Virginia couple bought a 100-year-old home and turned its backyard into a garden. One year later, a neighbour claimed the land was his and wanted its fence removed, but then a judge stepped in

A couple in Petersburg, Virginia found themselves in a dispute over their backyard just a year after buying their first home. Brittany Ellerbe and her husband had replaced the gravel behind their 100-year-old house with grass, built a fence and planted vegetables. They later found out that a portion of the land they had been using was claimed by the owner of the neighbouring property.

According to local broadcaster WWBT's 12 On Your Side, the dispute began when a realtor representing the former owner of a house on Wilcox Street told Ellerbe that their steps and part of the backyard were on his client's land. He also said that a section of their fence would need to be removed before the neighbouring property could be sold.

Seller sends workers to remove part of the fence

The family did not hear anything further for several months. The seller eventually arrived with a truck full of workers and began taking down part of the fence.


Ellerbe told 12 On Your Side that the family had not received a physical survey, a deed or any communication from an attorney before the workers arrived. A letter from a lawyer and a land survey showing the boundary lines were delivered to their home later. Some of the fence that had been removed was then used to enclose another section of the neighbouring property.

The couple hired a lawyer to challenge the claim. The dispute reached a Petersburg court in early October, where a judge granted an injunction and a temporary restraining order.

Judge questions missing property records

The order prevents anyone from removing or moving the family's fence until November 19. Ellerbe said the judge raised concerns about missing records and the fact that the survey had not been recorded.

The boundary between the two properties remains disputed. Petersburg's assessor's office told 12 On Your Side that the matter appeared to be a legal issue between the two property owners.