Built a house - now I'm being SUED by the neighbor

[MilesTeg]

And they ABSOLUTELY WILL show up at small claims court with evidence for the first time.  The civil rules of discovery do not apply to small claims actions.  You would have to transfer it to the regular docket, which would create a much more expensive process for all involved.

If a lay person requested my file prior to a small claims hearing, I would not turn it over, period.

Why on earth would our screwed up legal system allow for such legal behavior even in small claims. It's insanity. Lawyers earning all the bad jokes made about lawyers?

The discovery process can cost thousands, easy.  See Rules 26-36 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (which most states largely follow, with some exceptions).  Written questions (Rule 33), written admissions (34), depositions (33), etc. It would cost a ton of money. The whole point of small claims is to not go through that process (or any of the pleading/motion process) because the amount in controversy is small.

If defense counsel thinks he or she needs to conduct discovery, and that the costs are worth it, they will remove it to the regular docket.

I just defended a $6,000 small claim last Friday.  The plaintiffs showed up with things I'd never seen before so I made an oral motion to move it to the regular docket. 

It's about efficiency, not lawyers being jerks. If every small claim had a discovery process the courts would be incredibly jammed and require double or triple the personnel to handle more complicated dockets and hearings.

I get the idea of efficiency being good, but how is hiding evidence ever efficient? So, to relate this to the OP, you are claiming that sending a copy of some (hypothetical) dated photos of the claimed damage to the defendant is going to cost thousands of dollars?

[MilesTeg]

And they ABSOLUTELY WILL show up at small claims court with evidence for the first time.  The civil rules of discovery do not apply to small claims actions.  You would have to transfer it to the regular docket, which would create a much more expensive process for all involved.

If a lay person requested my file prior to a small claims hearing, I would not turn it over, period.

Why on earth would our screwed up legal system allow for such legal behavior even in small claims. It's insanity. Lawyers earning all the bad jokes made about lawyers?

Also, let me ask you this. If you were paying me $200 an hour, and the rules did not require me to disclose evidence prior to hearing, what would you think if I voluntarily did so?

Well, since I would only be using your services if I had a legitimate case and evidence, I would have no problem with that.

[ReadySetMillionaire]

How is letting someone suing you bring unvetted evidence against you to a judge at all an acceptable solution for anyone in any circumstance. Evidence can easily be faked or misleading in ways that you can't demonstrate in the 10 minutes (or whatever limited time) you have with the judge.

At a bare minimum, producing evidence on demand, even in small claims, should be compulsory in all court cases. Laughing off such requests may be legal, but it's in no way ethical or in service to justice.

And of course the laywers make up the rules.. Not necessarily trial laywers, but lawyers (i.e. politicians, judges, etc. are typically lawyers and/or get their policy from laywers).

You're confusing the Rules of Evidence (which still apply) vs. the Rules of Procedure (which do not). There are still evidentiary thresholds that must be met, including authentication (i.e., you must prove the document is authentic).

Small claims hearings are not necessarily 10 minutes. You usually get 30 minutes. If you think it will be longer you fill out a form and you can get up to two hours (at least here in Ohio).

And your comment about ethics is interesting, because the number one ethical obligation for attorneys is to represent your client.  You are ethically bound to act in their best interests.  Now, if you tell me, "Here, I'll give you all my evidence if you give me yours," that's fair and I would probably cooperate. If you just submitted a blanket request I would tell you to go eat sand.

I get the idea of efficiency being good, but how is hiding evidence ever efficient? So, to relate this to the OP, you are claiming that sending a copy of some (hypothetical) dated photos of the claimed damage to the defendant is going to cost thousands of dollars?

Again, I'm talking about the formal discovery process, which is not very efficient at all. So small claims largely ignores it, although the parties can improvise.  Again, I'd be fine with mutual disclosures, but one-sided, no way.

Further, I'm not saying that would cost thousands. I'm saying the attorney will not do it because it will give up a procedural advantage that the small claims court provides.

[newloginuser]

Just be careful what you put in writing. I WOULD NOT put in writing to them an apology, it can be taken as an admission of guilt.

Second thought is request a copy of their file from their attorney. It will be helpful to get a copy of what evidence they have. It won't just matter if the fence has damage, they have to prove the GF you hired was actually at fault.

I'm not 100% positive, but unless your GV did something negligent, sliding mud shouldn't cause you to be liable for damages. Think of it like a situation where you sand/salt a home on a rental property but the renter comes outsides and still slips and gets injured. They can sue, but you did what you were supposed to and what was required. If your property is high on a hill and the neighbor is below and mud falls, there may not be a real claim.

I'd also be skeptical that a person is requesting only $2,000 in damages and hired an attorney. Not really worth most attorney's time if that's the case.

Also feel free to ask me any questions, I did previously work in insurance, I'm not saying you aren't liable as more facts are needed but those are my thoughts. Also as a third thought, you may want to notify your insurance company if you wish to not deal with it personally. They will reach out to the GC and neighbors attorney and handle it if you don't wish to.

Most of this isn't sound advice. 

1. A written letter would just need to write "for settlement purposes only" and it would not be taken as an admission of guilt, and it largely would not be admissible as evidence (could get into a technical argument here, but I'll pass).

2. I'd laugh in your face if you requested my file. Not happening.

3. The advice about whether the GC did something negligent is silly. If the GC changed the water flow to cause runoff/damage to the other lot, OF COURSE there is negligence. If there was a hill in the back yard that would create runoff, then the GC needs to put french drains or some sort of water retention system that would not negatively affect the neighbor's lot. Also, there is a TON of dirt on a construction site. If that was running onto my yard I would be pissed (although I would have talked to the neighbors first, not sent a demand letter).

4. The thing about "not being worth most attorney's time" is crap. Some clients pay me $10,000 to get $6,000 from others as "a matter of principle." So long as the attorney got his or her retainer, he or she doesn't care how much the amount in controversy is.

I'm not going to keep coming back to this thread, but I'm just highlighting this post, as one of many, as to why OP needs to get an attorney and/or hand this over to insurance.

1. Writing on it "for settlement purposes only" wouldn't be applicable unless you're making a settlement offer. Writing that and then saying sorry could still be presented. I won't get into it with you, but if you acknowledge fault in an accident your insurance can deny you due to admitting fault before clear liability was determined.

2. Laugh all you want, they are required to share with you their evidence. If you received a demand letter (like it sounds like you did since they asked for $2,000) they should have sent over their compelling evidence as to why you're at fault. If they are going to sue you they will have to file evidence anyway. They aren't going to show up in small claims court and reveal everything for the first time.

3. Who says the GC didn't build a trench or do anything to try and prevent water run off? I don't think this is/was clear based on what I read.

4. If it's an insurance claim, most recoveries by the attorney are capped. This may not be an insurance claim ultimately, and this also doesn't apply to if the attorney charged a retainer, but it's certainly not meaningless. It could be a family member or a friend who's an attorney who has no intent to do anything more than send a letter.

Edit:
Just editing to say your best first step is to either contact your insurance company or contact an attorney if you wish to handle this yourself. Wishing you the best.

OP, please don't listen to this advice.

Some of it is misguided, some of it is flat-out wrong.

Yes OP, what you should do is admit fault and send that letter to the opposing lawyer. Or listen to somebody who isn't educated in this area. That's always another sound option.

Or if you would like to verify yourself, call your local state branch and find out what you'd need to do to file a small claims court against someone. Might help you sift through some of the weeds of this topic.

[SwitchActiveDWG]

Interesting reading in this thread, appreciate the lawyers chiming in on this issue.

[MilesTeg]

How is letting someone suing you bring unvetted evidence against you to a judge at all an acceptable solution for anyone in any circumstance. Evidence can easily be faked or misleading in ways that you can't demonstrate in the 10 minutes (or whatever limited time) you have with the judge.

At a bare minimum, producing evidence on demand, even in small claims, should be compulsory in all court cases. Laughing off such requests may be legal, but it's in no way ethical or in service to justice.

And of course the laywers make up the rules.. Not necessarily trial laywers, but lawyers (i.e. politicians, judges, etc. are typically lawyers and/or get their policy from laywers).

You're confusing the Rules of Evidence (which still apply) vs. the Rules of Procedure (which do not). There are still evidentiary thresholds that must be met, including authentication (i.e., you must prove the document is authentic).

No, I'm saying it's impossible for me, in some cases, to argue against the authenticity of evidence I have never seen. Best case scenario a lot of people's time wasted (i.e. the argument for efficiency goes out the door). Worst case scenario an unjust resolution to the dispute.

Small claims hearings are not necessarily 10 minutes. You usually get 30 minutes. If you think it will be longer you fill out a form and you can get up to two hours (at least here in Ohio).

Knowing I would need a longer hearing would require knowing what the content of the hearing is.

And your comment about ethics is interesting, because the number one ethical obligation for attorneys is to represent your client.  You are ethically bound to act in their best interests.  Now, if you tell me, "Here, I'll give you all my evidence if you give me yours," that's fair and I would probably cooperate. If you just submitted a blanket request I would tell you to go eat sand.

I would say you are confusing "ethics" with "duty". A lawyer certainly has a duty to their clients, but that doesn't mean they conduct themselves ethically in execution of that duty. Perhaps a more generous way to put it is there's a difference between the ethics of attorney-client relationships and the ethics of seeking justice.

Is it justice to "win" based on procedural advantage rather than the straight facts of the case?

I get the idea of efficiency being good, but how is hiding evidence ever efficient? So, to relate this to the OP, you are claiming that sending a copy of some (hypothetical) dated photos of the claimed damage to the defendant is going to cost thousands of dollars?

Again, I'm talking about the formal discovery process, which is not very efficient at all. So small claims largely ignores it, although the parties can improvise.  Again, I'd be fine with mutual disclosures, but one-sided, no way.

Further, I'm not saying that would cost thousands. I'm saying the attorney will not do it because it will give up a procedural advantage that the small claims court provides.

Yes, both parties should have the same burden, legally and in all circumstances. If nothing else, it would make it more efficient to determine the proper locale for the proceeding. If there needs to be so much evidence that discovery would actually be involved, I would say small claims is probably not the appropriate venue in the first place.

[newloginuser]

And they ABSOLUTELY WILL show up at small claims court with evidence for the first time.  The civil rules of discovery do not apply to small claims actions.  You would have to transfer it to the regular docket, which would create a much more expensive process for all involved.

If a lay person requested my file prior to a small claims hearing, I would not turn it over, period.

Why on earth would our screwed up legal system allow for such legal behavior even in small claims. It's insanity. Lawyers earning all the bad jokes made about lawyers?

The discovery process can cost thousands, easy.  See Rules 26-36 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (which most states largely follow, with some exceptions).  Written questions (Rule 33), written admissions (34), depositions (33), etc. It would cost a ton of money. The whole point of small claims is to not go through that process (or any of the pleading/motion process) because the amount in controversy is small.

If defense counsel thinks he or she needs to conduct discovery, and that the costs are worth it, they will remove it to the regular docket.

I just defended a $6,000 small claim last Friday.  The plaintiffs showed up with things I'd never seen before so I made an oral motion to move it to the regular docket. 

It's about efficiency, not lawyers being jerks. If every small claim had a discovery process the courts would be incredibly jammed and require double or triple the personnel to handle more complicated dockets and hearings.

I was trying to avoid the minutiae of it all but you basically proved my point about what would happen if they showed up with evidence that was not provided to you earlier. Yes the court wants you to settle out of court if possible, but who is going to settle a claim simply based on a letter asking for money?

There evidence could simply be a photo of their fence/yard and an estimate to repair it, but that would still need to be provided.

[MilesTeg]

These types of letters/tactics are a good example of unethical behavior by a lawyer in service to their client. Send a letter with zero backing evidence and hope you scare the person into making a legal mistake such as admitting guilt (which there may, in fact, be none) or just rolling over without a fight.

OP: get a lawyer =)

[lexde]

Just be careful what you put in writing. I WOULD NOT put in writing to them an apology, it can be taken as an admission of guilt.

Second thought is request a copy of their file from their attorney. It will be helpful to get a copy of what evidence they have. It won't just matter if the fence has damage, they have to prove the GF you hired was actually at fault.

I'm not 100% positive, but unless your GV did something negligent, sliding mud shouldn't cause you to be liable for damages. Think of it like a situation where you sand/salt a home on a rental property but the renter comes outsides and still slips and gets injured. They can sue, but you did what you were supposed to and what was required. If your property is high on a hill and the neighbor is below and mud falls, there may not be a real claim.

I'd also be skeptical that a person is requesting only $2,000 in damages and hired an attorney. Not really worth most attorney's time if that's the case.

Also feel free to ask me any questions, I did previously work in insurance, I'm not saying you aren't liable as more facts are needed but those are my thoughts. Also as a third thought, you may want to notify your insurance company if you wish to not deal with it personally. They will reach out to the GC and neighbors attorney and handle it if you don't wish to.

Most of this isn't sound advice. 

1. A written letter would just need to write "for settlement purposes only" and it would not be taken as an admission of guilt, and it largely would not be admissible as evidence (could get into a technical argument here, but I'll pass).

2. I'd laugh in your face if you requested my file. Not happening.

3. The advice about whether the GC did something negligent is silly. If the GC changed the water flow to cause runoff/damage to the other lot, OF COURSE there is negligence. If there was a hill in the back yard that would create runoff, then the GC needs to put french drains or some sort of water retention system that would not negatively affect the neighbor's lot. Also, there is a TON of dirt on a construction site. If that was running onto my yard I would be pissed (although I would have talked to the neighbors first, not sent a demand letter).

4. The thing about "not being worth most attorney's time" is crap. Some clients pay me $10,000 to get $6,000 from others as "a matter of principle." So long as the attorney got his or her retainer, he or she doesn't care how much the amount in controversy is.

I'm not going to keep coming back to this thread, but I'm just highlighting this post, as one of many, as to why OP needs to get an attorney and/or hand this over to insurance.

1. Writing on it "for settlement purposes only" wouldn't be applicable unless you're making a settlement offer. Writing that and then saying sorry could still be presented. I won't get into it with you, but if you acknowledge fault in an accident your insurance can deny you due to admitting fault before clear liability was determined.

2. Laugh all you want, they are required to share with you their evidence. If you received a demand letter (like it sounds like you did since they asked for $2,000) they should have sent over their compelling evidence as to why you're at fault. If they are going to sue you they will have to file evidence anyway. They aren't going to show up in small claims court and reveal everything for the first time.

3. Who says the GC didn't build a trench or do anything to try and prevent water run off? I don't think this is/was clear based on what I read.

4. If it's an insurance claim, most recoveries by the attorney are capped. This may not be an insurance claim ultimately, and this also doesn't apply to if the attorney charged a retainer, but it's certainly not meaningless. It could be a family member or a friend who's an attorney who has no intent to do anything more than send a letter.

Edit:
Just editing to say your best first step is to either contact your insurance company or contact an attorney if you wish to handle this yourself. Wishing you the best.

OP, please don't listen to this advice.

Some of it is misguided, some of it is flat-out wrong.

Yes OP, what you should do is admit fault and send that letter to the opposing lawyer. Or listen to somebody who isn't educated in this area. That's always another sound option.

Or if you would like to verify yourself, call your local state branch and find out what you'd need to do to file a small claims court against someone. Might help you sift through some of the weeds of this topic.

What are you talking about? Nowhere in this thread did I tell OP to write anyone a letter. I told him to talk to a lawyer.
Someone who is only semi-educated in this area is almost worse than someone who isn't educated at all. Working on an insurance claim has nothing to do with litigation, and insurance adjusters shouldn't try to give legal advice.

But I'm just a construction litigation attorney, what do I know? :-)

[EricEng]

15 months is an awful long time for house construction and I would sympathize with neighbors enduring noise and mess that long without recourse or anyone listening to their issues.

1) caused them to cancel parties
House Construction can be loud and I've known builders to be hammering up dry wall at 11pm at night which I've yelled at them for.  This could be valid.
2) During heavy rain, much dirt from my house slid under the fence into their backyard causing damage to their grass
There are short black plastic fences that are supposed to be installed to prevent this.  If your builder didn't do that, this is valid and commonly code.
3) "I" did damage to "their back yard fence"
If you owned the land and hired the builder, then yes you'll be liable.
4) "I" created a significant amount of mosquitos to appear in their backyard
If you owned the land and hired the builders and they left buckets that filled with rain water all over, then yes that can be an issue if they raised it and were ignored.  Some states have laws against that.

[ReadySetMillionaire]

These types of letters/tactics are a good example of unethical behavior by a lawyer in service to their client. Send a letter with zero backing evidence and hope you scare the person into making a legal mistake such as admitting guilt (which there may, in fact, be none) or just rolling over without a fight.

OP: get a lawyer =)

Find me a lawyer that would send all his/her evidence with their demand letter and I will Venmo you $100. Not kidding.

***

I've made my point. If people want to complain about lawyers that's fine. The legal system is what it is, and all we try to do is counsel our clients through the maze -- which we also usually hate.

But procedure is really important, and you have to use procedure to your advantage as a lawyer. Doing otherwise is negligent.  According to Jeremy Lever (a famous English lawyer):

...the outcome of cases, whether criminal or civil, is in practice more likely to be affected by procedural rules than by any niceties of substantive law...Parties are more likely to regard their treatment at the hands of the law as unjust because of what they perceive to be defects of procedure than because of what they perceive to be defects of substantive law.

Basically, ignore procedure at your peril.

I think it's time for @lexde and I to bow out. Hopefully OP gets a lawyer.

[newloginuser]

Just be careful what you put in writing. I WOULD NOT put in writing to them an apology, it can be taken as an admission of guilt.

Second thought is request a copy of their file from their attorney. It will be helpful to get a copy of what evidence they have. It won't just matter if the fence has damage, they have to prove the GF you hired was actually at fault.

I'm not 100% positive, but unless your GV did something negligent, sliding mud shouldn't cause you to be liable for damages. Think of it like a situation where you sand/salt a home on a rental property but the renter comes outsides and still slips and gets injured. They can sue, but you did what you were supposed to and what was required. If your property is high on a hill and the neighbor is below and mud falls, there may not be a real claim.

I'd also be skeptical that a person is requesting only $2,000 in damages and hired an attorney. Not really worth most attorney's time if that's the case.

Also feel free to ask me any questions, I did previously work in insurance, I'm not saying you aren't liable as more facts are needed but those are my thoughts. Also as a third thought, you may want to notify your insurance company if you wish to not deal with it personally. They will reach out to the GC and neighbors attorney and handle it if you don't wish to.

Most of this isn't sound advice. 

1. A written letter would just need to write "for settlement purposes only" and it would not be taken as an admission of guilt, and it largely would not be admissible as evidence (could get into a technical argument here, but I'll pass).

2. I'd laugh in your face if you requested my file. Not happening.

3. The advice about whether the GC did something negligent is silly. If the GC changed the water flow to cause runoff/damage to the other lot, OF COURSE there is negligence. If there was a hill in the back yard that would create runoff, then the GC needs to put french drains or some sort of water retention system that would not negatively affect the neighbor's lot. Also, there is a TON of dirt on a construction site. If that was running onto my yard I would be pissed (although I would have talked to the neighbors first, not sent a demand letter).

4. The thing about "not being worth most attorney's time" is crap. Some clients pay me $10,000 to get $6,000 from others as "a matter of principle." So long as the attorney got his or her retainer, he or she doesn't care how much the amount in controversy is.

I'm not going to keep coming back to this thread, but I'm just highlighting this post, as one of many, as to why OP needs to get an attorney and/or hand this over to insurance.

1. Writing on it "for settlement purposes only" wouldn't be applicable unless you're making a settlement offer. Writing that and then saying sorry could still be presented. I won't get into it with you, but if you acknowledge fault in an accident your insurance can deny you due to admitting fault before clear liability was determined.

2. Laugh all you want, they are required to share with you their evidence. If you received a demand letter (like it sounds like you did since they asked for $2,000) they should have sent over their compelling evidence as to why you're at fault. If they are going to sue you they will have to file evidence anyway. They aren't going to show up in small claims court and reveal everything for the first time.

3. Who says the GC didn't build a trench or do anything to try and prevent water run off? I don't think this is/was clear based on what I read.

4. If it's an insurance claim, most recoveries by the attorney are capped. This may not be an insurance claim ultimately, and this also doesn't apply to if the attorney charged a retainer, but it's certainly not meaningless. It could be a family member or a friend who's an attorney who has no intent to do anything more than send a letter.

Edit:
Just editing to say your best first step is to either contact your insurance company or contact an attorney if you wish to handle this yourself. Wishing you the best.

OP, please don't listen to this advice.

Some of it is misguided, some of it is flat-out wrong.

Yes OP, what you should do is admit fault and send that letter to the opposing lawyer. Or listen to somebody who isn't educated in this area. That's always another sound option.

Or if you would like to verify yourself, call your local state branch and find out what you'd need to do to file a small claims court against someone. Might help you sift through some of the weeds of this topic.

What are you talking about? Nowhere in this thread did I tell OP to write anyone a letter. I told him to talk to a lawyer.
Someone who is only semi-educated in this area is almost worse than someone who isn't educated at all. Working on an insurance claim has nothing to do with litigation, and insurance adjusters shouldn't try to give legal advice.

But I'm just a construction litigation attorney, what do I know? :-)

My apologies if you weren't the one saying to write a letter apologizing. Someone mentioned it and I didn't go back to look. my mistake :)

[MilesTeg]

These types of letters/tactics are a good example of unethical behavior by a lawyer in service to their client. Send a letter with zero backing evidence and hope you scare the person into making a legal mistake such as admitting guilt (which there may, in fact, be none) or just rolling over without a fight.

OP: get a lawyer =)

Find me a lawyer that would send all his/her evidence with their demand letter and I will Venmo you $100. Not kidding.

***

I've made my point. If people want to complain about lawyers that's fine. The legal system is what it is, and all we try to do is counsel our clients through the maze -- which we also usually hate.

But procedure is really important, and you have to use procedure to your advantage as a lawyer. Doing otherwise is negligent.  According to Jeremy Lever (a famous English lawyer):

...the outcome of cases, whether criminal or civil, is in practice more likely to be affected by procedural rules than by any niceties of substantive law...Parties are more likely to regard their treatment at the hands of the law as unjust because of what they perceive to be defects of procedure than because of what they perceive to be defects of substantive law.

Basically, ignore procedure at your peril.

I think it's time for @lexde and I to bow out. Hopefully OP gets a lawyer.

Procedure should certainly not be ignored. That's not at all what I am saying. I am saying the procedure you explain is does not serve justice and that it should be changed to do so.

[clarkfan1979]

I bought a bank foreclosure and closed on May 10, 2007. I mowed the lawn within 2-3 days of purchase. It was very long because it was spring and I'm sure the seller (bank) was not mowing the lawn regularly.

I met the neighbor on day 4-5. They asked if I purchased the house and I said, "yep, I closed a few days ago." Their 2nd comment was, "I'm glad to see you finally mowed the lawn" Maybe I misread them, but they seemed to be upset with me, not the seller, which left me confused.

[CindyBS]

I would recommend taking a lot of photos.  Photos on a dry day, photos shortly after it rains, complete with a weather report for that day.  Don't trespass on your neighbors property, but do try to take photos of their side of the fence where you can - maybe by standing on a A frame ladder in the yard or from a second story window? 

Do you have any standing water now that can breed mosquitos?  If so, get rid of it now.

Look into your city's police report to see if anyone called the cops on your builder for noise violations.  It is totally possible it was happening but the cops let the builder off with a warning.

[cats]

Do you have homeowner's insurance?  This may be something they would handle for you.  No experience as a homeowner myself but my parents were once sued by a woman who claimed our dog had bitten her and their homeowner's insurance dealt with it all.  Might want to check that out before going to the extra expense of hiring an attorney.

[jlcnuke]

What I've learned in this thread is that because I once hired a lawyer and have had insurance claims in the past, I know more about the law and how it works than lawyers do. amiright??

[EngagedToFIRE]

These types of letters/tactics are a good example of unethical behavior by a lawyer in service to their client. Send a letter with zero backing evidence and hope you scare the person into making a legal mistake such as admitting guilt (which there may, in fact, be none) or just rolling over without a fight.

OP: get a lawyer =)

Find me a lawyer that would send all his/her evidence with their demand letter and I will Venmo you $100. Not kidding.

***

I've made my point. If people want to complain about lawyers that's fine. The legal system is what it is, and all we try to do is counsel our clients through the maze -- which we also usually hate.

But procedure is really important, and you have to use procedure to your advantage as a lawyer. Doing otherwise is negligent.  According to Jeremy Lever (a famous English lawyer):

...the outcome of cases, whether criminal or civil, is in practice more likely to be affected by procedural rules than by any niceties of substantive law...Parties are more likely to regard their treatment at the hands of the law as unjust because of what they perceive to be defects of procedure than because of what they perceive to be defects of substantive law.

Basically, ignore procedure at your peril.

I think it's time for @lexde and I to bow out. Hopefully OP gets a lawyer.

Procedure should certainly not be ignored. That's not at all what I am saying. I am saying the procedure you explain is does not serve justice and that it should be changed to do so.

That's pretty much our entire legal system.  Just hope you never get involved in a non-small claims case...  The entire system and the "procedures" used is meant to bully and extort money from innocent people.  You "won" in court but were forced to spend $60,000 to do it.  Yay... The lawyers get paid, always.  And the lawyers make the rules, always.  So even if you know you will win, opposing slimy lawyer, absolutely morally bankrupt as nearly all lawyers are, will take $20k or whatever to settle so you don't get wiped out in the process.  You want to fight it?  You want to spend your life savings? Oh, you don't?  Then we'll just take XYZ amount to leave you alone.  Welcome to America!  And thank God small claims is at least a little more "to the point" where lawyers can't drag it out, rack up fees, and create hell for innocent people.

[EngagedToFIRE]

Do you have homeowner's insurance?  This may be something they would handle for you.  No experience as a homeowner myself but my parents were once sued by a woman who claimed our dog had bitten her and their homeowner's insurance dealt with it all.  Might want to check that out before going to the extra expense of hiring an attorney.

I would absolutely do this before consulting an attorney, unless initial consultation is free (rarely is).

[FrugalSaver]

OP, I'm still confused as to whether you received a demand letter or a summons. Very different things.

It sounds to me like the GC/subs pissed of your neighbors (common...I represent two GCs), and your builder didn't do much to make good with the neighbors. One of my GCs has a 4 page list of things that subs can and cannot do, and most of it is to keep good with the neighbors.

Anyway, while everyone else thinks this is frivolous, I think the runoff issue is possibly significant. Changing the course of water onto neighbor's properties usually isn't allowed (which is why uneven lots often have a french drain in the back of the yard). If you do not have that and your water is running onto their property, thus ruining their back yard and ability to have "quiet enjoyment" of their property, then you could be liable for that.

I'd contact both your insurance company and an attorney.

What is the difference?  I'm not sure I know how to tell.

Basically it says if i don't respond by Friday 7/19, they will begin fixing things and then sue me for whatever it costs them.

[FrugalSaver]

Was the letter from them, or their attorney?

Have you spoken to them at all?

Can you see any evidence whatsoever supporting their claims?

Did you have a custom home built on a lot? How big is the size of the lot? Did anyone give notice to the neighbors that a home was being built? Did your GC post the required documents on site while building that would put the neighbors on notice that a home was benign built?

A lot of missing info here. Seems like a s***ty way to start the neighborly relationship if you ask me...

WOuld there be an issue with me essentially typing in the contents of the letter and removing any names, etc for the experts here to read it?

[former player]

Do you have house insurance?  Have you found and read the policy?  Are you covered for this claim? Have you contacted your insurers?
Does your contractor have insurance?  Are they covered for the claim?  Have you contacted your contractor?

No lawyer here is going to read the letter for you until you've told us you've done this and what the results are.

Because a claim for $2k where you are insured is an insurance issue first and a lawyer issue second.  Look, supposing you were in a car accident, wouldn't you call your insurance company first?  Think of this as the house equivalent of a car accident in which you are being blamed.  Your car, the contractor was driving.

If your insurance doesn't cover it and your contractor doesn't want to know then rather than contacting lawyers you are probably better off making nice to your neighbour.  But the first thing is insurance, not lawyers.  And don't put it off: these things are better dealt with promptly.

[ReadySetMillionaire]

OP, I'm still confused as to whether you received a demand letter or a summons. Very different things.

It sounds to me like the GC/subs pissed of your neighbors (common...I represent two GCs), and your builder didn't do much to make good with the neighbors. One of my GCs has a 4 page list of things that subs can and cannot do, and most of it is to keep good with the neighbors.

Anyway, while everyone else thinks this is frivolous, I think the runoff issue is possibly significant. Changing the course of water onto neighbor's properties usually isn't allowed (which is why uneven lots often have a french drain in the back of the yard). If you do not have that and your water is running onto their property, thus ruining their back yard and ability to have "quiet enjoyment" of their property, then you could be liable for that.

I'd contact both your insurance company and an attorney.

What is the difference?  I'm not sure I know how to tell.

Basically it says if i don't respond by Friday 7/19, they will begin fixing things and then sue me for whatever it costs them.

A summons is from the court and will state that you have to answer a complaint or appear on a certain date. A demand letter is just a writing sent by an attorney with an artificial deadline.

[ReadySetMillionaire]

That's pretty much our entire legal system.  Just hope you never get involved in a non-small claims case...  The entire system and the "procedures" used is meant to bully and extort money from innocent people.  You "won" in court but were forced to spend $60,000 to do it.  Yay... The lawyers get paid, always.  And the lawyers make the rules, always.  So even if you know you will win, opposing slimy lawyer, absolutely morally bankrupt as nearly all lawyers are, will take $20k or whatever to settle so you don't get wiped out in the process.  You want to fight it?  You want to spend your life savings? Oh, you don't?  Then we'll just take XYZ amount to leave you alone.  Welcome to America!  And thank God small claims is at least a little more "to the point" where lawyers can't drag it out, rack up fees, and create hell for innocent people.

I certainly understand your frustration.  I obviously do not speak on behalf of all lawyers, but I think a fair amount of us also don't like the system, but because it is the law, we have to follow that process.

My tagline for my solo law practice is "Goal-Oriented Legal Counsel." I've built a reputation for being reasonable and fair, and not engaging in any procedural bullshit. Opposing counsel generally knows I'm going to be fair; but they also know that if they are going to horse around, I'm going to shove it up their ass.  All is fair in love and war or whatever.

[Laura33]

OP:  Your neighbors are assholes.  But that doesn't mean they are entirely wrong, either.  My rule is if the other side has a lawyer, you need a lawyer, too.  That doesn't have to be your own personal lawyer; this is partly what homeowner's insurance is for, to understand what you are and aren't liable for, and to bring in lawyers on your side to push back against unreasonable lawyers/clients on the other side. 

The primary issue that gives me pause is the stormwater runoff issue.  Most states have rules that (a) require contractors to take action during construction to minimize stormwater runoff, and (b) prohibit people from making stormwater runoff worse on someone else's property.  A house and driveway and all that is an impervious surface, so by definition adding that sort of thing will increase the amount of stormwater that runs off the property instead of being absorbed.  So usually that means when you design a house, you need to do appropriate grading so the runoff goes into a stormwater sewer, and/or adding things like French drains to keep the water on your property.

This is why the stormwater issue concerns me.  Because if someone messed up the design or grading, the stormwater could be an ongoing problem, not just a little construction runoff.  And that's the kind of thing that can cost a lot more than $2K to fix.

Two other things to keep in mind on this.  1.  Even if the contractor or architect or whoever is the one who screwed that up, you are very likely still responsible.  It is your property, and you cannot contract away your responsibilities to your neighbors and the environment.  Now, you may have a contract claim against whomever it is who screwed it up, but as far as the neighbors are concerned, they have the right to sue you, and to let you and the other guys fight it out over which one pays for the fixes.  And 2.  There are time limits here that you need to comply with.  If you have home insurance that would cover the cost of any repairs and defend you, your insurance contract is going to require you to notify them within a short period of time, like 60-90 days -- and if you do not notify them in that timeframe, they can try to deny coverage!  Similarly, if your contractor or architect or whoever screwed up, you probably have the right to go after them under your contract, but I guarantee that contract requires you to give them notice with an even-shorter period of time.

Now, on the other hand, this could all be complete and utter bullshit.  But I always like to weigh the downside risk of the available options.  Option 1, you report it to your homeowner's insurance and your contractor and anyone else you had a contract with related to the design and construction of the house, and you let them hash it out between themselves and the neighbors.  Worst case, it's all bullshit.  So your downside risk is that you made an unnecessary report to your homeowner's insurance.  Oh well.  OTOH, option 2, you don't report it, you talk to the neighbors, you try to deal with it yourself.  Worst-case, they were right, your grading is wrong/your contractors never got the required permits/now it's going to cost you $20K to regrade and install a French drain. 

IMO, the downside risk of option 2 far outweighs the downside risk of option 1.  So if I were giving you legal advice -- which I cannot, because I'm not your lawyer and don't practice in this area anyway -- I'd tell you to stop talking to me and go bring in the experts who are paid to deal with this kind of stuff, bullshit or not.  Good luck.

[doingfine]

I still stand by my opinion that the neighbors MAY be assholes, but we can't know via the information provided. Again, did you introduce yourself at the beginning of the project? Did you give them your name and number in case they had any concerns or complaints? Did you stop by to say hi and acknowledge the inconvenience caused from time to time during the extended construction phase?

If the answer to these questions is 'no', then the ass-hattery is about equal on both sides, IMO. If they've been living next to construction that has been affecting their quality of life and causing issues on their property for 15 months and they've never seen an owner to whom they could voice their concerns, their resentment has rightly been building for a long time.

I'll say it again, you can respond to them in kind with your own lawyers, but that will pretty much make this negative situation permanent. If you go and talk to them, face to face, you might find they really are assholes, but you at least have a chance of salvaging the relationship.

[MilesTeg]

I'll say it again, you can respond to them in kind with your own lawyers, but that will pretty much make this negative situation permanent. If you go and talk to them, face to face, you might find they really are assholes, but you at least have a chance of salvaging the relationship.

The worst possible thing the OP can try to handle this without representation of his own. That lawyer will eat him for breakfast - that's the job he was hired to do. The neighbors have already signaled, by engaging a lawyer as a first contact, that they have no interest in trying to create or maintain a workable relationship. There's no point in risking legal trouble to try to salvage something that is untenable.

[doingfine]

The worst possible thing the OP can try to handle this without representation of his own. That lawyer will eat him for breakfast - that's the job he was hired to do. The neighbors have already signaled, by engaging a lawyer as a first contact, that they have no interest in trying to create or maintain a workable relationship. There's no point in risking legal trouble to try to salvage something that is untenable.

Suggesting they knock on the door, introduce themselves, and get a sense of whether this might be resolved without lawyers is not even in the same ballpark as suggesting they 'try to handle this without representation of their own'.

I've long read that there are many neighborhoods in this country where people literally don't know their next door neighbor. Apparently I'm learning from this thread it's a lot more common than I ever imagined...

[MilesTeg]

The worst possible thing the OP can try to handle this without representation of his own. That lawyer will eat him for breakfast - that's the job he was hired to do. The neighbors have already signaled, by engaging a lawyer as a first contact, that they have no interest in trying to create or maintain a workable relationship. There's no point in risking legal trouble to try to salvage something that is untenable.

Suggesting they knock on the door, introduce themselves, and get a sense of whether this might be resolved without lawyers is not even in the same ballpark as suggesting they 'try to handle this without representation of their own'.

I've long read that there are many neighborhoods in this country where people literally don't know their next door neighbor. Apparently I'm learning from this thread it's a lot more common than I ever imagined...

They are engaging in sociopathic behavior (yes, if your first contact with a new neighbor is to sue them, you're engaging in sociopathic behavior), you can't trust your interactions with sociopaths. OP needs to respond through representation.

[doingfine]

They are engaging in sociopathic behavior (yes, if your first contact with a new neighbor is to sue them, you're engaging in sociopathic behavior), you can't trust your interactions with sociopaths. OP needs to respond through representation.

I'm about the last person that would ever think of using a lawsuit to settle much of, well, anything for that matter - but I maintain that if you are constructing a new home close enough to another dwelling to cause these kind of issues and you never bother to make contact with your future neighbors in over a year of construction, that's also sociopathic, and might reasonably drive a person to consider a lawsuit as a first line of contact. Perhaps this is not the case, but FrugalSaver has not yet chimed in to clarify one way or the other.

Again, responding to the lawsuit in-kind has a 100% chance of cementing bad relations with the people you will likely spend many years living next door to. Going to talk to them, as a neighbor, reserves at least a small chance of reversing that outcome and making things much more amicable for the future.

Don't underestimate the impact that a really bad relationship with your neighbors can have on your quality of life. They can easily choose to make things bad enough for you that you find your new home untenable.

[fuzzy math]

The worst possible thing the OP can try to handle this without representation of his own. That lawyer will eat him for breakfast - that's the job he was hired to do. The neighbors have already signaled, by engaging a lawyer as a first contact, that they have no interest in trying to create or maintain a workable relationship. There's no point in risking legal trouble to try to salvage something that is untenable.

Suggesting they knock on the door, introduce themselves, and get a sense of whether this might be resolved without lawyers is not even in the same ballpark as suggesting they 'try to handle this without representation of their own'.

I've long read that there are many neighborhoods in this country where people literally don't know their next door neighbor. Apparently I'm learning from this thread it's a lot more common than I ever imagined...

They are engaging in sociopathic behavior (yes, if your first contact with a new neighbor is to sue them, you're engaging in sociopathic behavior), you can't trust your interactions with sociopaths. OP needs to respond through representation.

I would not put it past the OP's new neighbors to claim harassment if the OP was to show up on their door, based on the neighbor's choice of first contact. They didn't even attempt to find the OP to tell them what had happened first, so clearly they did not care about the relationship to begin with. The OP did not have the foreknowledge that the neighbors had. The advice in this thread to send him into direct battle with them without equal weaponry is foolish. Tread very carefully OP and have your cell phone on you in case you randomly encounter them, things turn ugly and you need to video. I really feel for you, its got to be so uncomfortable in your new home already.

[wageslave23]

I still stand by my opinion that the neighbors MAY be assholes, but we can't know via the information provided. Again, did you introduce yourself at the beginning of the project? Did you give them your name and number in case they had any concerns or complaints? Did you stop by to say hi and acknowledge the inconvenience caused from time to time during the extended construction phase?

If the answer to these questions is 'no', then the ass-hattery is about equal on both sides, IMO. If they've been living next to construction that has been affecting their quality of life and causing issues on their property for 15 months and they've never seen an owner to whom they could voice their concerns, their resentment has rightly been building for a long time.

I'll say it again, you can respond to them in kind with your own lawyers, but that will pretty much make this negative situation permanent. If you go and talk to them, face to face, you might find they really are assholes, but you at least have a chance of salvaging the relationship.

If you buy a house next to an empty lot, you should expect to deal with construction and all the hassles that come with it.  If you don't want to deal with construction, move in to an established neighborhood.

[Sibley]

I'm seeing two very different possible scenarios here:

1. OP, has a generally decent neighbor who has been pushed to the limit due to construction problems and felt they had no options OTHER than a lawyer to proceed.

2. OP has a bat shit crazy neighbor, regardless of any legit construction issues.

The actions to take are potentially very different depending on if it's #1 or #2. If it's #2, then you're going to have problems no matter what. If it's #1, you've got a chance to de-esclate and restore good relations. If OP can figure out which scenario they're dealing with, that will help a lot.

Either way, OP needs to engage people who can deal with the legal side - possibly the insurance company.

[robartsd]

Assuming, OP owned lot and hired contractor (vs. purchasing after construction completed), I would hope that OP has already contacted any insurer who may have covered the property during construction and the contractor by now (letter received Saturday). After doing this OP should contact the neighbor/lawyer to let them know that they have taken some action to assess the situation (potentially meeting the demand for response by 7/19). I expect that the insurer would send someone out promptly to assess claimed damages. If the contractor recognizes that the fence and erosion problems were caused by the construction, they might quickly come to the table hoping to be able to make the repairs themselves rather than paying someone else to do them. OP should be aware that they may end up in an adversarial role with the contractor; but neglecting to contact them promptly would not help this. If the OP has no insurance coverage to claim against, contacting a lawyer would likely be best; but could contact the neighbor's lawyer to discuss the case directly if they want to risk dealing with this in the disadvantaged position of lay person vs. lawyer.

[FrugalSaver]

What if I don’t respond by 7/19?

[former player]

What if I don’t respond by 7/19?

There's quite probably an "inform insurer promptly" clause in your insurance contract which could be invalidated.


FFS, the worst thing you could possibly do with a lawyer's letter is ignore it.  Don't be that person.

[ReadySetMillionaire]

What if I don’t respond by 7/19?

Depending on your jurisdiction, failure to respond means opposing counsel will have quite a few statutory rights.   These range from unleashing malaria onto your mailbox all the way to detonating a nuclear bomb inside your house.  Effectively anything that makes the runoff issue an eye-for-an-eye is fair game under most state statutes.

***

Seriously, you posted about this on Saturday and got near unanimous advice to report this to insurance and/or get an attorney.  It's almost a week later, and now you have just two days to respond.  Why on earth are you still posting online to a bunch of internet strangers instead of contacting your insurance company and/or an attorney?

Do you have any idea how many phone calls you are going to have to make now to find an attorney on this short of notice?

I'm sure you're a well meaning person, but man, if you came into my office, I'd think you were a buffoon for sitting on this until this late in the ballgame.

[tommyguns2]

Items #1 and #4 are just plain silly.  You can't prove causation, nor can you attribute a cost for damages.  As the neighbors appear to be buttheads, there's a significant chance that their lack of parties was contributory, as they have no friends.  After all, to have friends, you need to be friendly.

Hire a lawyer who's aggressive.  It's already clear that you and your neighbor will not be friends, so he needs to know going forward that messing with you isn't worth it.  At this point, it's a better investment for you to give $2K to your lawyer than $2K to your neighbor.  Have your lawyer put together an aggressive, expensive strategy, with subpoenas for depositions, proof of damage (i.e., receipts, surveys, photos, expert testimony) etc.  Your neighbor's lawyer will quickly be running for the door, as there's no money to be made when there's only $2k in damages.  How much is your neighbor willing to spend to collect for silly damages that even when he's being generous amount to only $2K.

[MilesTeg]

What if I don’t respond by 7/19?

Right now you just have a shot across your bow (a demand letter). If you just ignore this letter, there will probably be an actual lawsuit filed at which point your options narrow significantly and the potential consequences increase.

Close your browser window, and go get a lawyer!

[FrugalSaver]

the letter basically reads as follows (small samples from the letter)

I have been retained by Mr. Asshat, to help resolve the dispute concerning...blah blah blah.  Once you agree to this settlement, my client will give you until August 31st to complete the work.  If you don't agree to this settlement by july 19, 2019, my client will repair the damage and pursue legal action to recover its costs and damages in excess of what he is seeking through this letter.  if you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me.

[Spondulix]

I'd also be skeptical that a person is requesting only $2,000 in damages and hired an attorney. Not really worth most attorney's time if that's the case.

Who's to say they hired an attorney? I have a couple lawyer friends who have offered write letters like this on my behalf. The imagery this whole scenario brings to mind is a bunch of people drinking at a party, listening to them complain about how annoying it's been to have a house going up next door, and someone else half-drunk says, "My brother is a lawyer! You should sue those jerks! I'll get him to help us out."

To me, it reads like someone who's been holding in a lot of anger about some little things that over time has become big things. Sometimes people do dumb things when they don't feel empowered in a situation (like try to sue their next door neighbor they have to live next to every day). Some people can't be angry or sad without having a reason - or they don't stop until they are heard - which is when that energy gets directed to someone or something even if it's inappropriate. I'll bet they talked to the contractor who probably didn't change anything and didn't tell the homeowner. I'll bet the workers did something near the fence - either leaving supplies or piles of dirt during the rain season or something that probably legit did something to the neighbor's property and attracted mosquitoes.

[former player]

the letter basically reads as follows (small samples from the letter)

I have been retained by Mr. Asshat, to help resolve the dispute concerning...blah blah blah.  Once you agree to this settlement, my client will give you until August 31st to complete the work.  If you don't agree to this settlement by july 19, 2019, my client will repair the damage and pursue legal action to recover its costs and damages in excess of what he is seeking through this letter.  if you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me.

And you've done nothing in response?  90 replies in this thread and you haven't replied to the lawyer?  Haven't talked to your contractor? Haven't met your neighbour?  Haven't contacted your insurance company?  Haven't talked to a lawyer?

You are an idiot and I give up.

MOD EDIT: Rule #1, please.

[Telecaster]

To me, it reads like someone who's been holding in a lot of anger about some little things that over time has become big things. Sometimes people do dumb things when they don't feel empowered in a situation (like try to sue their next door neighbor they have to live next to every day). Some people can't be angry or sad without having a reason - or they don't stop until they are heard - which is when that energy gets directed to someone or something even if it's inappropriate. I'll bet they talked to the contractor who probably didn't change anything and didn't tell the homeowner. I'll bet the workers did something near the fence - either leaving supplies or piles of dirt during the rain season or something that probably legit did something to the neighbor's property and attracted mosquitoes.

Might not be coming from the neighbor.   Lawyers tend to go big right off the bat.   The neighbor could have contacted the lawyer about the erosion, and the lawyer added in the other stuff.   That gives them some items they can give up easily when it comes time to negotiate.   

[BicycleB]

I too am curious about how matters reached this point without action by OP.

Now that my curiosity has been engaged, I look forward to hearing the resolution of this story. If it is not forthcoming, I think I will have to sue.

:)

[totoro]

the letter basically reads as follows (small samples from the letter)

I have been retained by Mr. Asshat, to help resolve the dispute concerning...blah blah blah.  Once you agree to this settlement, my client will give you until August 31st to complete the work.  If you don't agree to this settlement by july 19, 2019, my client will repair the damage and pursue legal action to recover its costs and damages in excess of what he is seeking through this letter.  if you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me.

This is a notice of intent to sue to recover if the damages are not settled but you should given that you may be sued and the letter would be evidence of notice of the alleged damage. Have you discussed this with the contractor? Have you viewed the alleged damage?

[ReadySetMillionaire]

the letter basically reads as follows (small samples from the letter)

I have been retained by Mr. Asshat, to help resolve the dispute concerning...blah blah blah.  Once you agree to this settlement, my client will give you until August 31st to complete the work.  If you don't agree to this settlement by july 19, 2019, my client will repair the damage and pursue legal action to recover its costs and damages in excess of what he is seeking through this letter.  if you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me.

They are basically putting you on notice that these repairs require immediate attention. Either you can agree to pay for them by 07/19/2019, or they will pay for them and then sue you for the balance.

FYI, if you continue not to do anything about this, you're going to get rolled.

[Valvore]

Anecdotal story that may or may not apply

I had to hire a lawyer to write a demand letter to a former coworker after a "dispute" (doesn't accurately describe what the issue was, but close enough). I wish I could have taken him to court but there was loophole in the law where I couldn't directly sue him because there wasn't damages I could put a monetary value on. I filed a police report and everything but their hands were tied because of loophole.

Anyway, the lawyer explained that the demand letter was just a request. You write "Do X and pay me $Y because you violated [as many laws that might slightly apply]. If you do not do X and pay me Y we may [legal threat] which may result in [scarier $Y and jail time]

The dickhead never responded and I had no additional legal recourse. A demand letter from a lawyer is used as a scare tactic or a way to settle something out of court. You can either pay up, ignore it and it goes away or they sue you. Have an ethical lawyer read it over and give you legal advice.

[EDIT] The demand letter cost me $1,300. I requested $1,500 from the former coworker to cover the cost of the letter. The lawyer wanted me to demand $10,000!

[arebelspy]

Posting to follow for future updates.

Did you retain counsel? Did you respond in some way by the 19th?

[Cassie]

I am also curious how it all turned out.

[ReadySetMillionaire]

So...