At least they left the fence posts

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby arborlad » Tue May 17, 2016 10:39 am

takeafence wrote:We have some fantastic news though.
Out of the blue, after six months, we have received a full apology.
We also have an affirmation that the fence belongs to us.
Halleluiah!



Maybe they took independent advice or perhaps read this forum, in any event, this most basic tenet of land law acted as it should - Quicquid plantatur solo, solo cedit , "whatever is affixed to the soil belongs to the soil".....................your land - your fence.

There has been a failed and unsubstantiated attempt to confute or discredit the above.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7385
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

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: At least they left the fence posts

Postby Collaborate » Tue May 17, 2016 12:51 pm

arborlad wrote:There has been a failed and unsubstantiated attempt to confute or discredit the above.


Never one to miss a dig, eh?

For the avoidance of doubt, the caselaw in this area deals almost exclusively with situations where land has been sold and the question to be asked is whether a structure was a fixture, and so part of the sale, or a chattel, and so not part of the sale.

I would love to be as sure of my position in ignorance as you, arborlad. You have refused to acknowledge the existence of the authorities.

In the absence of a clear authority applying this maxim to boundary fences, and disputes between neighbours, it must be said that the law in this area is unclear. Clearly, if I own my boundary and sell my property, the boundary becomes the property of the buyer. If a builder builds on my land and I don't pay him, I still own the building (unless the builder has preserved a lien), but have a debt to the builder. However, where the deeds cannot determine to within an inch where the boundary lies, who is to say that this maxim applies to OP's situation?

Show me the case in which this was applied, and I shall stand down.
Collaborate
 
Posts: 1123
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:17 am

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby arborlad » Tue May 17, 2016 1:15 pm

Collaborate wrote:You have refused to acknowledge the existence of the authorities.



I've refused nothing, because nothing has been produced.

Ntdwm produced this: vast case summary.........and nothing else - despite a request to do so :roll:

You produced this: It does exist...........and nothing else!
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7385
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby Collaborate » Tue May 17, 2016 2:05 pm

OK - I shall rephrase that.

You refused to consider the case law.

If you'd prefer it that I spoon feed it to you, here you go.

http://e-lawresources.co.uk/Land/Fixtur ... attels.php
Collaborate
 
Posts: 1123
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:17 am

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby arborlad » Tue May 17, 2016 2:45 pm

Collaborate wrote:OK - I shall rephrase that.

You refused to consider the case law.

If you'd prefer it that I spoon feed it to you, here you go.

http://e-lawresources.co.uk/Land/Fixtur ... attels.php




I read the first six or so with no great expectations, I wasn't disappointed. Two or three were about houseboats, another was about tapestries :roll: If you or ntwdm wish to be taken seriously, then case law specific to ownership of land and fences needs to be produced. S62 Law of Property Act would seem to be required reading for both!
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7385
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby Collaborate » Tue May 17, 2016 5:02 pm

I wouldn't be so quick to be disparaging if I were you. s62 is all about conveyances of land. Pray tell how it can be applied to OP's situation?

And by the way, it was me asking you to demonstrate a case in which the maxim has been applied as you say it should.
Collaborate
 
Posts: 1123
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:17 am

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby arborlad » Tue May 17, 2016 5:41 pm

Conveyancer wrote:Whether you have permission to put the fence up or not, if the fence is erected on the neighbour's land it is the neighbour's fence. Even if the neighbour concedes you may remove the fence and do what you like with it, it is still part of his property until severed from the land. If the neighbour sells before the fence is removed, the licence to remove the fence lapses.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7385
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby arborlad » Tue May 17, 2016 7:27 pm

Collaborate wrote:And by the way, it was me asking you to demonstrate a case in which the maxim has been applied as you say it should.



There is an average of 3,500 (2014) residential property sales in the UK every day, so, that maxim has been applied as it should around 3,500 times today.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7385
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby Collaborate » Tue May 17, 2016 7:43 pm

The difference is too subtle for you to understand, clearly.

The rule says that if you sell a plot of land, you are selling any building upon it (subject to interpretation).

That rule does not necessarily apply to OP's situation.

In any event, removable panels in a fence may or may not be fixtures.
Collaborate
 
Posts: 1123
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:17 am

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby arborlad » Tue May 17, 2016 8:13 pm

Collaborate wrote:The difference is too subtle for you to understand, clearly.

The rule says that if you sell a plot of land, you are selling any building upon it (subject to interpretation).

That rule does not necessarily apply to OP's situation.

In any event, removable panels in a fence may or may not be fixtures.



I strongly recommend you read S 62 Law of Property Act........
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7385
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby Collaborate » Tue May 17, 2016 8:48 pm

arborlad wrote:
Collaborate wrote:The difference is too subtle for you to understand, clearly.

The rule says that if you sell a plot of land, you are selling any building upon it (subject to interpretation).

That rule does not necessarily apply to OP's situation.

In any event, removable panels in a fence may or may not be fixtures.



I strongly recommend you read S 62 Law of Property Act........


I have. It doesn't apply here. Tell me how on earth you think it does.
Collaborate
 
Posts: 1123
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:17 am

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby arborlad » Wed May 18, 2016 10:42 am

Collaborate wrote:The rule says that if you sell a plot of land, you are selling any building upon it (subject to interpretation).



A conveyance of land shall be deemed to include and shall by virtue of this Act operate to convey, with the land, all buildings, erections, fixtures, commons, hedges, ditches, fences, ways, waters, water-courses, liberties, privileges, easements, rights, and advantages whatsoever, appertaining or reputed to appertain to the land, or any part thereof, or, at the time of conveyance, demised, occupied, or enjoyed with, or reputed or known as part or parcel of or appurtenant to the land or any part thereof.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7385
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby Collaborate » Wed May 18, 2016 11:50 am

I must have missed the bit in the OP where OP said this issue arose as a dispute over a conveyancing transaction.

Oh wait.... it didn't.
Collaborate
 
Posts: 1123
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:17 am

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby arborlad » Wed May 18, 2016 1:16 pm

Collaborate wrote:I must have missed the bit in the OP where OP said this issue arose as a dispute over a conveyancing transaction.

Oh wait.... it didn't.



Oh dear.........nobody can say I didn't try :roll:

For the benefit of the OP or anyone seeking help, if you read anything on this forum from Conveyancer, you can take it as completely accurate and correct. If you read anything from me and it concurs with what Conveyancer has said, you can regard it in the same way. If you read something from ntdwm, you will have to make your own judgement on how reliable any particular post can be!
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7385
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: At least they left the fence posts

Postby Collaborate » Wed May 18, 2016 2:01 pm

OK - so your authority is Conveyancer. I acknowledge the undoubtedly helpful and expert opinion that he brings to this board. Being a lawyer as well, I presume that he may feel a little more able to understand the points I have made and deal with them.

nothingtodowithme posted
There is vast case summary relating to "what is attached to the soil belongs to the soil".
It is a complex area of land law regarding chattels fixtures and fittings;relating to the purchase and sale of commercial and residential land and property.
To apply the phrase to a fence or posts for that matter is too simplistic and incorrect.


A perfectly valid point to make.

Your response to her was personal, and uncalled for:
Who should I believe, you?...........who doesn't have a very good record on these matters, or Conveyancer - who has an exemplary one.


I asked you if you've seen the case law. You replied
Not sure who you're asking, not me I hope, I wont be wasting any time searching for something that doesn't exist.


A curious position to adopt if we are trying to move from a place of ignorance to one of enlightenment. Perhaps it is too much for me to expect rational and informed debate and discussion.
Collaborate
 
Posts: 1123
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:17 am

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 Fences

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests