2

A person knocked my neighbours house, an old lady who has been living there for many years. The person was a draughtsman representing the owner of an adjacent property.

He claimed that he was designing some town houses for the adjacent property and asked for permission to remove a tree on the old ladies property. She said that she would get back to him and wanted to look at his designs.

I studied the designs and in my opinion, the problem with this tree, which he called a weed, was pretty much 100mm inside the the garage that he wanted to build and had been there for over 20 years. This is Victoria so the tree may have encroached on the neighbous property, but the designs that he provided were, in my opinion, misleading in that the placement of the tree was not in the actual place.

Is it fraud asking for someone to give up their right to keep an encroachment by, in my opinion, to lie and/or use deception?

4
  • Ask if the neighbor had a land survey done and if your neighbor can see it/get a copy. You might also check if there's a set-back rule (buildings can't be built directly on the property line, but that depends on the municipality.
    – mkennedy
    Commented Apr 1, 2023 at 3:02
  • 1
    Assume the facts regarding the positions are not in dispute here. The question is about the alleged misrepresentation. Commented Apr 1, 2023 at 3:34
  • Roger, you state that the tree is within your neighbor's property. You then say according to the plans they want to build a garage that includes part of the tree's footprint. Is it the trunk or the canopy? That sounds like the garage would then encroach on your neighbor's property because it would cross the property line.
    – mkennedy
    Commented Apr 1, 2023 at 14:53
  • Assume what facts are true? It isn’t clear to me at all whose property the tree is actually on. Example: “may have encroached…”. Is the tree encroaching or not? Commented Apr 1, 2023 at 16:41

1 Answer 1

2

Dishonesty is a required element of fraud in all Australian jurisdictions

Being wrong is not the same as being dishonest. So, absent evidence that the person knew the tree was incorrectly shown and knowingly used that to achieve their objective, this isn’t fraud.

There may be civil remedies (if harm actually happened) but no crime.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .