron is a sucker for grotesque bronze-age
superstitious idiocy.
jo...@phred.org
Dan...@gmail.com says...
> Perhaps. Where I grew up (suburb north of Boston) thorny plants
> overrunning the sidewalk were common, so I must have missed the places
> with such restrictions.
The restrictions exist far more often than vigorous enforcement of them,
but non-enforcement does not remove your liability if your rosebush wins
the lottery and becomes the one-in-a-million bush that does skewer an
eyeball.
Whenever you're putting something next to a public right-of-way, go
beyond asking yourself what's reasonable, ask yourself, "what could a
good lawyer convince a jury to make me pay a little old lady or an
injured child?" If you don't like the answers that gives, live further
from the public right-of-way ;-)
jo...@phred.org
Sorry, no intent to offend. Your misreading of the sentence was so
obvious I assumed it was a language issue.
proffsl
If their running past, they aren't running through. It's not the
Inherent Obligation of one to compensate for the children of others.
Matthew T. Russotto
<jo...@phred.org> wrote:
>
>Whenever you're putting something next to a public right-of-way, go
>beyond asking yourself what's reasonable, ask yourself, "what could a
>good lawyer convince a jury to make me pay a little old lady or an
>injured child?"
If you live your life by that standard, you are going to be paralyzed.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
foaddoc
_ Prof. Jonez _
> In article <MPG.20a28dc77...@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
> <jo...@phred.org> wrote:
>>
>> Whenever you're putting something next to a public right-of-way, go
>> beyond asking yourself what's reasonable, ask yourself, "what could a
>> good lawyer convince a jury to make me pay a little old lady or an
>> injured child?"
>
> If you live your life by that standard, you are going to be paralyzed.
So go kill some children then ...
_ Prof. Jonez _
Kent Wills wrote:
> "_ Prof. Jonez _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>
> [various snips for brevity]
>> When the jury finds that the person you accused
>> of being pregnant is in fact not pregnant, then, ipso facto,
>> your initial allegation/charge is false.
> If the woman in question had put on a great deal of weight and
> was seen shopping in the maternity section of the store, there was
> probable cause to believe she was pregnant. That she turned out not
> to be pregnant doesn't mean the allegation was false.
_ Prof. Jonez _
Really? Look up "attractive nuisance" then, and do tell us
who'd be liable when trespassing children fall into and drown
in your unfenced swimming pool ...
Kent Wills
_" <the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>
>Did you catch the recent one where he claimed
>that accusing someone of being pregnant - who
>factually isn't pregnant - is _not_ a false accusation
>in Kent's spongiform brain.
As always, you are being dishonest.
I stated that if the woman had put on a great deal of weight
and was seen shopping in the maternity section, accusing her of being
pregnant would not be a false accusation. Possibly incorrect, but not
false.
Why do you lie so often? Do you have the ability to be
honest?
Never mind. You've proved, again, that you can't.
>
>No wonder this moron is a sucker for grotesque bronze-age
>superstitious idiocy.
Where's the proof that atheism is correct? Why do you run and
hide when I ask about it?
Why, when I gave you the dictionary definition of a valid,
verifiable claim, did you stop posting to the thread?
Time to put up or shut up, stupid.
--
Kent
Bless me, Father, for I have committed an original sin.
I poked a badger with a spoon.
Kent Wills
<ul...@man.jp> wrote:
His usual dishonest tripe. The man is UNABLE to be honest, no matter
what nym he uses. The man is clearly pathological in his dishonesty.
Get help, man. Seriously. Your inability to be honest is doing you
farm more harm than good.
--
Kent
Take too many pictures, laugh too much, and love like you've never
been hurt because every sixty seconds you spend upset is a minute of
happiness you'll never get back
BTR1701
Larry Bud <larryb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
When I was practicing, I managed to win summary judgment motions
regularly. It ain't that hard if the plaintiff has no case.
BTR1701
• UltraMan •
SCSD
steve
"• UltraMan •" <ul...@man.jp> wrote in message
news:59qimcF...@mid.individual.net...
> steve wrote:
>> "BTR1701" <btr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>> news:btr1702-7BD976...@news.giganews.com...
>>
>>> Only in the sense that the booby trap could hurt someone. Setting a
>>> booby trap that merely annoys or inconveniences a trespasser isn't a
>>> crime.
>>
>> was GI Joe and would do hurdles or dive and rolls over the short
>> hedges in our front yard onto the lawn. On more than on occasion my
>> parents and I asked him to knock it off. He of course ignored us, as
>> did his parents when my dad spoke to them about it.
>>
>> One day he did it again and found out that the lawn on the other side
>> had a freshly applied layer of steer manure top dressing. He was
>> pissed as was his mother who thought we should launder or replace his
>> clothes and shoes. She came over and yelled at me about it. I pointed
>> out that we did it every year and had asked him to stop in
>> the past. He did after that, and the lawn looked great that year.
>
> Bullshit.
That is what his mother said
_ Prof. Jonez _
> As I understand it, on Wed, 2 May 2007 13:33:02 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez
> _" <the...@jonez.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Did you catch the recent one where he claimed
>> that accusing someone of being pregnant - who
>> factually isn't pregnant - is _not_ a false accusation
>> in Kent's spongiform brain.
>
> As always, you are being dishonest.
Kent Wills wrote:
_ Prof. Jonez _
> Where's the proof that atheism is correct? Why do you run and
> hide when I ask about it?
I will gladly show that your pig-ignorant grotesque
perverted superstition that you call christianity is
utterly false.
> Why, when I gave you the dictionary definition of a valid,
> verifiable claim, did you stop posting to the thread?
It just illustrated the level of your prevaricating dishonesty.
Why don't you hold your superstitious religious claims to
the same standard? If you had the honesty to do so
then my work would be done.
> Time to put up or shut up, stupid.
Ok, don't run away this time ...
So your Holey Baable is the inerrant revealed word of god himself, eh?
_ Prof. Jonez _
> "_ Prof. Jonez _" wrote:
>
> [various snips for brevity]
>> When the jury finds that the person you accused
>> of being pregnant is in fact not pregnant, then, ipso facto,
>> your initial allegation/charge is false.
> If the woman in question had put on a great deal of weight and
> was seen shopping in the maternity section of the store, there was
> probable cause to believe she was pregnant. That she turned out not
> to be pregnant doesn't mean the allegation was false.
---