Law library

Squatters and vacant property in Utah: what the law says

Utah is one of the few states where no judge has to sign. Since 2025 an owner can hand law enforcement a sworn complaint on a form the statute prints in full, and law enforcement is directed to serve a notice to vacate and put the owner back in possession. It is also one of the very few states where the statute lets an officer stand by while the owner changes the locks — which is a crime in most of the country, and Utah only allows it after law enforcement has served that notice. The price of getting the complaint wrong is written into the same section: the person you removed can be put back, and can collect triple the fair market rent plus your court costs and their attorney fees. Every answer below is quoted from the statute it came from.

Every answer on this page is quoted from the statute it came from and linked to the source, so you can read the law yourself. Last checked against the statutes on 2026-07-14.

What to do now — this part is ours, not the law

There is no 30-day rule. Nobody becomes a tenant by standing in your house long enough — not in thirty days, not in ninety. They are not a tenant on day one and they are not a tenant on day ninety. What time does change is how hard they are to remove, and how much of your money it takes. That is a reason to move today, not a deadline you have already missed.

If someone is in the property right now

  1. Do not go in, and do not change the locks. It is the first thing everyone wants to do and it is how the owner becomes the defendant. Read that question above before you touch anything.
  2. Call the police non-emergency line. Ask them to look at it as a criminal trespass rather than a landlord–tenant dispute. Those are different outcomes and the words matter.
  3. Have your proof of ownership in your hand when they arrive — the deed, a recent tax bill, your ID. The officer's whole decision turns on whether he believes you own it.
  4. Photograph everything, and write down every date. When you last saw it empty. When you found them. What was said. Who you called, and when.
  5. Call a lawyer the same day. Not next week. The clock on every route above has already started.
The full checklist — what to record and what to ask →

If it has not happened yet

Everything on this page gets easier the earlier you do it. Photograph the property empty, keep the utility bills, and write down who is allowed inside — before you lock up and walk away. None of that is expensive. All of it is worth more than it looks at 2am.

The checklist for leaving a property vacant →

Is a squatter a tenant — and what rights do they have?

No. Utah's eviction chapter says in as many words that a "tenant" does not include anyone with no legal right to be there, and it gives a squatter his own name in the same list — a "trespasser" is someone who never had any right to possession at all.

Read the law

If a trespasser counts as a tenant, the owner is routed into housing court and every fast option closes.

Utah Code § 78B-6-801(8) — definitions, Forcible Entry and Detainer (eff. 2026-05-06)

(8)(a) "Tenant" means any natural person and any individual, including a commercial tenant. (b) "Tenant" does not include a person or entity that has no legal right to the premises.

The same section, two subsections apart, names the squatter directly: "(9) 'Trespasser' means a person or entity that occupies real property but never had possessory rights in the premises." And it shuts a second door: "(7)(a) 'Peaceable possession' means having a legal right to possession. (b) 'Peaceable possession' does not include: (i) the occupation of premises by a trespasser". Now read the boundary of the fast route below, because it is NOT drawn on the word "tenant": § 78B-6-817(1)(d) closes that route where "the trespasser is not a current or former tenant of the real property under a written rental agreement authorized by the property owner" is untrue, and § 78B-6-817(1)(e) closes it against "an immediate family member of the property owner." The route turns on a WRITTEN RENTAL AGREEMENT, not on tenant status. Where that leaves a former tenant who overstays is a question for a Utah lawyer, and we do not answer it.

Read it at the source →

Can I just change the locks?

Not on your own — and never in another state. Utah is one of a handful where the statute lets law enforcement stand by while an owner changes the locks, and it only reaches that point after law enforcement has served a notice to vacate under the sworn-complaint procedure. Use the statute's procedure on a complaint that turns out to be wrong and the same section puts the person back in the house and hands them triple the fair market rent, your court costs, and their attorney's fees. Lock someone out on your own, outside the procedure, and you are in territory no Utah court has mapped — and the person who finds out how it maps will be the defendant.

Read the law — 3 provisions

Lawful in a handful of states, a crime in most. Getting this wrong turns the victim into the defendant.

1 · Utah Code § 78B-6-817(4) — law enforcement stands by to keep the peace (Enacted by Chapter 295, 2025 General Session; eff. 2025-05-07)

(4)(a) After law enforcement serves the notice to immediately vacate, the property owner or authorized agent may request that law enforcement stand by to keep the peace while the property owner or authorized agent of the property owner changes the locks and removes the personal property of the trespasser from the real property to or near the property line. (b) Law enforcement is not liable to the trespasser or any other party for loss, destruction, or damage of property. (c) The property owner and authorized agent are not liable to the trespasser or any other party for the loss, destruction, or damage to the personal property unless the removal was wrongful.

READ THE SEQUENCE, NOT THE SENTENCE, AND READ WHERE IT IS LAWFUL. This subsection opens "After law enforcement serves the notice to immediately vacate" — everything in it is downstream of the sworn complaint under Subsection (2) and of law enforcement acting on it under Subsection (3). And read the last clause: the owner's protection from liability runs out where "the removal was wrongful." THIS IS UTAH LAW AND IT IS NOT THE LAW ALMOST ANYWHERE ELSE. In most states a lockout is a crime and it makes the victim the defendant.

Read it at the source →

2 · Utah Code § 78B-6-817(5) — civil cause of action for wrongful removal

(5)(a) An individual may bring a civil cause of action for wrongful removal under this section. (b)(i) An individual harmed by a wrongful removal under this section may be restored to possession of the real property and may recover actual costs and damages incurred, statutory damages equal to triple the fair market rent of the dwelling, court costs, and reasonable attorney fees. (ii) The court shall expedite the trial and any hearing in an action described in this Subsection (5).

The sworn complaint asks the owner to initial this risk himself, in box 10: "I understand that an individual removed from the real property with this procedure may bring a cause of action against me for any false statements made in this complaint, or for wrongfully using this procedure, and that as a result of such action I may be held liable for actual damages, penalties, costs, and reasonable attorney fees."

Read it at the source →

3 · Utah Code § 78B-6-814 — exclusion of tenant without judicial process prohibited

It is unlawful for an owner to willfully exclude a tenant from the tenant's premises in any manner except by judicial process, provided, an owner or his agent shall not be prevented from removing the contents of the leased premises under Subsection 78B-6-816(2) and retaking the premises and attempting to rent them at a fair rental value when the tenant has abandoned the premises.

A CLAIM ABOUT OUR OWN SEARCH, NOT ABOUT THE LAW: on 2026-07-14 we read Utah Code §§ 78B-6-801, 78B-6-814 and 78B-6-817 in full on the Legislature's own server. This section speaks of a TENANT, and § 78B-6-801(8)(b) says a tenant "does not include a person or entity that has no legal right to the premises." We looked for a Utah provision or a Utah appellate decision resolving what happens to an owner who locks a trespasser out WITHOUT going through § 78B-6-817 at all, and we found none we could fetch and would stand behind. Untested is not the same as permitted, and the person who finds out which it is will be the defendant. DeedProof does not advise on this and never will.

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

If police do act, what is the charge — and can they arrest for it?

Yes — the arrest power is on the face of the statutes, but the grade turns on whether your building counts as a "dwelling". Staying in a building you know you have no right to be in, after being told to go, is criminal trespass. In a dwelling Utah grades it a class A misdemeanor and lets an officer arrest on reasonable cause; outside one it is a class B, and the officer generally has to see it. Utah defines a dwelling as a building usually occupied at night — whether an empty house mid-renovation is one is a question about YOUR building. The removal statute says separately that law enforcement may arrest a trespasser found on the property.

Read the law — 5 provisions

A charge that only supports a citation does not remove anyone from a house. This is the link that killed the previous market.

1 · Utah Code § 76-6-206(2) — criminal trespass

(2) An actor commits criminal trespass if, under circumstances not amounting to burglary … (b) knowing the actor's or unmanned aircraft's entry or presence is unlawful, the actor enters or remains on or causes an unmanned aircraft to enter or remain unlawfully over property to which notice against entering is given by: (i) personal communication to the actor by the owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner; (ii) fencing or other enclosure obviously designed to exclude intruders; or (iii) posting of signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders;

THE LIVE ELEMENT HERE IS NOTICE, NOT THE GRADE. Subsection (2)(b) requires notice against entering, given in one of three named ways — and the first of them is simply being told by the owner. Note that the removal statute at § 78B-6-817(1)(c) requires the owner to attest that he "has directed the trespasser to leave the real property" before law enforcement acts at all. Subsection (2)(a) is a separate route to the same offence, and it turns instead on intent to annoy, injure, damage, or commit a crime, or recklessness as to causing fear for another's safety.

Read it at the source →

2 · Utah Code § 76-6-206(3) — grading

(3)(a) Except as provided in Subsection (3)(b), a violation of Subsection (2)(a), (b), or (d) is a class B misdemeanor. (b) The following is a class A misdemeanor: (i) if a violation of Subsection (2)(a) or (b) is committed in a dwelling;

The grade turns on one word — "dwelling" — and that word is defined in a DIFFERENT SECTION, which is the next link. The two grades do not lead to the same place: the arrest statute after them reaches a class A on reasonable cause alone, and a class B only where the officer sees it.

Read it at the source →

3 · Utah Code § 76-6-201(2) — definitions, Burglary and Criminal Trespass

"Dwelling" means a building which is usually occupied by a person lodging in the building at night, whether or not a person is actually present.

THIS IS THE LIVE QUESTION FOR A VACANT HOUSE, AND IT IS A QUESTION ABOUT YOUR BUILDING. The definition turns on whether the building is USUALLY occupied at night, not on whether anyone is in it now — the last clause says so. Whether a house sitting empty mid-renovation is a dwelling is not something we can answer for you, and the grade, and with it the officer's power to arrest on reasonable cause alone, turns on the answer.

Read it at the source →

4 · Utah Code § 77-7-2 — arrest by peace officers

A peace officer may make an arrest under authority of a warrant or may, without warrant, arrest a person: (1)(a) for any public offense committed or attempted in the presence of any peace officer; … (2) when the peace officer has reasonable cause to believe a felony or a class A misdemeanor has been committed and has reasonable cause to believe that the person arrested has committed it; (3) when the peace officer has reasonable cause to believe the person has committed a public offense, and there is reasonable cause for believing the person may: (a) flee or conceal himself to avoid arrest; (b) destroy or conceal evidence of the commission of the offense; or (c) injure another person or damage property belonging to another person;

This is the link that killed the previous market elsewhere — an offence graded so low that the officer may only write a citation. Utah does not have that problem: Subsection (2) reaches a class A misdemeanor on reasonable cause, and Subsection (1)(a) reaches ANY public offence the officer sees. Note what both still run on — the officer's own judgment about whether an offence is being committed, which is the very thing the paperwork in the intruder's hand is designed to cloud.

Read it at the source →

5 · Utah Code § 78B-6-817(3)(e), (6) — arrest preserved by the removal statute

(3)(e) If appropriate, law enforcement may arrest any trespasser found on the real property for trespass, outstanding warrants, or any other legal cause. … (6) This section does not limit the rights of a property owner or limit the authority of a law enforcement officer to arrest a trespasser for trespassing, vandalism, theft, or other crimes.

These are the provisions, in order. We have drawn no conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw. Read them and decide.

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

What decides whether police arrest or walk away?

Permission — whether the officer at the door believes the person inside had it. To judge that he also has to know who could have granted it, which means knowing who owns the building. Utah makes you swear you are the record owner, and swear in advance that any lease they produce is fraudulent. It does not tell anyone how to check either sworn story.

