Introduction | senezvscollins

Introduction: -Visit often for future updates and posts.

Updated as 1/15/15 - Other venues coming soon!

If you read nothing else on this website please read the letter to Judge Souder, dated 8/10/14. The Letter is under the section marked Letters.

The Collins sued because they wanted me to take down my boat house that has been there since the 1930’s or give them a view across my front yard; by not placing things like swings, table umbrellas, plants or trees in my front yard. There’s no legal remedy for a view in Maryland. The Collinses thought they had the Achilles heel when they discovered in April or May of 2004 that our property lines crossed. Since they had no hard core proof of anything they made up a whole lot of lies all of which I documented and proved prior to going to Circuit Court on 12/8/06.

I’ve gone into the Counts in more detail in the Collins Complaint Rebuttal, Collins Answer to Counter Complaint and the Collins Interrogatory Rebuttal. In short all of the accusations of trespassing, drainage, signs, loss of view, permits, citations, flood lights, cameras and damage to their property and bulkhead where all a lie.

I fail to understand why so much time was spent in court on all the bogus accusations and not the real issues! Issues like the wall being there for more than twenty years and citing existing barrier or similar adverse possession legal cases. Mr. Myers deposition clearly states he thought he owned the property to the wall, he put in the boat ramp, he thought he owned the boat ramp, the boat ramp was used by others with permissive use only, it wasn’t co-owned or a cooperative effort and he said the Collins didn’t use the boat ramp. I have twelve signed affidavits from people with knowledge to support Mr. Myers deposition statements. Copies of the affidavits are on this website.

The Collinses made up so many lies in their complaint, interrogatories and the court hearing it’s hard to even keep track of. They just threw out whatever they thought might stick and put me in a negative light. Before the Collins sued the no trespassing sign was down, permits were done, Baltimore County said no drainage issues, and they were told they had no legal right to a view. That didn’t stop them from putting all of this in the law suit. Collinses own exhibits don't support their position on drainage since the pictures are of my property in that area. See the exhibit review. If I had really asked that question the Collins said I did, they wouldn’t have had to make up all those gross exaggerated allegations. It’s sad that an attorney would even write up a bogus lawsuit like that. You can read more of this in the rebuttal section and the section on Collinses inconsistencies.

Mr. Myers clearly stated the wall was there when he bought the house and he put in the boat ramp and railroad tie retaining wall afterwards. That didn’t stop the Collins from saying in the interrogatories and trial court that the property line wall, the jog in that wall and the jog in the railroad tie wall were all a cooperative effort for a co-owned boat ramp. The time line is impossible! It was the elephant in the room that Mr. Carney never pointed out. If they have the nerve to make up this kind of story when the evidence says otherwise do you really think they wouldn’t make up a story that I asked if my fence could follow the wall instead of the property line? This however wasn’t in their complaint, answer to the counter complaint, interrogatories or Mr. Myers deposition it was something the Collins made up as they learned more about the legalities of adverse possession.

If the Collinses story of a co-owned boat ramp was true they would have elicited Mr. Myers testimony and deposition immediately. The truth is that I had my attorney's contact Mr. Myers to validate and make arrangements for his deposition. I paid for Mr. Myers deposition, not the Collinses. The Collinses could have also contacted the children of Mr. & Mrs. George Cook to obtain affidavits like I did, but the Collinses knew they were lying about everything.

The property line:

The Collinses claimed to know where the property line was in trial court from the “location survey’s” they had done when they were building their house in the fall of 2000. The Collins “boundary survey” wasn't done until 6/25/04; ten years later they still don’t know where the property line is.

The Collinses put in the complaint that half the boat ramp was theirs, when it’s clearly not. September 2004 and court December 2006. If they knew the property line as they "stated" they would have know that half the boat ramp wasn't theirs.
They clogged my sump pump drain and rerouted it twice, clearly on my property in May 2006.
The drain the Collinses so adamantly claim runs on their property doesn’t. It’s against my wall which is about 12 inches inside my property line.
Every measurement and height they gave in court was wrong and wrong in support of their lies.
The Collinses said in court they didn’t know they were on my property in the back until Mr. Myers deposition on 10/25/06, that’s why they didn’t file for adverse possession until 12/6/06. How could they know the front property line and not the back? This was two years after their survey! This however is also a lie because the April 5th, 2005 letter they sent me says, “Further discussion needs to be held to address the wall which straddles the property line in some places and the Collins shed which also straddles the property line.”
The Collinses dug a hole in my yard on 2/20/12 indicating the fence line. This was right after I just resurveyed and moved my fence to the surveyed property line. Their son- in-law ran down and hung over my fence to look at the hole. That’s because the area is just a sliver of property and they thought they had more of my property. Obviously they would have known if they could read a survey.
When the trial court ordered the Collinses to move their shed from my property to the side yard setback of two and a half feet it took two tries. The first time was the weekend of 11/10/07 but it wasn’t the required distance. After I filed a complaint they moved it to the appropriate distance on 4/17/12

Drainage:

The Collins claimed massive amounts of drainage was running down my property onto their property and damaging their property and bulkhead. The wall fell and was down from 06/27/06 to 11/22/13. The wall fell because the Collinses plugged the ten weep holes in the wall with concrete, which was four feet high, allegedly because of the drainage. (Mr. Collins is suppose to be an engineer). Their yard has looked the same as it did when they bought the property in 2000, during the whole time the wall was down and to this day. The Collinses also planted a row of ornamental grasses, a Cork Screw Willow, a Bald Cypress, a Red Bud tree, Canna, Miscanathus grass and Fennel Asparagus along the wall.

Without the wall my property along that area was eroding and I had to file a lawsuit against Collins for property damage. In the winter I put out an ice eater to protect my bulkhead and pier, the Collins have never done anything to protect their bulkhead from the winter ice! I believe part of their accusations were an attempt to make me pay for their bulkhead. Most of their bulkhead damage was on the side furthest from my property.

It was interesting to see how the Collinses resolved the fallen property wall and erosion issue. The Collinses took out the fallen wall and slopped their side up to my property height, about 3 feet higher and planted just regular lawn grass. This of course would allow any and all drainage to run to their side. Obviously there never was a drainage issue, further proving the drainage accusation was all a lie!

Questions that can be asked:

1- How could the wall position be a cooperative effort for a boat ramp if the wall was there when Mr. Myers bought the property?

2- If the wall in the front wasn't on the property line to make a co-owned boat ramp why was the wall in the back not on the property line?

3- Why didn't Mr. Cook provide access from his property to the co-owned boat ramp? He put the wall right down to his bulkhead.

4- Why is the concrete slab the Cooks shed was sitting on over the property line onto Myers side? The slab is 11 inches high and rises to 20 inches high on the other end on Myers side.

5- Why would you build a co-owned boat ramp on the smaller of the two properties? Cooks property was twice as wide as Myers?

6- Why wouldn't Mr. Cook put in his own boat ramp? Cooks property was twice as wide as Myers?

7- Why is the wall on the other side of the Collins not on the property line?

8- If the wall was put there for a co-owned boat ramp wouldn't the property up to the wall on Myers side be co-owned?

9- If we all knew the boat ramp was co-owned why did I stop letting the Collinses use the boat ramp four years later?

10- If Myers told the Collins about the property line, why didn't the Collinses complain to Myers when I put up the fence prior to settlement? Mr. Myers still owned the property and the Collins said they were all friendly.

11- If the wall was placed there for a co-owned boat ramp how can they accuse me of trespassing?

12-If Mr. Myers told the Collinses about the property line why didn't they pursue Mr. Myers testimoney about the wall, I did.

13-If the boat ramp was co-owned why wasn't it shown on the property listings? That would have been a plus for the property.

14-Why didn't the Collinses ever say the realator told them about the supposedly co-owned boat ramp and property line?

15-Why didn't the Collinses ever say that Mr. Cooks daughter, Iris Wallace, told them about the co-owned boat ramp and property line? Iris Wallace handled the property settlement for her deceased parents.

If you would like to contact me, you can do so on the Home Page by clicking on the Contact button at the bottom of the page.