In many ways it seems wrong, although I can see there is a case that if a landowner doesn't notice someone else living and using their property for over a decade they could be deemed to have abandoned it. There are also potential cases that relate to land rather than buildings and the concept that if land has been used for an extended period with nobody disputing it then it becomes reasonable not to enforce it after a certain time has passed. An example of this might be if the fence between my yard and my neighbor's yard is a few feet away from where the deeds say it should be. One of us will be using that patch of land, as if it were our own, believing it is our own, potentially spending money on improving it (laying a patio, growing plants etc). It would seem very harsh to have spent money on improving land in good faith only to find you have to dig everything up because actually your neighbor owns 18 inches of the land you just upgraded.
The issue of where one person's rights end and another's begins is always a thorny issue. A loosely related issue is that of abandoned buildings that fall into disrepair and drag down an entire community. Obviously in a society that puts any value at all on private property rights the owner has to be respected as the owner, although it raises the ongoing question of whether the community has any rights to not have derelict buildings drawing the problems associated with derelict buildings.
Of course in areas that levy taxes based on property values there's another related question of whether an owner can be forced to spend money on improving a property when those improvements will result in an increased tax bill.
