Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post Reply
Morgan Sweet
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 7:47 pm

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by Morgan Sweet » Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:32 pm

arborlad wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:16 pm
arborlad wrote:
Thu Dec 20, 2018 6:06 pm

Unless you know something about title plans the rest of us don't, in which case you should share with the forum, the role of the title plan will be limited to how one property relates to another - nothing else!
You appear to justify your position regarding the importance of the LR Title Plan based on the writings on this forum and have unfortunately reached an inaccurate understanding.

MacadamB53
Posts: 6626
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 100
Number of topics per page: 50

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by MacadamB53 » Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:48 pm

Hi Morgan Sweet,

The LR Title Plan is an important part of the evidence of where the legal boundary exists.

how? please elaborate.

kind regards, Mac

arborlad
Posts: 8349
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by arborlad » Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:20 pm

Morgan Sweet wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:32 pm
arborlad wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:16 pm
arborlad wrote:
Thu Dec 20, 2018 6:06 pm

Unless you know something about title plans the rest of us don't, in which case you should share with the forum, the role of the title plan will be limited to how one property relates to another - nothing else!
You appear to justify your position regarding the importance of the LR Title Plan based on the writings on this forum and have unfortunately reached an inaccurate understanding.


You are again bringing the forum into disrepute with your misinformation.

You should go back to your experts and get them to read this thread..............
arborlad

smile...it confuses people

Morgan Sweet
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 7:47 pm

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by Morgan Sweet » Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:23 pm

MacadamB53 wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:48 pm
Hi Morgan Sweet,

The LR Title Plan is an important part of the evidence of where the legal boundary exists.

how? please elaborate.

kind regards, Mac
Go to court without a copy of the Title Plan and see how you get on.

Morgan Sweet
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 7:47 pm

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by Morgan Sweet » Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:26 pm

arborlad wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:20 pm
Morgan Sweet wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:32 pm
arborlad wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:16 pm
You appear to justify your position regarding the importance of the LR Title Plan based on the writings on this forum and have unfortunately reached an inaccurate understanding.


You are again bringing the forum into disrepute with your misinformation.

You should go back to your experts and get them to read this thread..............
Are you officially appointed to Police this forum or just self appointed?

MacadamB53
Posts: 6626
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 100
Number of topics per page: 50

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by MacadamB53 » Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:27 pm

Morgan Sweet wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:23 pm
MacadamB53 wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:48 pm
Hi Morgan Sweet,

The LR Title Plan is an important part of the evidence of where the legal boundary exists.

how? please elaborate.

kind regards, Mac
Go to court without a copy of the Title Plan and see how you get on.
thanks for that - I was hoping you might be more helpful?

arborlad
Posts: 8349
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by arborlad » Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:42 pm

Morgan Sweet wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:26 pm
arborlad wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:20 pm
Morgan Sweet wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:32 pm


You appear to justify your position regarding the importance of the LR Title Plan based on the writings on this forum and have unfortunately reached an inaccurate understanding.


You are again bringing the forum into disrepute with your misinformation.

You should go back to your experts and get them to read this thread..............
Are you officially appointed to Police this forum or just self appointed?


The suggestion was made so that those experts you know and trust can correct you.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people

Morgan Sweet
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 7:47 pm

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by Morgan Sweet » Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:51 pm

MacadamB53 wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:27 pm
Morgan Sweet wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:23 pm
MacadamB53 wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:48 pm
Hi Morgan Sweet,

The LR Title Plan is an important part of the evidence of where the legal boundary exists.

how? please elaborate.

kind regards, Mac
Go to court without a copy of the Title Plan and see how you get on.
thanks for that - I was hoping you might be more helpful?
Perhaps I should have been more helpful, however I believe that you know that the Title Plan is a legal document that clearly shows the general boundary of a parcel of land. It is, as I suspect that you well know, based on OS maps that are also not exactly accurate but shows the general boundary and is the starting point in most boundary disputes. It is usually the first item of evidence that a Solicitor will refer to in a dispute. It has not the weight of a boundary agreement or a determined boundary position but is still an important legal document that will be referred to in most disputes; as I think that you well know.

MacadamB53
Posts: 6626
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 100
Number of topics per page: 50

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by MacadamB53 » Tue Jan 08, 2019 12:35 am

Hi Morgan Sweet,

thanks for clarifying.

in summary: 1. the title plan only shows the general whereabouts of the land referred to in the title because 2. it’s drafted using an OS map that is unacceptably inaccurate.

as you say, we already know this.

so why are you suggesting there’s more to a title plan?

kind regards, Mac

arborlad
Posts: 8349
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by arborlad » Tue Jan 08, 2019 10:01 am

Morgan Sweet wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:23 pm
MacadamB53 wrote:
Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:48 pm
Hi Morgan Sweet,

The LR Title Plan is an important part of the evidence of where the legal boundary exists.

how? please elaborate.

kind regards, Mac
Go to court without a copy of the Title Plan and see how you get on.



Go to court with just a copy of the Title Plan and see how you get on.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people

Morgan Sweet
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 7:47 pm

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by Morgan Sweet » Tue Jan 08, 2019 11:13 am

Hello mac and aborlad

I found the Title Plan to be a most important part referred to by both Legal Professionals and Chartered Surveyors, in fact it was the first piece of evidence asked for and considered by both before my case could progress. If you, however believe that the Land Registry Title Plan is not an important part of the evidence in a boundary dispute so be it; I know differently.

arborlad
Posts: 8349
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by arborlad » Tue Jan 08, 2019 11:35 am

Morgan Sweet wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 11:13 am
Hello mac and aborlad

I found the Title Plan to be a most important part referred to by both Legal Professionals and Chartered Surveyors, in fact it was the first piece of evidence asked for and considered by both before my case could progress. If you, however believe that the Land Registry Title Plan is not an important part of the evidence in a boundary dispute so be it; I know differently.


Ask those professionals to read this thread - please!

You are deluding yourself into believing something that simply isn't true.

You have a totally unrealistic expectation of what information can be obtained from a document that is inherently inaccurate to start with, add on the number of times it may have been copied................
Last edited by arborlad on Tue Jan 08, 2019 11:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
arborlad

smile...it confuses people

Collaborate
Posts: 1795
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 9:17 am
Number of Posts per Page: 20
Number of topics per page: 20

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by Collaborate » Tue Jan 08, 2019 11:45 am

Hopefully this article from the New Law Journal (2008 - the law hasn't changed to a material degree since then) will shed some light.
Plans

Land Registry's requirements In the case of registered land, the first point of reference when trying to establish the extent of a property will be the Land Registry's official copy of the registered title plan.

The Land Registry's Practice Guide 40 provides comprehensive guidance on their requirements for plans at first registration. The following is a brief summary:


● Plans must be drawn to and show an appropriate metric scale and show orientation.

● Dimensions must be in metric units, to two decimal places.

● The plan must show sufficient detail to enable the land to be identified on the Ordnance Survey map and, where appropriate, the landlord's title plan.

● The property must be clearly identified by suitable colouring, edging or hatching.

● Edgings should not be so wide as to obscure any other detail on the plan.

● Different floor levels must be identified both on the plan as well as in the verbal description in the lease.

● Colour references on the plan must match the text of the deed.

● The plan must be signed by the landlord.
Annexed plan
Conveyances, transfers and leases often describe the relevant property by reference to an annexed plan, using phrases such as “for the purposes of identification only” or “as more particularly described”. The meaning of these phrases is quite different and will determine the extent to which a court relies on the annexed plan to identify the property. Where the first phrase is used, the verbal description of the property will be relied on to determine the property. However, in the case of the second phrase, it is the plan that will be relied on above the description.

It is worth noting that the Land Registry Practice Guide 40 states at para 7.4 that “plans described as 'for identification purposes only' are not satisfactory for land registration purposes”. However, the Land Registry has given informal guidance that the use of the phrase may be appropriate when the written definition of the property is very detailed, as is often the case in the lease of a floor in an office block. In such situations the Land Registry has said that they would be unlikely to reject such a lease, providing that the plan attached to the document can be accurately related to the Ordnance Survey map and the verbal description of the property in the deed is consistent with the Ordnance Survey map and the plan attached to the lease.

Determining boundaries

The general boundaries rule
Whilst the Land Registry's Register of Title is definite as to legal ownership of property, in the majority of cases the registered plan accompanying such title is not definitive as to the extent of the property but merely shows “general boundaries”. Indeed, most Land Registry plans come with the health warning: “This title plan shows the general position of the boundaries: it does not show the exact line of the boundaries.”

This point was clearly illustrated in the recent case of Derbyshire County Council v Fallon [2007] EWHC 1326. The case concerned the ownership of a strip of land that formed the boundary between the Fallons' registered land and the council's unregistered land, and was shown on the registered plan to the Fallons' title as being included in part of the Fallons' property. In 2002, following a dispute, the Fallons informed the council that unless the council applied to the Land Registry to rectify the Fallons' title, the Fallons would build on the disputed strip. Following such building, in the summer of 2003, the council applied to the Land Registry's adjudicator to alter the Fallons' title. The adjudicator concluded that the council's paper title did include the disputed strip and that, following the Court of Appeal in Lee v Barrey [1957] Ch 251 the general boundaries rule meant that the Fallons could not rely on the registered plan of their property to conclusively establish the extent of their property. However, the adjudicator refused the council's application to rectify the register and the council appealed.

On appeal the court held that the adjudicator had correctly decided that the council had paper title to the disputed strip. However, he had also been correct in finding that there were exceptional circumstance as there was a real question as to whether the council could actually recover the disputed land (and this was an issue for the court to decide). Therefore the adjudicator was within his powers to refuse to amend the boundaries on the registered plan as in the circumstances substituting one general boundary for another would not affect ownership or possession of the disputed property and would simply confuse the issue.

Land Registry's determination process
The Land Registry does have a procedure for determining the exact line of a boundary and recording it on the registered title as a “determined boundary”. The Land Registry Practice Guide 40 contains full guidance on the procedure for boundary determination and on the accuracy and detail required of the plans to be submitted. The process will generally involve a chartered surveyor and the adjoining land owner and as such can be protracted and expensive.

In the absence of a registered title plan with determined boundaries, in order to determine the boundaries of a property, a court will have to review background evidence such as title documentation and physical attributes of the property.

Construing the document as a whole
Sometimes neither the description nor the plan in or annexed to a document contains sufficient detail to enable the boundary in question to be determined. In such cases, as in Strachey v Ramage [2008] EWCA Civ 384 the court will construe the documents concerned. Strachey v Ramage concerned two adjacent properties that had initially been in common ownership. In 1988 the former owner of both parcels sold one parcel of land including the farmhouse called Trenawin to Ramage's predecessor in title and later another parcel comprising fields and a couple of barns to Strachey's predecessor in title. Prior to the disposals a fence had been erected with the intention of marking the boundary of the parcels. The main concern when the fence was erected was to allow access to Strachey's predecessor in title access to the two barns.

Strachey applied to the court for a declaration that the fence marked the boundary of her property. However, Ramage sought to rely on the initial 1988 conveyance of the buildings, which included a plan that appeared to show that the boundary did not follow the fence line and that Strachey's land included the fence. On appeal the court considered the 1988 conveyance and concluded that the written description of the property was too vague to identify the boundary and in addition the plan could not be relied on as it was referred to for “the purpose of identification only”. In order to determine the boundaries of the property it was necessary to consider the conveyance as a whole.

In the 1988 conveyance the initial vendor (Strachey's predecessor in title) had covenanted to maintain the fence that had been erected. The court concluded that this provision made no sense if the fence was wholly on the land he was selling. Furthermore the fence was referred to as the “boundary fence”.

On this basis the court concluded that the fence did mark the boundary of the property, and whilst amending the registered plan would do nothing more than produce “another general boundary in a more accurate position than the current general boundary” (as per the Deputy Adjudicator in Derbyshire County Council v Fallon), the absence of any exceptional circumstances meant that the Land Registry title plans should be altered accordingly.

The hedge and ditch rule
The court may also examine the physical attributes of the property itself. The hedge and ditch rule is a method derived from case law for determining the location of a boundary. It is based on the presumption that a land owner digging a ditch on the perimeter of his property would dig the ditch just in from the boundary of the property and deposit the excavated soil right at the boundary, upon which a hedge would be planted.

Should a dispute occur as to the location of the boundary between two properties, the hedge and ditch rule means that the boundary will be presumed to be on the side of the hedge furthest from the ditch.

There are of course situations where the presumption cannot be applied, for instance where there are two hedges on either side of a ditch, and case law dictates that the rule does not apply if the ditch is natural (Marshall v Taylor [1985] 1 Ch 641) or if the land is conveyed by express reference to the Ordnance Survey plan (Rouse v Gravel Works Limited [1940] 1 KB 489). The presumption can be rebutted in a number of circumstances including where the boundary was created after the earthworks (Falkingham v Howard, Times, 11 March 1991).

Many unfortunate boundary disputes would be avoided if the Land Registry's title plan was definitive as to the legal extent of property ownership. However, the scale of the exercise required to survey all property boundaries to establish their true position is so enormous that it is inconceivable that, in general, the Land Registry's plans will be definitive as to the extent of legal title. Until such a time, practitioners should continue to bear in mind the importance of surveys, inspections and investigations of title and the need for precise drafting.

Morgan Sweet
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 7:47 pm

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by Morgan Sweet » Tue Jan 08, 2019 12:24 pm

Thank you for that information, it confirms my understanding that the Land Registry Title Plan is an important piece of evidence and indeed the first point of reference when trying to establish the extent of a property. I do question how some people on this forum think that boundary disputes are resolved if they disregard the importance of the Title Plan. I have never said that it is equivalent to a determined boundary or a boundary agreement; if you have either it is most unlikely that there would be any dispute. I stand by my understanding that The Title Plan is an important piece of evidence in a boundary dispute.

MacadamB53
Posts: 6626
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 100
Number of topics per page: 50

Re: Neighbour appropriated some of my garden

Post by MacadamB53 » Tue Jan 08, 2019 1:17 pm

MacadamB53 wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 12:35 am
Hi Morgan Sweet,

thanks for clarifying.

in summary: 1. the title plan only shows the general whereabouts of the land referred to in the title because 2. it’s drafted using an OS map that is unacceptably inaccurate.

as you say, we already know this.

so why are you suggesting there’s more to a title plan?

kind regards, Mac
where have I suggested that a title plan is less important than you described?

Post Reply