By the discussions I've had with surveyors in my country (Sweden), any coordinate descriptions of properties are deferred to the physical markers in the ground (cairns for older property, metal stakes for newer ones). This would only be an issue in properties that have never been surveyed (and marked) at all.

Straight borders might become crooked if they cross the crack though.

▲

brabel 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I am also in Sweden, and learned recently that a large part of my property seems to actually belong to the neighbour according to the online map! But there is a page in the relevant authority's website which clarifies that the online map can be 10s of meters off (in Swedish): https://www.lantmateriet.se/sv/kartor/vara-karttjanster/Visa...

There, it even explains some history and methodology for defining the borders. Mostly, they are defined by physical markers that hopefully the original surveryors left on the ground. I found a couple around my property (which is on hills so it's likely difficult to mark properly on a map from above) and it seems the borders are actually almost correct. As my fences have been up for over 20 years in the same location, I believe they also count now as de-facto borders now!

▲

apelapan 4 days ago | parent [-]

The official map of your property will not be exactly the same as the one on Lantmäteriet.se.

In more densely populated areas, there will be a local coordinate system, where each property is defined in terms of the neighbouring ones. This also applies to newly formed properties in old areas.

The property borders on digital maps are machine approximations of the mapping from the local coordinate system onto an absolute global coordinate system. This mapping can never be perfect, and it is often much less perfect than it could have been.

When the physical markers are missing or suspected of having moved from their original location (happens all the time for all sorts of reasons), Lantmäteriet will review the original documents of your and any number of neighbouring properties and deduce where the markers ought to be.

Regarding your fence, 20 years is very far from enough to establish "urminnes hävd". I suggest you wait another 100 years before you start assuming that they could act as facts on the ground in a property disputes! :-) And even then I wouldn't bet on it, unless the national archives are all destroyed...

	▲	apelapan 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I had to go back and check regarding "Urminnes hävd" (ancient custom). The creation of new instances of this for property rights was blocked back in 1970. You can still use it, but then you must prove that the property right was an established ancient custom already before 1970. Anything that started after that will never qualify, no matter how much time passes.
	▲	brabel 3 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> Regarding your fence, 20 years is very far from enough to establish "urminnes hävd". I was thinking of adverse possession, for which the time limits are 20 years or even 10 years in some cases: https://jdc-definitions.wikibase.wiki/wiki/Adverse_Possessio... Original Swedish text: https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-och-lagar/dokument/sven...

▲

xattt 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It sure would suck to lose half your property to the earth suddenly saying screw you.

▲

MichaelZuo 5 days ago | parent [-]

You could lose all your property, without compensation too, if your unlucky enough to have a big enough meteorite crash into it.

▲

justincormack 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

People lose property to coastal erosion all the time. Here there is a scheme to give some people replacement land further inland I think in some areas.

	▲	mhb 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Impressive. Here they give them money to rebuild in the same spot and hope for the best.

▲

xattt 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Can you not cash in on the meteorite?

▲

whycome 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Or be native

▲

__MatrixMan__ 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

The natives lost something, to be sure, but I'm not sure it was property. Property is created when you kick everyone else out. I assume that's the rationale behind "property is theft," it used to be everybody's and now it's yours.

▲

gtowey 4 days ago | parent [-]

You're correct. They didn't lose property as they had no legal concept of ownership. Instead they lost their homes, their culture, and their lives. How lucky for them!

	▲	__MatrixMan__ 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		If they work hard enough, perhaps they can buy some of it back. How civilized.
	▲	laser_eagle 4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[dead]

▲

ipaddr 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Natives signed treaties which are still respected today.

	▲	yieldcrv 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		The level of respect is per treaty, a blanket statement cant be corroborated as many are not respected or dont have consensus amongst the affected people of being respected

▲

mc32 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Or lose a war, or bet your property or not pay taxes or eminent domain… but I guess nomads never had a immovable property claim.

▲

immibis 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Or Palestinian

▲

reliabilityguy 4 days ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

▲

immibis 4 days ago | parent [-]

Not sure what you're talking about here

▲

mhb 4 days ago | parent [-]

A clue is that history did not start in 1948.

▲

immibis 3 days ago | parent [-]

Can you say what you mean please?

▲

mhb 3 days ago | parent [-]

You felt compelled to parade your ignorance by inserting this cheap shot about "Palestinians" into an unrelated discussion. What I mean by ignorance is joining the uninformed masses bleating about "genocide" and "colonialists". Presumably imagining that Jewish people arrived in Palestine de novo at some point in the 19th or 20th century and conquered the native Arab "Palestinians" there.

That's what I mean.

▲

immibis 3 days ago | parent [-]

You're still beating around the bush. Can you say what you mean?

	▲	mhb 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Since you're intent on not understanding the clear wording of what I mean, why don't you explain what you mean by "Or Palestinian"?

▲

gosub100 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Can't even have an article about earthquakes without signalling your political tribe.