Adjusting right of way
Discussion
I'm looking for a bit of advice, if anyone has any experience of this sort of thing as its a new one on me.
Were hopefully gaining planning approval soon for a very small extension on our property, (No.34).
This sits over a right of way for our neighbours, (I know I know, bla bla bla... but well its literally this extension or nothing)
Ideally, I'd like to adjust the right of way as shown here, around the back of the new extension to where conveiantly, a couple of trees are being removed due to subsidence issues.
I've briefly mentioned to this about with my neighbours landlord, who is already being a bit of a knob about such matters.
FYI, no landscaping / terracing etc is present next door, just a concrete path and a bit of grass.
I presume its a case of getting the owners of 32 and 28 (who will have no problem with this) to agree, and then getting title deeds renewed?
Any input gratefully appreciated!
Were hopefully gaining planning approval soon for a very small extension on our property, (No.34).
This sits over a right of way for our neighbours, (I know I know, bla bla bla... but well its literally this extension or nothing)
Ideally, I'd like to adjust the right of way as shown here, around the back of the new extension to where conveiantly, a couple of trees are being removed due to subsidence issues.
I've briefly mentioned to this about with my neighbours landlord, who is already being a bit of a knob about such matters.
FYI, no landscaping / terracing etc is present next door, just a concrete path and a bit of grass.
I presume its a case of getting the owners of 32 and 28 (who will have no problem with this) to agree, and then getting title deeds renewed?
Any input gratefully appreciated!
Ok, I've updated this somewhat with the points noted above, and yes I did completely balls up on the numbering.
A small driveway separates 36 and 34 which leads to parking for those two properties, the land that we own is within green, and the new extension is within our ownership.
28 and 32 have an easement accross our land for use, which realistically is once a year if that really.
We get on well with 28 and they would have no issue with moving the ROW.
32 is owned by a landlord, presumably mortage free and really has no interest in the proeprty whatsoever, and even said when the current tennants leave they may sell (potentially to us, as we have asked previously)
I would propose to adjust the ROW, as shown on the plans as trees are due to be removed in this area anyway so to me, it seems like a pretty reasonable solution.
Drumroll said:
Your idea might suite you but it certainly doesn't your other 2 neighbours. Number 32 garden basically will become a foot path for number 28.
Just because someone doesn't see things the way you do, doesn't make them a knob.
Whilst I somewhat agree, does it fundementally ruin their life or affect them realistically any further than it does already? - no. So, get a grip and don't have a problem with it would be my view, and would be the view I would have if it was vice versa. To be difficult for the sake of being difficult is just.. Well, anyway - I'd potentially get it I they had an interest or owned and lived in the property but anway... Just because someone doesn't see things the way you do, doesn't make them a knob.
They had a formal chance to complain, during the planning process (with multiple applications submitted) and obviously had no point or objection to raise.
I would also agree with the points raised that I potentially should have contacted the neighbours to discuss this prior to planning, but planning has been such a faff to get through (and it still may not) that why rock the boat with something that cannot be done.
JQ said:
Another issue you will have to overcome - there will not be a RoW over 32's land giving access to the gate you intend to install for the occupier of 28. As such you will also need to vary the RoW between 32 and 28.
Fair point, and noted.So to given an idea of context see photo below, perhaps the sketch above didn't quite put accross the minor (imo ofcourse 
) inconvience that it would present to the neigbour. Behind the gate, and pretty much adjacanent to the soil pipe on the next property along is the door into 30
The shaded red area shows where the rear extension would be going, and the green shaded area shows the approx positon of the new access into no 32.
Obviously this may move a touch to the left, there is the outbuilding behind the hedgrerow.
1 concrete slab, maybe 2 would sort out the access on the neighbours side, it is predominantly concrete / mud.
) inconvience that it would present to the neigbour. Behind the gate, and pretty much adjacanent to the soil pipe on the next property along is the door into 30The shaded red area shows where the rear extension would be going, and the green shaded area shows the approx positon of the new access into no 32.
