Save your property in Greece from 20yr Trespass

Forums Living in Greece Property Save your property in Greece from 20yr Trespass

This topic contains 34 replies, has 10 voices, and was last updated by  rustersorven 3 years, 2 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #157142

    poppy1
    Participant
    Homeric

    Many people, Greek nationals or not, own real estate property in Greece. This property may consist of lands, lots, houses, apartments, agricultural land etc. and the owners may have obtained ownership title on it either by a sale transaction, or by acceptance of an inheritance, or by donation from a relative or a friend.
    The owners of real estate property in Greece, especially those that reside permanently outside of Greece, must bear in mind that the more they abandon their property in Greece, the higher the risk to legally lose it someday. Property, anywhere in the world, must be taken care of, and real estate property has no meaning for the owner, unless he/she exercises his/her ownership rights over it, at least from time to time. Otherwise, a trespasser may start dominating the property himself and establish ownership rights with time.
    It is possible a third party, a trespasser, someone who admits that has no rights at all, to start dominating over a land and finally to become its legal owner? Under Greek law this is possible, if the owner of the land does not care about the fate of his own property for a certain period of time. If the owner does not throw out the trespasser, for a period of twenty years from the time of the first trespass act, the trespasser becomes legal owner himself.
    This is called “hrisiktisia” in Greek, and it is a legal notion based on the principle that properties must be cultivated or developed by their owners. The development of a property is good for the people, the community and the economy. It is unproductive to leave pieces of real estate unattended and outside of the economic life of the community.
    The Greek law allows the owner of a real estate property a period of twenty years to exercise the owner’s rights over this property. The owner must show up, at least from time to time, during those twenty years. The owner must have proof that he/she exercised, either in person or via a proxy, his/her property rights over the land/property, by building a fence, by defending the property against trespassers, by cultivating it, by developing it, by planting trees in it, by renting it out to others and by doing several other acts that prove the owner’s presence and his dominant role over his own land.
    If the owner does not perform some of these acts during the twenty – year period, the law awards full property rights to that person (even to the transgressor) who can prove that he/she actually did what the owner omitted to do all these years.
    The twenty – year period is the basic rule, but Greek law confers ownership even after ten years, in some cases. If a person holds a title over the land, but the title proves to be invalid for any kind of reason, that person becomes full legal owner if he can prove that he dominated over the land for ten years and that he acted in good faith.
    According to court rulings and their precedence, the twenty years start to count from the time the trespasser starts his illegal domination over the land and the owner omits or fails to act against him. Action against the trespasser may be a court lawsuit or even physical defense of the property, if the trespass action is very recent.
    It is noteworthy that the trespasser does not have to notify the owner that domination has started in order the twenty – year period to start running. It is the owner’s obligation to check from time to time and as often as possible whether third parties are trespassing on his land.
    On the other hand, there is a notification obligation, if the “trespasser” is a co-owner of the real estate. This means in plain words that if two brothers own the same piece of land in Greece, each of them having 50% ab indivisio (undivided) of the same land, and the one brother lives in Greece, taking care of the property for himself and on behalf of his brother, who lives in New Zealand, the brother who lives in Greece cannot start the twenty – year domination over his brother’s half, unless he notifies him that he starts taking care of the property exclusively for himself and not on behalf of the brother who lives abroad.
    The Greek courts have formed this rule in order to protect the co-owner who lives outside of Greece and cannot tell whether his brother develops the land for both of them, or only for himself.
    The conclusion is that owners of real estate in Greece must visit their property at least every few years in order to personally make sure that the property has not been captured by someone else, and that there are no signs of trespassing by third parties. Owners must take pictures of their land, in order to be able to prove the land’s situation at certain times, and they must take such action as to defend their property in court against trespassers.
    If the owners cannot visit Greece for some years, they must at least ask a relative or a trustworthy person to verify on their behalf whether the property is still free of any transgression. The owners must also keep the deeds that prove their ownership right on the land in order to be able to prove before a court of law their rights against the transgressors. Legal deeds are obviously very useful to a lawyer who can perform a title search and find out whose right prevails over a specific real estate.

  • #186788

    kiwi
    Participant
    Aristotelic

    Yes I have heard of this sucky law! :finger:

  • #186789

    Alien
    Participant
    Oracle

    It is quite the same in the Netherlands, I didn’t know this about Greece.

    So, when I visit every year (up till now no photo’s, but I will next visit!) and somebody of the village is taking care of my olive trees (but nothing on paper!). Is this enough to proove that it is my land or can the villager who now takes care of my trees be the “transgressor” and obtain the land in a few years? ic_shock

  • #186790

    Ian
    Participant
    Homeric

    @Alien wrote:

    It is quite the same in the Netherlands, I didn’t know this about Greece.

    So, when I visit every year (up till now no photo’s, but I will next visit!) and somebody of the village is taking care of my olive trees (but nothing on paper!). Is this enough to proove that it is my land or can the villager who now takes care of my trees be the “transgressor” and obtain the land in a few years? ic_shock

    I would say that if the local is taking care of the trees on your behalf (you’ve asked him to do so) you’re actually ‘acting as expected of an owner'; you’re actually hiring someone to take care of the property (even if payment may consist of yield only).
    Just make sure you have witness(es) that can support your claim that the agreement exists. :nod:

    All in all I don’t think it’s a bad law.
    Some properties around here apparently belong to grandchildren of people who died decades ago who’re living abroad (the grandchildren, not the corpses) and who’ve never bothered to do anything about it (I sometimes wonder if they’re at all aware that they owe property in Greece).
    There’s a field just below my property that apparently belongs to somebody living in Canada. 😕
    I graze the horses there (when there’s anything green there, so not right now) but that’s about all that ever happens there. :)) :))

  • #186791

    kolofarthos
    Participant
    Homeric

    so in a few years time Ian is the winner!

  • #186792

    Alien
    Participant
    Oracle

    @kolofarthos wrote:

    so in a few years time Ian is the winner!

    😆

  • #186793

    Alien
    Participant
    Oracle

    @Ian wrote:

    @Alien wrote:
    It is quite the same in the Netherlands, I didn’t know this about Greece.

    So, when I visit every year (up till now no photo’s, but I will next visit!) and somebody of the village is taking care of my olive trees (but nothing on paper!). Is this enough to proove that it is my land or can the villager who now takes care of my trees be the “transgressor” and obtain the land in a few years? ic_shock

    I would say that if the local is taking care of the trees on your behalf (you’ve asked him to do so) you’re actually ‘acting as expected of an owner'; you’re actually hiring someone to take care of the property (even if payment may consist of yield only).
    Just make sure you have witness(es) that can support your claim that the agreement exists. :nod:

    All in all I don’t think it’s a bad law.
    Some properties around here apparently belong to grandchildren of people who died decades ago who’re living abroad (the grandchildren, not the corpses) and who’ve never bothered to do anything about it (I sometimes wonder if they’re at all aware that they owe property in Greece).
    There’s a field just below my property that apparently belongs to somebody living in Canada. 😕
    I graze the horses there (when there’s anything green there, so not right now) but that’s about all that ever happens there. :)) :))

    The example you give, it is indeed a ‘good cause’. I can assure you when it is a case of “new neighbours being rude, agressive and taking me to court’ it isn’t so wonderful. Especially when they after all this “nonsens” don’t even act upon the verdict of the judge.

    Are you all here now my witness whenever I have problems with my small plot in Greece and (hopefully not!) a transgressor?
    I don’t think I could go through all this court-business again and certainly not in Greece :(
    It is all too sad to be true.

  • #186794

    poppy1
    Participant
    Homeric

    One of the major problems that property owners, including those residing abroad,
    often encounter, is the trespassing of property in Greece by others claiming
    ownership rights. The lack of executing formal Notarial Deeds in the past and
    effecting conveyances of ownership rights through verbal agreements and through
    verbal partitions of jointly inherited properties, has resulted to many land owners,
    not having recorded Deeds to prove their rights. Additionally, it is often the case that
    people have taken advantage of the physical absence of the legal owners and raise
    claims on Greek properties, which have been unattended by legal owners for many
    years.
    According to Greek real estate law, someone may acquire property in Greece not
    only through a Notarial Deed (purchase Deeds, Acceptance of Inheritance Deeds, Gift
    Deeds, etc…), duly executed and registered before the competent Greek Land
    Registry archives, but also through adverse possession rights (“hrisiktisia”). The law
    provides of two types of adverse possession in Greece: the ordinary and the
    extraordinary.
    In order to claim “ordinary” adverse possession rights, a person has to be in
    possession of a Greek property for a period of more than 10 years, exercising his
    ownership rights in good faith by virtue of a legal title of the property. However,
    although the Deed by virtue of which he acquired the property is legal, there could
    be a legal flaw (e.g. the person who conveyed the property was not the legal owner
    or he was incompetent to contract and convey ownership, etc..).After the passing of
    10 years of exercising adverse possession rights as owner of the Greek property, this
    person is legally granted ownership of the property through “ordinary” adverse
    possession rights.
    In other cases, a person may claim extraordinary adverse possession rights. In order
    to acquire property through extraordinary adverse possession in Greece, a person
    has to claim that he is in possession of the property, exercising uninterrupted
    ownership rights on it, for a period of more than 20 years. Thus, without having a
    legal title on the Greek property proving his ownership right, a person who claims
    and proves that he has in his uninterrupted possession a property for a period of
    more than 20 years, is recognized by the Greek law as legal owner.
    In most of the cases, the recognition of adverse possession in Greece is established
    through the filing of a lawsuit against another person who contests such ownership
    rights before the competent Court of First Instance of the property’s location. The
    Court upon examining the relevant evidence and witnesses, issues its ruling,
    recognizing or not the adverse possession rights that the petitioner claims. The
    relevant ruling is then registered to the competent Greek Land Registry archives of
    the property’s location.
    Protection of owners against those who claim adverse possession in Greece, can be
    effected either extra judicially or through Court proceedings. The legal owner has to
    file a lawsuit in Greece against those who claim adverse possession rights,
    requesting the recognition of his ownership against the squatters. The Court, upon
    review of the required documentation, will rule as to the actual legal owner of the
    property and as to whether the squatter has fulfilled the necessary conditions for
    claiming adverse possession (squatter’s rights in Greece leading to Legal Title).
    While the Civil Code has tried in good faith to regulate ownership rights in Greece on
    properties that have been left unattended for many years, people have taken
    advantage of the physical absence of the legal owners, exercising squatters’ rights on
    Greek property. It is often the case of people who believe that their properties have
    been taken care of by their relatives or local acquaintances, while claims have been
    raised on their properties, resulting to losing them.

  • #186795

    kiwi
    Participant
    Aristotelic

    I have a friend in this situation where someone was ‘kindly’ looking after his land, ended up planting crops etc for his own use. Said friend made him sign a paper saying he was leasing the land for a few euros, and took pament and issued receipts, and apparently that is sufficient to keep the land with the original owner.

  • #186796

    KP
    Participant
    Aristotelic

    Commoners law in the UK used to be even easier than this!
    For example in the New Forest where we used to live, if a commoner could erect a house between sundown and dawn having hung the doors by dawn, then they had an automatic right to live there and keep the land it was on! Lots of old laws like that around!

  • #186797

    skywalker
    Participant
    Neophyte

    Hi there,

    in Germany we do not know such behaviour.

    Does anyone know to which law of the Astiko Kodiko, the greek civil law this notification of the co owner is referring to. My grandaunt F. lived on a property and house and act as an owner but she was cheated and in the end even threatened because of her possession and the wife E. of her brother who died, lived also on the property, but she simply claimed that she is possessing 50% which is not true according to inheritance laws without informing F. The nice of E., L. bought the 50% in 1992 well knowing that the 50% did not really belong to E, again F. was not officially informed. We had trials but they used a corrupt witness, which I realised in 2008 (after the death of my dad who trusted his lawyer, unfortunately). And now I am fighting to get back my inheritance.
    The lawyers I have asked do not know this co-owner regulation. Therefore more information is most welcome.
    Thanx in advance.

  • #186798

    poppy1
    Participant
    Homeric

    Hi Skywalker, not sure if this will help
    ESSENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL PROVISIONS OF THE GREEK CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
    Article 3
    1.Jurisdiction of Greek civil Courts is applicable both on Greek citizens and foreigners, subject to the
    provision that competence of the Greek courts is established.
    2. Excluded from the jurisdiction of Greek Courts are foreigners having the benefit of extraterritoriality,
    unless the disputes concerned fall under the provision of Article 29 (forum rei sitae).
    Article 22
    The Court territorially competent shall be, save where it is otherwise provided by law, the one for the situs
    where the defendant has his residence.
    Article 29
    1. Regarding disputes relating to in rem rights on immovables, their possession, joint division, definition of
    the borders of the plot, claims against any possessor, compensation for compulsory expropriation as well
    regarding disputes arisen from the lease of real estate or from rights related to its exploitation, the court in
    whose province the real estate is situated shall be the only competent court.
    2. Should the real estate be situated in the province, for which more than one courts are competent, the
    claimant has the right of choice (between these courts).
    Article 33
    Disputes relating to the existence or the validity of a legal act inter vivos and to the rights resulting from
    this legal act may be brought before the court for the place where the legal act has been established or for
    the place of performance of the obligation of question. To the same court may be brought also disputes
    related to damages of negative interest as well as to restitution which is based on misdemeanour during the
    negotiation stage.
    Article 34
    Counterclaims may be brought before the court, before which the claim is pending, subject to the provision
    that these counterclaims fall under the materiality competence of this court or under the materiality
    competence of a court of lower degree.
    Article 35
    Civil claims, which are based on an act giving rise to criminal proceedings, may be brought also before the
    (civil) court, in the territory of which the act giving rise to criminal proceedings has been executed, even if
    the claim shall be brought against a person who has no criminal liability.
    Article 37
    1. Where there are several defendants, the claimant shall seize, at his choice, the court of the situs where
    one of them has his residence, and if he has no residence, the situs where any of the co-defendants has his domicile.
    2. Disputes between the same parties, having the same cause of action and relate to in rem rights on
    immovables, which are situated in different territories od different courts, may be brought before the one of
    these courts.
    Article 40
    1. Trials related to asset matters against persons not having a residence in Greece may be brought before
    the court, in the territory of which the defendant’s asset or the object in question is to be found.
    2. Should said asset consist in monetary claims of the defendant against any third party, the asset is deemed
    to be found in the situs, where this third party has his residence.

    Foreign residents making a claim
    A person residing abroad may only claim their inheritance at the Athens courts. If the owner of a Greek property dies abroad, regardless of their nationality, the successors must take all the necessary actions through the Athens courts.
    The first step in claiming an inherited property in Greece is to contact an attorney qualified and permitted to conduct research in Greece’s land registries and mortgage offices. The claimer should provide the lawyer with:
    Any existing will
    A detailed family tree in order to determine who can claim a share of the property according to Greek law
    According to Greek inheritance law the children and the spouse are entitled to inherit a part of the legacy regardless of the conditions imposed by a will. If the deceased has not left a will the heritage is divided among their closest relatives. If the deceased was not Greek, the legacy will be divided according to the law of their country of citizenship.

  • #186799

    flup
    Participant
    Neophyte

    Anybody got any ideas about how χρησικτησία will work with property belonging to an unregistered owner according to the ruling in the ktimatologio.

    I’m thinking in particular about subsection 5.

  • #186800

    poppy1
    Participant
    Homeric

    Hi Fluppy
    The acquisition of ownership of movable or immovable property used to be occurring with secondary way, by succession or, more frequently, with some sort of agreement such as the sale or donation. There are cases, however, that for some legal reasons the contract with the buyer in good faith sought to acquire ownership of the thing does not produce legal effects, as in the case of disposal by incompetent dikaiopraktika person or non-substantial.
    The casuistry was acquired great practical importance when the acquisition of title to property, as compared with mobile ownership may be acquired by non-principal, except where the acquirer is in bad faith.
    However, the loss of any right of the possessor of the property due to a formal defect that did not know or could not have known, would constitute a special hardship for him. On the contrary, the legislature considered that the bona fide possessor is entitled in such cases reasonable legal protection, more so when taken into account that the economic exploitation of the property from him throughout the period of possession of, consolidates a solid reality.
    With this justification, the law grants the possessor of the property the opportunity cost of ownership by adverse possession thereof, if cumulative number explicitly prescribed conditions. The no adverse possession, an original way of acquisition of property and missing the point of transfer from another person, may be ordinary and extraordinary.
    Regular usucaption principle requires the property to be eligible for adverse possession and also the customer ownership to nemetai good faith for at least ten years under a legal or even beliefs title.
    Amenable to adverse possession is basically all the property, unless declared as things other transaction. As imprescriptible considered the property ownership of which belongs to people who are in custody, guardianship or guardianship and those belonging to the State and the Church.
    The adverse possession also does not mean if there is no basic requirement of possession of the property, which was founded as the possessor proves that during all the required period of ten years had dominating physical effects on this property. For the constituent elements of possession that requires clear and constant physical operations on the property, which manifests the will of the possessor to employs as his own. Such acts are considered distribution, supervision, visiting, hiring and retention of the property, the counting and drawing diagrams and, when inherited property, acceptance of inheritance and the payment of that tax. Therefore not sufficient for the affirmation of possession opportunistic acts, such as fencing the property, which constitute evidence of simple possession and not exercise adequate supervision over it.
    Moreover, good faith consists essentially in the belief that the possessor has acquired the property. This belief should be there at the time the possessor acquires possession of the property, whether you realize later that it actually does not own it.
    The existence of legal title as a condition for the acquisition of title by adverse possession is not taken understandably strict sense, since in this case the title would be enough by itself for the foundation of full ownership rights. In this context, legal title is taken the legal fact which would in principle suitable for the acquisition of ownership, but ultimately not occurred due to the assistance of a formal defect.
    Article 1043 of the Civil Code stipulates, however, that sufficient to acquire title by adverse possession is regular and beliefs title, that title is non-existent but is considered in good faith by the possessor real and valid, unless the crisis was due heavy negligence.
    The extraordinary adverse possession differs from a regular in that it does not require a statutory instrument or beliefs, or the bona fide possession of the thing. For the foundation of that is sufficient to prove the real fact of possession.The extraordinary adverse possession differs from a regular in that it does not require a statutory instrument or beliefs, or the bona fide possession of the thing. For the foundation of that is sufficient to prove the real fact of possession. Compensation but is double the time required to elapse for the invocation of the right. Therefore, the acquisition of property by extraordinary adverse possession occurs after twenty years after the bad faith possessor began to claim the property.
    The adverse possession is interrupted with the raising of assertive action against chrisidespozontos or loss of possession of the property. However, in the latter case, the stop is not reached, if the possession was regained within a year or more later, but with an action brought within one year of cessation. Moreover, the acquisition of ownership by adverse possession requires the transcription of the title transfer on the books kept in Ypofikofylakeio the periphery of the property.
    Finally, from a tax standpoint, is of particular importance on “real estate transfer tax”, which provides that if the transferor in a contract refers to the acquisition by adverse possession of the property is other than tax on translational contract and transfer tax for the acquisition by adverse possession, which is calculated on the value of ownership of the property at the time of the training contract and payable by the transferor, minus the benefit costs incurred by the chrisidespozonta.

  • #186801

    kiwi
    Participant
    Aristotelic

    :unibrow: Does anyone else get the feeling that laws here are made so convoluted as to ensure there are at least 35 possible variations on the interpretation?

  • #186802

    flup
    Participant
    Neophyte

    Thanks for taking the time and posting that very detailed reply Poppy.

    However, I was thinking in particular about “Extraordinary Adverse Possession” in relation to note 5 on the ktimatologio site which states,

    After the cadastral data are publicly presented (suspension stage)[2011], it is not permitted to submit a declaration with an ownership reason of usucaption [extraordinary adverse possession], if it is about a property flagged to belong to an “unknown owner”.

    So does this mean that all property which has been declared as belonging to an “unknown owner” is no longer subject to the 20 year land grab rule, in the sense that it can’t be claimed?

  • #186803

    poppy1
    Participant
    Homeric

    Hi Fluppy
    A method of gaining legal title to real property by the actual, open, hostile, and continuous possession of it to the exclusion of its true owner for the period prescribed by state law. Personal Property may also be acquired by adverse possession.
    Adverse possession is similar to prescription, another way to acquire title to real property by occupying it for a period of time. Prescription is not the same, however, because title acquired under it is presumed to have resulted from a lost grant, as opposed to the expiration of the statutory time limit in adverse possession.
    Real Property Title to land is acquired by adverse possession as a result of the lapse of the Statute of Limitations for Ejectment, which bars the commencement of a lawsuit by the true owner to recover possession of the land. Adverse possession depends upon the intent of the occupant to claim and hold real property in opposition to all the world and the demonstration of this intention by visible and hostile possession of the land so that the owner is or should be aware that adverse claims are being made.
    The legal theory underlying the vesting of title by adverse possession is that title to land must be certain. Since the owner has, by his or her own fault and neglect, failed to protect the land against the hostile actions of the adverse possessor, an adverse possessor who has treated the land as his or her own for a significant period of time is recognized as its owner.
    Title by adverse possession may be acquired against any person or corporation not excepted by statute. Property held by a Municipal Corporation cannot be taken by adverse possession. As long as the property has a public use, as with a highway or school property, its ownership cannot be lost through adverse possession.
    Anyone, including corporations, the federal government, states, and municipal corporations, can be an adverse possessor.
    Elements In order that adverse possession ripen into legal title, nonpermissive use by the adverse claimant that is actual, open and notorious, exclusive, hostile, and continuous for the statutory period must be established. All of these elements must coexist if title is to be acquired by adverse possession. The character, location, present state of the land, and the uses to which it is put are evaluated in each case. The adverse claimant has the burden of proving each element by a preponderance of the evidence.
    Actual Adverse possession consists of actual occupation of the land with the intent to keep it solely for oneself. Merely claiming the land or paying taxes on it, without actually possessing it, is insufficient. Entry on the land, whether legal or not, is essential. A Trespass may commence adverse possession, but there must be more than temporary use of the property by a trespasser for adverse possession to be established. Physical acts must show that the possessor is exercising the dominion over the land that an average owner of similar property would exercise. Ordinary use of the property—for example, planting and harvesting crops or cutting and selling timber—indicates actual possession. In some states acts that constitute actual possession are found in statute.
    Open and Notorious An adverse possessor must possess land openly for all the world to see, as a true owner would. Secretly occupying another’s land does not give the occupant any legal rights. Clearing, fencing, cultivating, or improving the land demonstrates open and notorious possession, while actual residence on the land is the most open and notorious possession of all. The owner must have actual knowledge of the adverse use, or the claimant’s possession must be so notorious that it is generally known by the public or the people in the neighborhood. The notoriety of the possession puts the owner on notice that the land will be lost unless he or she seeks to recover possession of it within a certain time.
    Exclusive Adverse possession will not ripen into title unless the claimant has had exclusive possession of the land. Exclusive possession means sole physical occupancy. The claimant must hold the property as his or her own, in opposition to the claims of all others. Physical improvement of the land, as by the construction of fences or houses, is evidence of exclusive possession.
    An adverse claimant cannot possess the property jointly with the owner. Two people may, however, claim title by adverse possession as joint tenants if they share occupancy of the land. When others or the general public have regularly used or occupied the land with the adverse claimant, the requirement of exclusive possession is not satisfied. Casual use of the property by others is not, however, inconsistent with exclusive possession. Generally, easements do not affect the exclusive possession by an adverse possessor. In some jurisdictions easements exercised by the public or railroad rights of way will destroy exclusive possession.

    Hostile Possession must be hostile, sometimes called adverse, if title is to mature from adverse possession. Hostile possession means that the claimant must occupy the land in opposition to the true owner’s rights. There need not be a dispute or fighting over title as long as the claimant intends to claim the land and hold it against the interests of the owner and all the world. Possession must be hostile from its commencement and must continue throughout the statutory period.
    One type of hostile possession occurs when the claimant enters and remains on land under color of title. Color of title is the appearance of title as a result of a deed that seems by its language to give the claimant valid title but, in fact, does not because some aspect of it is defective. If a person, for example, was suffering from a legal disability at the time he or she executed a deed, the grantee-claimant does not receive actual title. But the grantee-claimant does have color of title because it would appear to anyone reading the deed that good title had been conveyed. If a claimant possesses the land in the manner required by law for the full statutory period, his or her color of title will become actual title as a result of adverse possession.

    Continuous Adverse possession must be continuous for the full statutory period if title is to vest. Continuity means regular, uninterrupted occupancy of the land. Mere occasional or sporadic use is not enough. Continuity is sometimes explained as the daily control of the land by the adverse claimant for the length of the statutory period. If a person has continuously occupied only a part of all the land claimed under adverse possession, he or she will acquire title only to the occupied portion.
    While continuous possession is required for the acquisition of title by adverse possession, it is not necessary that only one person hold the land continuously for the statutory period. The time periods that successive adverse occupants have possessed the land may be added together to meet the continuity requirement if privity exists between the parties. The addition of these different periods is called tacking. Privity refers to the giving of possession of the land from one owner to the next so that it is continuously occupied by a possessor. Privity exists between different persons whose interests are related to each other by a sale or inheritance of the land or by operation of law, as possession by a trustee in Bankruptcy.

    Tacking is permitted only when the possession by the prior occupant had been adverse or under color of title. If any time lapses between the end of one owner’s possession and the start of another’s occupation, there is no continuity, so tacking will not be allowed.
    Interruption of continuous possession deprives the adverse possessor of the legal effect of his or her prior occupancy. The statute of limitations will begin to run again from the time he or she starts actual, open, hostile, notorious, and exclusive possession. The length of the interruption is insignificant as long as it disturbs continuous possession. At that time the law restores constructive possession of the land to the true owner.
    The commencement of a lawsuit by the owner against the occupant over the right of ownership and possession of the land is one way to interrupt continuous possession. It may be an action to quiet title, for trespass, for an Injunction involving possessive rights, or to file a petition for registration of land title. Such lawsuits will destroy the continuity of possession only if successfully pursued to final judgments. If the owner chooses to abandon or settle a suit or if a court dismisses it, the continuity of possession is not breached.
    The entry of the owner upon the land with the intent to repossess it is a clear exercise of ownership that disturbs possession. A survey of the land made at the request of the true owner does not interrupt possession unless the purpose is to help the true owner take possession. The owner’s actions must be notorious and open so there can be no doubt as to what is intended. An accidental, casual, secret, or permissive entry is ineffective. While the entry must be notorious, it must also be peaceable to prevent violence and warfare, which might otherwise result.
    The payment of real estate taxes by the owner, while demonstrating that he or she has not abandoned land, is not considered to have any impact on continuous possession.
    The adverse claimant may destroy his or her continuous possession by abandoning the land or giving it to someone else, even the owner, before the time at which title to it would vest. It does not matter how long or brief the Abandonment is as long as it was intentional. A temporary absence from the land is not the same as an abandonment and has no effect on the occupancy, provided it is for a reasonable period of time.
    Statutory Period The time period of the statute of limitations that must expire before title can be acquired by adverse possession varies from state to state. No statute will begin to run until the adverse claimant actually possesses the property in question under color of title or claim of right, where necessary. As of that time, the landowner is entitled to bring a lawsuit against the possessor to recover the property.
    The adverse possessor must occupy the property for the full statutory period. In jurisdictions that also require color of title, it must coexist with possession for the complete period.
    If the statute of limitations has been suspended—for example, because there is a lawsuit pending between the owner and the claimant or the owner is insane, an infant, or serving in the armed services—that amount of time will not be counted toward the time necessary for the acquisition of title.

  • #186804

    poppy1
    Participant
    Homeric

    Forgot to say
    Once adverse possession is completed, the claimant has full legal title to the property. The expiration of the statutory period eliminates any Cause of Action or liability for ejectment or trespass regarding the new owner’s prior unlawful possession of the property. Once the time period is satisfied, the adverse possessor is considered the original owner of the land. He or she may use the land any way he or she sees fit provided it is lawful.
    Personal PropertOwnership of personal property may be acquired by adverse possession if the same requisites are met. The claimant must possess the property actually, openly, notoriously, exclusively, hostilely, under claim of right, and uninterrupted for the statutory period.

  • #186805

    skywalker
    Participant
    Neophyte

    Oh God. My English is not bad but my brains don’t want to read this and are blocking. :(
    I don’t remember what I wrote previously but this will be a long and hard fight against really evil people, perhaps I should buy weapons :roll: ?
    You know what a lawyer told me most recently: Every judge is corrupt.

    Poppy thank you very much. I will try to reread everything. But I must figure out a salvage plan on my own, the lawyers are also strange to be honest.

  • #186806

    skywalker
    Participant
    Neophyte

    You know what I would like to go on the property and the house and clean it from the grass which is growing on it, this would be an act of ownership, yes ? But the problem is the evil people have poissened the environment around the property. Everybody is saying that the evil people are possessing 2/3 of the property because the evil people did told them so, and going there feels so strange, I feel as if I am in danger, myself, therefore I don’t want to be alone on the property. To be honest perhaps engaging temporary body guards ? Not corrupt, please ? I thought about that, too.

  • #186807

    flup
    Participant
    Neophyte

    Why don’t you hire somebody to cut the grass for you and get a receipt from them that you submit in your annual expense declaration for tax purposes ( better if you could use the new card).

    I would think that this would show undisputed official stewardship of the land, not dependant upon local confirmation, via the tax expenses receipt and declaration.

  • #186808

    poppy1
    Participant
    Homeric

    Trespass Against a Property Co-Owner
    Trespass to an immovable property is any unlawful entry or damage or interference with any such property by any person, including a co-owner. The property may be a house, an apartment, an area of common use or a piece of land.
    In order for a co-owner to establish a claim for trespass by the other, he must be actually ousted or dispossessed of the property. This may happen since, nowadays, many people buy a property jointly with others, without making an agreement with regard to the occupation, use and enjoyment of the property.
    The rule is that each co-owner is entitled to the possession of the whole property in undivided shares, so if one expels the other from the property, or part of it, he commits trespass. The issue is mainly raised when the co-owners do not co-operate and quarrel and the one ousts the other from the property. In such a case, the ousted co-owner is entitled to raise a claim against the other for trespass. The normal measure of damages is the market rental value of the property occupied or used wrongly, for the time of the wrong occupation or use by the other.
    No co-owner can maintain a claim for trespass unless he is actually ousted or dispossessed of the property. The co-owners are considered like tenants in common and have the same rights as if a co-tenant takes possession and leaves the other out, giving the right to his co-tenant to maintain an action of trespass for mesne profits against the other.
    Each co-owner has the right to possess, use and enjoy the commonly owned property in a proper manner so that not to create any obstacles or hinder the other from exercising his rights. Despite the fact that trespass is actionable per se without having to prove the damage, in the case of co-owners it is to the benefit of the ousted party to claim and prove the actual damage he suffered; otherwise, his claim will be only for the restoration of his proprietary rights infringed and he will be awarded with nominal damages. It is not adequate to prove that trespass was committed but also to adduce evidence with regard to the actual damages suffered.
    One cannot rely on the fact that because trespass is proved and damages are claimed, it will be upon the trespasser to disprove the damages claimed in the action. It is upon the claimant to prove his damages; otherwise he will only be awarded with nominal damages.
    The solution available to a co-owner when he is ousted from a jointly owned property is to make an application to the Land Registry for the sale of the property in public auction. By doing so, the jointly owned property will be sold and the co-owners will share the net proceeds, without them having to quarrel.
    When the property has no separate title deed, this procedure cannot take place, since the Land Registry cannot place a property for sale in public auction without a separate title deed. Even the Court cannot issue an order for the sale in public auction of the jointly owned property without the existence of a separate title deed. Thus, the remedy to the co-owner of such a property is the restoration of his proprietary rights and damages.
    People who purchased a property in joint names should regulate their rights in a written agreement with regard to the use and enjoyment of their property in the event they do not get along with each other. There is a number of ways they can regulate their rights, including the peaceful and unobstructed use and enjoyment of their property. It is up to them to regulate the issue on time and not to leave it for later when they may not be in good terms.

  • #186809

    skywalker
    Participant
    Neophyte

    Thanks to you, both.

    Poppy I am almost at the point to become a lawyer myself. What you have written is correct accoring to german laws for instance. And obviously for greek laws. but when I go to a greek lawyer I am teaching them !
    Does anyone know a good greek lawyer ?

    My grandaunt F. was not informed by E. who at first used a last will, to be honest I have found a cure to restore our rights with regards to the last will about which my grandaunt, my dad and mom (in 1998) have been informed very late. F. and E. used to live upon the undivided property and did never make any contract because to my grandaunt F. it was clear that she was possessing and caring for more than 80% of the property. But they cheated her, in the front of the property there is a little shop with a tenant, and for instance they told her that she is receiving more than 8x% of the rent which she really received but in the contracts they wrote that E. and F. get 50% of the rent each. E. should not be able to sale more then she actually owns to her nice L. But no one cares in Greece. And my dad was not informed at all.

    Not to inform anyone is the method of the evil people, but they declared everything at the Hypothifiliakio..
    I am totally traumatized by this, my mistrust in others has grown exponentially, really.

    To be able to use the receipt of someone I need a greek banking account as a foreigner, yes ? I had that idea, as well. I don’t speak greek this sometimes a real problem. Ok. I have to try harder to find someone to cut the grass.

    Thanks guys.

  • #186810

    kiwi
    Participant
    Aristotelic

    Not speaking Greek will put you at a huge disadvantage as they will just walk over you and its hard enough to figure things out even if you do speak a little. I would suggest to use a lawyer that is out of the immediate area, the residents will all have sold their souls against the ‘evil’ foreigner. It’s a lot easier in a city but in the countryside, other laws operate, rules of the jungle. Be careful when you pit yourself against ignorant people who are too stupid to know or care what the results of their actions will be. You need to weigh up whether it is worth the money and the hassle to win this, and I hope you are young, because by the time it gets to court in Greece you will be sporting false teeth and very grey hair.
    Sad situation.

  • #186811

    poppy1
    Participant
    Homeric

    You may find this interesting reading Skywalker
    http://www.maknews.com/html/articles/king_v_greece/king_v_greece.html

  • #186813

    skywalker
    Participant
    Neophyte

    Hi there,

    thanks you both. Exactly kiwi, I am trying to fix a certain sum which I will invest and not more but as the evil people are much older than me and as they are evil and not good, they are so greedy not to pass it on to their children. At a certain point in the whole history of this real estate there must be a turning point to the good or better. It is a family real estate to me and it is my sincere conviction that no others are entitled to steal away anything from a family real estate of the root family. By the way this should be a common principle in civil law systems protecting the real estate of root familys. The wife E. (not member of the root family) of my granduncle was entiteled to a certain well defined share, why this greed, why not speaking opernly and honestly with my dad and uncle (members of the root family). Instead of that all kinds of bad behaviour. And the nice of E. , L. and her husband H. a retired doctor (who was the treating doc of my granduncle and my grandaunt). This is really stinking to the sky.
    I still believe in justice and in the ultimative Good, or God. And I want the real shares of the family inheritance back I am very determined about this: restitutio ad integrum.

    The tax question is important: When I do engage someone to cut the grass or pay money to the lawyers then I will need a greek banking account ? Yes ? Otherwise I can’t use the receipt for a negative income from Greece ? Yes ?
    thanks

  • #186812

    kiwi
    Participant
    Aristotelic

    The receipt would simply mean that you had paid to get the grass cut. If you don’t have a Greek AFIMI tax code number then you are seen as a non resident.

    Most lawyers are looking for work, they are trained in making even a simple job drag out for as long as YOUR money lasts. As I said before, this sounds complex and will take a long time. Root family or not, marriage gives certain rights in Greece regarding inheritance.

    Another very important thing you should be aware of is that if you do manage to win, you will have to pay a vast amount of inheritance tax…think about it.

  • #186814

    skywalker
    Participant
    Neophyte

    Hi,

    thanks, yes I do have a afimi number but so far no receipt was used with our afimi numbers because no one asked for or informed us. Ok. from this time on, I will ask all the people even lawyer number 1, who was not my lawyer, to write a receipt with our AFM numbers on it. I guess Lawyer number 1 is a tax criminal. And yes, he is playing around with us to gain extra money out of nothing we realized that already. My lawyer is lawyer number 2 to care for the AFM number posts, she doesn’t want to be a real lawyer not to interfere with lawyer number 1 and I do have found lawyer number 3, a young man, but quite honestly I am not sure if he is capable to solve the whole case. Therefore I have contacted a lot of lawyers.

    I don’t mind paying tax. Paying tax if correctly done, I mean with all legal possibilities used not to pay so much :) is usually fine. The greek state needs money. And Greece is a part of Europe. So far my dad and uncle have already invested 25 000 €. For nothing.
    Whereas I have invested my time and intelligence for far less money and have reached more. Thanks to all internet knowledge givers and may God bless them all (different websites in different languages). Without the help of anyone or everyone I would have been lost. Thank you so much.

    The name of the monster is: corruption. If I would know that one of my lawyers would pay corruption money to the judge I would theoretically be obliged to sue myself in Germany. Either you follow the rules or you don’t . But what if the rules of living do differ so much ? How do you behave then ?

    If I should really win and remain alive, I hope to be able to initiate a big party on the property. The same property where dad and my uncle were running around and playing as children.

  • #186818

    skywalker
    Participant
    Neophyte

    Hi there,

    we are still fighting against the co-owners.
    But in the maintime I have done a lot of research. It is very obvious that one witness lied at a court that took place in 2005 and that a judge decision in 2005 was made upon false statements, done by the co-owner E. who died in 2003 but her (Rechtsfolger) legal follower (?) L. profited from the false statements.

    Now my question to you is:
    I have presented every detail to the Ktimatologio because the translation of the sue document of E.and L. from 2005 have been translated into German in June 2012 and my dad for sure did not know about the whole magnitude of the false statements. The judge virtually decided upon the lies…which were presented in 2005. And the highest court Areopag applauded them…
    Now, there will be a hearing before 1 judge 1 lawyer 1 engineer initiated by the Ktimatologio.
    Do I need a lawyer to go there and will the judge decide upon what has been said there orally or will he decide upon the presented documents ? Has anyone more information about this kind of hearing ????

    I am writing a book about the whole story…

  • #186819

    Ian
    Participant
    Homeric

    @skywalker wrote:

    Hi there,

    we are still fighting against the co-owners.
    But in the maintime I have done a lot of research. It is very obvious that one witness lied at a court that took place in 2005 and that a judge decision in 2005 was made upon false statements, done by the co-owner E. who died in 2003 but her (Rechtsfolger) legal follower (?) L. profited from the false statements.

    Now my question to you is:
    I have presented every detail to the Ktimatologio because the translation of the sue document of E.and L. from 2005 have been translated into German in June 2012 and my dad for sure did not know about the whole magnitude of the false statements. The judge virtually decided upon the lies…which were presented in 2005. And the highest court Areopag applauded them…
    Now, there will be a hearing before 1 judge 1 lawyer 1 engineer initiated by the Ktimatologio.
    Do I need a lawyer to go there and will the judge decide upon what has been said there orally or will he decide upon the presented documents ? Has anyone more information about this kind of hearing ????

    I am writing a book about the whole story…

    In your case I would definitely have a lawyer there, if only to make sure that the proceedings are explained to you by someone who’s in your camp.

    Whether the judge will include oral ‘evidence’ or only the documentation presented in his deliberations is pretty much up to the judge and may be influenced by how well this oral input is argumented.

    Happy to say I have no personal experience in a similar case.

    Good luck.

  • #186820

    kiwi
    Participant
    Aristotelic

    Don’t hold your breathe. This could still take years to get to the judge. I have a friend who is still waiting after five years to have a day in court. Best of luck.

  • #186821

    rustersorven
    Participant
    Neophyte

    So it would be advisable to rent out your property in greece. Renting the property would avoid any trespassing in the property.

  • #186816

    symbiosis
    Participant
    Neophyte

    Presumably a few photos of the owner on the property and with people working on it would be sufficient proof that you had been around and taking care of it?

  • #186817

    kiwi
    Participant
    Aristotelic

    Yup and holding a Greek daily newspaper with the date clearly visible

  • #186815

    symbiosis
    Participant
    Neophyte

    @kiwi wrote:

    Yup and holding a Greek daily newspaper with the date clearly visible

    Good idea, mind you I also have plenty of water bills in my name and date stamped when paid at the local council offices too

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.