DeedProof solves this

We verify you own the property and file your notarized statement where police can check it. How it works →

Read the law — 3 provisions

Every other question here is downstream of this one. The whole encounter, in one decision, made in a doorway in the dark.

1 · Utah Code § 76-6-206(2)(b) — the words the offence hinges on

(2) An actor commits criminal trespass if, under circumstances not amounting to burglary … (b) knowing the actor's or unmanned aircraft's entry or presence is unlawful, the actor enters or remains on or causes an unmanned aircraft to enter or remain unlawfully over property to which notice against entering is given by: (i) personal communication to the actor by the owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner;

Read what the officer is actually being asked to decide: whether the person inside KNOWS his presence is unlawful, and whether notice was given by "the owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner." Both halves run through the owner. An officer cannot weigh either one without knowing who the owner is — and that is the fact nobody at the door can check.

Read it at the source →

2 · Utah Code § 78B-6-817(2)(b) — the statutory complaint form, boxes 1, 2, 6 and 12

1. ...... I am the owner of the real property or the authorized agent of the owner of the real property. 2. ...... I have attached evidence that I am the record owner of the real property, or the authorized agent of the owner. … 6. ...... The trespasser is not a current or former tenant according to any valid lease authorized by the property owner for the real property, and any lease that may be produced by an occupant is fraudulent. … 12. ...... A copy of my valid government-issued identification is attached, or I am an agent of the property owner and documents evidencing my authority to act on the property owner's behalf are attached.

READ BOX 6 AGAIN. The owner swears, before anyone has looked at it, that whatever lease the occupant produces is fake. And read box 12 against box 2: a government-issued ID establishes WHO THE AFFIANT IS. It does not establish that he owns the building. The whole complaint is made under penalty of perjury — the form ends "I UNDERSTAND THAT THE STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS PETITION ARE BEING MADE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, PUNISHABLE AS PROVIDED IN UTAH CODE, SECTION 76-8-502."

Read it at the source →

3 · Utah Code § 78B-6-817(3) — what law enforcement does on receiving the complaint

(3)(a) Upon receipt of the complaint and evidence of ownership, and the owner or authorized agent appears entitled to the relief described in this section, law enforcement shall, without delay, instruct the trespasser or serve a notice to immediately vacate on any trespasser and shall put the owner or authorized agent in possession of the real property. (b) If verified, law enforcement shall, without delay, serve a notice to immediately vacate on any trespasser and shall put the owner in possession of the real property. … (d) Law enforcement shall attempt to verify the identity of any trespasser occupying the real property and note the identities on the return of service.

A CLAIM ABOUT OUR OWN SEARCH, NOT ABOUT THE LAW: on 2026-07-14 we read Utah Code § 78B-6-817 in full on the Legislature's own server. We looked for any provision telling law enforcement how to establish that the person who signed the complaint actually owns the building — what "evidence of ownership" is enough, what "if verified" means and who does the verifying, a deed check, a recorder's lookup, a registry, anything. We found no such provision. Note the asymmetry the section does define: subsection (3)(d) directs law enforcement to attempt to verify the identity of the TRESPASSER, and says nothing of the same kind about the owner. Confirm against the official code before relying on it.

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

What is the lawful way to get them out?

A sworn complaint handed to law enforcement, on a form the statute prints out in full — not a lawsuit. If that route is closed to you, or law enforcement does not act on it, what is left is the court track in the eviction chapter, which ends with a judge ordering them out and a sheriff or constable at the door to enforce it.

Read the law — 4 provisions

The route sets the real cost. A summary track is weeks; a full civil suit is months.

1 · Utah Code § 78B-6-817(1)–(2) — limited alternative remedy to remove a trespasser

(1) An owner of real property, or the property owner's authorized agent, may request that law enforcement of the appropriate jurisdiction in which the real property is located, immediately remove a trespasser occupying the real property if the property owner, or an authorized agent of the property owner, attests that: (a) the trespasser has unlawfully entered and remains on the real property; (b) the real property was not open to members of the public at the time the trespasser entered; (c) the property owner has directed the trespasser to leave the real property; (d) the trespasser is not a current or former tenant of the real property under a written rental agreement authorized by the property owner; (e) the trespasser is not an immediate family member of the property owner; and (f) there is no pending litigation related to the real property between the property owner and the trespasser.

Read the conditions before assuming this route reaches your situation, because two of them do real work: (d) a CURRENT OR FORMER TENANT is outside this section entirely, and (e) so is an immediate family member. A tenant who overstays, or a relative who will not go, is on the ordinary eviction track instead. The section is titled a "limited alternative remedy", and the limits are the point.

Read it at the source →

2 · Utah Code § 78B-6-809 — proof required of plaintiff; defense

(1) On the trial of any proceeding for any forcible entry or forcible detainer the plaintiff shall only be required to show, in addition to the forcible entry or forcible detainer complained of, that the plaintiff was in actual peaceable possession at the time of the forcible entry, or was entitled to the possession at the time of the forcible detainer. (2) In defense, the defendant may show that the defendant or the defendant's ancestors, or those whose interest in the premises is claimed, had been in the quiet possession of the property for the space of one entire year continuously before the commencement of the proceedings, and that his interest is not ended or determined, and that this showing is a bar to the proceedings.

ONE YEAR IS THE NUMBER TO NOTICE HERE, AND IT IS NOT ADVERSE POSSESSION — it is a defence to this proceeding, raised by the occupant, on a showing of a full year of quiet possession. It is why a building nobody visits is the exposure.

Read it at the source →

3 · Utah Code § 78B-6-806(1)(a) — necessary defendant (eff. 2026-05-06)

No person other than the tenant of the premises, a lease signer, and subtenant if there is one in the actual occupation of the premises when the action is commenced, may be made a party defendant in the proceeding, except as provided in Section 78B-6a-303.

A QUESTION WE RAISE AND DO NOT ANSWER. This section lists who may be made a defendant in the proceeding and the list is drawn around tenants, lease signers and subtenants — while § 78B-6-801(8)(b) says a tenant "does not include a person or entity that has no legal right to the premises." How that sits with a court action aimed at someone who was NEVER a tenant is a question for a Utah lawyer. We quote it; we do not resolve it. Note the version: this is the text effective 2026-05-06. The superseded version of the same section ends "except as provided in Section 78B-6-1111".

Read it at the source →

4 · Utah Code § 78B-6-812(2), (4)(a) — order of restitution and its enforcement

(2) An order of restitution shall: (a) direct the defendant to vacate the premises, remove the defendant's personal property, and restore possession of the premises to the plaintiff, or be forcibly removed by a sheriff or constable; (b) advise the defendant that the defendant has three calendar days after service of the order to vacate the premises … (4)(a) If the defendant fails to comply with the order within the time prescribed by the court, a sheriff or constable at the plaintiff's direction may enter the premises by force using the least destructive means possible to remove the defendant.

The three-day clock in (2)(b) is subject to the exceptions printed with it, including the immediate return of possession under § 78B-6-810(3)(d) and a default order under § 78B-6-810(4).

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

How long does it take, and what does it cost?

Days if law enforcement acts on your sworn complaint — months once anyone fights it. The complaint route is meant to run "without delay". But if the person inside produces a lease and law enforcement backs off, what is left is the court track in the eviction chapter, and that chapter's expedited timetable — trial begun within sixty days of service — is written for an action in which THE TENANT remains in possession. The money cuts both ways: the court awards costs and attorney fees to whoever WINS, and triples the damages it assesses. On a complaint that turns out to be wrong, the winner is the person you removed.

Read the law — 3 provisions

The two numbers every owner wants, and the one nobody warns them about: you do not get it back.

1 · Utah Code § 78B-6-817(3)(a) — "without delay"

Upon receipt of the complaint and evidence of ownership, and the owner or authorized agent appears entitled to the relief described in this section, law enforcement shall, without delay, instruct the trespasser or serve a notice to immediately vacate on any trespasser and shall put the owner or authorized agent in possession of the real property.

THIS IS THE UNCONTESTED BRANCH, AND IT IS THE ONE THAT MAY NOT HAPPEN TO YOU. Everything in it hangs on the words "appears entitled to the relief" — the statute gives law enforcement no standard for that judgment and no deadline to make it, and the person inside your building is holding a lease. Nothing in this section compels an officer to reach the same conclusion you did.

Read it at the source →

2 · Utah Code § 78B-6-810(1)–(2) — court procedures and the 60-day trial clock

(1) In an action under this chapter in which the tenant remains in possession of the property: (a) the court shall expedite the proceedings, including the resolution of motions and trial; (b) the court shall begin the trial within 60 days after the day on which the complaint is served, unless the parties agree otherwise; … (2)(a) In an action for unlawful detainer, the court shall hold an evidentiary hearing, upon request of either party, within 10 business days after the day on which the defendant files an answer or response. (b) At the evidentiary hearing held in accordance with Subsection (2)(a): (i) the court shall determine who has the right of occupancy during the litigation's pendency;

READ THE FIRST LINE OF THE SECTION BEFORE YOU TAKE THE NUMBER. It opens "In an action under this chapter IN WHICH THE TENANT REMAINS IN POSSESSION" — the sixty days is written for an action against a tenant, and the first answer on this page quotes § 78B-6-801(8)(b) to the effect that a person with no legal right to the premises is not one. Whether this timetable reaches an occupant who was NEVER a tenant is the same open question § 78B-6-806(1)(a) raises above, and we do not resolve it. Even where it applies, "shall BEGIN the trial within 60 days" is a floor, not a finish, and the clock starts at SERVICE — its own delay when the person you are serving does not want to be found. The 10-business-day evidentiary hearing decides only who occupies the building while the case runs.

Read it at the source →

3 · Utah Code § 78B-6-811(3), (5)(a) — treble damages, costs and attorney fees

(3) The court shall enter the judgment against the defendant for the rent and for three times the amount of the damages assessed under Subsections (2)(a) through (2)(e). … (5) In an action under this chapter, the court: (a) shall award costs and reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party;

NO DOLLAR FIGURE APPEARS ON THIS PAGE, and that is deliberate. Utah district court filing fees and constable service fees are set outside these statutes, and every fee figure on this site appears verbatim in a document we fetched or it does not appear. And read "prevailing party" both ways: it points at whoever wins, which on a wrong complaint is the person you removed — § 78B-6-817(5)(b)(i) gives them triple the fair market rent, court costs, and reasonable attorney fees.

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

Can a sheriff remove them on the owner's affidavit alone, with no court?

Yes — Utah is one of the few states where no judge is involved at all. You sign a sworn complaint on the form the statute prints, hand it to law enforcement, and they are directed to serve a notice to vacate and put you back in possession. The check on you is not a hearing; it is the perjury warning on the form and the triple-rent lawsuit afterwards.

Read the law — 2 provisions

Where a state has passed this, it hands the owner the whole mechanism for free. This field tracks the existential risk.

1 · Utah Code § 78B-6-817(2)(a), (3)(a)–(c) — complaint to law enforcement, no court (Enacted by Chapter 295, 2025 General Session)

(2)(a) To request the immediate removal of a trespasser on the real property, the property owner or property owner's authorized agent shall submit a complaint by presenting a completed and verified Complaint to Remove Trespassers Unlawfully Occupying Real Property to law enforcement of the appropriate jurisdiction in which the real property is located. … (3)(a) Upon receipt of the complaint and evidence of ownership, and the owner or authorized agent appears entitled to the relief described in this section, law enforcement shall, without delay, instruct the trespasser or serve a notice to immediately vacate on any trespasser and shall put the owner or authorized agent in possession of the real property. … (c) Law enforcement may serve the trespasser by hand delivery of the notice or by posting the notice on the real property.

A CLAIM ABOUT OUR OWN SEARCH, NOT ABOUT THE LAW: on 2026-07-14 we read § 78B-6-817 in full on the Legislature's own server and found no judge, no magistrate, no clerk, no hearing and no counter-affidavit anywhere in the removal path. Compare Georgia, where one signed page from the occupant sends the whole thing to a magistrate — Utah writes no such escape hatch into this section. The section was enacted by Chapter 295 of the 2025 General Session and took effect 2025-05-07; verify against the official code before relying on it.

Read it at the source →

2 · Utah Code § 78B-6-817(2)(b), (5) — penalty of perjury; wrongful removal

I HAVE READ EVERY STATEMENT MADE IN THIS PETITION AND EACH STATEMENT IS TRUE AND CORRECT. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS PETITION ARE BEING MADE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, PUNISHABLE AS PROVIDED IN UTAH CODE, SECTION 76-8-502.

That is the whole check, and it runs backwards in time: it punishes a liar AFTER someone has been put out of a building. Nothing in the section asks anyone to establish, BEFORE the removal, that the person who signed it owns the place.

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

How long before they can claim they own it?

Seven years — and the tax bill has to have been paid by them, for every one of those years. Utah does not let a squatter run the clock on possession alone: the statute says adverse possession may not be established unless the occupier and their predecessors paid all the taxes levied on the land.

Read the law — 3 provisions

The thing an owner of an empty building actually fears. Pure state statute.

1 · Utah Code § 78B-2-214 — adverse possession; continuous; seven years; taxes paid

Adverse possession may not be established unless it is shown that the land has been occupied and claimed continuously for seven years, and that the party and the party's predecessors and grantors have paid all taxes which have been levied and assessed upon the land according to law.

READ THE SECOND HALF OF THE SENTENCE. The seven years is the part everybody quotes; the taxes are the part that decides it. An owner who keeps paying the tax bill on a building he never visits is, on the face of this section, standing in the way of the claim.

Read it at the source →

2 · Utah Code § 78B-2-208 — adverse possession; possession presumed in owner

(1) In an action for the recovery of real property, it is presumed that: (a) the person establishing legal title to the property has been in possession of the property; and (b) any occupation of the property has been under and in subordination to the legal title. (2) Subsection (1) may be rebutted by a showing that the property has been held and possessed adversely to the legal title for at least seven years before commencement of the action.

Read it at the source →

3 · Utah Code § 78B-2-211 — what constitutes adverse possession under written instrument

For the purpose of constituting an adverse possession by any person claiming a title based upon a written instrument or a judgment or decree, the property is considered to have been possessed if: (1) it has been usually cultivated or improved; (2) it has been protected by a substantial enclosure; (3) although not enclosed, it has been used for the supply of fuel, fencing timber, for the purpose of husbandry, or for pasturage or for the ordinary use of the occupant;

This section is about a possessor holding written evidence of title — which is what makes a forged deed dangerous to a building left alone for years. A different and shorter clock sits nearby and is worth knowing about: § 78B-2-209(2) presumes ownership by adverse possession where a party shows prima facie evidence of ownership under a TAX TITLE held for four years and has paid all the taxes in that period. That is a claim built on the tax rolls, not on squatting, and it is a separate animal.

Read it at the source →

These are the provisions, in order. We have not drawn a conclusion from them — that is not ours to draw.

This page is the law. What it costs you in Utah — the filing fee, the sheriff’s bill, the months, and whether you ever see the money again.

Your deed proves you own it. It does not prove you never rented it.

That is the officer’s real question, and the lease in their hand does not contradict your deed. You can swear it is a forgery — but a statement you write the morning after, against a lease dated last year, is worth very little. The version that counts has to already exist.

How DeedProof verifies owners and files the affidavit in advance →

› Every source on this page (14)

DeedProof is not a law firm and this page is not legal advice. We cite primary sources; we do not interpret them for your situation. Laws change — confirm current requirements with the relevant government office or a licensed attorney.