Issue from Previous Owners - now neighbour wants to sue me for it

[RPI]

Outstanding outcome. Much better than getting lawyers involved or even going the QCAT route.

 

[wylie]

Outstanding outcome. Much better than getting lawyers involved or even going the QCAT route.

Absolutely agree this outcome is the best all round. I'd love to hear though whether the neighbour would have had a chance of winning by suing the new owner?

 

[WattleIdo]

It's my land being retained, their property is cut lower than ours. The fence sits on top of the wall.

He had tried to contact the previous owner via the sales agent (and directly I assume as well since the husband was camping in the house after divorce), but they had ignored him since they didn't care about the fence.

The fence repair only came up for me because of bad timing and bad luck; Immediately after settlement the pool safety certificate expired.

To get a tenant in - I need to renew the certificate.

To renew the certificate with a leaning fence (climbable object), I have to fix the fence.

To fix the fence, I have to contact the neighbour.

Neighbour says to fix the fence, the retaining wall must also be replaced since the posts go into it.

Neighbour was just shocked at the total cost of fence + retaining wall being around $6000 and had a bad reaction to my PMs letter, and I think a misunderstanding.

I did have the option of installing just a metal "pool fence" for < $1000 and walking away from the rest, but I'd rather fix it for the long term and the fence issue will come back later anyway.

So yesterday I talked to the neighbour directly as they indicated they would prefer this and not to go via the PM. We both explained our situations and we both agreed that it's bad for both of us, so we came to a compromise.
He will try and find cheaper options and quotes, and we will do 50/50 on the lot, maybe about $2k-2.5k each.

Alot less hassle and expense than dealing with QCat and lawyers etc
Common sense and some nice emails prevails.

However it's less exciting reading for somersoft, as we aren't going to establish who is "right". But I think there's a lesson here anyway.

Thanks for your input all

Looks like good old fashioned Aussie fair go attitude won out in the end!

 

[chilliblue]

At least you were able to communicate and looks like come to a good resolution.

 

[TMNT]

good outcome!

Its interesting how everyone seems to end up with absolute dud neighbours!!!

playing devils advocate, they are probably thinking we are dud neighbours too

 

[danwatto]

They turned out to be really good neighbours!

Just thought we were duds I guess, or the previous ones were..

 

[letiha]

For the neighbours to "sue" they would have to commence proceeding in their magistrates or other small claims court in their area (sorry didn't see where the property was located).

Normally the claim and statement of claim would have to do a few things:

1. allege the parties involed.
2. Allege the period of time
3. Allege the negligence
4. Allege the damage
5 Allege the cost of the damage.


A claim would start like this.....

1. At all material times the defendant was the registered owner of the property at 1 Smith Street, Brisbane in the State of Queensland, being described as Lot 1 on Survey Plan 12 345 Parish of Brisbane County of Stanley in the State of Queensland.



So even if they tried this the first part of the defence would be.

"In respect to paragraph 1, the defendant denies the allegations because they were not the registered owner of 1 Smith Street, Brisbane in the State of Queensland between xxxx May 2014 and XXX June 2014.

Its that simple...

They really could still sue the previous owners

 

[sash]

My standard response to these sort of threats is ...please go ahead.

Then in the same breath...it will be a bit of an inconvenience...but your barristers have 99% win rate. Also let him know that of course you will counter sue for costs.....

Hi All,

I acquired a property a couple of months ago in Brisbane.

There were some palm trees close to the fence, and we removed them.

Then we wrote to the neighbour and asked about replacing the fence.

However now the neighbour tells me that the palm trees have damaged his retaining wall close to the fence over the last few years and wants me to pay the full cost of $6000 to replace his retaining wall.

What's the law say about this? Am I really liable for something that occurred prior to owning the property?

Of course we did searches and there were no actions in place when I purchased it, but the neighbour is looking to take action in the near future.

Many thanks

 

[TMNT]

My standard response to these sort of threats is ...please go ahead.

Then in the same breath...it will be a bit of an inconvenience...but your barristers have 99% win rate. Also let him know that of course you will counter sue for costs.....

same, in a previous lifetime I used to sell some left over stock on ebay and online, and I used to get threats often "I will be taking legal action if you dont give me a refund/freebie". To which my response was "sure, here are my lawyers details, please contact them directly" never heard back from 99% of them.

Not sure how they thought how a mans size 9 shoe was going to fit a lady with a size 6 just because it was pink

or

how a birthday present was going to be delivered by Monday evening party, when they made a purchase on Friday 4pm even though they paid express post