Couple relied on real estate ads to assume property line included fire pit in backyard, which led to “unneighbourly” dispute with actual property owner.
A dispute over who owned a sliver of land that included a hot tub and a fire pit has ended badly for both sides after a B.C. Supreme Court judge cited “unneighbourly” behaviour.
Recommended Videos
The story highlights the importance of getting property surveyed before buying it and not relying on the realtor’s photos or previous use.
And the importance of getting along with your neighbours.
“I think it fair to say that both Ms. (Arlene) Stearman and Mr. (Colin) Boguski acted in an unneighbourly fashion,” Justice Murray Blok ruled.
He ordered Stearman to pay $750 to Boguski for nuisance and trespass in the years-long dispute, but refused to grant the Boguskis access to land they had thought was theirs.
Rachel and Colin Boguski bought their Squamish property in 2019 sight unseen because they had missed a chance to buy it in 2015 and still wanted it, according to the judgment.
It was their “dream house” because it had a natural setting and a “significant” amount of privacy.
The fire pit and a firewood shed were included in photos on their real agent’s online ads for the house, they told the court. Their agent never told them the fire pit and shed were not on their property, they said.
For eight months, they enjoyed frequent use of the fire pit, they said.
In May 2020, Stearman, who owned the adjoining lot, had a survey done that showed the fire pit was entirely on her property.
She requested the Boguskis remove the platform that it stood on. Stearman eventually constructed a fence that Boguski said was 10 metres from their house.
Stearman’s lot, about a half city block in size, was almost 10 times the size of the Boguskis’ lot and the fire pit wasn’t visible from her house.
The Boguskis asked the court to hand part of Stearman’s lot to them or grant them an easement because she had never before objected to the presence of the fire pit, which had been there at least 15 years, it said.
Stearman told the court she had owned the lot since 2000 but for the first five years lived there only half time because her work as a geologist took her to Alberta and Northern Canada. From 2005 to 2017, tenants lived there.
She and partner Robert Milburn, also named as defendant, told the court the Boguskis created their own misfortune because they purchased the property sight unseen, never asked their real estate agent about the property line, and didn’t obtain a survey, it said.
The Boguskis allege that for three years after they filed their lawsuit, Stearman carried out actions that interfered with the privacy and enjoyment of their home, and sought damages.
She played classical music at an “extremely loud” volume in one incident. In another, in 2021, until 1 a.m., she stood near the boundary and yelled profanities toward the Boguskis’ house and another time sang loudly, the Boguskis alleged.
In 2022 and 2023, objects were placed in the fire pit area that they suspected had been equipped with cameras and were put there to make them feel uncomfortable, the couple told the court.
Stearman would also walk near the property line after dark and stare at the house, the judgment said.
“Ms. Boguski felt spied upon and believed Ms. Stearman was filming or photographing them in their home,” it said.
The former owner, who built the shed and the brick platform for the hot tub, said he believed the structures were built on his property and no one ever complained to him in the 10 years he used them.
Stearman said in an affidavit that she first became aware of the Boguskis’ intrusion on her property when she saw Colin clearing brush from the area of the fire pit in March 2020 and asked him to stop. He did.
Stearman denied she screamed at the Boguskis but she admitted to playing music and singing while gardening, including the Rodeo Song, which includes the line, “Well, it’s 40 below and I don’t give a f—,” because “I was taking a stand for myself, privately,” by venting her frustration over the dispute, it said. But she thought they weren’t home at the time, she said.
Blok dismissed the Boguskis’ requests for lands around the fire pit and shed because they belonged to Stearman. But he did rule that an award was warranted for some of the incidents of alleged nuisance and trespassing. “I am satisfied that the interference was unreasonable.”