Open plan on deeds..... fence erecting?
Discussion
First of all I am surprised at the absence of correct (or complete )legal advice. This type of 'neighbour' situation is a nightmare involving a great deal of stress time and potential expense. The considerations are the title and any restrictive covenants. In most cases where titles are registered at the Land Registry and although registration has been piecemeal over the country since 1925 most now are and in which case almost certainly boundaries are 'general' effectively meaning they can be anywhere. There is a demanding and costly procedure to apply for definitive boundaries under sec 60 of the Land Registration Act which requires accurate plans etc.Clearly it would be hoped that neighbours could discuss and cooperate to avoid these problems but human nature being what it is usually makes this difficult if people act unreasonably.The deeds or registered plan will usually show by inward 'T' marks on any boundary to show ownership and if joint an 'H' (turned sideways to show boundary is joint or 'party') where both sides have ownership and consequential joint expense. Unless there is a covenant setting out style height etc., either side can construct a new boundary on their side. Their may also be restrictive covenants imposed by the developer as has been mentioned and who has the benefit until the last plot is sold and in which case the developers right may pass to the last purchaser. You need to look at he wording of the covenant to determine its meaning. The next issue is trespass and damage. Legitimate visitors including e.g., postmen etc., have automatic rights but can become trespasses if told to leave after which reasonable force can be used (but obviously with extreme care!) Damage to your property is also actionable but as initially mentione proceed cautiously. Hope this helps.
bazzfb said:
First of all I am surprised at the absence of correct (or complete )legal advice. This type of 'neighbour' situation is a nightmare involving a great deal of stress time and potential expense. The considerations are the title and any restrictive covenants. In most cases where titles are registered at the Land Registry and although registration has been piecemeal over the country since 1925 most now are and in which case almost certainly boundaries are 'general' effectively meaning they can be anywhere. There is a demanding and costly procedure to apply for definitive boundaries under sec 60 of the Land Registration Act which requires accurate plans etc.Clearly it would be hoped that neighbours could discuss and cooperate to avoid these problems but human nature being what it is usually makes this difficult if people act unreasonably.The deeds or registered plan will usually show by inward 'T' marks on any boundary to show ownership and if joint an 'H' (turned sideways to show boundary is joint or 'party') where both sides have ownership and consequential joint expense. Unless there is a covenant setting out style height etc., either side can construct a new boundary on their side. Their may also be restrictive covenants imposed by the developer as has been mentioned and who has the benefit until the last plot is sold and in which case the developers right may pass to the last purchaser. You need to look at he wording of the covenant to determine its meaning. The next issue is trespass and damage. Legitimate visitors including e.g., postmen etc., have automatic rights but can become trespasses if told to leave after which reasonable force can be used (but obviously with extreme care!) Damage to your property is also actionable but as initially mentione proceed cautiously. Hope this helps.
Correct me if I'm wrong but "T's" and "H's" in this case are irrelevant as there will not be a fence or hedge on the deeds and that nobody actually owns a boundary as it's just an imaginary line the width of an hair.I'm late to the thread, and I've not read all of it, but if the situation's still as it was at the beginning it seems to me there are a couple of legal options. I'm deliberately avoiding any comments about whether or not you should `go legal', as you asked specifically for legal advice.
The first - and cheapest - option is to see whether the original planning permission mandated that there should be no fences at the front. You should be able to get a copy of the original PP from your local Council's website, though there’s a good chance a copy will be with your deeds.
If there is such a restriction you can ask the Council to write to the neighbour, pointing out the planning condition, and warning him that a breach could lead to enforcement action. Unfortunately, it's unlikely that they would actually take such action, due to lack of resources, but the warning may be enough.
Secondly, I've not seen details of the title, so I can't comment whether you could enforce the covenant. Blueg33 clearly has seen it, and if you or he could send me a copy that would be very helpful. However, whether or not you can enforce it the original developer can certainly do so. I think you said the neighbour bought it directly from the developer. This means it's enforceable in contract, without having to worry about the complexities of land law.
Unfortunately, if it was only a small, local developer they may no longer exist. If you are happy to name the original builder exactly as it’s stated in your deeds I can easily find out. If they do exist, you just need to write to them asking that they write to your neighbour pointing out the covenant and saying they may take legal action if he breaches it. Whether they would do so is another matter, but it’s worth a try. If they’re a volume builder, like Barratt or Persimmon they are more likely to co-operate, if only for PR reasons.
