So Which Neighbor Is Wrong In This Dispute...?

[SteyrAUG]

On the left we have Neighbor A. He has a sprinkler system that pumps from well water. In FL that means that anything exposed to that water over a period of time usually develops a nice rust surface as seen in this photo.



Neighbor A has two sprinklers on HIS SIDE of the property line as indicated in the above line drawing.

Neighbor B is on the right. He has a carport which is open from the west side (facing Neighbor A's property) and from the south where he enters the car port. When his car is parked in the carport it is approximately 10 feet away from Neighbor A's sprinklers.

Under conditions of zero wind each sprinkler belonging to Neighbor A typically covers a 6 foot area. However if things get windy, sprinkler water from Neighbor A can easily travel twice that distance. This is compounded by the wooden fence that runs east to west from one home to the other and creates a wind vortex under the right conditions.

Now here is the dispute.

Neighbor A likes to run his sprinklers before sunrise or after sundown for maximum irrigation benefit and less run time on his pump.

Neighbor B has a luxury automobile parked in his carport and complains about the sprinkler water which regularly finds it's way across the property line and onto his car. He is well aware of the potential damage caused by sprinkler well water.

Neighbor B has requested that Neighbor A run his sprinklers while he is at work so his car won't be harmed. Problem is Neighbor B doesn't go to work until about 10am and is home by 5pm.

Neighbor A has refused that request as he doesn't want to run the sprinklers between 10am and 5pm because it isn't as efficient and he believes it can actually harm his lawn. Neighbor A has basically told Neighbor B it's not his problem and he can run his sprinklers on his property whenever he see's fit.

Neighbor B complains about having to wash off his car before he goes to work every day and sometimes is running late and has to pay for a drive through car wash. He believes Neighbor A is responsible for creating damage to his car and should pay for any car washing expenses.

So which neighbor, if any, is at fault and how should the dispute be corrected?

[RIDE]

Neighbor B (you) ask if you can replace the existing sprinkler heads with adjustable heads that can be adjusted so as to not over spray (at your expense... (They're cheap and a nice gesture)
You could also get a car cover. It sucks to have a neighbor that's a prick or any contention between neighbors. If it were me, I'd do whatever I could to get right with the neighbor and not have a guy that hates me living right next door.

[Sensei]

roundup.jpg

[SteyrAUG]

Neighbor B (you) ask if you can replace the existing sprinkler heads with adjustable heads that can be adjusted so as to not over spray (at your expense... (They're cheap and a nice gesture)
You could also get a car cover. It sucks to have a neighbor that's a prick or any contention between neighbors. If it were me, I'd do whatever I could to get right with the neighbor and not have a guy that hates me living right next door.

Actually "I" don't have a car port, nor do I have a luxury vehicle, nor do I have to drive to work. I also don't have a sprinkler system on a well. But I have been watching, and hearing, these two go at it for months now.

Additionally, Neighbor A does have direction sprinklers at the property line. They are only spraying water towards his property, they are not 360 degree sprinklers. There is probably nothing he could do or buy that would water his lawn and at the same time prevent wind from carrying the water to the neighbors car. The only solution would be to run city water (which he would pay for) rather than well water.

It is also apparent to me, that neither one of these individuals is interested in "getting right" with each other and it's been progressively devolving for awhile now ever since Neighbor B got his new car.

I've been trying to watch the dispute from a Libertarian mindset and I've been having some difficulty deciding who is actually in the wrong. So I came here to run it by you guys.

And if I was Neighbor B, I would simply extend the north / south section of wooden fence to come up even with the south end of my carport and solve the problem that way.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Garage. Don't put your expensive car in an open sided structure and pretend there is a forcefield.

The sprinkler guy should be considerate and spray at other times when the car isn't usually there.

Buy a red car.

Plant bushes on the line to block the water/mist and the offending neighbor from view.

Thanks for another reason to not want to move to Florida.

[SteyrAUG]

Garage. Don't put your expensive car in an open sided structure and pretend there is a forcefield.

The sprinkler guy should be considerate and spray at other times when the car isn't usually there.

Buy a red car.

Plant bushes on the line to block the water/mist and the offending neighbor from view.

Thanks for another reason to not want to move to Florida.

If you enclosed the carport to make a garage, assuming you could get permitted to do so, you wouldn't be able to open your car door as car ports are typically smaller than a garage when it comes to square footage. This is why they are common and popular in working class neighborhoods, that and the fact that you don't need to worry about snow and ice.

The car in question is white, red really isn't an option at this point.

A row of hedges / bushes on the property line of Neighbor B probably would solve most of the wind spray issue and he wouldn't even have to worry about irrigation. Probably more practical than extending the fence as well.

[jmoney]

I would sue neighbor a for trespass, neighbor a will lose.

[MorphCross]

If you end up having to act as witness in a civil suit act impartially. As to their petty conflict I would ignore them both. If I was a luxury vehicle owner in Florida I would make sure that my vehicle paint would be up to snuff against salt spray. I wouldn't be shocked if the stock paint job on the car isn't up to snuff. The undercarriage is a different matter entirely. Paint of the grade used on houses and steel entry doors is a different matter.

[SteyrAUG]

If you end up having to act as witness in a civil suit act impartially. As to their petty conflict I would ignore them both. If I was a luxury vehicle owner in Florida I would make sure that my vehicle paint would be up to snuff against salt spray. I wouldn't be shocked if the stock paint job on the car isn't up to snuff. The undercarriage is a different matter entirely. Paint of the grade used on houses and steel entry doors is a different matter.

If anyone officially asks I didn't see or hear a thing. Bad enough I have to listen to these two tards go back and forth, sure as hell not going to let them monopolize my time with depositions and such. I don't set up a lawn chair and "watch the show" but if I'm working out front it's hard to miss them and they aren't trying to be quiet or anything.

As to the other matter, no car finish can stand up to the elements in FL. I've seen some high price autos with top dollar paint jobs get taken down. All it takes it is little bit under the chrome fitting here and a little bit in the gaps there. Add a little daily parking lot sun exposure, humidity, etc. and your cherry new Cadillac looks like a ghetto mobile in less than a year.

[SteyrAUG]

I would sue neighbor a for trespass, neighbor a will lose.

I'm intrigued. How would that work?

Neighbor A never physically came onto the property of Neighbor B. Can you legally sue for trespass via airborne water spray? If so I'm suing every neighbor who smokes cigarettes and buying new toys.