Boundary ownership query.

[anonymous-user]

You have missed my point. I was making no comment about fences, a subject about which I know less than zero. I was satirising the pompous put down about "owning no boundaries". Hence the comparison to the equally ridiculous "cars of note".

[roadsmash]

mattwh said:

so you spend good money on a fence to look crappy so potentially scoates can't climb it ? bks - you spend money on a fence for it to look appealing as it can be. your statement is false Pondrower - you clearly own no boundaries.

You are talking nonsense.

[anonymous-user]

I confess that I have never once noticed which way round any fence goes, but I like the Pythonesque implications of one bloke who runs a fence putter upping company saying "they go this way" and another bloke who is a fence putter upper saying "no, they go this way". Capital vs Labour!

[Drawweight]

I’ve got a fence either side of my house. Both joint owned.

We found the fencer, instructed and paid him (before we got the neighbours share of the money) so we naturally enough got the choice of which side we wanted facing out garden.

The good side seemed obvious but one side is near my shed so it was easier for the fencer to do that side from the neighbours garden.

So we’ve got one ‘good’ side and one ‘bad’’ side and do you know. Apart from painting it, it doesn’t really make a lot of difference.

[anonymous-user]

Chris32345 said:

Oceanrower said:

You would, generally, be wrong.

The rails are on the back of the fence. These are generally on the inside of the property, or the owners side if it is a dividing fence.

To put the 'good' side on the inside would, essentially, leave a ladder on the outside for ne'er do wells to climb...

Are you for real?
Have you seen no fence ever?

Oceanrower is correct
It’s always been that way
10 seconds on google will confirm, eg:-
“Face the finished side of the fence toward your neighbour
The finished side should face toward your neighbour. Not only is this more polite, but it's the standard. Your property will look a lot nicer with the “good” side facing the outside world. Otherwise, your fence will look like it was installed backwards.“

[Tommo87]

Jimboka said:

Chris32345 said:

Oceanrower said:

You would, generally, be wrong.

The rails are on the back of the fence. These are generally on the inside of the property, or the owners side if it is a dividing fence.

To put the 'good' side on the inside would, essentially, leave a ladder on the outside for ne'er do wells to climb...

Are you for real?
Have you seen no fence ever?

Oceanrower is correct
It’s always been that way
10 seconds on google will confirm, eg:-
“Face the finished side of the fence toward your neighbour
The finished side should face toward your neighbour. Not only is this more polite, but it's the standard. Your property will look a lot nicer with the “good” side facing the outside world. Otherwise, your fence will look like it was installed backwards.“

Its true for an Arris rail boundary fence to public land or roadway to have the rails on the owners side so as to make it harder for people to gain access from the 'good/Pretty side.

Its also a historic neighbourly thing to do the same on the dividing line between neighbours, but in recent years I have seen a significant of people giving themselves the prettyside.

[NDA]

I seem to recall a few years ago being told that in the absence of anything on the deeds, you were responsible for the boundary on the right hand side of your property. This is probably complete nonsense!

[myvision]

NDA said:

I seem to recall a few years ago being told that in the absence of anything on the deeds, you were responsible for the boundary on the right hand side of your property. This is probably complete nonsense!

I was told left side!!!

[NDA]

myvision said:

I was told left side!!!

[Oldandslow]

myvision said:

NDA said:

I seem to recall a few years ago being told that in the absence of anything on the deeds, you were responsible for the boundary on the right hand side of your property. This is probably complete nonsense!

I was told left side!!!

Depends which way you're looking at it.

[jondude]

Oldandslow said:

myvision said:

NDA said:

I seem to recall a few years ago being told that in the absence of anything on the deeds, you were responsible for the boundary on the right hand side of your property. This is probably complete nonsense!

I was told left side!!!

Depends which way you're looking at it.

Matters not too much as sooner or later one of you will get sick of the ugly or damaged fence and if money is the issue, the one 'responsible' can just haul it down. There is no legal requirement to have a fence on the boundary, I believe.

Meaning if the other neighbour is then peed off because now the one responsible has decided he does not want a fence, all that can done is the disgruntled neighbour puts a fence up on his side of the invisible boundary. (Or more often than not exactly where the old one was, very few neighbours will argue if someone else pays to put up a new fence)

Edited by jondude on Monday 26th October 11:02

[TriumphStag3.0V8]

mattwh said:

Breadvan - I have complete respect for everything you bring to this forum but this is the exception that proves the rule. Internal fences within a property, as in dividing fences, are inward facing - i.e. posts outside. (source 32 years of fitting them.) To place the internal boundary fence posts facing inwards is just wrong - or at least doing the (paying) customer a disservice.

I hope no one ever paid you during those 32 years of fitting fences, as you have been doing it wrong.

[Foss62]

TriumphStag3.0V8 said:

mattwh said:

Breadvan - I have complete respect for everything you bring to this forum but this is the exception that proves the rule. Internal fences within a property, as in dividing fences, are inward facing - i.e. posts outside. (source 32 years of fitting them.) To place the internal boundary fence posts facing inwards is just wrong - or at least doing the (paying) customer a disservice.

I hope no one ever paid you during those 32 years of fitting fences, as you have been doing it wrong.

It certainly appears so...He has also been depriving customers of their land. Apart from the courtesy of giving the neighbour the ‘facing’ side, this means the fence panels can be as close to the boundary as possible. As all of the fence has to be on the boundary owners land, doing it the other way round ‘loses’ the land between the posts to the neighbour.

[Foss62]

myvision said:

NDA said:

I seem to recall a few years ago being told that in the absence of anything on the deeds, you were responsible for the boundary on the right hand side of your property. This is probably complete nonsense!

I was told left side!!!

Legally it can be either side or no sides or all sides, it just depends on agreements made when the land was developed and how the developer decided to allocate responsibilities. Often the only actual legal requirement is for posts and wire.

[roadsmash]

Foss62 said:

TriumphStag3.0V8 said:

mattwh said:

Breadvan - I have complete respect for everything you bring to this forum but this is the exception that proves the rule. Internal fences within a property, as in dividing fences, are inward facing - i.e. posts outside. (source 32 years of fitting them.) To place the internal boundary fence posts facing inwards is just wrong - or at least doing the (paying) customer a disservice.

I hope no one ever paid you during those 32 years of fitting fences, as you have been doing it wrong.

It certainly appears so...He has also been depriving customers of their land. Apart from the courtesy of giving the neighbour the ‘facing’ side, this means the fence panels can be as close to the boundary as possible. As all of the fence has to be on the boundary owners land, doing it the other way round ‘loses’ the land between the posts to the neighbour.

Personally I think the “I’ve been fencing for 32 years” comment was nonsense, I think Matt was just trying to get us to bow to his experience.

No experienced fencer would ever install panels like he’s describing.

[C350Akra]

mattwh said:

Breadvan - I have complete respect for everything you bring to this forum but this is the exception that proves the rule. Internal fences within a property, as in dividing fences, are inward facing - i.e. posts outside. (source 32 years of fitting them.) To place the internal boundary fence posts facing inwards is just wrong - or at least doing the (paying) customer a disservice.

I presume by 'internal fences' you must mean fences dividing two areas of one commonly owned piece of land, e.g. between a lawn and a vegetable garden in one house's plot of land? If so, this is totally irrelevant since we are talking about 'boundary fences' which divide different plots of land.

[Oceanrower]

roadsmash said:

Foss62 said:

TriumphStag3.0V8 said:

mattwh said:

Breadvan - I have complete respect for everything you bring to this forum but this is the exception that proves the rule. Internal fences within a property, as in dividing fences, are inward facing - i.e. posts outside. (source 32 years of fitting them.) To place the internal boundary fence posts facing inwards is just wrong - or at least doing the (paying) customer a disservice.

I hope no one ever paid you during those 32 years of fitting fences, as you have been doing it wrong.

It certainly appears so...He has also been depriving customers of their land. Apart from the courtesy of giving the neighbour the ‘facing’ side, this means the fence panels can be as close to the boundary as possible. As all of the fence has to be on the boundary owners land, doing it the other way round ‘loses’ the land between the posts to the neighbour.

Personally I think the “I’ve been fencing for 32 years” comment was nonsense, I think Matt was just trying to get us to bow to his experience.

No experienced fencer would ever install panels like he’s describing.

I think I said this about a week ago but then got shouted down. (Not by you, I should add)

[roadsmash]