Obviously this may move a touch to the left, there is the outbuilding behind the hedgrerow.
ozzuk said:
Planning doesn't consider access so any objections raised on that basis likely wouldn't impact it. To stop you building the LL just has to say you must maintain the access then you are pretty much dead in the water. - Maybe offer some landscaping as part of the works - someone will need to put a path where the tree was. Is it all concrete prior to that point? i.e. nothing else impacted by your diagonal path proposal?
Well, I mean I am maintaing the access aren't I? 1 concrete slab, maybe 2 would sort out the access on the neighbours side, it is predominantly concrete / mud.
JQ said:
I find it utterly bizarre you've gone to the time, effort and expense of going for planning for an extension you cannot legally build, having not spoken to the neighbours who's consent you need in advance.
As noted above, theres absolutely no guarantee that I any verbal acceptance will be carreid on formally on paper.Whats the point of going to all the hastle, argument etc... if they agree and I can't even get planning, which again has proven to be highly contentious.
Now I'm in a position where I can discuss, offer positive solutions (£££) and may actually get an extension (or still may not) rather than just day dreaming about it because my neighbours landlord is (in my opinion) a grump on first approach.
Whilst I appreciate all the advice given in the thread, gee wizz I'm glad I don't live next to you lot..
|https://thumbsnap.com/BQhaUcQC[/url]DanL said:
Depends what the ROW is used for, I’d have thought?
If it’s used every week by people putting their bins out then I wouldn’t expect the neighbours to agree. No one wants to walk further than necessary , and I’d assume there’s a path or other hard ground across the back of the houses to make moving the bins reasonably easy.
If it’s a legacy from when the properties were built and just provides occasional access to the rear for scaffolding and so on then I might hope that the neighbours would be amenable to the change…
I don't think its defined anywhere what the actual use is, but realistcally its very limited use of occasionally the green bin and access for severn trent to clear a shared drain (no connected to our property)If it’s used every week by people putting their bins out then I wouldn’t expect the neighbours to agree. No one wants to walk further than necessary , and I’d assume there’s a path or other hard ground across the back of the houses to make moving the bins reasonably easy.
If it’s a legacy from when the properties were built and just provides occasional access to the rear for scaffolding and so on then I might hope that the neighbours would be amenable to the change…
Regarding title plans, I've purchased the 3 in question and its actually quite positive potentially.
Starting with No 30 (which was purchased last year)
Oh, and for further context...
Absolutely no right of passage noted, so can only assume a balls up on the solicitors part. I know the owner brought it from the long time landlord without it going to market so perhaps full checks weren't made, anyway - no ROW noted on either 32 or ours.
No 32 (adjacent)
A right of way is noted, but potentially positively a large rear extension is missing from our plan. This means the ROW currently is in the middle of our Kitchen and is blocked up. Even better that the adjacent landlord, who claimed he owned and built our extension potentially overlooked that little doozy?
|https://thumbsnap.com/MEhpdfGq[/url]No 34.
Ours again has the extension missing, Im prettty certain I remember seeing a differnt land regsitery plan when we purchased the property through our solicitor, but ultimately this is what is on the land registry plan so surely what matters?
Again, this shows the ROW in the middle of our Kitchen.
I'd possibly suggest i'm actually in quite a good position, as well, they need updating... and to my mind, no 30 is out of the equation now... (unless written somewhere that they have access)
As posted earlier, the OS extract below denotes pretty much the existing layout
Oh, and further further context.. the other side of the gate..
paulrockliffe said:
The plans don't show rights gained by prescription, so they aren't the complete picture. It's definitely not a positive that you've already obstructed the access with another extension, if you push this too far your neighbour could look at the plans and make things even more difficult for you.
As noted above, the owner of the adjacent property commented that he built the extension on our property circa 25 years ago when he apprarently owned this property - Which would make it his balls up, not holding anyone to blame etc... but it needs making right so why not ammend at the same timeGassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff