How can you resolve land disputes?

No matter if you are a real estate professional or not, it is recommended to involve domain experts (lawyers, surveyors, etc.) early when you find potential for a dispute, e.g. during a due diligence, in order to assess the actual severity of the finding and hence not jump to conclusions yourself which either overstate risks or - even worse - neglect them.

Don't forget the less obvious sources of concern. Those that aren't contractual or legal, but equally important to the parties involved. Historical uses of land, perceptions about usage and ownership etc. For instance, a homeowner using land that didn't belong to then for years as additional green space, having that taken away can be a significant trauma.

- In my opinion, the suspensive conditions in any offer to purchase any property have to include an extensive and exhaustive due diligence list. Any question about ownership, land claims, etc will be big red flags which will require thorough investigation before proceeding with the offer

My first response will be 'avoid it!'. These disputes tend to be costly (engagement of specialists - surveyors, planners, legal counsel, etc) and lengthy. In an environment where change happens more rapidly and dramatically, the time spent attempting to resolve these disputes often have more than a financial impact on transactions. In Nigeria, Customary Arbitration has been used to settle land disputes more efficiently, and in cities such as Lagos, Alternative Dispute Resolution is encouraged, as well as the "fast-track" court (although cases must meet certain conditions) process. Planning disputes are a bigger challenge. The planning approval process on a normal day is fraught with bureaucracy and inefficiencies!

In my experience, land disputes often stem from sentiment, rather than mistake of fact. "I don't want to lose the view." "I don't want __ in my neighborhood." "We enjoy using that space for __." Documentation is your best friend, especially if legal recourse may be required, but an emotional cure can often defuse an escalation. Offering to add extra landscaping or architectural flourishes to address aesthetic concerns. Enhanced common space for more varied use. A capital contribution to improve an alternate location. Even if not contractually obligated, it can often be cheaper and more expedient to offer an olive branch that addresses their root motivation, rather than attack the argument with which they're furthering their goals.

Look for common ground. Always. Try and start there. Find opportunities for small, quick wins to create momentum for the harder issues.

On the other hand title claim disputes are all legal issues and you should follow an experienced local attorney who may know the town, area and laws pertaining to the Land Dispute. If attorney is well know in local political circle or the township and state it is an added benefit though not necessary. Good rapport and people tackling skill under the table always pays off.

Impartially judge your competency. Bring in expert negotiators if you aren't one. I have had satisfaction with using skills described by Chris Voss in his books and online videos.

Engaging in good faith negotiations is the next step. This is a cooperative process where both parties communicate their needs and concerns, listen to each other, and explore possible solutions. The article suggests that negotiations can be facilitated by a neutral third party or mediator to help reach an agreement, saving both time and money.

ADR has been around for decades but in the UK has grown in importance this century. The benefits of ADR and especially mediation should never be underestimated. Even if settlement cannot be reached, the (failed) discussions might lead to settlement in the future. The courts recognise the benefit of finding resolution without determining issues. Judges invariably stay proceedings commenced where mediation has not been tried and require parties to explain why they haven't engaged in ADR since costs can take into account whether a party has tried to resolve a dispute otherwise than through the courts. There is likely to be introduced at some point a requirement under the Civil Procedure Rules for litigation to include a formal ADR stage.

ADR can't work miracles, but in most cases it's worth the investment of time and money to pursue. The cost and time to pursue litigation as a rule will exceed your investment in ADR by several orders of magnitude, and the potential upside of an immediate result is huge.

To my understanding, you cannot seek ADR to settle the land dispute regarding the ownership and location (boundary of the land), they have no authority to settle. You need to go to a court in conjunction with the land authority.

If negotiations fail or are not feasible, the article recommends seeking alternative methods like arbitration, conciliation, or adjudication. ADR is generally faster, cheaper, and more flexible than going to court, and it allows for confidentiality and control over the outcome.

If negotiation fails or is not feasible, the third step is to seek ADR methods like arbitration or conciliation. These are often faster, cheaper, and more flexible than going to court. Think of this as mediation in a family dispute; a neutral third party helps to facilitate a resolution.

Hire the best. And only go legal if you're in it for the long haul. Otherwise, reevaluate and circle back to a previous step!

It is can be risky using a local lawyer for a one time engagement and trusting their fiduciary obligation to you to be strictly honored when the lawyer reasonably expects their future clients to be your opposition in your case or the local authorities. In such a case bring in a lawyer from a different city who has no expectation of future work with the opposition or the authorities involved. One would hope lawyers would recuse themselves from your case if there was a chance that they would not be in full ethical and fiducial loyalty to you so take steps to find an attorney who would love to see your opponents lose as much as to have you win.

Taking the matter to court is considered a last resort. Litigation is a formal, adversarial process that can be lengthy, expensive, and unpredictable. It can also damage your reputation and relationships in the industry. Therefore, it should only be considered when all other options have been exhausted.

The fourth step, to be used as a last resort, is litigation. This is the formal process of resolving disputes through the judicial system. It's like going to trial in a criminal case; it's lengthy, expensive, and should be avoided if possible.

Once a resolution is reached, it's imperative to comply with the outcome, whether it's an agreement from negotiation or ADR, or a court judgment. Compliance demonstrates your professionalism and integrity, and it helps you move forward with your project without further legal hindrances.

If you are not going to be willing or able to comply, there may be another way to move on with integrity if the dispute and obligations will run with the land. Disclose the situation and sell the land to a company which is willing to comply. This can be a win/win/win resolution depending on the situation.

A common mistake made by litigants in person is to read land registry plans to locate precise boundaries. The general boundaries rule in the UK should be drawn to the attention of everyone who downloads readily accessible title documents.

After a resolution has been reached, compliance is mandatory. It's essential for the successful closure of the dispute and for maintaining professional integrity. Failure to comply can result in legal complications and negatively impact your professional reputation.

A lot of disputes can occur during due diligence and feasibility reviews and can derail closing a deal. I stopped allowing land buyers to submit offers on non-promulgated sales forms which were often biased and riddled with typos and botched cut-and-paste work. I now require offers to be on state real estate commission promulgated forms or the national realtor version of the promulgated forms. The contract review is much more accurate and efficient when an addendum is used to organize special conditions. I also collect the best addendum special conditions for reference in future work.

A common question to ask oneself if engaging in such litigation is what difference it might make when someone else buys the property. If it doesn't affect or is unlikely to affect how a potential purchaser views the affected land, then it sounds more like a point of principle which should be avoided at all costs!

Most of the land disputes that I have been involved in, were resolved, simply because the claim was false. I many occasions the person, claiming to have the right to the property is making a claim solely based on assumption. When you are first approached, however, it happens, reach out and say That you wish to discuss and have an expert involved.