“Off Grid” Land Mates Turn “Police Informant”: The Value of Written Agreements on Shared Land

18 posts / 0 new
Last post
anon (not verified)
“Off Grid” Land Mates Turn “Police Informant”: The Value of Written Agreements on Shared Land

When your “off grid” land mates leaves the property and turn “police informant” demanding it be sold, what protects the remaining family?

Recent BC Supreme Court decision in McKerracher v Neustater outlines the reasons why agreements between parties sharing land need to be in writing.

In a recent decision by Justice Margarite Church of the BC Supreme Court, Defendants Jacob Neustater and Callandra Neustater of Quesnel BC successfully sold the jointly owned property held between Michael McKerracher and Rachel McKerracher regardless of the Mckerrachers disability status, their low income level, or the fact they had small children.

The two families owned property together that was described as “off grid”, in a remote location serviced by a trail through crown land. The parties made several agreements concerning the property, including what would happen if a party chose to leave. These agreements included buyout arrangements. Unfortunately for the McKerrachers these agreements were not bound by law and after a series of disputes the Neustaters left the property.

Angry text messages were sent back and forth by Mr Neustater and Mr McKerracher and the Neustaters made social media publications with claims against the McKerrachers including their mental health.

Threats were made to the McKerrachers that included the Neustaters threatening Court, the ministry of Child and Family Development, the reporting of a marijuana dispensary to police, and the reporting of their home to bylaw. In the same message Neustater gave the Mckerrachers “options” including demanding double the property value “in one month” for their share of the property. The court documents show that the Justice failed to link the two separate statements from the same text message disagreeing that it was proof of extortion.

In the Court documents the McKerrachers claim they contacted their mutual friends about these threats and an activist collective from Prince George then doxxed the Neustaters and placed posters of them in the city of Quesnel claiming they were “Police informants”. The Court found that Mr McKerracher may not have been the one to place the posters up, but he was responsible for their creation.

Due to the types of threats, the court acknowledged that the assertion that the Neustaters were “Police informants” was substantially true. While other allegations were left unproven. Justice Church quoted the definition of police informant in her lengthy reasons for judgments.

The McKerrachers then allege a series of events occur in the next months that ended up with the McKerrachers being driven from the property. They allege that the events consisted of damage to vehicle, foot prints in the snow in and around their yard, broken and stolen belongings, reporting of vehicles for out of province plates, and an eventual trespass notice served on the McKerrachers by the ministry of forests after a complaint. Due to the nature of the road being in accessible, and the occupants parking on remote crown land, this forced the McKerrachers to relocate their family. The Neustaters denied that they contacted Department of Forests, or did any other damage. Although they were the only ones attending the remote property while the McKerrachers resided there.

Dispite the agreements to purchase each other’s share in the property if one party chose to leave, once the Mckerrachers had left the property the Neustaters filed a Petition to the Court to force the sale under the Partition of Property Act. The McKerrachers state that they were aware that the defense to this Act was their habitation of their house and that it had been taken away from them. So they agreed to the sale and asked the land to be listed at a later date to allow them to remove their belongings. This request was denied by the Neustaters who continued their claim to hearing where Justice Church ordered the land sold. The Court ordered that the McKerrachers had “every opportunity to remove their belongings”.

While the McKerrachers were the Plaintiffs in this case, they failed in the Court of law to prove that the damage and tampering of their belongings on the remote property was done by the Neustaters, although the timing was suspicious as Court documents show the Neustaters were actively attempting to remove them from the property at that time. Mr Neustater claimed that he was accessing the property consistently during these times, and although the McKerrachers state that he was informed several times to stay away from them and their children, Mr Neustater asserted his legal right to be anywhere on the property. Not just at his own home but anywhere he chose including the yard, garden, and homesite of the McKerracher family.

The Court acknowledged that there were agreements, but none of them mattered in law without signatures. A malicious property owner is well within their rights to land and title to attend any part of the property. So, according to law without written contracts or agreement for allocation of private space, the other land owners can disturb, break, destroy, trespass, restrict people including friends, and disallow vehicles on “property held in common”. Even if the person threatens Child and Family Services, the RCMP, then continues to frequent the home site of the other owner.

The Neustaters hired Quesnel lawyer Kenneth B Thomson as counsel who the Court acknowledged as having concerning conduct. It should be noted that the McKerrachers are low income and is a persons with disability due to a spine injury. They were self represented throughout the claim. While the Neustaters used two different lawyers, one who seemingly delayed the case for several years and one who sold the property through the Courts once the McKerrachers had left the property.

