Submitted by ROK (as a comment)

It would be good to get to the bottom of the problem with Violet Beckles. She went through so many lawyers and non lawyers as well as Government Departments like the Land Registry, UDC and the Minister of Social Transformation himself) that it ain’t funny and can’t get a piece of the land for which she has papers.

Ms. Beckles has papers for land all over Barbados: Halls Road, Whitepark, Lightfoot Lane, Sandy Lane, Kensington, Christ Church; you name it, Beckles got papers for land there. She claims to have inherited all the land belonging to a lady she used to work for. Apparently, this lady used to buy land with every cent she had. She seemed to be fixated on buying land.

When the lady died, it was either that she had no children or trusted Mrs. Beckles to handle the land (I think she had a stepson). Mrs. Beckles has two problems. First she never had the lands transferred into her name as they are still in the name of the lady she said gave them to her. So while there is proof that the lady owned the land, there is no proof linking the land to Mrs. Beckles; nothing to connect back to her.

Second, she never made a move to collect rent on the properties and establish control. For example, a doctor set up a clinic on a piece in Sandy Lane; there is also Kensington oval and now the Courts of justice, but Mrs. Beckles never came forward to own the land until something big was happening to the land.

All these lands were being occupied by persons without let or hindrance for more than fifty years. How do you uproot somebody after the statute of limitations on land has expired and the occupants have gone to the lengths to get a good title?

I told Mrs. Beckles a long time ago that she is treasuring the papers and she must get up and deal with the land. She did not trust anybody to even see the deeds. I believe that today, especially because of the statute of limitations that her deeds are worthless against any land for which a title was subsequently issued.

In other words, children who came along living on the lands with their parents genuinely believed that their parents owned the land. Let me throw in a scenario which happened nearly ten years ago.

I got a call from an elderly man from St. Lucy (somebody put him on to me) who said he got notice to move off his own land which he had bought many years ago. Apparently, when the tenantry was up for sale, he bought his and a piece that his friend was on because the friend could not pay for the land.

This was allowed by the plantation and was actually recorded in the plantation log. However at that time no papers were issued for the lands.

In the meantime the children of his friend grew up thinking that the land belonged to their father. All those children subsequently left home and emigrated. Therefore, having not received any payment for the land and his friend dead and gone, the old man occupied the land since he purchased it. He gave his home to his wife and children and he took control of the land which his friend occupied but which was his.

One of his friend’s sons had come back to take control of what he felt was his father’s land. He proceeded to file a title suit, got it and then went on to give the old man notice to move and had actually gone to further lengths with plans to develop the land.

The long and short is that the lawyer handling the case withdrew the suit and informed his client. I gave him all the proof collected and he was finished with his search, he was satisfied that the old man was the proper owner and since he was occupying his own lands, no statute of limitations could be applied and as a matter of fact the son could not claim that he was occupying the land without let or hindrance.

This is therefore, Ms. Beckles mistake. She never took control. It is such a pity because she would have been a multi millionaire today, rather than the condition in which I last saw her. Not sure where she is or her condition now.

The main question to ask though is what caused her to sit on the title deeds and not try to collect a cent in rent from any of those properties or even secure them from squatters and encroachers over all those years?

It would be good to get to the bottom of the problem with Violet Beckles. She went through so many lawyers and non lawyers as well as Government Departments like the Land Registry, UDC and the Minister of Social Transformation himself) that it ain’t funny and can’t get a piece of the land for which she has papers. Ms. Beckles has papers for land all over Barbados: Halls Road, Whitepark, Lightfoot Lane, Sandy Lane, Kensington, Christ Church; you name it, Beckles got papers for land there. She claims to have inherited all the land belonging to a lady she used to work for. Apparently, this lady used to buy land with every cent she had. She seemed to be fixated on buying land. When the lady died, it was either that she had no children or trusted Mrs. Beckles to handle the land (I think she had a stepson).

Mrs. Beckles has two problems. First she never had the lands transferred into her name as they are still in the name of the lady she said gave them to her. So while there is proof that the lady owned the land, there is no proof linking the land to Mrs. Beckles; nothing to connect back to her. Second, she never made a move to collect rent on the properties and establish control. For example, a doctor set up a clinic on a piece in Sandy Lane; there is also Kensington oval and now the Courts of justice, but Mrs. Beckles never came forward to own the land until something big was happening to the land. All these lands were being occupied by persons without let or hindrance for more than fifty years. How do you uproot somebody after the statute of limitations on land has expired and the occupants have gone to the lengths to get a good title?

I told Mrs. Beckles a long time ago that she is treasuring the papers and she must get up and deal with the land. She did not trust anybody to even see the deeds. I believe that today, especially because of the statute of limitations that her deeds are worthless against any land for which a title was subsequently issued. In other words, children who came along living on the lands with their parents genuinely believed that their parents owned the land. Let me throw in a scenario which happened nearly ten years ago. I got a call from an elderly man from St. Lucy (somebody put him on to me) who said he got notice to move off his own land which he had bought many years ago. Apparently, when the tenantry was up for sale, he bought his and a piece that his friend was on because the friend could not pay for the land. This was allowed by the plantation and was actually recorded in the plantation log. However at that time no papers were issued for the lands. In the meantime the children of his friend grew up thinking that the land belonged to their father. All those children subsequently left home and emigrated. Therefore, having not received any payment for the land and his friend dead and gone, the old man occupied the land since he purchased it. He gave his home to his wife and children and he took control of the land which his friend occupied but which was his. One of his friend’s sons had come back to take control of what he felt was his father’s land. He proceeded to file a title suit, got it and then went on to give the old man notice to move and had actually gone to further lengths with plans to develop the land.

The long and short is that the lawyer handling the case withdrew the suit and informed his client. I gave him all the proof collected and he was finished with his search, he was satisfied that the old man was the proper owner and since he was occupying his own lands, no statute of limitations could be applied and as a matter of fact the son could not claim that he was occupying the land without let or hindrance. This is therefore, Ms. Beckles mistake. She never took control. It is such a pity because she would have been a multi millionaire today, rather than the condition in which I last saw her. Not sure where she is or her condition now.

The main question to ask though is what caused her to sit on the title deeds and not try to collect a cent in rent from any of those properties or even secure them from squatters and encroachers over all those years?