81 yr old USAF veteran. Living off the grid for 27 years with the former land owners PERMISSION...

[usaf-vet]

..... has been forced to leave his home and is held in jail because he refused to leave when evicted by the current landowner.

The woodlot Lidstone called home was just a few miles away from Interstate 93. But it was hidden by the trees; it’s on 73 acres that’s been used for timber harvests. The property has been owned by the same family since 1963. There are no plans at this time to develop it. The owner of the land had been seeking to tear down the cabin before the fire.
Lidstone has claimed that years ago, the owner gave his word — but nothing in writing — allowing him to live there. But in the eyes of the current owner, he’s a squatter and needs to go.

While in jail his home was mysteriously burned to the ground.

His home went from this:



To this while, he was in jail:




An investigation is underway to determine the cause of the fire.

For the complete story and more photos. This has occurred in the "Live Free or Die" State New Hampshire

https://apnews.com/article/River-Dave-New-Hampshire-Dave-Lidstone-e0ef2fb3349a23ceebaa9e244b97eb5a/gallery/3d0333fe978c46d08657808c7ed557dd

[marble falls]

1. Permission is trumped by a contract or a deed. Too bad the friend didn't deed him.

[Submariner]

2. He might get mad and go all First Blood

and burn the town down.

[Thomas Hurt]

3. Adverse Possession? Otherwise, he is screwed I think.

Sounds like the new owner needs to be investigated. Is it arson if you burn a structure on your own property? Illegal burning? Destruction of private property.

[madville]

5. The structure belongs to the property owner

But the personal possessions “of value” left behind generally do not even after eviction. Most states have laws about notifying previous tenants in writing of property left behind after evictions and attempting to return said items before they are allowed to dispose of or auction them off, etc.

[LeftInTX]

9. His personal possessions were removed prior to the fire

I think they were removed when he was evicted and went to jail

[obamanut2012]

15. His possessions and pets were removed when he was evicted

[fescuerescue]

13. Permission actually invalidates adverse possession is most states.

Which is logical when you think about it since permission is the opposite adverse.

But the catch is that permission can be withdrawn. Once it's withdrawn, thats when the clock starts on adverse possession.

[Hekate]

4. That's beyond sad. My late Oregon brother had an arrangement like that for years...

Friendship and a handshake were involved, and he got to live in the woods in a 1950s “Homette” trailer with pink appliances

Now what’s this old vet in New Hampshire supposed to do now that his new landlord burned his home down?

[madville]

8. He was already legally evicted and wasn't ever living there again regardless

So the house burning down or not doesn’t really matter as far as him having a place to live since he had already been legally removed. Now if the fire is proven to have been intentionally set and it burned up his possessions, at a minimum he’ll have a decent little lawsuit maybe.

[former9thward]

16. His possessions had been removed when he was evicted.

[usaf-vet]

21. Move to the streets?

[Orrex]

6. When the former owner sold the property, did they disclose this man's presence?

My seller had to explicitly disclose a 4 inch easement that was plainly visible. A grown man living in a remote shack would seem to merit at least a mention in the small print.

[fescuerescue]

14. Hard to know.

But it probably wouldn't matter.

Once the property changed hands, the new owner had the option of asking him to leave.

If the old owner didn't disclose it, the old owner has some liability. But that doesn't affect the new owners rights.

[Grins]

7. If I live with someone as man and wife..

…for 7 years I’m considered married under common law. Living on property with consent of the owner for a much longer timeframe and you are screwed?

Any lawyers out there…?

[LeftInTX]

10. Sounds like the owner did not know he was there until 2015 and a judge ordered him to vacate in 2017

Property owner Leonard Giles, 86, of South Burlington, Vermont, didn’t even know Lidstone was there until the town administrator found out in 2015 and told him, expressing concern “with regard to the solid and septic waste disposal and the potential zoning violations created by the structure,” according to Giles’ complaint in 2016.

Lidstone, a bearded, small-framed, spritely man, has resisted efforts to leave since a judge issued an order for him to vacate in 2017. Following that, both sides had attempted to reach some sort of agreement for him, but were unsuccessful, according to court documents.

You can own a lot of land and not know that someone is squatting there. For example: You can own land in National Forests where thousands of acres exist for the timber industry. https://www.boondockersbible.com/knowledgebase/can-i-buy-land-in-a-national-forest/

Eviction in National Forests would fall under local laws. Just giving an example of why someone might not know someone is on their property..This property could have been a timber place....

My parents' place up north is in a National Forest..However, we could spot a squatter, because we only own an acre...

[Orrex]

11. If your common law spouse marries someone else

Without telling that person about you, is that person also married to you?

[LeftInTX]

12. Also the squatter is saying:

That he wasn't living there, but it was a "fishing camp"

The owner does not own the property

He threatened to bite the judge's ankles

https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2021/08/04/river-dave-has-lived-in-this-n-h-cabin-for-decades-but-the-property-owner-and-a-judge-says-its-time-to-go/

Since a judge made a decision, I assume the judge is a lawyer.

It sounds like this poor guy probably has mental health issues......
It sounds like there was sanitation issues...

I don't know where he goes.....

[marybourg]

17. Common law marriage only exists in a few states.

And involves telling people that you are married. Which means you want to be considered married. But— would you take someone who’s down and out into your home if that was going to give him or her ownership rights to it? That was not what was intended. You i tended to give shelter, space to put up a tent, maybe. But not ownership. Entirely different concepts. But good try!

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

20. That's not how common law marriage works.

Each state has its own laws about common law marriage, and if someone is trying to claim a common law marriage, they'd better know exactly how it works where they live. Some states absolutely don't honor such a thing. Others make it reasonably easy. Mostly, it's either not an option or harder than people realize.

And keep in mind his supposed consent was never in writing.

Somewhere else on DU someone hired a person to do work on their home (new floors, stuff like that) without bothering to get an estimate, and now the contractor is charging a whole lot more than expected.

Get it in writing. Every time.

[obamanut2012]

18. You are legally allowed to burn down your own stuff

As long as you adhere to local burn laws.

He was legally evicted, after being told years ago by a court he had to leave.

He wasn't a "poor old man." Just because someone is old doesn't mean they are a sweet little Santa.

[Jilly_in_VA]

19. The judge in the case suggested

that they go to mediation. The landowner's lawyer said that would be "too difficult". There's your problem right there. TH LANDOWNER'S LAWYER. The clod in the churn, as Tennessee Ernie Ford would put it.