# Adverse Possession on farmland



## alpine (3 Aug 2011)

Hi, 

If a son has the use of farmland from a mother, then could adverse possession be claimed on the land if they effectively had free use for the 12 year period?  

Can adverse possession only be claimed during the lifetime of the owner?

Would it matter that there was a lease in place between the owner and the son, but the rent was not paid?

Thanks


----------



## mf1 (3 Aug 2011)

I'm confused. 

Who wants to claim adverse possession against whom? Son against mother? Son against someone other than mother? 

If its son against mother, and if son has the use - by agreement. How can that be adverse? 

Adverse implies that mother is unaware. 

mf


----------



## alpine (3 Aug 2011)

Sorry MF for not clarifying. 

It was a query regarding averse possession on the son’s behalf against mother for the free use of the land. 

Mother is 80 on contributory state pension.  She is aware that the son is not paying the money and is happy with this arrangement.  She feels that if she does need the money, then he will cough up...  Fair enough. 

However, part of this land is earmarked for sons siblings, via provisions made in a will.  Son is not aware of this, but knows provisions are made.  Could the son potentially claim adverse possession either a) during the mother’s lifetime or b) after she bequeaths said lands to her other children?

Thanks


----------



## WizardDr (4 Aug 2011)

A licence is the simplest and cleanest.

If the son acknowledges that then adverse possession cannot arise. 

Howver, are you saying the sons siblings as in the children of the mother? If the mother cuts son out he may have a section 117 claim

This sounds a bit mesy without more of the story


----------



## putsch (5 Aug 2011)

alpine said:


> Mother is 80 on contributory state pension.  *She is aware that the son is not paying the money and is happy with this arrangement*.  She feels that if she does need the money, then he will cough up...  Fair enough.




Is it the case that the son would like to "ready up" a claim for adverse possession? or are you inquiring on behalf of future beneficiaries who would like to defend a claim? the situation is not very clear. But as of now if the Mum is agreeable to the current situation then "adverse" isn't appropriate. However it is a very technical and complex area - you would need to get specialised advice.


----------



## One (5 Aug 2011)

Adverse is not appropiate here.


----------



## csirl (8 Aug 2011)

Its not adverse possession as the mother consents to it. Whether or not the mother receives rent is irrelevent. Legally, the son is there by verbal license.


----------



## WizardDr (15 Aug 2011)

csirl - but the son has to acknowledge the existence of the licence and I dont think he would - at least from what we have been told so far - and therefore adverse possession could  very well arise. 

Has alpine lost interest to help fill in some gap?


----------



## csirl (15 Aug 2011)

WizardDr said:


> csirl - but the son has to acknowledge the existence of the licence and I dont think he would - at least from what we have been told so far - and therefore adverse possession could very well arise.


 
As long as the mother is aware of whats happening and consents, then it is not adverse possession. Doesnt require the son to acknowledge.


----------



## shesells (16 Aug 2011)

To me (and I might be wrong) it reads as if the son wants to claim all the land as his under adverse possession so that in the event of the mother's death, the land is his and cannot be bequeathed in part to the other siblings?


----------



## WizardDr (18 Aug 2011)

Csirl - I think if the Son doesn't acknowledge - mother will have a problem. I will see if I can dig out a reference, but otherwise avoding adverse possession would be straight forward - merely issue a licence - the acknowledgement is key.

Anyway - alpine has gone silent and we may not have all the facts.


----------



## alpine (18 Aug 2011)

Sorry, I was away on holidays. 

Anyhow, there is a lease in place on the land (and stamped by the Revenue), the rent is just not being paid.

It is only a portion of the leased land that is intended for other siblings. 

I was just wondering on a whatif basis.


----------



## Mrs Vimes (18 Aug 2011)

WizardDr said:


> Csirl - I think if the Son doesn't acknowledge - mother will have a problem. I will see if I can dig out a reference, but *otherwise avoding adverse possession would be straight forward - merely issue a licence* - the acknowledgement is key.



Most of the (very few) cases of adverse possession that I've seen reported by courts have been cases where the land in question was not claimed by the true owner (eg died and inheriting relatives did nothing to assert ownership).

My understanding is that an attempt to collect rent or evict the trespasser will re-set the clock for adverse possession claims.

Sybil


----------



## shesells (18 Aug 2011)

alpine said:


> Sorry, I was away on holidays.
> 
> Anyhow, there is a lease in place on the land (and stamped by the Revenue), the rent is just not being paid.
> 
> ...



Was my reading correct?


----------



## csirl (19 Aug 2011)

alpine said:


> Sorry, I was away on holidays.
> 
> Anyhow, there is a lease in place on the land (and stamped by the Revenue), the rent is just not being paid.
> 
> ...


 
Then there's no prospect of adverse possession.


----------