Jacob Neustater is a member of several groups including Métis group the Red River Echos, as well as the North Cariboo Métis Association in Quesnel where he has organized protests and is involved in indigenous activism. Activists need to be aware that there are members of their communities that may be willing to use the colonial law systems such as the Ministry of Forests, the RCMP and the Ministry of Child and Family Services for personal gain.

This breakdown in law should be a stark warning to anyone sharing or wishing to share land. How does a renter have more rights in this case then a property owner? How are Basic human rights set aside and the Courts watch a family including a disabled person with small children become homeless? How can someone use a third party to evict a family and the Courts do not seem to care?

When relationships breakdown, someone’s word just is not good enough in the Supreme Court of BC.

*Lawyer Kenneth B Thomson of Quesnel BC has since agreed not to practice law in any capacity according to the Law Society of BC Lawyer database.

em goldman (not verified)
load of crap

jeez if anyone actually bothers to read the actual judgement from the court case that the mckerrachers started in the colonial court system to rob this indigenous family of their home they will see a completely different story. what a load of crap this article is - pure bullshit. the mckerrachers threatened the nuestaters until they had to leave their home, and then the mckerrachers spread lies about them and tried to steal their home using the courts. they lost their case because they were full of shit. this is a great example of activist communities killing each other from the inside because people like this mckerracher guy can't work to resolve conflict and instead turn to spreading rumors.heres the actual court decision https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/22/03/2022BCSC0389.htm

Anon (not verified)
Lol

Lol, okay JACOB NEUSTATER.

Anon (not verified)
Judgement.. hmmm

You mis-spell judgment in every batshit post you make. Imagine justifying being an informant by linking to a court writing that reinforces it. Wasn't it you who had that property sold by justice church? Lol

anon (not verified)
Okay, since you brought it up

Okay, since you brought it up. Those posts might well be batshit crazy, but...

Misspell doesn't take a hyphen, and judgement is the way non-American Anglophones spell the word. Nice try though

anon (not verified)
Imagine being a sad klanadian

Imagine being a sad klanadian troll that gets your property sold so you spend all day on anews lol.

Roguella (not verified)
Huh?!

Um I knew of these people way back when the Country Grind was a thing.. way to commodify being indigenous to make excuses! Last I heard buddy was a Viking.

anon (not verified)
one of the few things worse

one of the few things worse than the toxicity of the activist milieu? being isolated in the woods after starting an "intentional community" tainted by the activist milieu

anon (not verified)
Okay...why/how's that so worse?

I don't see much that leads to some badly-described horror you're drawing here. If it starts from activism it CAN mean that it'll be at least rooted in a sharing of views, values, or intents.

anon (not verified)
if you don't believe me, go

if you don't believe me, go try it and report back! i'll wait here

anon (not verified)
ok then

Willing to offer me a quarantine place for the next 14 after I arrive? Coz I ain't got vaxxed and Klanada's still into that Covid craze vibe...

But here's an easier workaround 4 u! Just be more explicit when you talk outta your ass, m'kay?

anon (not verified)
my original post was clearly

my original post was clearly just a joke. ain't my problem if it sailed over your head

anon (not verified)
ACTivIsM is LiKe an AnGRy

ACTivIsM is LiKe an AnGRy HeRd of bLeaTing HeArt ShEeP bLeAtINg About THe lIvInG cOnDItiOnS iN ThEiR BaRn!

SirEinzige
Give up activism

All the more reason to give up activism.

waypinikew (not verified)
Weenuk

These comments are funny. This isn't an indigenous family as much as a mennonite family who are over-extending the husband, Jake, mother's lineage. His father is a wealthy white man who made his living helping mine the worlds irreplacable tundra. He is a hypocrite who will coward behind colonial forces whenever it works out for him. It is upsetting to see him race shift back and forth over the years. He has always manipulated vulernable people beyond their comfort zones and persuaded naive individuals into unsafe or unethical activities because he has the means to take risks. The property disagreement was a good example of how the Neustaters seem to have a lot more resources to fight and could bounce back much easier if they had lost.

Drinkitallup (not verified)
The Neustaters see themselves

The Neustaters see themselves as victims better than most Christians see themselves as targets of discrimination; truly annoying aholes diversifying themselves to avoid being relevant aging punks.

Chugachuga (not verified)
Irrelevant *

Irrelevant *

Tiana Ohnonotthisnow (not verified)
kishkayhtum

Kiiya ooshihtow; namoo wiiya niiya.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Q
y
m
s
6
H
G
1
Enter the code without spaces.