Trespassing

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by Descant

I know this is troubling to the OP, but I can't help wondering about some things. For example, is it a driveway, or as is not uncommon, a class VI road where it is illegal to block? Do the trespassers have permission from a previous owner? Is adverse possession for lake access possible, etc.
It would seem to me that the chain going up and down is an obvious indicator that nobody is home.

To the OP: Where's "your guy"? Most people have a "guy" who watches the place when it is vacant to be sure it doesn't freeze up, or a tree fall into the living room, or shovel the roof, etc. while nobody is there, etc. Maybe the guy who plows? You do keep the access open so fire apparatus can get in, right? (if not, does your insurance co know?) BTW, for the posters above, if some trespasser sues you, your insurance carrier provides defense costs. No charge to you.

If you've gone to the expense of trail cams, there's an opportunity for some fun here. It shouldn't take much to add a speaker/microphone so that you can talk to the trespassers on camera from your cell phone. Scare their pants off. Double it and make your signal cannon remote controlled. You only get one shot, but still fun.

Vacant lot.

[Descant]

Originally Posted by John Mercier

Vacant lot.

I wish post #20 had been post #2.

[John Mercier]

Originally Posted by Descant

I wish post #20 had been post #2.

I got the information from post #1.

[longislander]

These are among the strongest landowner protection laws I have seen.

I'm not attorney, but they are based on the landowner "allowing" the use of the propery, for recreational use or otherwise. Does not seem to be the crux of this thread...

Another great NH statute to protect landowners is RSA 79-A:1 (Current Use) that also provides property tax benefits, that some of us enjoy. (note, 10 acres etc.). It really makes a difference to my taxes in MoBo.

https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa...9-A/79-A-1.htm

[54fighting]

Originally Posted by longislander

I'm not attorney, but they are based on the landowner "allowing" the use of the propery, for recreational use or otherwise. Does not seem to be the crux of this thread...

Another great NH statute to protect landowners is RSA 79-A:1 (Current Use) that also provides property tax benefits, that some of us enjoy. (note, 10 acres etc.). It really makes a difference to my taxes in MoBo.

https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa...9-A/79-A-1.htm

The statutes specifically reference trespassing and the possibility of dangerous conditions. The potential for liability was mentioned a few times, so the cite seemed relevant. FWIW, if you take your property out of current use you are required to make a one time payment of 10% of the current value of the property.

[longislander]

The statutes specifically reference trespassing ...

Landowner Liability Law (RSA 508:14) and Duty of Care Law (RSA 212:34).

Where?

https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa...508/508-14.htm

https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa...212/212-34.htm

Lawyers:
"Under New Hampshire Law RSA 635:2, someone has committed criminal trespass if they know they are not licensed or privileged to be in a place, or if they remain in a place after being told to leave. A first offense is a misdemeanor."

https://www.tennandtenn.com/criminal...%20misdemeanor.

https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa.../635/635-2.htm

FWIW, if you take your property out of current use you are required to make a one time payment of 10% of the current value of the property.

Was, and am fully aware of the info, and do believe it is worth your commenting: "... land must be 10 or more acres, and must be a forest, farm, or unproductive land."

https://www.revenue.nh.gov/current-use/booklets.htm

When I bought my 34 acres in 2017 the tax bill was $24. Subsequently took 2 acres out of current use for the house build and driveway. Yes, I did pay the 10% ... no problem! Still enjoying the other 32 acrres at current use and also enjoy the land value appreciation. I've subsequently subdivided the 34 acres into two lots: 13 acres and 21 acres. The 13 acres is in trust to my son, and the 21 acres are still enjoying "current use" (except fot the two acres for the house and driveway).

I should change my forum name to MoBONecker!

[54fighting]

Originally Posted by longislander

The statutes specifically reference trespassing ...

Where?

https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa...508/508-14.htm

https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa...212/212-34.htm

Lawyers:
"Under New Hampshire Law RSA 635:2, someone has committed criminal trespass if they know they are not licensed or privileged to be in a place, or if they remain in a place after being told to leave. A first offense is a misdemeanor."

https://www.tennandtenn.com/criminal...%20misdemeanor.

https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa.../635/635-2.htm

Was, and am fully aware of the info, and do believe it is worth your commenting: "... land must be 10 or more acres, and must be a forest, farm, or unproductive land."

https://www.revenue.nh.gov/current-use/booklets.htm

When I bought my 34 acres in 2017 the tax bill was $24. Subsequently took 2 acres out of current use for the house build and driveway. Yes, I did pay the 10% ... no problem! Still enjoying the other 32 acrres at current use and also enjoy the land value appreciation. I've subsequently subdivided the 34 acres into two lots: 13 acres and 21 acres. The 13 acres is in trust to my son, and the 21 acres are still enjoying "current use" (except fot the two acres for the house and driveway).

I should change my forum name to MoBONecker!

I’m wrong. There is no specific reference to trespassing in the statute. This is the interpretation of NH Fish & Wildlife. Whether this is based on case law interpreting the statutes or common sense or both I do not know; it is difficult to imagine a scenario where, under the same circumstances, liability could exist to a trespasser where none exists to a permittee.

I didn’t mean to suggest that you were unaware of this aspect of the current use law. However, since you chose to highlight the advantage of the law (presumably with the intent of enlightening others less knowledgeable) it seemed appropriate to mention the potential disadvantage.

[John Mercier]

It doesn't make a difference. There have been attempts to circumvent it. But they failed in court.

A horseback rider trying to sue a landowner, and failing, led to Lyndeborough vs Boisvert.

The closest I have heard of was the chain across the access point that killed a snowmobiler. We now suggest adding a piece of 4" pvc pipe painted/draped in bright orange. With the trespass sign(s) legally posted to the trees/posts that the chain/cable runs across.

[Sue Doe-Nym]

Without running this topic even more into the ditch, I sincerely hope that this can be resolved for you. It’s pathetic that some people seem to feel that it’s their right to use what isn’t theirs. Something like this can very easily turn confrontational, even violent. I hope that doesn’t happen here. Anyhow, good luck with it.

[54fighting]

Originally Posted by Sue Doe-Nym

Without running this topic even more into the ditch, I sincerely hope that this can be resolved for you. It’s pathetic that some people seem to feel that it’s their right to use what isn’t theirs. Something like this can very easily turn confrontational, even violent. I hope that doesn’t happen here. Anyhow, good luck with it.

Thanks. I’m not sure how or why the thread swerved into a property tax discussion, but I’m sure the matter will be resolved peacefully.

[Susie Cougar]

I’m just wondering. Are you a new property owner? Has your land been used in the past? Could it be that they had permission to use it from someone before you? It just seems so odd.

[54fighting]

Originally Posted by Susie Cougar

I’m just wondering. Are you a new property owner? Has your land been used in the past? Could it be that they had permission to use it from someone before you? It just seems so odd.

Not a new owner, no prior permission and this is not one individual. Started seeing indications during the pandemic so I put up trail cams. I don’t think anyone would walk down the driveway of a vacant home or dock their boat and come ashore in that case. This is a different situation. It’s a vacant lot with visible and convenient access to the water, with what may have been perceived to be a low risk of detection. If you couple those circumstances with a certain mindset maybe it’s not so odd.

[ITD]

Originally Posted by 54fighting

Not a new owner, no prior permission and this is not one individual. Started seeing indications during the pandemic so I put up trail cams. I don’t think anyone would walk down the driveway of a vacant home or dock their boat and come ashore in that case. This is a different situation. It’s a vacant lot with visible and convenient access to the water, with what may have been perceived to be a low risk of detection. If you couple those circumstances with a certain mindset maybe it’s not so odd.

Unfortunately that's what happens, one person discovers it, then brings a friend who brings a friend and so on. You are right to nip it in the bud.

[SAB1]

Here’s my take. If the land is not legally posted and there is just a sign hanging on a chain across the road I think alot of people perceive it as trying to stop illegal dumping and not an occasional walker passing thru. Not saying that’s right. I also think some people, including those that may live near, think it’s fine to pass thru and the sign is meant to keep the riff raff away.

[54fighting]

Originally Posted by SAB1

Here’s my take. If the land is not legally posted and there is just a sign hanging on a chain across the road I think alot of people perceive it as trying to stop illegal dumping and not an occasional walker passing thru. Not saying that’s right. I also think some people, including those that may live near, think it’s fine to pass thru and the sign is meant to keep the riff raff away.

I appreciate the responses but it’s probably time to sunset this thread.

I’d like to be clear; although I object to what these people are doing I don’t consider them to be riff raff or somehow less than. I would not look at a private property, no trespassing sign and think, since this sign does not satisfy all of the statutory requirements for posting it is simply intended to discourage illegal dumping (when would a sign ever be sufficient for that purpose?) and does not apply to me as I am not riff raff. This is a pretty simple concept. Private property belongs to another, and confirm rather than assume that explicit signage does not apply to you.

[John Mercier]

Once it is legally posted (and the legal requirement is there to help enforcement), for someone to pass the sign onto the property legally requires written permission on that person specifically from the posted landowner.