Another boundary dispute
Discussion
PhilboSE said:
AyBee said:
Agree that the best way forward is probably to get the bloke to pay for the land unless your dad desperately wants it back. I suspect you'll need to go legal before he entertains paying anything though unfortunately.
Apparently when my dad first raised it with the neighbour, he fessed up and asked my dad what he wanted to "compensate". My dad said he'd have a think and get back to him - since then all attempts to communicate have been stonewalled. Unfortunately "going legal" does usually involve both sides incurring significant costs; there's some good advice on http://www.boundary-problems.co.uk/boundary-proble...:"In the stereotypical boundary dispute between residential properties both parties stand on their principles, engage solicitors, obtain surveyors' reports, instruct barristers and go to court. The process can take three of four agonising years in which the anxiety may well make at least one of the protagonists very ill. The whole process will cost as much as the protagonists feel compelled to spend, typically between £25,000 and £50,000 each side. At the end of the day, one of the parties is going to lose the case and is likely to be ordered to pay a substantial proportion of the other party's costs. And all for a narrow strip of land to which a chartered valuation surveyor would ascribe no marketable value."
Without just giving in and letting this chancer win the day, and conscious of not getting involved in a financially futile legal exercise, are there any alternatives?
spikeyhead said:
What would happen if your JCB accidentally bumped into their structure a few times?
WinstonWolf said:
Know anyone with an old car who could 'accidentally' knock it down?
I don't know, I'm interested in (qualified) opinions. But I'd suspect it would escalate things quite dramatically. It would obviously be highly counterproductive to induce the neighbour to start causing criminal damage to the tenant's property (e.g. vehicles) as a result.Reading up about such disputes, one of the main issues is that it's very hard to prove where the boundary is. The Land Registry documents are not accurate enough. My dad has already retained a boundary dispute surveyor who states that his assertion about where the boundary lies is highly evidenced, but these things are rarely absolute.
My 2p, shoot me down as you see fit.
The surveyor chap how clear cut is he makin this sound, in terms of is he sayin "that's yours" "not his" ?
And excuse my ignorance but does this or would this not come under his house insurance policy?
From the photos and description its looks like a very good case for "borrowing" an extra foot or two.
My final point is (again excuse my ignorance) but "if" you dragged it thru the courts, why wouldn't he (tha land thief) be made to pay all the fees??
The surveyor chap how clear cut is he makin this sound, in terms of is he sayin "that's yours" "not his" ?
And excuse my ignorance but does this or would this not come under his house insurance policy?
From the photos and description its looks like a very good case for "borrowing" an extra foot or two.
My final point is (again excuse my ignorance) but "if" you dragged it thru the courts, why wouldn't he (tha land thief) be made to pay all the fees??
blindswelledrat said:
The word is "through". Through.
Out of interest- what about this would come under a house-insurance policy? Do you mean that legal costs to fight him?
YAWN, Thru, Through, lets not derail his thread with pettiness shall we. Out of interest- what about this would come under a house-insurance policy? Do you mean that legal costs to fight him?
And yes I mean does his policy cover him for such things?
cossy400 said:
My 2p, shoot me down as you see fit.
The surveyor chap how clear cut is he makin this sound, in terms of is he sayin "that's yours" "not his" ?
And excuse my ignorance but does this or would this not come under his house insurance policy?
From the photos and description its looks like a very good case for "borrowing" an extra foot or two.
My final point is (again excuse my ignorance) but "if" you dragged it thru the courts, why wouldn't he (tha land thief) be made to pay all the fees??
In order:The surveyor chap how clear cut is he makin this sound, in terms of is he sayin "that's yours" "not his" ?
And excuse my ignorance but does this or would this not come under his house insurance policy?
From the photos and description its looks like a very good case for "borrowing" an extra foot or two.
My final point is (again excuse my ignorance) but "if" you dragged it thru the courts, why wouldn't he (tha land thief) be made to pay all the fees??
Boundary surveys aren't absolute because boundaries generally aren't defined in absolute terms, so there's always an element of interpretation. He says there's plenty of indications about where the boundary could be deemed to be, but they're usually very hard to prove. However, he says my dad's position is very well based and evidenced.
My dad's property is a commercial one not residential - though I'm not even sure a residential one would cover this kind of dispute.
At the front of the property he's actually encroached over 2 metres on my dad's land.
Being "awarded costs" does not actually mean the other party pays all the fees, for many reasons (especially if you have incurred unreasonable fees). The courts make a judgement on what constitutes a reasonable amount of your fees that the other party pays. Even if you get awarded costs, you may have a battle on your hands to extract them from the losing party. Your solicitors will want paying, so you have to pay them yourself and then try to get the money from the other party. If they choose not to pay, it's possible to have to clear more legal hurdles to get something out of them.
Edited by PhilboSE on Monday 23 November 17:49
Red Devil said:
Rude-boy said:
RE poles - very naughty but don't let others issues become yours. I would be holding fire on the call to BT until I had worked out where things stood on getting everything sorted. No point in coming to a reasonable agreement and then scuttling it by an early call to BT...
It's hard to be sure from the photo but that utility pole does not appear to be providing a service to the developed property. In which case a wayleave is required. That ramshackle lean-to is obstructing access for maintenance/repair and the utility company may have something to say about it. Whether they can force its removal I don't know.It would be a delicious irony if the encroached on parcel of land were to be sold at a negotiated price and the neighbour then finds that he still has to keep the access route clear by dismantling the shed.
Strategywise i would be keeping my powder dry there until things had resolved themselves one way or the other.
PhilboSE said:
cossy400 said:
My 2p, shoot me down as you see fit.
The surveyor chap how clear cut is he makin this sound, in terms of is he sayin "that's yours" "not his" ?
And excuse my ignorance but does this or would this not come under his house insurance policy?
From the photos and description its looks like a very good case for "borrowing" an extra foot or two.
My final point is (again excuse my ignorance) but "if" you dragged it thru the courts, why wouldn't he (tha land thief) be made to pay all the fees??
In order:The surveyor chap how clear cut is he makin this sound, in terms of is he sayin "that's yours" "not his" ?
And excuse my ignorance but does this or would this not come under his house insurance policy?
From the photos and description its looks like a very good case for "borrowing" an extra foot or two.
My final point is (again excuse my ignorance) but "if" you dragged it thru the courts, why wouldn't he (tha land thief) be made to pay all the fees??
Boundary surveys aren't absolute because boundaries generally aren't defined in absolute terms, so there's always an element of interpretation. He says there's plenty of indications about where the boundary could be deemed to be, but they're usually very hard to prove. However, he says my dad's position is very well based and evidenced.
My dad's property is a commercial one not residential - though I'm not even sure a residential one would cover this kind of dispute.
At the front of the property he's actually encroached over 2 metres on my dad's land.
Being "awarded costs" does not actually mean the other party pays all the fees, for many reasons (especially if you have incurred unreasonable fees). The courts make a judgement on what constitutes a reasonable amount of your fees that the other party pays. Even if you get awarded costs, you may have a battle on your hands to extract them from the losing party. Your solicitors will want paying, so you have to pay them yourself and then try to get the money from the other party. If they choose not to pay, it's possible to have to clear more legal hurdles to get something out of them.
Edited by PhilboSE on Monday 23 November 17:49
Would it not be beneficial to at least throw some money to a solicitor to maybe send a warning shot to the other party, to see what if any response he got?
Then buy a scrap car and drive thru it, if he didn't respond?
If he has ignored all attempts to contact him, then if you want the matter resolved then you are left with few choices. A stiffly worded letter from a solicitor along with your surveyors report, offering him a period of time to re-instate the boundary would be a good start. When I had a boundary dispute this is what I did (even though I was the supposed transgressor (even though I wasn't), I said unless I hear from the other party within so many days then I will continue my works - never heard from the other party. You've already had the survey done so the only costs you'll incur are a solicitors letter.
Alternatively you could apply for planning permission for something like an extra high fence between the properties (one that needs PP), that way you'll get the local planning dept involved, who will then involve a planning enforcement officer when they discover that he has encroached, by such a large amount. Alternatively you could just approach the planning office anyway.
Forcing a formal boundary dispute will effect the value of his property as well (unless resolved), again years ago I pulled out of a house purchase as the garage had been built 4 inches (yes one brick width) onto neighboring land, for which there was no permission and no chance of buying the land. The owner had made the house un-sellable.
I think that there are several things you can do without incurring large £££££, any one of which might have the desired effect. the most important thing here, is not to let it get personal and don't get stressed by it.
Alternatively you could apply for planning permission for something like an extra high fence between the properties (one that needs PP), that way you'll get the local planning dept involved, who will then involve a planning enforcement officer when they discover that he has encroached, by such a large amount. Alternatively you could just approach the planning office anyway.
Forcing a formal boundary dispute will effect the value of his property as well (unless resolved), again years ago I pulled out of a house purchase as the garage had been built 4 inches (yes one brick width) onto neighboring land, for which there was no permission and no chance of buying the land. The owner had made the house un-sellable.
I think that there are several things you can do without incurring large £££££, any one of which might have the desired effect. the most important thing here, is not to let it get personal and don't get stressed by it.
AyBee said:
Rude-boy said:
5 years, no complaints from dad's Tenants, I am thinking (on the basis of the very scant information here) that the best way forward is come to an agreement with the neighbour that involves them paying a nominal sum for the land and all the fees for sorting the transfer to them.
It's not up to his dad's tenants to complain, they have no idea where the boundary is and no idea whose land is whose.Agree that the best way forward is probably to get the bloke to pay for the land unless your dad desperately wants it back. I suspect you'll need to go legal before he entertains paying anything though unfortunately.
The father has entered into a lease to let to the tenants an area of land with a building upon it and pay a rent according to the specifications of what they are renting.
The neighbour has encroached onto the land which the father is letting to the tenant. They tenant therefore has less than they have contracted to let through the lease but is still paying the original agreed rent.
Whilst the tenant could not care less there is no "OMG must deal with today" issue. As soon as the tenant starts to mention that they are not getting exclusive full and undisturbed occupation of all of the land which they have contracted through the tenancy to let then OP's dad has a problem he can't just ignore or deal with softly, softly. To protect their own position in terms of the lease they would need to get onto it asap.
Likewise if the tenants have been moaning for the last 5 years about the loss of land and the additional maintenance costs caused by the property owner not enforcing their ownership and rights on the neighbour and 'acquiescing' to the encroachment then the Landlord is going to have two battles to fight...
How about a letter before action laying out your position and evidence and stating that ignoring you will not make this go away nor would this be looked upon kindly by a court. Also point out that this dispute will make his house virtually unsaleable until resolved. I'd also say something to the effect that you will be looking to him for all legal costs incurred as he is the trespasser.
I am not sure that a boundary dispute will affect the value of a commercial property as much as a residential property. Commercial buyers are likely to be much more understanding, and of course if the property is to be sold it needs to be resolved anyway. I know there might be no intention of selling now, but at some point there will be a sale and then it will need sorting. Better to do it now when people are alive, can remember etc.
I have in the past been involved in a boundary dispute that involved a sliver of land 18 inches wide. You might think that 18 inches isn't important, but it turned out that in this case it was important. The simple reason was that with the additional 18 inches one party had enough land to build a house in the garden, without it they didn't! Therefore that 18 inches (which almost certainly wasn't theirs) was very important to them.
Seems to me that the OPs site if redeveloped could be residential and on that basis that strip of land could be very valuable if it is the difference between getting one more unit on the land or not.
I have in the past been involved in a boundary dispute that involved a sliver of land 18 inches wide. You might think that 18 inches isn't important, but it turned out that in this case it was important. The simple reason was that with the additional 18 inches one party had enough land to build a house in the garden, without it they didn't! Therefore that 18 inches (which almost certainly wasn't theirs) was very important to them.
Seems to me that the OPs site if redeveloped could be residential and on that basis that strip of land could be very valuable if it is the difference between getting one more unit on the land or not.
Looking at the first photo it looks like his land.Your concrete standing hasnt been encroached and it looks like he's followed the line of his garden.How sure are you its your bit?
Edit;ignore that,I can see the rear fence now.Cheeky git,hang some anvils on the fence.
Edit;ignore that,I can see the rear fence now.Cheeky git,hang some anvils on the fence.
Edited by Funkycoldribena on Monday 23 November 21:43
You should have a plan with the lease agreement you have with your tenant clearly showing boundaries. Thick pencil normally but that's not just 18".
Your tenant may well be none too happy as he is renting that space the neighbours shed sits on. I would assume via a fully insured and repairing lease.
The tenants are maybe responsible for the saucy chaps encroachment, they may wish to talk to their insurance company.
Your tenant may well be none too happy as he is renting that space the neighbours shed sits on. I would assume via a fully insured and repairing lease.
The tenants are maybe responsible for the saucy chaps encroachment, they may wish to talk to their insurance company.
Big_Dog said:
You should have a plan with the lease agreement you have with your tenant clearly showing boundaries. Thick pencil normally but that's not just 18".
Your tenant may well be none too happy as he is renting that space the neighbours shed sits on. I would assume via a fully insured and repairing lease.
The tenants are maybe responsible for the saucy chaps encroachment, they may wish to talk to their insurance company.
Quality of plan will depend on length of lease. 7 year or over drawn to,LR standards. Shorter term any nod sketch seems to be suitable.Your tenant may well be none too happy as he is renting that space the neighbours shed sits on. I would assume via a fully insured and repairing lease.
The tenants are maybe responsible for the saucy chaps encroachment, they may wish to talk to their insurance company.
Tenants had up to 5 years to be unhappy......
cossy400 said:
And excuse my ignorance but does this or would this not come under his house insurance policy?
My Dad managed to get an issue like this sorted out under his home insurance. They initially said no but he was persistent.It took around 4 years to resolve (neighbour eventually complied) but cost my Dad nothing.
The fence on that lean to looks terribly vulnerable to me. I am surprised that as yet it hasn't been reversed into by a large vehicle with a very sharp and robust rear end, such as a flatbed. It is so easy to do without rear parking sensors or a banksman and where do you find one of them when you need one? Like hens teeth they are.
Sometimes I wish I were not a lawyer and could sort things like this out with a purely pragmatic swing of the sledgehammer. Boundary disputes are the worst form of litigation and I steer well clear of them.
As much as I hate giving in to what is basically bullying I agree with the assessment that a legal fight is likely to be long and expensive and so is only to be pursued if you have a lot of mental energy, and money.
Sometimes I wish I were not a lawyer and could sort things like this out with a purely pragmatic swing of the sledgehammer. Boundary disputes are the worst form of litigation and I steer well clear of them.
As much as I hate giving in to what is basically bullying I agree with the assessment that a legal fight is likely to be long and expensive and so is only to be pursued if you have a lot of mental energy, and money.
As another grievance you can bring to his attention, you are not allowed to simply let rain water fall from your property onto someone elses property.
The OP said the only real issue that the tenants have said is the rain water floods part of the carpark. This alone is grounds for the council to visit or so Ive been told.
I have the exact same thing with our neighbours garage drain simply emptying out over our land and flooding our garage, I've been told to get the planning office out, but Im waiting on some fencing before heading that way.
The OP said the only real issue that the tenants have said is the rain water floods part of the carpark. This alone is grounds for the council to visit or so Ive been told.
I have the exact same thing with our neighbours garage drain simply emptying out over our land and flooding our garage, I've been told to get the planning office out, but Im waiting on some fencing before heading that way.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff