Garden Law Discussion

In most cases, It is the neighbouring property that has the rights across your land, not the neighbours themselves. Therefore anyone legitimately crossing your land to access the property which benefits from rights of access across your land has to be able to exercise these rights; not just the peop...

Collaborate.... Please point out where anyone has suggested a PROW has to be 'wheelchair friendly'!!!??
No-one has said that!!........are you equating 'disabled' with 'wheelchair-user'?
Only 5% of disabled people are wheelchair users......someone needs some diversity training methinks!

[quote="Clifford Pope" post_id=211921 time=<a href="tel:1556380361">1556380361</a> user_id=13280] Round us the local authority has been putting in a lot of new metal "kissing gates" - the kind that have an enclosed swinging gate so users have to pass through one at a time. They are certainly not us...

Thanks again both. So it seems that “no gates” is not reasonable and we need to find something that is as as easy to operate as possible for less able people. No problem and happy to explain that to a judge. no gates is the default unobstructed expectation, the introduction of gates has to be agree...

Answers to Qs 1 no set width. Some farm tracks are Public Footpaths and are 4m wide. There has to be enough width for people to pass and repass and due to LAs seeking to widen Disabled Access the historical width is sometimes enforced. 2 no recovery of costs for relocation since the position of the ...

You need to check what the right of way is defined as in the Definitive Map which the council have. You need to ensure that it is in fact a public footpath and nothing else. The right of way is historical and rights obtained historically are indeed relevant. You cannot get rid of the right to pass o...

The determination is whether the gate(s) forms a 'substantial interference' with the rights to pass and repass over the servient land. This determination is made by a Judge in court. In general an unlocked gate has not been deemed a substantial interference but of course every set of circumstances a...

Collaborate that brought a to my face....think I'll campaign for a 'like' button it was needed here

They could just remove it off the highway so don't be surprised if it just disappears.

They may, or may not, care. If someone complains the council may send you a letter. If the council choose to pursue the matter to prevent a precedent being set and everyone doing similar, then you may well be sent a bill for costs (labour to remove fence from highway which verge probably is legally)...

The owner of the lane may wish to discuss this matter with the neighbouring landowner but these are the only 2 people that are relevant in this matter. The chances are that the hedge historically marked the boundary between the lane and the neighbour's land and hence that the neighbour owns the hedg...

Arborlad says so doesn't cut it in court....no matter how impressive it is that you have seen literally hundreds of properties (and with your own eyes no doubt.) Properties incorporate land, rights and responsibilities and these cannot be assumed or inferred based on the baseless assumption that pro...

Although the easement element of the situation may not be relevant, the way the properties were laid out and used 'when first built', in all likelihood will be a mirror image of each other. What???! Properties mirror image each other? Says who? "In all likelihood" is that a legal concept that stand...

No right of way is recorded on the disclosed part of that particular document but that does not categorically rule it out, especially if they make a claim of such rights. Correct it isn't your business unless they substantially interfere with your right of way; only the owner of the land is likely t...

Why do you think this is relevant to your dispute?