Criminal damage

Re: Criminal damage

Postby mr sheen » Mon Sep 26, 2016 10:46 pm

Is this the same neighbour that you are keeping in the dark about his ownership of land (or is that a different neighbour?) and against whom you are putting up trellis of a questionable legal height or to avoid legal limits?
Probably best to keep these 2 threads together so that the whole picture becomes clearer to contributors since there is obviously a boundary dispute involved since you have disputed the irregular boundaries and there are odd bits of land/ownership issues that are relevant to the full picture as to why mediation has been refused at this stage. One quick look at the other thread and a completely different view of this dispute is evident and it involves much more than a few red robin bushes and there are grievances on both sides.
Also since the boundaries are disputed and fences/trellis has been erected on front gardens which changes the open plan access to odd pieces of land...things are being pushed on both sides and the picture then looks quite different.

If you want to rally support and get others to call your neighbours bullies, then giving just a few snippets of minor issues, as seen here, will get you that.

If, on the other hand, you want an objective view of your position and the issues/arguments that the other side may raise, then you need to give full info. Having read the more detailed previous thread, this is a complex dispute involving complex boundaries and until the issues in dispute are clearly identified mediation is premature and will be pointless. Then add in complaints about wheelie bins, calling the police on the neighbours soon after they moved in, taking the approach that they had to carry out work at times that suit the neighbours etc etc this is an involved neighbour dispute mainly about petty issues.
I note that I commented on the previous thread and am of the same opinion.....mountain out of molehill....sadly this got off to a bad start with these neighbours. You can either keep annoying each other or be more tolerant and get on with your own lives.
mr sheen
 
Posts: 2093
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:33 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: Criminal damage

Postby SarahSue » Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:04 am

Oh wow at that!

I won't even dignify most of that rant with an answer. But I am not keeping anyone in the dark about their boundary. There has been no boundary dispute. I originally posted because I was concerned there *might* be but no one has ever challenged the boundary. We all have exactly the same amount of land at the front of our properties. Neither he or any other neighbours or previous owners of that house have ever disputed boundaries. I repeat THERE IS NO BOUNDARY DISPUTE. I have never stated there is. I just wanted clarification because I was worried there might be. Please read my post properly before passing judgement so harshly.
I have put in place a trellis planter which does not contravene any planning laws. It isn't fixed. It is merely to screen an eyesore and let's not forget an eyesore that was put there to harass.
I do not wish to rally support. I don't need that. I have more than enough support thankfully from others.
As for calling the police, I wonder what your reaction would be to verbal abuse and threatening behaviour. How dare you pass judgement when you were not a witness to any of this.
SarahSue
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:44 am

Re: Criminal damage

Postby SarahSue » Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:09 am

mr sheen wrote:Criminal damage is a determination that the police and CPS make.
If you are involved in an on- going boundary dispute the police may not want to get involved and actually have important things to do. Community support officers may have achat with both parties to try to keep the peace.
The problem you have...you claim they are clearly in your boundary .....does he agree? Or does he dispute where the boundary is, or does he believe the plants have encroached into his land and hence he has a right to remove them from his property...this is also the problem the police will have since determination of the position of a boundary is a complex matter.


We are not involved in an ongoing boundary dispute and it has never been brought to our attention that the boundary is disputed. There is a garden at the front of our property which no one has disputed is ours.
SarahSue
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:44 am

Re: Criminal damage

Postby SarahSue » Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:16 am

Mr Sheen, please do me the courtesy of reading the thread properly before commenting. Said neighbour has never disputed the boundary lines. All the neighbours have the exact same amount of land at the front of their properties. My worries were merely that potentially there could be an issue. THERE IS NO BOUNDARY ISSUE. And since we contacted the police, said neighbour has stopped swearing at us and being abusive. A result there, I think. And if said neighbour were to dispute boundary lines, it would be to give himself more land than all the other houses in the street. I am not keeping anyone in the dark about anything. He bought the property accepting the boundary lines as set out when he bought the property i.e. that my garden belonged to me and the land in front of his house belonged to him.
SarahSue
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:44 am

Re: Criminal damage

Postby mr sheen » Tue Sep 27, 2016 9:51 am

Read the other thread fully and I see......someone who is renovating a property they own as they wish when they wish, someone placing their wheelie bins on their own land where they like on their own land and getting annoyed with the neighbour who thinks they should be able to dictate the times the renovations are carried out, wants to dictate the position of bins on land they do not own and gets the police involved in neighbour disputes. A typical neighbour dispute where both sides are behaving in a manner that is not very neighbourly.

Was trying to couch this nicely but after the rants above may as well spell out as I see it! No doubt you can't see it from both sides since you are entrenched in the idea that the neighbour is putting his wheelie bins on his own land in order to harass you....to onlookers like me looks like both are seeking to harass the other over trivia. This isn't a legal dispute that requires mediation but a case of putting a stop to the nonsense and getting on with their own lives....and peace may then follow.
mr sheen
 
Posts: 2093
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Criminal damage

Postby SarahSue » Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:38 am

No Mr Sheen, your summation is totally inaccurate.

The dispute began when said neighbour began pushing his bins in front of our house. Would you find that acceptable? Would anyone? Said neighbours were renovating and hadn't yet moved in so hard to talk to them and each time we knocked no one answered. He saw me pushing them back off our property and came out ranting and raving and being abusive. Of course you only have my word for that. Choose to believe it or not. Then once they moved in, he said to me we would see his smelly bins each time we left the house. Those words. Pretty clear don't you think that he intended to harass? Again, choose to believe my words or not.
We had the option to screen the bins or ignore the eyesore. Perfectly reasonable to choose the screening option which I sought to do in a legal way. Screen fencing is mentioned in the deeds as allowable.
I am not sure where you get the idea there is an ongoing boundary dispute. I have never mentioned an ongoing boundary dispute and merely question the *potential* of there being one and wanting clarification that it wouldn't be likely. As said, I have lived in this property for 24 years and several people have moved in and out and the existing boundary which I believe is now the legal boundary has never been questioned. If said neighbour believes our garden is his, he has never mentioned it or sought to challenge it.
Everyone in the set of four attached townhouses has the same amount of land in front of their houses. For him to claim some of mine, it would be seen as land grabbing and give him a bigger portion than everyone else.

Of course, on reflection, the only way to avoid all this bad feeling and conflict would be to have just allowed his bins to remain in front of my house. Honestly, would anyone find that acceptable? Would anyone find it acceptable to have their bushes damaged in the way he attempted to damage mine? Is it not just possible that someone is acting badly, seeking to harass and is dead set on ruining the front of a neighbour's property? Where is your empathy Mr Sheen? This whole year has been horrendous for us, really stressful. I agree it is petty but we did not start the pettiness. We merely sought to screen an eyesore.

His attempts to damage the bushes was because he knows full well we will at some point have a decent screening all the way along our garden. When someone says the words to you 'You will see our smelly bins whenever you leave your house', their intentions are pretty clear don't you think?
SarahSue
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:44 am

Re: Criminal damage

Postby SarahSue » Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:46 am

And I am not acting in a neighbourly fashion by attempting to screen an eyesore? Really?

As for renovations, they carried on for months and were mainly in the evenings and at weekends. We complained ONCE on a Saturday night at 11pm, having been woken up that day at 7am by drilling. Yes, very neighbourly and who wouldn't be annoyed at that? That hardly counts as dictating does it? Or maybe it does in your view, Mr Sheen. And how neighbourly to make a false statement to Environmental Health claiming our sprinkler had been on for five hours? Is the penny dropping now that we are being harassed by this neighbour?
:roll:
SarahSue
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:44 am

Re: Criminal damage

Postby MacadamB53 » Tue Sep 27, 2016 8:35 pm

Hi SarahSue,

I don't doubt anything you've shared - no point.

so, the neighbour made it pretty clear from the get go that he's a bit of a d|ck so...

We had the option to screen the bins or ignore the eyesore.

choose option 2, choose option 2, choose option 2!

by choosing option 1 you've given him something to respond to...

...the good news is - option 2 is still available and will work.

Kind regards, Mac
MacadamB53
 
Posts: 6062
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:13 am

Re: Criminal damage

Postby COGGY » Tue Sep 27, 2016 8:44 pm

Mac said

choose option 2, choose option 2, choose option 2!

by choosing option 1 you've given him something to respond to...

...the good news is - option 2 is still available and will work.


I agree with this. As long as you respond he will continue to annoy. When he gets no response he will tire of the saga. Regards Coggy
COGGY
 
Posts: 1355
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:58 pm

Re: Criminal damage

Postby arborlad » Fri Dec 09, 2016 4:16 pm

arborlad wrote:http://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=20281&start=45



Can these threads be merged please:
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7407
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Criminal damage

Postby arborlad » Fri Dec 09, 2016 6:33 pm

nothingtodowithme wrote:Gardenlaw it might cause confusion to merge these threads as they contain different issues which do not relate to this particular thread.
In addition the op was formerly using the username sorra and has changed to the username SarahSue

Regards Terri.




You are mistaken - there is nothing being discussed in this thread that hasn't been covered in whole or in part in the thread linked to - merging the two threads makes sense.

There is no significance to the name change - this thread was started with the original.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7407
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Criminal damage

Postby arborlad » Mon Dec 12, 2016 11:55 am

arborlad wrote:
arborlad wrote:viewtopic.php?f=4&t=20281&start=45



Can these threads be merged please:




Link to other thread seems broken :?
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7407
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Criminal damage

Postby arborlad » Tue Dec 13, 2016 7:11 pm

nothingtodowithme wrote:
arborlad wrote:
nothingtodowithme wrote:Gardenlaw it might cause confusion to merge these threads as they contain different issues which do not relate to this particular thread.
In addition the op was formerly using the username sorra and has changed to the username SarahSue

Regards Terri.




You are mistaken - there is nothing being discussed in this thread that hasn't been covered in whole or in part in the thread linked to - merging the two threads makes sense.

There is no significance to the name change - this thread was started with the original.



No I am not mistaken you are Sorra and SarahSue.
Shame on you.




:lol: you forgot Pilman :lol:
arborlad

smile...it confuses people
arborlad
 
Posts: 7407
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Criminal damage

Postby SarahSue » Mon Dec 19, 2016 1:55 am

No idea what is going on here but appears to be a squabble between members???

Is this site not moderated?

If anyone wants to fight, can you do it on someone else's thread please. Ta!
SarahSue
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:44 am

Re: Criminal damage

Postby despair » Mon Dec 19, 2016 6:05 pm

Sarahsue

Nothingtodowithme has been an utter pain recently but sadly Garden LAw admin has not dealt with the issue even though they have been asked

they had no business butting in on your thread
despair
 
Posts: 16056
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 8:07 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 Hedges

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests