Boundary dispute

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby cleo5 » Mon Jun 22, 2015 8:05 pm

arsie,
Correction. Have been in touch with electricity co today and they say according to their map there is no power line laid there and it may well be telephone cable that the monitor is picking up??
So that's a relief.

despair.
Do not know. How can I find out if J pays his water bills and when he started payng them?
We are not on a meter.

Still waiting for aerial photos.
Got surveyor coming tomorrow. Hopefully he may shed light on bundaries et etc.

Why was there no easement agreement written into our deeds about this pipe?

As we did not know about it when we bought to property it would see we need not allow an easement. Read this in a law book? True or not?
cleo5
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon May 18, 2015 12:33 pm

Ads are not endorsed by www.gardenlaw.co.uk or the staff thereof and visitors should perform their own due diligence on the product or service offered.
 

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby MacadamB53 » Mon Jun 22, 2015 8:15 pm

Hi cleo,

the reason the pipe isn't mentioned in your deeds is because either:

1. it was done without a deed being deemed necessary - ie. the owners didn't think it through that far.
2. it was done without the owners knowledge (not necessarily by deception)
3. the verge is owned by the owner of the pipe - ie you've got it wrong about it being yours

assuming you do own the verge then the owner of the pipe has acquired an easement for his property to have water supplied via a pipe running through your verge (which includes a right to maintain and repair said pipe) - this is fact whether you were there or not.

Kind regards, Mac
Last edited by MacadamB53 on Mon Jun 22, 2015 8:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MacadamB53
 
Posts: 6037
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:13 am

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby arsie » Mon Jun 22, 2015 8:57 pm

Does a water pipe automatically have easement or does one have to be 'earned' over time?

If it's not a live main wire I would just cut and uproot any cable. But get someone else to do it ;)
arsie
 
Posts: 1955
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:13 am
Location: Norfolk

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby cleo5 » Tue Jun 23, 2015 12:47 am

Right Mac,
My thoughts are similar but for the fact that they have"taken it by adverse possession" (so they think) and if they needed to do this then it wasn't on their deeds in the first place when B sold to N.
Otherwise why did N go to such lengths and over so many years trying to obtain it if they already owned it?

When J he put the pipe in, the land belonged to farmer B but in 1972 the land was sold and J never knew it was sold(why would he.... . so maybe has assumed all this time that because it belonged to B then N as B's purchaser became the rightful owner.
I said to him last week "why didn't you tell me all those years ago you thought it was N's and I'd have shown you my deeds".
His reply "why should I have told you."?

Farmer B said it was mine..... he should know as he sold it.

I just don't think farmer B gave much thought to the pipe when he sold the land.
Maybe it wasn't even mentioned.

Here is a quote from a book written by a barrister
". Easements can be either legal or equitable in nature.The main difference is that a legal easement is enforceable against anyone who buys the land subject to the easement but an equitable easement is enforceable against the person who buys the land ONLY if she knew about the easement at the tme of the sale"........
.. under s 1 of the Law of Property Act 1925 a deed is necessary to create the easement. etc



arsie,
There is no electricity cable apparently. It is a phone cable?
It is suggested I dig exploratory holes/trenches to find where the pipe and cable are.
cleo5
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon May 18, 2015 12:33 pm

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby MacadamB53 » Tue Jun 23, 2015 7:03 am

Hi cleo,

I understand what you mean about why would he think it was his and now claim AP (it is still possible - just remote).

regarding the two classes of easement - legal or equitable:

if he's acquired an easement by prescription then this would be deemed a legal easement.
to acquire an easement by prescription he must have used the pipe 'as of right' (without permission, without force and without secrecy) for +20 years.
it sounds to me like this is the case.
a deed is not required in order for an easement to be acquired by prescription.

equitable easements are a different kettle of fish - not relevant to your situation.

Kind regards, Mac
MacadamB53
 
Posts: 6037
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:13 am

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby cleo5 » Tue Jun 23, 2015 1:06 pm

Thanks Mac,
That makes sense. It must be by prescription then.
Surveyor came and says all is as it should be. No need to worry.
Just what you said... carry on, remove stone if you want. remove wire etc etc.
He knew all about this sort of stuff so we do feel reassured.Also he said our solicitor was uite correct in saying nothing needs to be unless they challenge it.
cleo5
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon May 18, 2015 12:33 pm

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby COGGY » Tue Jun 23, 2015 1:53 pm

Hi Cleo

Good news then. I hope that puts your mind at rest. Enjoy the sunshine.

Kind regards
Coggy
COGGY
 
Posts: 1355
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:58 pm

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby cleo5 » Tue Jun 23, 2015 3:44 pm

Thanks Coggy and Mac and arsie and rdfi and all who helped me get through this bad patch.
Your knowledge and opinions were appreciated.

Once more I urge anyone reading this to get your property registered whether you bought it 30/40 years ago or whenever. Make sure you take out legal fees insurance with your house insurance ,just in case.
get your boundaries checked and fence off your land.

Don.t permit anyone to mow your grass or move your fence without you being there and watching them and if neighbours do anything that bothers you tell them about it straight away and do not allow them to get away with it.

If you find you have really nasty neighbours then sell up and move if possible. Don't imagine matters might improve because they won't; Leopards don't change their spots.
Also get someone to watch your property whilst you are away .
Be aware that those so -called friends may take advantage of your good nature may be out to do you down.
cleo5
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon May 18, 2015 12:33 pm

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby arborlad » Sat Jun 27, 2015 6:02 pm

cleo5 wrote:" Plans say "new shrub hedge to be planted in place of the demolished Cornish hedge"



I think this should be given more significance, if you didn't own you shouldn't have demolished it and the correct owner should have prevented it.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7386
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby cleo5 » Sun Jun 28, 2015 9:33 am

Arborlad just seen your last post.

We didn't demolish anything. All was demolished before building commenced on these houses long before we came here.

We do own it. The developer who put in for pp did own it. Conveyances all show true owership back to March 1967 when it was sold by farmer B..... who inherited in the 1950's.

The owner before our developer put in pp for piggeries.

These piggery buildings set diagonally reached in part right to the road and in other part to the stone hedge bordering the road. There was a gate and gateposts and it joined up with the stone wall with high hedge on it to the Northern boundary. (the whole thing was therefore totally enclosed and comprised some 7 acres or so of steep grassy/scrubland.) To one side of this beyond the Northern boundary was a quarry. This has now been filled in and houses a mobile home and a bungalow.
The demolished stone wall to the front and the rubble from the piggeries was to be used as infill for the private drive serving these 5 houses.

My front garden has no depth of soil as it is also all piggery building remains and builders rubble.

Under the thin grass of the verge, there is both remains of piggeries concrete and old granite of original wall. They adjoined the edge of the lane/now concreted road. The only remaining piece of original wall is a lump then comes the gap for my drive and then comes the stone wall with trees on top still remaining in front of the other 4 houses

Directions by the planners re planting a new shrub hedge in place of the demolished stone wall could not be followed because the foundations of both wall and piggeries still remain. No way could holes be made for any shrubs.

Also developers in July1979 put in pp for another house below and to the right of mine using the verge as a roadway to this 6th house... but planning permission was refused. I have copy of this refusal.... and as we were then in process of negotiation to buy ours we were offered all the extra land which included the verge for an extra amount. This was all included in the conveyance which we signed in Oct 1979. And we haven't sold anything to anyone.

Not only is the verge extra parking for this house but it can also be vehicular access should my land ever be developed.

The attempt to take this bit by ad poss has been foiled for now but it seems to have been mentioned as being "taken" on smallholders deeds.....so they told us.
I am doing all I can to ensure that all is as it should be and the house sale will have no hitches when the time comes.
cleo5
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon May 18, 2015 12:33 pm

Frontagers.

Postby arborlad » Mon Jul 06, 2015 9:58 am

Postby cleo5 » Sun Jul 05, 2015 9:10 pm

I read somewhere that if one's house fronts a road and that even if access is not by/into the road one is still a frontager?
Can anyone confirm this?
I ask because I have just been informed that someone further along this road plans to take it by adverse possession.
As a frontager will I be informed by the LR when they make this application.
cleo5



Although this may seem to be an entirely separate issue, it is really only a facet of the whole, and I think, best kept within the same thread.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7386
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby cleo5 » Mon Jul 06, 2015 12:11 pm

Right.
yes it is all part of the same thing.

Mac yes anyone can use the road now but if it is taken then who knows?
cleo5
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon May 18, 2015 12:33 pm

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby cleo5 » Mon Jul 06, 2015 12:28 pm

The whole thing is escalating very nastily.

For various reasons, I don't want one person to gain control of the road and, though I don't use it I want it kept open for all who might want to. I just wondered if a, I was a frontager and b, whether as such the LR will inform me when the application goes in? That was all. having read all I can find Iam still unclear. Wait and see I suppose.
cleo5
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon May 18, 2015 12:33 pm

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby MacadamB53 » Mon Jul 06, 2015 12:30 pm

Hi cleo,

if everyone and anyone has used or has been able to use the road then they are going to find it extremely difficult to substantiate an AP claim - particularly if their own property comes with a right to use the road.

further, HMLR don't tend to give possessory title to a strip of land set out as a road.

if your property includes a ROW over the road then I would imagine HMLR might well notify you of the application.

Kind regards, Mac
MacadamB53
 
Posts: 6037
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:13 am

Re: Boundary dispute

Postby cleo5 » Mon Jul 06, 2015 1:28 pm

No . No mention of ROW over our property.
This all belonged to the farm. There was a farm gate along my front bit adjoining the road and Corish stone hedge either side of gate.
This was all removed when our houses were built. My exit in not to the road but via a drive that leads into the road where public bit adjoins unadopted bit. The field opposite was used for grazing so perhaps for safety sake the driveway was made.
(cars coming out into narrow road / loose cattle(they were sometimes loose) etc.
Farmer told me the road was not his hence it's title could not have been passed on...... but one owner assumed it was his and so thought he had fenced me in....
He too had no title so could not convey it on, only a use of it.
cleo5
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon May 18, 2015 12:33 pm

Ads are not endorsed by www.gardenlaw.co.uk or the staff thereof and visitors should perform their own due diligence on the product or service offered.
 
PreviousNext

Return to Boundaries

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 6 guests