What should I be concerned about regarding a wigwam on my property?

October 30, 2009 1:33 PM

What concerns should I have about someone I've met who wants to setup a wigwam on my property for the winter?

I know it sounds a little crazy, or at least unconventional, but I've met a couple who want to setup a wigwam on my property. They'll have a wood burning stove and a composting toilet. They'll bury their food in the ground and may have limited access to electricity. I may provide them with fresh water. If not, they'll get water from a nearby river (1/4 mile away). Rather than pay "rent", they'll work a certain number of hours -- bartered work -- doing chores around the house and the yard. They'll park their car in my driveway.

Should I draw up some sort of contract? What questions should I ask before allowing them on the property? Should I contact a lawyer or my town hall, and if so, what should I ask? Should I get a security deposit? Should I have a waiver of liability?

posted by indigo4963 to home & garden (43 comments total)

Depending on where you live you may need a permit to have a second habitable structure on your property. Since a wigwam probably isn't going to be built to code it may not be allowed. You might be able to get around the regs if it's not a permanent structure and you just claim they're camping, but it could be tough, especially if you have nosy neighbors who might complain.

I see by your profile you live in CT. I'd bet if you called your town hall and asked about a wigwam with a wood burning stove in it they'd a) laugh and b) tell you all the by-laws you'd be breaking. If you call and ask them about long term camping on your property they might not laugh. I'd frame it as camping, personally.

How long have you known these folks? Did they meet you for the sole purpose of asking you about living on your property. I'd be very cautious, especially with a wood burning stove. Aren't wigwams made out of sticks and pine needles?

It also may be difficult to remove them when you're tired of them.
posted by bondcliff at 1:41 PM on October 30, 2009 [2 favorites]

Also, the answer depends on what your property is like. Do you have 1/4 acre in suburbia? A 40 acre wooded lot abutting a town forest? A large farm?
posted by bondcliff at 1:47 PM on October 30, 2009

This is not legal advice, and IANYL, so get advice from a lawyer in your jurisdiction. Generally, if you invite someone onto your property for your own economic benefit (say, bartered labor), you owe a duty of care to that person. My recollection is that you will be liable for harms caused by dangerous conditions on your property that you knew or should have known about (would have known about had you made a reasonable inspection). See here for an overview (see "invitees"). How this general rule is applied in your jurisdiction is something I don't know anything about; again, please see a lawyer--I don't know whether a waiver would be legally effective in this situation.

Personally, I wouldn't do this--it seems like it's fraught with legal issues (tort liability, landlord/tenant law, employment law, zoning law, who knows what else). Plus, you have weirdos living in a wigwam in your yard. No part of this makes sense to me.
posted by Admiral Haddock at 1:56 PM on October 30, 2009 [8 favorites]

I would be concerned about the liability aspects of this as well. What happens if the river water turns out to be contaminated and they get sick? Or they get attacked by a raccoon that you "should" have warned them about and/or taken actions to remove? Or if the composting toilet violates local health codes? Or if doing this violates various habitability requirements in your jurisdiction (landlords are typically required to supply heat, running water, an enclosed dwelling, etc...)?

I would definitely contact a lawyer and have a lease addressing these and other issues. This is super important if, as bondcliff says, you someday want to part ways with them and they are refusing to leave. If you have a lease with a definite term and monthly rent charged, you can get a court to evict them if that ever becomes an issue. Without an agreement, it becomes he-said-she-said game that you don't want to be near.
posted by zachlipton at 1:57 PM on October 30, 2009

will they haul all of their garbage away from the site? or does "burying their food" apply to wrappers, tampons, etc.?
posted by Think_Long at 2:00 PM on October 30, 2009

I think that in many jurisdictions this kind of arrangement would make you a landlord, with the rights and responsibilities of a landlord. If that's the case, it's up to you to decide whether you want to be a landlord, and to find out whether the planned accommodations would even be legal in your jurisdiction, because if not it's going to redound on you.

Get. A. Lawyer. One who's experienced in representing landlords.
posted by Sidhedevil at 2:01 PM on October 30, 2009

I have 1.4 acres bordering open space. The nearby river is in open space. I just met the people through a couchsurfing website. The woman has good references and the man has family locally. They seemed like good people.
posted by indigo4963 at 2:01 PM on October 30, 2009

would this be any different if there were no exchange of work or money -- like just friends or acquaintances living on my property?
posted by indigo4963 at 2:21 PM on October 30, 2009

would this be any different if there were no exchange of work or money -- like just friends or acquaintances living on my property?

Again, you need a lawyer.

People living in a structure with a stove and a toilet may need to pass a board of health or other inspection in order to meet your jurisdiction's occupancy-permit standards.

There's a big difference between "I let my friend set up a pup tent in my yard for a couple of days" and "some people are living in a structure with a stove and a toilet" in most jurisdictions. Find out now what your jurisdiction thinks of this kind of set-up.
posted by Sidhedevil at 2:35 PM on October 30, 2009

I would not do this without a contract, both for liability purposes and to make sure that everyone is on the same page re: rights and responsibilities.
posted by craven_morhead at 2:45 PM on October 30, 2009

Non-permanent structures below a certain size (in my area, I think it's 10ft by 10ft) might not fall under the various laws about housing codes. As bondcliff says, I think this might be better framed (legally) as allowing someone to camp on your land for a while. Obviously this depends on your local legal minutiae and might not be very clear-cut.

From a practical POV, I'd be most concerned about waste disposal. Have they done this sort of thing before? Are they going to be able to deal with burying waste / getting water / staying warm when it's the dead of winter and everything's frozen? (Would it maybe be better if they could use your garbage cans?) If they can't cope, are you going to have to choose between taking on some unwanted boarders vs. having them freeze to death in your yard, or do they have somewhere they can go if they need to (the guy's local family)?

I guess I'll be the rare yea-sayer and say that, although I can think of lots of ways this could go horribly wrong, I've also known plenty of people who've been in odd little arrangements like this and had them work out fine. If you can talk over the contingencies ahead of time, draw up a written agreement abut what you each expect of the other while they're there and under what conditions you're willing to let them stay, and still have a good feeling about these people, I'd say go for it.
posted by hattifattener at 2:48 PM on October 30, 2009 [1 favorite]

Most jurisdictions are very strict about what constitutes a dwelling, and whether or not someone is allowed to sleep in it (for example, sheds may be fine without a permit, but you can't live there). Your first call should be to City Hall, your County Supervisor, Code Enforcement Officer, whatever/whoever it is that you have. Be prepared for a long silence on the other end of the phone, followed by at least some degree of incredulity.
posted by sageleaf at 2:52 PM on October 30, 2009

Do not do this without a lawyer.

They might be perfectly nice people. They probably are perfectly nice people. However, they might not be. They might be squatters who will refuse to do any yard work once their wigwam is set up. They might hold loud, drunken parties on your property at three in the morning. They might sell cocaine out of their wigwam. They might leave plastic wrappers and bottles all over the place. You have no idea.

Even if they're wonderful people who don't cause you any trouble, what happens if you decide you're ready for them to go and they don't want to? What if your tree falls on their wigwam and they decide to sue you? What if someone else you don't know shows up and moves into the wigwam with them?

I'd recommend against doing this at all, but if you must, get a lawyer and draw up a contract.
posted by EarBucket at 2:53 PM on October 30, 2009 [7 favorites]

Houses with composting toilets are often required by code to have a septic system anyway.

Which is stupid, but the kind of thing that you might be on the hook for if things randomly take a turn for the official. The entire extra dwelling is just a front for a million different code violations that could be picked at by a willing party.

That said, if it were me, with land next to nothing as you have, I'd go ahead with it with nothing more than a signed contract that states that they will properly dispose of all their waste and get off the land when you say so. The labour part would be more of a handshake deal because I'd make sure my right to boot them off at will was very clear in the written contract.

Yes, you technically need a lawyer to do this properly. Odds are that you will get along fine with these folks issue-free. 'Random' inspections or asshole tenants will change those odds, and the penalties could be steep. I have serious problems with the obstacles put in place to block being helpful and friendly, but here we are.

Can you 'lease them some land'? For $100, or something?
Then it's their issue. I don't know. I thought I was going to be helpful when I started typing.
posted by Acari at 2:56 PM on October 30, 2009

If your land abuts open land, and they'll be going to the river on open land to get water, what benefit do they get from setting up shop on your property vs setting up shop on the open land?
posted by davejay at 3:04 PM on October 30, 2009

Agree with davejay, why don't they just use the open land and leave you out of it?
posted by cestmoi15 at 3:08 PM on October 30, 2009

Reread what Admiral Haddock wrote. This will do nothing but cause you grief. Personally, I have never read such a misguided proposition. No way should you even think of doing this.
posted by JayRwv at 3:11 PM on October 30, 2009

There is no amount of bartered work that could make up for the inevitable headaches inherent in this situation.
posted by BillBishop at 3:24 PM on October 30, 2009 [4 favorites]

Adding my voice to the chorus of "Worst idea ever." I live in the woods, in a proper cabin, with a wood-burning stove as my sole source of heat. The stove pipe gets HOT. Definitely hot enough to burn down the wigwam the first time it's fired up.

Whether it happens before or after they catch giardia from the river is up for grabs.

If they manage to avoid those almost-certain fates, my mind boggles at the volume of firewood they would need to make it through a CT winter in an uninsulated wigwam. I go through 2 cords, but my cabin has proper insulation, and I live in a temperate climate. I'll take a random stab and say, they're going to need 15 cords of wood.

One cord of wood costs about $200 here. It is a stack of wood 4 feet high x 4 feet wide x 8 feet long. You can't just have a cord delivered every week, you need to order it all up front. Do they have $3,000 in pocket, to order their winter's worth of wood? I am guessing: No.

These people are idiots. And not just regular idiots. Christopher McCandless-level idiots.

You need to protect them from themselves, and turn down their offer. If they insist on committing a novel and poetic form of suicide, let them do it on someone else's/public property.
posted by ErikaB at 3:44 PM on October 30, 2009 [13 favorites]

who owns the open space? you can't just set up a wigwam anywhere, which is why they contacted someone with land.

this sounds like an incredibly massive pain for you, even if you set aside liability concerns. is it just me or is 1.4 acres not a whole lot when you throw in a wigwam, toilet, buried food scraps, plus any activities you may want to do in your back yard.

now if it was a yurt on the other hand, I could get behind that. I've always been more of a yurt guy
posted by Think_Long at 3:45 PM on October 30, 2009 [2 favorites]

See a lawyer and ask about drawing up some kind of blanket coverage protecting you from claims against you for pretty much anything. But personally, I think you should do it. Sounds like fun for those people, and you sound like you'd kind of like to say yes - why else would you be posting? See a lawyer, though--cover your bases.
posted by A Terrible Llama at 3:48 PM on October 30, 2009

*comment largely due to sudden overwhelming desire to live in a wigwam.
posted by A Terrible Llama at 3:48 PM on October 30, 2009 [2 favorites]

I know a couple of people who made an arrangement like this. In general, it seemed to work for them because they are -- how do I put it? -- highly tolerant of chaos. All kinds of crazy stuff happened, good and bad: impromptu 300-person music festivals, a pet raccoon that became rabid and bit someone, an accident with a horse that ran away with a home-made cart, a couple of years of cooperative onion farming, a work-barter agreement that turned into a sexual relationship, and so on. Both the teepee-dweller and his de facto landlord seemed to find this chaos funny and/or unremarkable. That's just how they are, I guess -- they're pretty easygoing and they'll roll with whatever.

Of course, the whole arrangement seemed nuts to me -- risky and dangerous and downright scary -- because I like a degree of stability and control in my life. If you like stability and control as much as I do (a lot), I'd say you should probably not enter into this arrangement. There's just too much unpredictability built into it. If you're the kind of happy-go-lucky free spirit who is not at all disturbed by the scenarios I described above, and you're willing to take a chance on the consequences, then you might end up having lots of fun -- the people I know sure did.
posted by ourobouros at 4:24 PM on October 30, 2009 [9 favorites]

A former professor of mine lives off the grid in a wigwam in Oregon during the summer months. She uses solar power for her laptop and to heat water. If you'd like me to ask her about pros and cons, memail me and I'll drop her a line.
posted by vickyverky at 4:35 PM on October 30, 2009

Eh, I know plenty of people who ask permission from strangers to camp while on epic bike trips. The only thing that concerns me about this proposal is the extended length of time and the lack of fixed endpoint. I think it would behoove you to get that in writing, and also formalize a procedure for resolving grievances/issues (in either direction.)
posted by desuetude at 4:56 PM on October 30, 2009

They could be perfectly nice, decent people. I'm just going to pull a number out of my ass and say there's a 90% chance of nice. But what if:

- you run out of menial jobs for them to do halfway through the winter? Is it OK with you if they basically squat the rest of the time?

- two people turn into three, five, or ten? All living in the teepee, or whatever, and maybe not being as respectful of your property or your arrangement? Days or weeks could go by before you clue into this happening.

- it gets really, insanely cold and wet this winter, and they beg for a night indoors, and then another and another. It might happen.

I think all the comments above re: liability have some strong reasoning that you should at least entertain, but there are also innumerable other scenarios in which these might not be the sorts of people who have an inclination to sue you or screw you over in some way, and yet still may become pests of a different kind. At the very least, have a meeting of the minds with them and discuss whatever concerns could come up. I pine for the days when people didn't have to watch their backs and could trust strangers who seemed alright. You have to assume whatever happens on your property is your responsibility in one way or another. The main question you have to ask yourself is: do you want to take that on, no matter what could happen? Would you do this with a handshake alone?
posted by contessa at 6:21 PM on October 30, 2009

The romantic part in me is going: "oh, how COOL!" the pragmatic part of me is going "hmm. maybe not."

If you do go ahead (and the ask me chorus is trending "not"), the contract should contain this:
an end date. This is the day you both agree it all ends, they pack up, go home, and leave your land how you want it. (Want the wigwam gone? They dismantle it. Want to keep it? put it in the contract.) Also, put in the contract how much notice you need to give them before you can evict them.

Other stuff to think about is mentioned up thread. Also: wifi? Do you have it, and are you cool with them using your bandwidth? (I come from the aussie perspective of having bandwidth caps, though.)
posted by titanium_geek at 6:33 PM on October 30, 2009

If this ends up happening, please update us down the road on the gray!
posted by radioamy at 7:26 PM on October 30, 2009 [1 favorite]

You sound like a really nice ant. These grasshoppers will probably want to come into the hill when it gets really cold and getting them out will probably require, well, an exterminator.

Free spirits are a lot of fun but one of the reasons they move around so much is that they wear out their welcomes.
posted by codswallop at 7:30 PM on October 30, 2009 [6 favorites]

People are freaking out about using a solid fuel appliance in a flammable structure. It's not all that rare or even insane to do so. Lots of back country work camps do this. A semi permanent structure like a wigwam is actually better suited to this appliance than a tent as it's got more height than a tent and you aren't so worried about packing your gear in so weight isn't a factor. You can use things like insulated pipe and abundant sheet metal shielding.

ErikaB writes "If they manage to avoid those almost-certain fates, my mind boggles at the volume of firewood they would need to make it through a CT winter in an uninsulated wigwam. I go through 2 cords, but my cabin has proper insulation, and I live in a temperate climate. I'll take a random stab and say, they're going to need 15 cords of wood."

I've lived in a tent during winter for weeks at a time. You do not need a a cord and a half of wood a week because you don't maintain your tent at 20 degrees 24X7. You light a small fire in your stove in the morning to make breakfast and boil some water for washing and coffee. You get changed while your tent is warm. Coffee and soup goes in your thermos for lunch so you don't have to fire the stove until dinner. Once dinner is done your tent is warm again for evening activities and changing back into bed clothes. Maybe you go through a face cord a week and that only if you're burning junk wood like cottonwood. Some birch or oak would mean maybe half a face cord a week.

