Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Propery owners dispute

In San Francisco our houses are attached. Slumlord next door who runs what amounts to a rooming house must have been influenced by the city to do deferred maintenance on his property. He hired non-English speaking workers, obviously unlicensed and unbonded. To reach part of his house, they bridged over my sidepatio with wooden boards and with huge nails nailed into my roof. I found out when some boards flew off almost hitting my sliding glass doors. A roofing inspector I called stated that only rain will tell for sure if damage was done. The slumlord refused to pay any part of the $60 fee. So now, without my permission, his workers simply jump onto my roof from his house dropping ladders, bringing tools and everything they need. I know my roof is being damaged. What is my recourse? The neighborhood hates him, we wish he would sell.

Thanks for forthcoming advice.


Asked on 1/16/07, 9:45 pm

2 Answers from Attorneys

Bryan Whipple Bryan R. R. Whipple, Attorney at Law

Re: Propery owners dispute

In one point of view, it is obviously trespessing; people and materials coming across the property line without permission.

There is also a point of view, which is I believe supported by some case law, that when people subdivide and then build zero-lot-line or party wall structures on the subdivided narrow lots, they give each other an implied easement for necessary maintenance.

I have researched this issue in the distant past and don't remember how these competing points of view would be resolved, but my hunch is that if this went to court there would be a battle royal over the implied easement theory, and it is entirely possible that the court would adopt the slumlord's position that he has an easement to come on your property to do work that cannot reasonably be done from his side alone.

Of course, the issue of the legality of the slumlord's contractor crossing the boundary is separate and distinct from the issue of liability for damage from negligence and incompetence. It's even possible that the use of unlicensed contractors, who are committing a misdemeanor, could be challenged by you as an affected third party.

Still, I think you are bottom-line better off having the work done, even if it results in a little inconvenience and damage. $60 is chicken feed compared with the effect on the value of your property from having a well-maintained neighboring property vs. a termite tenement.

Read more
Answered on 1/16/07, 11:56 pm
Anthony Roach Law Office of Anthony A. Roach

Re: Propery owners dispute

I agree with what Mr. Whipple said, my only concern is on how serious any damage to your roof is. If it is $60.00, then that would be trivial. But if a year or two down the line you learn that they have opened a hole that has allowed water to damage the roof structure, then you have some significant damage. At that point, you are going to have to be concerned about someone arguing that the statute of limitations began running now, when you had it inspected. My advice is to keep an eye on it, and at least it does rain more in San Francisco than in Southern California.

Very truly yours,

Read more
Answered on 1/17/07, 2:51 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Real Estate and Real Property questions and answers in California