Q: I came home two weeks ago to find that my neighbor had demolished the old brick wall that sits on our shared property line and separates our backyards. When I asked the neighbor what was going on, he said he was building a new wall and subsequently asked my permission to do so. I was mad that he tore the old wall down without asking first, but told him it was OK to build a new one. Now the wall is completed, but he says he is going to take me to court if I don’t pay half of his $6,000 in construction costs. What should I do?

A: If anyone should be suing here, it’s you, not your neighbor. He had no right to rip down the jointly owned wall without getting your permission first, and therefore is financially responsible for replacing it.

The fact that you later gave him permission to build a new wall does not obligate you to pay for half of its cost unless you signed some sort of agreement to do so. He can sue, but he probably won’t win.

You can pay part of the construction bill if you’re feeling charitable, but you certainly don’t have to. And if your neighbor sues, you should file a lawsuit of your own because he tore down the old wall without your prior consent.

Q: We applied for a new-car loan and were approved after the bank checked our credit. However, we then canceled the loan because we decided to save our money to make a down payment on a home instead. Will our decision to cancel the car loan hurt our credit score by (incorrectly) making it look like we applied for the loan but then got turned down?

A: No, the car loan you rejected won’t affect your credit score or hurt your chances of getting a mortgage.

Your credit report likely will show an “inquiry” from the bank that processed your automobile loan, but will not state whether the application was approved or denied. Mortgage lenders understand that consumers often apply for new loans but then decide against taking them out, so your decision to cancel the auto loan won’t have any effect on your eventual home-loan application.

Q: There is an old home in my area that has been vacant for several years. A friend of mine says that if I simply moved into the house and paid the property taxes, I could eventually take it over by suing the absentee owner in court. Is this true?

A: The legal term for acquiring property in such a manner is “adverse possession,” and it’s a process that’s far more complicated than your friend suggests.

Adverse possession is based on the old English common law regarding squatters’ rights. Forty-nine states permit the use of adverse possession (Louisiana follows the more arcane French Napoleonic Code).

The procedure to acquire property through adverse possession varies by state. California probably has the most liberal rules: If you live in a property for five years without the current owner’s permission and pay the real estate taxes, you can then gain title to the property by filing a quiet-title lawsuit against the legal owner.

The process is far more difficult in most other states. Texas, for example, requires “open, notorious, hostile, exclusive and continuous occupancy” for 30 years before someone can gain property through adverse possession.

Talk to a real estate attorney first if you’re serious about trying to get title to the vacant home through adverse possession. If you don’t follow the law to the “T,” you won’t get the property and will have wasted a lot of time and money instead.