Your biggest hurdle is the human waste. If you are going to have trouble that where it'll be. They can be tricky to maintain especially in non permanent and essentially unheated settings. And when things go bad the result is smelly hazardous waste. Also solid waste is usually where even the loosest local administration bodies have the power to regulate because done wrong you can seriously screw up local water. The other problems are all minor compared to this one.
posted by Mitheral at 11:57 PM on October 30, 2009 [1 favorite]

It does sound like fun but the relationship between you seems really imbalanced. They are getting a really good deal and you are getting a few chores done? Do you normally have to hire someone to do these chores or spend a lot of time doing them when you would rather not? Do you have cows to milk twice a day or are the chores more make-work projects? There tends to be a lot more chores in in the other three months of the year, unless you were thinking of doing some inside renovating and have them do framing and drywall kind of work. If one of their chores is shovelling the driveway in the morning, what happens if they are sick that day, or slept in and you timed your wake-up time with the idea of a shovelled drive?

They are probably really nice, charismatic people, and it sounds fun;, but the costs and risks to you are much higher than for them so give yourself a week or so to mull it over and examine it from all sides before you commit.
posted by saucysault at 3:57 AM on October 31, 2009

IANAL. Woodstove in a wigwam, limited electricity, no septic system. There are fire/carbon monoxide issues, sanitation issues - graywater, if not blackwater, danger affiliated with getting water from the river. Living in a tent in a Northeast winter requires a lot of preparation and skill, and may create mess, like ugly graywater iced up where it was thrown, then melting into the driveway and icing up again. They will need more wood than they think to stay warm (wigwam is a small volume to heat, but uninsulated), and wood has to be stored. It's November; do they have a source of dry, seasoned wood? They may end up wanting to run electrical cable from your house, and create electrical safety issues. Getting water from a river in winter means getting across the edges of ice, which are thin, to the open water. Hauling water even a short distance is a lot of work.

Unless these people are the rare few who are in amazingly good shape, totally committed to this lifestyle, really hardcore and really well-prepared, then it's a recipe for disaster. If they get hurt, you might be held liable for allowing them to be stupid on your property. And, honestly, if there's a fire, and they lose all their stuff, or worse, someone is injured, you'll feel horrible. It's not just a woodstove, it's candles and oil lamps that cause fires, and without proper installation, carbon monoxide poisoning.

A wigwam would need a proper platform to be useful in winter. There are lots of ask.me threads about staying warm in houses in the winter. Doing the amount of work to live this way requires really good nutrition; do they have enough income to stay well-fed?

Talk to them really seriously about this, to be certain they are really well-prepared.
posted by theora55 at 10:38 AM on October 31, 2009

Thank you everyone for the great responses. Lots for me to think over. Contacting my local officials to find out whether this is legal is one of them. Maybe a lawyer, but they cost money, and money is too tight right now. I guess it's true that there is an imbalance -- they gain much, I gain little, and I potentially open myself to all sorts of trouble if and when things go awry. Other people I've spoken with think I should get rent but then also say that then I would be a landlord and with a financial agreement, things get more complicated.

The woman involved spent a winter in Wisconsin with a similar wigwam / wood stove out in the wilderness. I like to think they know what they're doing. A yurt in the future is a possibility.

I'm thinking of doing a trial run with them for a week or two, to see how everything works out.
posted by indigo4963 at 12:55 PM on October 31, 2009

money is too tight right now

The set-up this couple is proposing seems well-suited to either a wealthy person with a large property who can afford to eat the costs (hiring a lawyer at the outset, repairing damaged property, paying any fines or fees involved, etc.) or some type of commune explicitly intended for this type of living situation.
posted by Meg_Murry at 2:01 PM on October 31, 2009

I don't mean that as a judgment of what they're trying to do or of your interest in it--but if you can't afford a lawyer, I don't think you can afford to do this.
posted by Meg_Murry at 2:02 PM on October 31, 2009

(Why does there being an imbalance matter? It's irrelevant to living a great life, really.)

I would do it, as I think it would contribute something positive in my life, and that has value for me. I would learn a lot, and that would be great. I had a neighbor right in the middle of L.A. who set up a teepee and lived in it for a year and a half. It was a really great addition to the neighborhood.

I could speak to the legal set up, but I don't have much more to contribute besides thinking that looking at it as a rental of property, and they would be your tenants.
posted by Vaike at 3:21 PM on October 31, 2009

- Zoning / city regs: I'd look for a clause somewhere that says it doesn't count as a dwelling if it doesn't have "a kitchen" in it. I have a high tolerance for risk, so I wouldn't ask the city about it unless I thought my neighbors might turn me in.
- I'd definitely get an end date in writing, along with a few things that lead to immediate departure, and maybe a $100 deposit against damage. I definitely wouldn't expect any chores to actually get done.
- I'd ask for money and in the contract specify that it's for something random, like the use of a parking space or the right to walk to the river or something. Landlord issues might still legally end up applying, but I'd do my best to avert that. You can learn about landlord issues in Nolo books. Keep in mind that most related ordinances (e.g., just cause eviction or rent control) are city specific. (Would s/he need to learn about adverse possession too?)
- Speaking of water, do you have use / withdrawal rights on the river? I don't know about water law, but it might be something to consider.
- Think about the impact on the land. They'll be walking one path over and over again. Where the wigwam is will be really trampled. Do you mind?
posted by salvia at 6:40 PM on October 31, 2009

Maybe a lawyer, but they cost money, and money is too tight right now.

Shouldn't they pay for the lawyer since the relationship was their idea and ulimately more to their advantage? If everything is on the up-and-up I am sure they would be happy help you feel comfortable.
posted by saucysault at 7:51 PM on October 31, 2009

Folks here need to relax. People can live in things other than town houses and condos. You should hang out with them a bit, perhaps more than just a dinner or two. They should be somewhat serious minded and experienced. They should know that they need to leave if you ask them to, that they should leave it how they found it. Where do they live now? Can you go and see it? You don't want slobs. It is possible to live in a wigwam, tent, yurt or other structure and not look like a caveman. Get more references. Create a written agreement together that you all can live with and then sign it.

It can be an interesting experiment. You may learn a lot from them.

Trust your gut feeling, not the fear mongers here. Mitheral sounds knowledgeable.
posted by recurve at 1:55 AM on November 1, 2009

If you are doing any kind of sustainable farming, check out becoming a registered Wwoofer host, have the couple register as Wwoofers and take them on that way. You might be able to get legal guidance from the Wwoofer organisation regarding how to deal with work-trade guests as well as economical liability cover.
posted by Kerasia at 2:36 AM on November 1, 2009

The set-up this couple is proposing seems well-suited to either a wealthy person with a large property who can afford to eat the costs (hiring a lawyer at the outset, repairing damaged property, paying any fines or fees involved, etc.) or some type of commune explicitly intended for this type of living situation.

Warning: I'm going to make a giant generalization here. I am aware that there are exceptions. Wealthy people don't do things like let people set up wigwams on their property, because they have possessions that they fear will be stolen and are otherwise highly protective of the value of their expensive property. A spot of dead grass doesn't hurt you if you aren't figuring a pristine lawn into the value of your property.

The OP met these people through a couchsurfing website. Considering that couchsurfing permits people you don't know into your actual home, I'm thinking that everyone involved in this scenario is already starting off kinda on the same page, here, regarding comfort levels with inconvenience.
posted by desuetude at 9:32 AM on November 1, 2009

My point wasn't that wealthy people would do this, and perhaps "wealthy" is the wrong term entirely. What I was trying to get at is that, assuming the OP lives in a fairly typical residential area, the laws regarding what he can do, is expected to do, and may not do on or to his property were probably not written in ways that explicitly or even implicitly accommodate, say, a wigwam on his property.

This isn't about the OP's preferences, it's about the real legal implications of what he is proposing to do. Whether or not he cares about "a pristine lawn" or thinks that "people can live in things other than town houses and condos" is not the issue. The issue is that he may live in an area governed by laws that do involve expectations regarding landscaping or outbuildings or nontraditional landlord-tenant arrangements. A better term than "wealthy" would be financially comfortable. If the OP's house is in a residential area with typical residential area laws, and he wants to do this thing, which is fairly far outside of the expected norms of what one does on one's residential property, he needs to be able to hire a lawyer.
posted by Meg_Murry at 7:12 AM on November 2, 2009

Thank you for all the answers. In the end, the people decided to not do the wigwam on my property at this time. I marked a bunch of answers as "best" - those that were balanced between positive and realistic. Maybe it was a crazy idea, and maybe it would have turned out to be a disaster but I like to believe that it would have turned out fine.
posted by indigo4963 at 9:12 AM on December 10, 2009