50 replies to this topic

[panky]

I think you really need to approach the neighbour before you do anything else and explain your concerns. If he is reasonable hopefully he will agree to move the fence. If not then that is when you take it further and press the issue.

[Ethel]

I suspect there isn't much chance of that. If it does get more serious it is useful to be able to show you tried though. Think I'd talk to the other neighbours affected first.

[GraemeC]

Land registry and local planning - if nothing else, he should have applied for change of use.

A neighbour of mine recently fenced round a patch of grass that was theirs and on their deeds, however as it had been previously accessible from the pavement and people took there dogs on there he was made to take the fence down as he hadn’t applied for change of use. He lost when applying (and appealing) for retrospective planning as they also cited the fence as obstructing the view at a junction (which was codswallop).

Your case is very similar. However different councils will handle in different ways.

[pusb]

Just so I know exactly what I am dealing with, I tried this morning to take my every day car around there, just to see if it was possible.

 

After much manoeuvring I just managed to get my car, an MGF, around to my garage and back out again.

 

However it was only possible with the roof down to get the best view possible, as I could only do it with millimetres to spare.

 

An MGF isn't exactly a big car, with something just a tiny bit bigger, it wouldn't have been possible at all to get round. 

 

I really don't fancy trying to get a freshly painted Mini through there. Despite appearances, a Mini isn't much smaller than an MGF (11 inches narrower & 34 inches shorter by my reckoning) 

[pusb]

I think you really need to approach the neighbour before you do anything else and explain your concerns. If he is reasonable hopefully he will agree to move the fence. If not then that is when you take it further and press the issue.

 

That could be a problem. Apart from the fact that I never really speak to him (said hello a few times but just got a grunt back), I think he works nights.

 

I might put a note through his door

[DeadSquare]

I don't think there's any doubt it belongs to him. It's whether he has to keep it unobstructed to allow the other residents access.

 

You may well be correct about the new neighbour's ownership;  just as a small area of the back lane is coloured green on Pusb's plan, showing it as belonging to Pusb, there may be a similar area on the new neighbour's plan, but as all these houses seem to have been built contemporaneously, the wording of the deeds will probably be identical, and the "Pass and re pass" words will be in all the deeds,

 

"PASS AND RE PASS WITHOUT LET OR HINDRANCE"  is a very ancient right, and as the common access is expressly granted to the purchaser, the purchaser's successors and authorised persons, the 25 or however many years, is barking up the wrong tree.

 

The enclosing of the blue triangular area  will hinder Pusb, just as his neighbour's garage does on the adjacent corner, and this hindrance is probably in every deed of the houses served by the back lane and side passage.

[mab01uk]

Are there not other neighbours in your street with rear access garages who are also affected by this? If so you should perhaps consult them up and down the road first as you will have more chance of success with a group of residents than an individual taking action. Even if some of your neighbours don't use or have garages the restriction of the rear access will put some buyers off in the future and could affect their house values......mention of loss of house value should get most neighbours interested!

 

Unfortunately it looks like your immediate neighbours have set a precedent by taking out their corner 15 years ago and building on it, relying on the other neighbours corner to maintain enough access room for others....this has probably inspired the other neighbour eventually to do the same to gain some land, based on "If they can do that then so can I."

 

Do you have a Resident Association for the area or your street who might be able to help or advise?

(I live in a 1937 built house and have a Residents Association which was formed when the houses were built and is still going strong today sorting out local issues and reporting back via a quarterly newsletter/magazine and online all for £2 per year).

 

It might also be of interest to the local council if you live on a main road as this change could remove full potential for off street parking from all the homes served by the rear access road, remember an important aspect of most planning applications is provision of off street parking. Even if you can still get a Mini or MGF through most modern cars are now far bigger!

Edited by mab01uk, 24 August 2019 - 08:23 AM.

[Ethel]

"mention of loss of house value should get most neighbours interested!"

 

That could be your trump card - with your fence building neighbour in particular. It wouldn't exactly help him if he tried to sell to have an ongoing dispute over his property.

 

It would be interesting to see some more deeds. As Dead Square says, they were likely all written together, but it would be interesting to see how the bit between  the 2 houses that leads to the road is divvied up. If it's split down the middle there's no questioning he personally owes you right of access. 

 

It does look like the main dispute ought to be between him and your immediate neighbour who has lost access to his garage. It they're friendly, their deeds should tell what his deeds show by deduction.

 

There are specifications for access by fire engines etc. They may well not apply directly if all the houses front on to a public road but they will give you some basis for defining the corner he's cut off. Also, car parks have similar specs. If it's specified as 8ft wide I don't think there's any argument it's vehicular access.

 

 

 

[DeadSquare]

"mention of loss of house value should get most neighbours interested!"

 

That could be your trump card - with your fence building neighbour in particular. It wouldn't exactly help him if he tried to sell to have an ongoing dispute over his property.

 

It would be interesting to see some more deeds. As Dead Square says, they were likely all written together, but it would be interesting to see how the bit between  the 2 houses that leads to the road is divvied up. If it's split down the middle there's no questioning he personally owes you right of access. 

 

It does look like the main dispute ought to be between him and your immediate neighbour who has lost access to his garage.

 

There are specifications for access by fire engines etc. They may well not apply directly if all the houses front on to a public road but they will give you some basis for defining the corner he's cut off. Also, car parks have similar specs. If it's specified as 8ft wide I don't think there's any argument it's vehicular access.

 

 

 

 

 

The snag with that idea, is that your immediate neighbour is the 'alien in the wood pile'.  If he conmplains, it is a case of the pot calling the kettle discoloured.

[humph]

It's not unusual for house deeds to show "ownership" of the land outside the property i.e. the pavements or alley ways. My parent's deeds show their property extending into the mddile of the highway outside, but when you read the words it's not quite the case, that will probably be the same here, there is a reason the house is shown pink and the alley green. The house owner may have rights and duties regarding the plots shown in green on these deeds but it doesn't mean they have the rights to claim it as their own or build on it. Could my parents extent their house out over the pavement and out to the centre line of the road outside? Doubt it.  In the case of both these neighbours this looks like a clear case of land grab i.e. move your garden fence, hope nobody complains for long enough that enough time elapses that the land become yours under old fashioned ownership laws.  Key here is to nip it in the bud before too much time passes as has been said.

 

Take some advice from Citizens advice, don't go heavy handed with solicitors letters, but get the facts then ask around the neighbours about anyone else with an issue. As a group you could then approach the neighbours involved about the fence issue, and if you get knowhere the council should be your next call, I'm guessing planning department or maybe the rights of way officer (possibly highways?). If you get nowhere speak to a solicitor if you have one, perhaps your company has a free legal advice line as part of their benefits package.

Edited by humph, 24 August 2019 - 09:06 AM.

[Ethel]

It's not unusual for houe deeds to show "ownership" of the land outside the property i.e. the pavements or alley ways. My parent's deeds show their property extending into the mddile of the hoghway outside, but when you read the words it's not quite the case, that will probably be the same here, there is a reason the house is shown pink and the alley green. The house owner may have rights and duties regarding the plots shown in green on these deeds but it doesn't mean they have the rights to claim it as their own or build on it. Could my parents extent their house out over the pavement and out to the centre line of the road outside? Doubt it.  In the case of both these neighbours this looks like a lcear case of land grab i.e. move you garden fence, hope nobody complains for long enough that enough time elapses that the land become yours under old fashioned ownership laws.  Key here is to nip it in the bud so to speak before too much time passes as has been said.

 

Take some advice from Citizens advice, or a solicitor if you have one, perhaps your company has a free legal advice line as part of their benefits package. Don't go heavy handed with solicitors letters, but get the facts then ask around the neighbours about anyone else with an issue. As a group you could then approach the neighbours involved about the fence issue, and if you get knowhere the council should be your next call, I'm guessing planning department or maybe the rights of way officer (possibly highways?).

Deeds usually aren't that clear, but every square inch of permanent land belongs to someone. The Queen gets the bits that aren't claimed. In your parents case they will own the land the road's on but it'll be subject to the Highways Act as it will have been "adopted".

 

Keep the deeds safe in case gold is discovered under the tarmac - it's yours!

[Richie83]

I have a friend who’s builder replaced a bottom fence with a quality brick wall. Cost him thousands. Sadly it was one brick widths closer into the lane running behind the wall; a lane that gave access to a garage. He received a letter explaining he had to remove that wall as he’d encroached on the lane. Bad news for him; this doesn’t sound too far off that situation. I’d say both your neighbour and the house the other side should not have squared off their fencing as they’ve done.

As others have said take a look at the land registery/deeds and take it from there.

[Ethel]

 

"mention of loss of house value should get most neighbours interested!"

 

That could be your trump card - with your fence building neighbour in particular. It wouldn't exactly help him if he tried to sell to have an ongoing dispute over his property.

 

It would be interesting to see some more deeds. As Dead Square says, they were likely all written together, but it would be interesting to see how the bit between  the 2 houses that leads to the road is divvied up. If it's split down the middle there's no questioning he personally owes you right of access. 

 

It does look like the main dispute ought to be between him and your immediate neighbour who has lost access to his garage.

 

There are specifications for access by fire engines etc. They may well not apply directly if all the houses front on to a public road but they will give you some basis for defining the corner he's cut off. Also, car parks have similar specs. If it's specified as 8ft wide I don't think there's any argument it's vehicular access.

 

 

 

 

 

The snag with that idea, is that your immediate neighbour is the 'alien in the wood pile'.  If he conmplains, it is a case of the pot calling the kettle discoloured.

 

Takes us back to the prescriptive easement thing. If nobody's complained about his garage in 15 years it's hard to say it'd be the obstruction, but the fence builder has allowed, or inherited, allowance of access to that garage across his plot. If that falls down it'll be because the garage hasn't been used as such and the right has lapsed.

 

I don't think there's any disputing the fence builder is being a bit of a twunt, more for so those further down his side of the lane, owing to the sharper angle on his corner.

[DeadSquare]

 

It's not unusual for houe deeds to show "ownership" of the land outside the property i.e. the pavements or alley ways. My parent's deeds show their property extending into the mddile of the hoghway outside, but when you read the words it's not quite the case, that will probably be the same here, there is a reason the house is shown pink and the alley green. The house owner may have rights and duties regarding the plots shown in green on these deeds but it doesn't mean they have the rights to claim it as their own or build on it. Could my parents extent their house out over the pavement and out to the centre line of the road outside? Doubt it.  In the case of both these neighbours this looks like a lcear case of land grab i.e. move you garden fence, hope nobody complains for long enough that enough time elapses that the land become yours under old fashioned ownership laws.  Key here is to nip it in the bud so to speak before too much time passes as has been said.

 

Take some advice from Citizens advice, or a solicitor if you have one, perhaps your company has a free legal advice line as part of their benefits package. Don't go heavy handed with solicitors letters, but get the facts then ask around the neighbours about anyone else with an issue. As a group you could then approach the neighbours involved about the fence issue, and if you get knowhere the council should be your next call, I'm guessing planning department or maybe the rights of way officer (possibly highways?).

Deeds usually aren't that clear, but every square inch of permanent land belongs to someone. The Queen gets the bits that aren't claimed. In your parents case they will own the land the road's on but it'll be subject to the Highways Act as it will have been "adopted".

 

Keep the deeds safe in case gold is discovered under the tarmac - it's yours!

 

 

Farmers who own their farm, own the land 1/2 way under the road;  if they own both sides, they own all the land under the road, but they have to let the Queen's subjects "pass and re pass without let or hindrance",  so ownership of land does not give a right to obstruct it.

 

Apropos.  Land on either of a water course, like a road, is deemed to be divided down the center, so that if "by act of God" one bank gets washed away, the dividing line moves  As land on the outside of a bend gets washed away, land on the inside often gets built up.  Lucky for some.

Edited by DeadSquare, 24 August 2019 - 10:04 AM.

[DeadSquare]

There is no doubt, from the evidence presented to us, that from 1936, any owner of Pusb's property, past present or future, has the right to pass unhindered, over the brown area marked on his plan that has had a building placed on it by his immediate neighbour.

 

If a house owner on the other side of the side passage "has a similar plan and deeds with the same wording", then the blue fenced area is a present and future hindrance to that house owner, regardless of whether that house owner has ever wished to pass over the triangular area that is marked in blue.

 

 It might well be argued that Pusb may not have the right to pass unhindered over the triangular area marked in blue, because it is not shown in brown on his plan.

Edited by DeadSquare, 24 August 2019 - 11:37 AM.