|
martinalex
168 posts
41 months
|
Mr GrimNasty said: martinalex said: I can see why he thinks his greenhouse would lose light - it definitely would but then no house comes with entitlement to a greenhouse in a specific place. Hate to tell you this....... but..... if it's been there 20 years you can't reduce his light to a level where he can't use it to successfully grow whatever it is he has been growing. A domestic greenhouse doesn't acquire a right to light
|
|
|
martinalex
168 posts
41 months
|
All that jazz said: Really? What, by about half an hour in the evening? Remember that the photo is looking SE. The OPs garden is south facing, the neighbour's is west facing, so even with a 6'6 fence erected there the greenhouse is still going to get the sun on it all day except for the very late evening half hour before the sun sets over the horizon where the height of the fence would cast a shadow. Nit-picking at best by the neighbour. You worked that out precisly from a wonky photo and plan! The fences would be so close to the greenhouse - it wouldn't matter which way it was facing - it will be darker.
|
|
|
PaulHogan
2,409 posts
148 months
|
I notice your neighbour's fence with his other neighbour is a 6 footer FRO fence suggesting that your neighbour has already fallen out with one side...
|
|
|
Mr GrimNasty
2,470 posts
40 months
|
martinalex said: Mr GrimNasty said: martinalex said: I can see why he thinks his greenhouse would lose light - it definitely would but then no house comes with entitlement to a greenhouse in a specific place. Hate to tell you this....... but..... if it's been there 20 years you can't reduce his light to a level where he can't use it to successfully grow whatever it is he has been growing. A domestic greenhouse doesn't acquire a right to light Yes it does. Like other parts of a domestic property can. In fact it is one of the easiest examples to succeed with a claim, because it isn't the 'same' level of light you are entitled to, but the amount necessary to continue using it for the intended purpose.
|
|
|
dickymint
11,430 posts
128 months
|
Mr GrimNasty said: martinalex said: Mr GrimNasty said: martinalex said: I can see why he thinks his greenhouse would lose light - it definitely would but then no house comes with entitlement to a greenhouse in a specific place. Hate to tell you this....... but..... if it's been there 20 years you can't reduce his light to a level where he can't use it to successfully grow whatever it is he has been growing. A domestic greenhouse doesn't acquire a right to light Yes it does. Like other parts of a domestic property can. In fact it is one of the easiest examples to succeed with a claim, because it isn't the 'same' level of light you are entitled to, but the amount necessary to continue using it for the intended purpose. You are correct Grim. But only if said greenhouse has enjoyed this light for 20 years.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
martinalex
168 posts
41 months
|
Mr GrimNasty said: Yes it does. Like other parts of a domestic property can. In fact it is one of the easiest examples to succeed with a claim, because it isn't the 'same' level of light you are entitled to, but the amount necessary to continue using it for the intended purpose. I understand the point you're making - but I don't accept that, in practice, it would be easy or economical to proceed with a claim in the neighbour's situation and more generally, if you've had the opportunity to object at a planning stage to a light blocking structure (and your objection was rejected) then I would recommend you move your greenhouse because you will struggle enforcing any claim. I also don't think a 'right to light' claim would ever succeed against the construction of a standard 2 metre garden fence - so it won't apply in these circumstances
|
|
|
mrsshpub
220 posts
54 months
|
dickymint said: You are correct Grim. But only if said greenhouse has enjoyed this light for 20 years. Interesting. We have a greenhouse put up in 1987 that we can no longer use to grow anything because it's shaded by willow trees growing very close to our property boundary on land our local Council is responsible for maintaining. These trees are also overhanging our land by several metres. The Council have told me that my greenhouse does not have a 'right to light'. Could you please point me in the direction of the relevant law?
|
|
|
motco
4,796 posts
116 months
|
Is it the 1832 Prescription Act?
|
|
|
TooLateForAName
2,216 posts
54 months
|
mrsshpub said: dickymint said: You are correct Grim. But only if said greenhouse has enjoyed this light for 20 years. Interesting. We have a greenhouse put up in 1987 that we can no longer use to grow anything because it's shaded by willow trees growing very close to our property boundary on land our local Council is responsible for maintaining. These trees are also overhanging our land by several metres. The Council have told me that my greenhouse does not have a 'right to light'. Could you please point me in the direction of the relevant law? Me too! Also in dispute with council over trees grown against our boundary and they've told us we have no legal right to light.
|
|
|
dickymint
11,430 posts
128 months
|
mrsshpub said: dickymint said: You are correct Grim. But only if said greenhouse has enjoyed this light for 20 years. Interesting. We have a greenhouse put up in 1987 that we can no longer use to grow anything because it's shaded by willow trees growing very close to our property boundary on land our local Council is responsible for maintaining. These trees are also overhanging our land by several metres. The Council have told me that my greenhouse does not have a 'right to light'. Could you please point me in the direction of the relevant law? As Motco said. http://www.msasurvey.com/map/RICS%20Rights%20of%20...
|
|
|
mrsshpub
220 posts
54 months
|
dickymint said: Many thanks. I feel a strongly worded letter coming on.
|
|
|
dickymint
11,430 posts
128 months
|
mrsshpub said: dickymint said: Many thanks. I feel a strongly worded letter coming on. Go get em Sue. Bear in mind it's the right to light as in light levels as opposed to sunshine. PS. Say hello to Steve for me, how's His mighty Wedge? 
|
|
|
All that jazz
2,247 posts
16 months
|
martinalex said: You worked that out precisly from a wonky photo and plan! The fences would be so close to the greenhouse - it wouldn't matter which way it was facing - it will be darker. No, I worked it out in 2 seconds after the OP said his garden was south facing and the neighbour's was west facing. Or are you not familiar with the four points on a compass?
|
|
|
A.C.E
477 posts
116 months
|
martinalex said: But one man's 'kids playing like little kids do' is endless and deliberate torment to another man - perception of irritation is in the eye of the victim. It suits lots of parents to imagine their darlings are 'only playing'
So when you were 6, and all you kids knew that if you played outside this old lad's house, that he didn't like it and would come and tell you to bugger off - You still did it!!! - you weren't such a polite lot then - why didn't you play outside your own house or someone else's?
YUP we were playing marbles ffs! and yes, were were always polite.
Perhaps you all just enjoyed provoking him..ER ,NOPE. not at all.
And your dad sounds simply thuggish for being involved in that - for something you insisted on doing again and again and was clearly your fault. Not thuggish in the slightest, just didn't like bullies, just like myself!
do you have kids? were we grew up, it was a cul de sac of about 20 houses, that at the end were old air raid shelters. we played in the road as well as the air raid shelters, and the old lad was a total cock. if my kids at aged 6 were getting a b  king for playing outside someones house NOT causing offence, nor being antagonistic in any way shape or form (like we were) i would do EXACTLY the same as what my father did NO QUESTION!
|
|
|
roofer
1,751 posts
81 months
|
BigTom85 said: he's got a caravan That changes things, so, rip his fence up, sling it in his garden and burn it. Then take a dump on those hideous boxes whilst firing air gun at his greenhouse, finally, shoot birds and dump them on his patio table, he can observe them from there.Install 2m high fence with 300mm trellis on top. HTH.
|
|
|
martinalex
168 posts
41 months
|
All that jazz said: martinalex said: You worked that out precisly from a wonky photo and plan! The fences would be so close to the greenhouse - it wouldn't matter which way it was facing - it will be darker. No, I worked it out in 2 seconds after the OP said his garden was south facing and the neighbour's was west facing. Or are you not familiar with the four points on a compass? More familiar than you are with good manners. You'd also need to apply a few more brain cells as well as a compass - start with the angle of the light through an aperture. Measure the height of the greenhouse and the height of the fence and the distance. With your intellect it should only take you a minute ... or two.
|
|
|
martinalex
168 posts
41 months
|
A.C.E said: do you have kids? were we grew up, it was a cul de sac of about 20 houses, that at the end were old air raid shelters. we played in the road as well as the air raid shelters, and the old lad was a total cock. if my kids at aged 6 were getting a b king for playing outside someones house NOT causing offence, nor being antagonistic in any way shape or form (like we were) i would do EXACTLY the same as what my father did NO QUESTION! Of course you'd do the same - You don't surprise me at all - I wouldn't expect anything more from you. I'll ask again, why didn't you just leave him alone. At 6 you're old enough to learn that not everyone appreciates your company. Why did you keep playing outside his house? Obviously he didn't OWN the space there - but nor did you. Quid pro quo - sounds like you kids all had loads of room in your cul de sac - you didn't need to be outside his house especially - what prevented you from leaving him alone? There were 19 other houses to play outside - including your own bloody house - what was so attractive about playing outside his house - 19 other houses - they must all have been s t in some way. I just don't get you - what on earth makes you think it's okay to do that? He was obviously awkward, probably had his reasons - why not just leave him be? Kids don't have any more rights than anyone else.
|
|
|
sly(si)
129 posts
118 months
|
you don't get it do you?
i don't think, by the way you post, you are a parent, am i wrong?
|
|
|
omgus
4,977 posts
45 months
|
martinalex said: Angry Stuff that then needed to be edited with more angry stuff nearly 2 hours later.
Wow. Do you currently have issues with children playing near your house?
|
|
|
sly(si)
129 posts
118 months
|
it certainly looks like it. the guy clearly has issues he needs to deal with.
imagine family's with young children living in the same road? *shudder the thought*
|
|
