In California, is 35-50 year old tree on a property line the responsibility of both owners?

Question

I have very big old tree planted on half of what appears to be the property line between the neighbors and our lot. The neighbors say it’s our tree and our responsibility because one of the previous owners of our property planted it there. It looks to be right on the property line to me and the fence between the lots runs right up to the center (about 50% give o r take 10% or so). The tree must have been there for at least 35 to 50 years (it’s a coastal Cypress about 60-75+ feet tall). We have lived here 14 years now and the tree was very large when we moved here. They would like the tree removed and I have agreed to pay ½ for the removal, but not 100% (or 50% of the trimming which I prefer). I’m in the state of California, is this tree mine, theirs or both of our responsibilities after all this time.

Answer 1

Very legal you should consult with a local legal beagle but sounds to me like it belongs to both of you unless your neighbor can unequivocally prove the prior owner planted it and now it encroaches on their property then it's your responsibility.
You might want to look in the real estate laws of California for guidance here
California Real Estate Laws http://www.dre.ca.gov/relaw.htm You will need permits for any removal agreed upon so you might want to go here
California building codes: http://www.bsc.ca.gov/
Best of luck

Answer 2

Actually.... A few previous posters claim that the responsibility would be yours if the neighbor could prove that a former owner of your house planted it. That is incorrect.

If they prove a former owner of your parcel planted it, then they have proved that the former owner of your property encroached on their property. By them (or their former owner) failing to remedy the encroachment (i.e. cutting back the part of the tree that came onto their side), or bringing any other action against the owner, you have earned an "easement by prescription". Basically, the tree is yours and you have the legal right to allow it to continue to grow undisturbed even though it is on their property line.

If you had paid their property taxes you could even bring a quiet title action to legally take ownership of that land by adverse possession.

So, if you really would prefer to keep the tree, keep it! If you want to compromise with the neighbor explain that you have a prescriptive easement for your tree, but nonetheless would be willing to share the cost or removal as a sign of goodwill between neighbors.

Answer 3

You have made a fair offer. While there are no statutes in any state clearly covering such a situation, a court would find that you now have shared ownership, regardless of who planted the tree on whose property. After all these years, current and previous owners of the property next to you would have been expected to challenge the 'growth' of the tree onto their property. Their failure to do so would most probably result in a judge declaring that you have shared ownership now, and accordingly, shared responsibility for the maintenance of said tree.

Answer 4

I have dealt with this before. The tree falls under the same laws as the fence, you pay 50% each. My neighbor (was hte rear one in this case) was so worried about us each paying our fair share he actually timed the workers electricity use and made them go back and forth between properties with their extension cords! (I found that very funny!)

It does not matter who planted the tree, any more then who originally build the fence.

Answer 5

If the tree is on the survey line it's a joint responsibility unless there is incontrovertible proof WHO planted it; then it is the owner's responsibility