The third option would only exist if you can enforce the covenant. This is obviously the best scenario, and in that event you can write to the neighbour pointing out the covenant and recording his stated intention to break it by building a fence. You can say that unless you receive a written undertaking from him within 7 days that he will not erect a fence you will be forced to instruct solicitors with a view to obtaining an injunction - a court order prohibiting him from erecting a fence. You should also point out that if that proves necessary you'll be claiming your legal costs as well, which are likely to be in the region of £5,000.
It’s crucially important to put things in writing, as there are always at least two versions of any conversation. Also, if you do write to him you must be polite and reasonable. You should always read any letter being sent in this situation through the eyes of a judge who may be reading it in a year's time. If you appear to be unreasonably aggressive or rude it will prejudice the judge and might even lose you the case.
Realistically, it would be better to go to a solicitor at this stage. It may cost you a couple of hundred quid, but a solicitor's letter does still carry authority, and is less likely to be ignored. Furthermore, threats of costs will carry more credibility if the neighbour can see you've already invested some cash.
Finally, do check if you have legal expenses insurance. This is often bundled in with the house contents policy, and many people don't even know they have it. Although it's a bit of a scam, being designed as a way for your insurers to sell juicy cases to their panel solicitors, it does have its uses, and is definitely worth checking.
The first - and cheapest - option is to see whether the original planning permission mandated that there should be no fences at the front. You should be able to get a copy of the original PP from your local Council's website, though there’s a good chance a copy will be with your deeds.
If there is such a restriction you can ask the Council to write to the neighbour, pointing out the planning condition, and warning him that a breach could lead to enforcement action. Unfortunately, it's unlikely that they would actually take such action, due to lack of resources, but the warning may be enough.
Secondly, I've not seen details of the title, so I can't comment whether you could enforce the covenant. Blueg33 clearly has seen it, and if you or he could send me a copy that would be very helpful. However, whether or not you can enforce it the original developer can certainly do so. I think you said the neighbour bought it directly from the developer. This means it's enforceable in contract, without having to worry about the complexities of land law.
Unfortunately, if it was only a small, local developer they may no longer exist. If you are happy to name the original builder exactly as it’s stated in your deeds I can easily find out. If they do exist, you just need to write to them asking that they write to your neighbour pointing out the covenant and saying they may take legal action if he breaches it. Whether they would do so is another matter, but it’s worth a try. If they’re a volume builder, like Barratt or Persimmon they are more likely to co-operate, if only for PR reasons.
The third option would only exist if you can enforce the covenant. This is obviously the best scenario, and in that event you can write to the neighbour pointing out the covenant and recording his stated intention to break it by building a fence. You can say that unless you receive a written undertaking from him within 7 days that he will not erect a fence you will be forced to instruct solicitors with a view to obtaining an injunction - a court order prohibiting him from erecting a fence. You should also point out that if that proves necessary you'll be claiming your legal costs as well, which are likely to be in the region of £5,000.
It’s crucially important to put things in writing, as there are always at least two versions of any conversation. Also, if you do write to him you must be polite and reasonable. You should always read any letter being sent in this situation through the eyes of a judge who may be reading it in a year's time. If you appear to be unreasonably aggressive or rude it will prejudice the judge and might even lose you the case.
Realistically, it would be better to go to a solicitor at this stage. It may cost you a couple of hundred quid, but a solicitor's letter does still carry authority, and is less likely to be ignored. Furthermore, threats of costs will carry more credibility if the neighbour can see you've already invested some cash.
Finally, do check if you have legal expenses insurance. This is often bundled in with the house contents policy, and many people don't even know they have it. Although it's a bit of a scam, being designed as a way for your insurers to sell juicy cases to their panel solicitors, it does have its uses, and is definitely worth checking.
Pro Bono said:
I'm late to the thread, and I've not read all of it, but if the situation's still as it was at the beginning it seems to me there are a couple of legal options. I'm deliberately avoiding any comments about whether or not you should `go legal', as you asked specifically for legal advice.
The first - and cheapest - option is to see whether the original planning permission mandated that there should be no fences at the front. You should be able to get a copy of the original PP from your local Council's website, though there’s a good chance a copy will be with your deeds.
If there is such a restriction you can ask the Council to write to the neighbour, pointing out the planning condition, and warning him that a breach could lead to enforcement action. Unfortunately, it's unlikely that they would actually take such action, due to lack of resources, but the warning may be enough.
Secondly, I've not seen details of the title, so I can't comment whether you could enforce the covenant. Blueg33 clearly has seen it, and if you or he could send me a copy that would be very helpful. However, whether or not you can enforce it the original developer can certainly do so. I think you said the neighbour bought it directly from the developer. This means it's enforceable in contract, without having to worry about the complexities of land law.
Unfortunately, if it was only a small, local developer they may no longer exist. If you are happy to name the original builder exactly as it’s stated in your deeds I can easily find out. If they do exist, you just need to write to them asking that they write to your neighbour pointing out the covenant and saying they may take legal action if he breaches it. Whether they would do so is another matter, but it’s worth a try. If they’re a volume builder, like Barratt or Persimmon they are more likely to co-operate, if only for PR reasons.
The third option would only exist if you can enforce the covenant. This is obviously the best scenario, and in that event you can write to the neighbour pointing out the covenant and recording his stated intention to break it by building a fence. You can say that unless you receive a written undertaking from him within 7 days that he will not erect a fence you will be forced to instruct solicitors with a view to obtaining an injunction - a court order prohibiting him from erecting a fence. You should also point out that if that proves necessary you'll be claiming your legal costs as well, which are likely to be in the region of £5,000.
It’s crucially important to put things in writing, as there are always at least two versions of any conversation. Also, if you do write to him you must be polite and reasonable. You should always read any letter being sent in this situation through the eyes of a judge who may be reading it in a year's time. If you appear to be unreasonably aggressive or rude it will prejudice the judge and might even lose you the case.
Realistically, it would be better to go to a solicitor at this stage. It may cost you a couple of hundred quid, but a solicitor's letter does still carry authority, and is less likely to be ignored. Furthermore, threats of costs will carry more credibility if the neighbour can see you've already invested some cash.
Finally, do check if you have legal expenses insurance. This is often bundled in with the house contents policy, and many people don't even know they have it. Although it's a bit of a scam, being designed as a way for your insurers to sell juicy cases to their panel solicitors, it does have its uses, and is definitely worth checking.
I don't have a copy of the title to hand, I only got the title from Land Registry and saved it on my other computer.The first - and cheapest - option is to see whether the original planning permission mandated that there should be no fences at the front. You should be able to get a copy of the original PP from your local Council's website, though there’s a good chance a copy will be with your deeds.
If there is such a restriction you can ask the Council to write to the neighbour, pointing out the planning condition, and warning him that a breach could lead to enforcement action. Unfortunately, it's unlikely that they would actually take such action, due to lack of resources, but the warning may be enough.
Secondly, I've not seen details of the title, so I can't comment whether you could enforce the covenant. Blueg33 clearly has seen it, and if you or he could send me a copy that would be very helpful. However, whether or not you can enforce it the original developer can certainly do so. I think you said the neighbour bought it directly from the developer. This means it's enforceable in contract, without having to worry about the complexities of land law.
Unfortunately, if it was only a small, local developer they may no longer exist. If you are happy to name the original builder exactly as it’s stated in your deeds I can easily find out. If they do exist, you just need to write to them asking that they write to your neighbour pointing out the covenant and saying they may take legal action if he breaches it. Whether they would do so is another matter, but it’s worth a try. If they’re a volume builder, like Barratt or Persimmon they are more likely to co-operate, if only for PR reasons.
The third option would only exist if you can enforce the covenant. This is obviously the best scenario, and in that event you can write to the neighbour pointing out the covenant and recording his stated intention to break it by building a fence. You can say that unless you receive a written undertaking from him within 7 days that he will not erect a fence you will be forced to instruct solicitors with a view to obtaining an injunction - a court order prohibiting him from erecting a fence. You should also point out that if that proves necessary you'll be claiming your legal costs as well, which are likely to be in the region of £5,000.
It’s crucially important to put things in writing, as there are always at least two versions of any conversation. Also, if you do write to him you must be polite and reasonable. You should always read any letter being sent in this situation through the eyes of a judge who may be reading it in a year's time. If you appear to be unreasonably aggressive or rude it will prejudice the judge and might even lose you the case.
Realistically, it would be better to go to a solicitor at this stage. It may cost you a couple of hundred quid, but a solicitor's letter does still carry authority, and is less likely to be ignored. Furthermore, threats of costs will carry more credibility if the neighbour can see you've already invested some cash.
Finally, do check if you have legal expenses insurance. This is often bundled in with the house contents policy, and many people don't even know they have it. Although it's a bit of a scam, being designed as a way for your insurers to sell juicy cases to their panel solicitors, it does have its uses, and is definitely worth checking.
It was a large developer Mclean, who were bought by Tarmac and wound up I think around the mid 1990's. with housing assets (land etc) being transferred to Wimpey, who are now Taylor Wimpey. I doubt the developer exists in a suitable form to enforce the covenant, you can be sure that Taylor Wimpey won't care at all.
blueg33 said:
I don't have a copy of the title to hand, I only got the title from Land Registry and saved it on my other computer.
It was a large developer Mclean, who were bought by Tarmac and wound up I think around the mid 1990's. with housing assets (land etc) being transferred to Wimpey, who are now Taylor Wimpey. I doubt the developer exists in a suitable form to enforce the covenant, you can be sure that Taylor Wimpey won't care at all.
Years back we lived on a McLean development, technically McLean Homes Northern Ltd. It was a large developer Mclean, who were bought by Tarmac and wound up I think around the mid 1990's. with housing assets (land etc) being transferred to Wimpey, who are now Taylor Wimpey. I doubt the developer exists in a suitable form to enforce the covenant, you can be sure that Taylor Wimpey won't care at all.
There was a bit of a kerfuffle where one property wished to develop their plot, e.g. convert existing garage into a room, build a detached garage and build a wall, on an open plan estate, which would have effectively annexed land owned by some friends and broken several of the covenants. The developer MHN did very little, and their effectiveness was less than square root of bugger all.
The thing which caused the plans to change, albeit not disappear, was the friends proving conclusively that the land in question was theirs. This was about 20sq m of land, not exactly where something lay to a few cm. in relation to a theoretical boundary line. All the other stuff, developer, waste of space.
Off topic footnote, I'm sure a lot of the trouble folks have with spelling and random errant apostrophes is down to flaming auto (in)correct. Why in "Years back.." do you want or even ever need a bloody apostrophe.
Edited by FiF on Tuesday 1st May 13:52
Referring to Dickymint I have to disagree with your view because boundaries are indeed simply a line on the registered title plan (which anyone can obtain from the Land Registry for a fee) and it is quite usual and helpful but not always used to show ownership by the 'T' and 'H' marks as described and if used are very relevant to determine ownership. The existence of an hedge and ditch beyond is only relevant where necessary to determine ownership and allows the legal presumption to be made in the absence of other evidence to determine that the boundary of the particular land is the far side of the ditch and not the hedge.
bazzfb said:
Referring to Dickymint I have to disagree with your view because boundaries are indeed simply a line on the registered title plan (which anyone can obtain from the Land Registry for a fee) and it is quite usual and helpful but not always used to show ownership by the 'T' and 'H' marks as described and if used are very relevant to determine ownership. The existence of an hedge and ditch beyond is only relevant where necessary to determine ownership and allows the legal presumption to be made in the absence of other evidence to determine that the boundary of the particular land is the far side of the ditch and not the hedge.
I wish (for clarity) you had quoted my post but here it is................."Correct me if I'm wrong but "T's" and "H's" in this case are irrelevant as there will not be a fence or hedge on the deeds and that nobody actually owns a boundary as it's just an imaginary line the width of an hair."
T's and H's if marked on a plan only refer to ownership or responsibility of maintenance of a wall/fence/whatever.
Nobody owns a boundary as it is an imaginary line and by definition cannot be owned.
In the OP's case there will be no T's or H's on his deeds as there was never a physical structure there to own therefore, as I said, irrelevant.
Only physical structures can be owned.
M12MTR said:
Well here it is. Returned home from work today to this:
https://www.instagram.com/p/BiPh-QMBVhl/
So not I'm not a "paranoid nutter" as stated above.
Am I really that bothered about it now that it's up? No. The 60cm high fence isn't that bad tbh. Also where he's sited it is also fine by me.
I still advocate that it's the principle and the open plan covenant on my deeds. His bullying nature - all 3 fence incidents over the past 2 years - with ZERO communication or respect for me or my property. Plus his encroachment/ trespass on my property of the rear fence.
I will decide what to do in due course. (I'm thinking a nice 2m high fence on my side just to annoy him / stop him seeing me / interupt his view). He's shown the boundary line - which I'm happy with - and if he can erect a fence so can I. Lol.
(Thanks to all of the constructive / helpful posts / posters above ;-) ).
It looks utterly ridiculous.https://www.instagram.com/p/BiPh-QMBVhl/
So not I'm not a "paranoid nutter" as stated above.
Am I really that bothered about it now that it's up? No. The 60cm high fence isn't that bad tbh. Also where he's sited it is also fine by me.
I still advocate that it's the principle and the open plan covenant on my deeds. His bullying nature - all 3 fence incidents over the past 2 years - with ZERO communication or respect for me or my property. Plus his encroachment/ trespass on my property of the rear fence.
I will decide what to do in due course. (I'm thinking a nice 2m high fence on my side just to annoy him / stop him seeing me / interupt his view). He's shown the boundary line - which I'm happy with - and if he can erect a fence so can I. Lol.
(Thanks to all of the constructive / helpful posts / posters above ;-) ).
He has very clearly removed the lawn your side of the boundary.
It's against the covenants - and this is a bully who obviously thinks he can do absolutely whatever he likes to you / your property.
My opinion is you should either push back - plenty of super advice above - or just get on with being bullied.
M12MTR said:
I put up my own higher fence - 2m running the full length of MY side of my drive - to obstruct his view which he clearly enjoys "watching me" - plus I will build 1.8m high doors to close off my driveway - adjacent with the front of my brickwork. When these doors open outward they will also obstruct the view. I will now spend the money on this rather than a fruitless legal battle. I will also widen my drive to allow me to 'play cars' on my drive. Tbh I have been thinking these plans for a good while now. So my neighbour has made my mind up. ;-)
I'm pretty certain you won't.M12MTR said:
Oh. And I WILL REMOVE his rear fence that is sited on my property.
You won’t. You won’t do anything. He knows it. You know it. We all know it. He’s done a nice job of the work, given you nothing to complain about. If you were to stick up a fence at the front, which you won’t, he’ll have you take it down within 48 hours. He has the measure of you and won’t ever treat you with an ounce of respect because frankly you don’t even respect yourself.
The whole thread was a total non issue or misleading, corrected and passive aggressive twaddle. Hopefully you can move on now and be grateful you have a neighbour who at least does a good job when they do it.
I know I’m being somewhat rude but you never had any intention of doing anything and all your passive aggressive twaddle about removing fences, seeing solicitors or whatever has just been pointless hot air that serves no purpose and frankly just makes you appear plain odd.
M12MTR said:
Thanks for your opinion DonkeyApple.
You are of course welcome to have it.
Surely I know what I'm going to do and not you.
Go troll elsewhere.
It’s not exactly trolling to call someone out on their BS. You are of course welcome to have it.
Surely I know what I'm going to do and not you.
Go troll elsewhere.
Frankly, you’re the one trolling with your passive aggressive tripe. All I am doing is calling you out on your BS.
Sayonara oddball.
Enjoy your new 2M fence and kiss goodbye to your land that you will gift him as your neighbour won't give a toss about not being able to see you.
You also moaned about loss of light if he had put up a 2M fence now you want to deprive yourself!!!
He seems to have done everything by the book apart from the rear fence which i doubt you will do much about apart from maybe remove the bolts that are attached to your garage and wait for the next storm.
You also moaned about loss of light if he had put up a 2M fence now you want to deprive yourself!!!
He seems to have done everything by the book apart from the rear fence which i doubt you will do much about apart from maybe remove the bolts that are attached to your garage and wait for the next storm.
M12MTR said:
I put up my own higher fence - 2m running the full length of MY side of my drive - to obstruct his view which he clearly enjoys "watching me" - plus I will build 1.8m high doors to close off my driveway - adjacent with the front of my brickwork. When these doors open outward they will also obstruct the view. I will now spend the money on this rather than a fruitless legal battle. I will also widen my drive to allow me to 'play cars' on my drive. Tbh I have been thinking these plans for a good while now. So my neighbour has made my mind up. ;-)
I think this is a terrible idea that will just result in a horrible looking mess, also you then both run the risk of someone else chasing you both over the covenants that you've both broken.I also think that there's some pretty solid legal advice and some very generous offers of support, in this thread, that you created,,, to seek legal advice. I'm not sure I'd consider following it as fruitless as beginning a campaign of erratic building works in a tempt to out build the idiot you rightly recognise as a bullying, dismissive covenant-breaking fool.
But it'll make this thread interesting if you do.
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff