Right of Access to Rear of Terrace
Discussion
I live in an old end terrace house (built 1900) and the title states that the other houses on the terrace have "the full and free right of way at all times and for all purposes"
It's clear that it was written without consideration for vehicles and basically just lets people who live on the street access to their back door.
I have a neighbor who believes that my driveway (which forms the entrance to the rear of the terrace) is fair game for the whole street. As a result, she parks there and actively encourages others to do so.
My question is.. Do these rights usually extend to vehicles? And surely it refers to access across, rather than permission to loiter or park there? The previous owner successfully applied for permission to build a garage, which would have prevented all vehicular access, to me that means my neighbors have pedestrian rights only, as the council gave permission to build a structure that would have prevent access other than on foot.
Any thoughts on this appreciated.
It's clear that it was written without consideration for vehicles and basically just lets people who live on the street access to their back door.
I have a neighbor who believes that my driveway (which forms the entrance to the rear of the terrace) is fair game for the whole street. As a result, she parks there and actively encourages others to do so.
My question is.. Do these rights usually extend to vehicles? And surely it refers to access across, rather than permission to loiter or park there? The previous owner successfully applied for permission to build a garage, which would have prevented all vehicular access, to me that means my neighbors have pedestrian rights only, as the council gave permission to build a structure that would have prevent access other than on foot.
Any thoughts on this appreciated.
It's an interesting question, do planning look at the deeds and clarify if the garage is allowable, as I'm not sure they would. If they don't, it seems you could get planning permission for a garage but the deeds would override this as you would be breaching the covenants?
I'd be tempted to fit a barrier that rises from the ground to block the driveway to vehicles, so you'd be like batman, drive up, press a button, fence lowers and allows you on/off, then rises and stops cars parking there. The nature of it could mean you left ample pedestrian access to utilise the path to the back of the terrace, but the numptie parking on your drive would be out of luck
I'd be tempted to fit a barrier that rises from the ground to block the driveway to vehicles, so you'd be like batman, drive up, press a button, fence lowers and allows you on/off, then rises and stops cars parking there. The nature of it could mean you left ample pedestrian access to utilise the path to the back of the terrace, but the numptie parking on your drive would be out of luck
You need to read what is covered by the right of access, and look at in context to your title.
You are claiming that they are parking on your driveway. If the driveway is yours, the right of access will allow other to pass through the driveway, but not use it. If you are claiming that a section of the common alleyway at the end of the terrace outside your house is actually your parking space then you may not get the answer you were hoping for.
What is shown on your title plan?
You are claiming that they are parking on your driveway. If the driveway is yours, the right of access will allow other to pass through the driveway, but not use it. If you are claiming that a section of the common alleyway at the end of the terrace outside your house is actually your parking space then you may not get the answer you were hoping for.
What is shown on your title plan?
I had this situation in a previous house. Like you I was at the end and the land which the access road was on belonged to me. I applied for PP to build a garage on this and it was given with the proviso that I did not fully block access. I never built it though as it caused a few arguments with neighbours.
I moved shortly afterwards. After I left, the neighbours continued to argue to the point that one of them took the buyer of my house to court to get an injunction to prevent them from parking on their own land and so preventing vehicular acccess to the rear 'road'. The injunction was granted, but it backfired as the court also ruled that no-one could obstruct the rear road by parking outside their own house as that would also obstruct access. The newly defined 'access road' was then of no use to anyone as no-one could stop on it.
I moved shortly afterwards. After I left, the neighbours continued to argue to the point that one of them took the buyer of my house to court to get an injunction to prevent them from parking on their own land and so preventing vehicular acccess to the rear 'road'. The injunction was granted, but it backfired as the court also ruled that no-one could obstruct the rear road by parking outside their own house as that would also obstruct access. The newly defined 'access road' was then of no use to anyone as no-one could stop on it.
Northernchimp said:
I live in an old end terrace house (built 1900) and the title states that the other houses on the terrace have "the full and free right of way at all times and for all purposes"
It's clear that it was written without consideration for vehicles
Perhaps, but that doesn't mean it excludes them.It's clear that it was written without consideration for vehicles
Northernchimp said:
I have a neighbor who believes that my driveway (which forms the entrance to the rear of the terrace) is fair game for the whole street.
It is, as far as "right of way" goes, so they certainly have access to drive over it for whatever purpose they see fit. You cannot block them from doing so, because you'd be in breach of that right of way - just as they would be if their parking prevented anybody from using that right of way. Whether parking is included in that right of way is another question - it doesn't say it isn't.Northernchimp said:
The previous owner successfully applied for permission to build a garage, which would have prevented all vehicular access, to me that means my neighbors have pedestrian rights only, as the council gave permission to build a structure that would have prevent access other than on foot.
Planning permission doesn't necessarily take account of things like RoW, and it certainly doesn't cancel it out.Your solicitor should have explained this to you when you bought the property.
Hi,
Thanks for the replies so far. The driveway, which doubles as the entrance to the rear of the terrace belongs to my house. The land is definitely within my boundaries. I did check to make sure I wasn't mistaking an access road that passes by my house for a driveway and I'm certain that I'm not.
To me it's people seeing a wide road looking thing and using it as one, then asserting their non existing right to do so whenever they're challenged.
Thanks for the replies so far. The driveway, which doubles as the entrance to the rear of the terrace belongs to my house. The land is definitely within my boundaries. I did check to make sure I wasn't mistaking an access road that passes by my house for a driveway and I'm certain that I'm not.
To me it's people seeing a wide road looking thing and using it as one, then asserting their non existing right to do so whenever they're challenged.
Northernchimp said:
Hi,
Thanks for the replies so far. The driveway, which doubles as the entrance to the rear of the terrace belongs to my house. The land is definitely within my boundaries. I did check to make sure I wasn't mistaking an access road that passes by my house for a driveway and I'm certain that I'm not.
To me it's people seeing a wide road looking thing and using it as one, then asserting their non existing right to do so whenever they're challenged.
So it's your land, it's wide enough to park a car AND allow vehicular access down the back of the terrace, and someone else is parking on the bit that does NOT block access?Thanks for the replies so far. The driveway, which doubles as the entrance to the rear of the terrace belongs to my house. The land is definitely within my boundaries. I did check to make sure I wasn't mistaking an access road that passes by my house for a driveway and I'm certain that I'm not.
To me it's people seeing a wide road looking thing and using it as one, then asserting their non existing right to do so whenever they're challenged.
The title doesn't specify pedestrian or vehicular, possibly due to when it was written. With a couple of exceptions, it has always been interpreted as pedestrian.
I have no issue with people seeking access to the rear of their property (by foot or vehicle, if that's their right), my objection is the neighbours treating land clearly belonging to my house as shared - essentially abusing the access covenant. They have never sought access, just shared privileges over the drive that forms the mouth of the access road (which is blocked at the other end anyway). If I could determine that access is pedestrian, it would leave me a in stronger position to tell them, regardless of for access or parking, they have no right to enter what is clearly by land by any means other than on foot.
I have no issue with people seeking access to the rear of their property (by foot or vehicle, if that's their right), my objection is the neighbours treating land clearly belonging to my house as shared - essentially abusing the access covenant. They have never sought access, just shared privileges over the drive that forms the mouth of the access road (which is blocked at the other end anyway). If I could determine that access is pedestrian, it would leave me a in stronger position to tell them, regardless of for access or parking, they have no right to enter what is clearly by land by any means other than on foot.
Could a vehicle drive all the way behind the terrace, or does it become more of a footpath behind the houses? Normally if it's for vehiclular access it would have two entrances. It sounds to me like it's really only pedestrian access to the rear.
Can you put a Google maps link for it?
Can you put a Google maps link for it?
You will need to post a lot more than just the headline if you want any useful help, and even then it's a very specialist area and can be very costly to get into a fight over, so you want to be armed with more than just a few reassurances from people on the internet agreeing with you.
Northernchimp said:
The title doesn't specify pedestrian or vehicular, possibly due to when it was written. With a couple of exceptions, it has always been interpreted as pedestrian.
I have no issue with people seeking access to the rear of their property (by foot or vehicle, if that's their right), my objection is the neighbours treating land clearly belonging to my house as shared - essentially abusing the access covenant. They have never sought access, just shared privileges over the drive that forms the mouth of the access road (which is blocked at the other end anyway). If I could determine that access is pedestrian, it would leave me a in stronger position to tell them, regardless of for access or parking, they have no right to enter what is clearly by land by any means other than on foot.
The problem is that, by not restricting the access to pedestrian, vehicular access - horse and cart at the time - is permitted. So they DO have a right of entry with vehicles.I have no issue with people seeking access to the rear of their property (by foot or vehicle, if that's their right), my objection is the neighbours treating land clearly belonging to my house as shared - essentially abusing the access covenant. They have never sought access, just shared privileges over the drive that forms the mouth of the access road (which is blocked at the other end anyway). If I could determine that access is pedestrian, it would leave me a in stronger position to tell them, regardless of for access or parking, they have no right to enter what is clearly by land by any means other than on foot.
Parking on it is not explicitly forbidden, either, so long as it doesn't prevent that right of way from being exercised. The only question is whether the concept of a right of way "for any purpose" itself includes parking.
Fill yer boots with this lot, and these are just from the first few google results...
http://www.boundary-problems.co.uk/boundary-proble...
http://www.boundary-problems.co.uk/boundary-proble...
...which suggests that, even when there's not an obstruction, parking is not permitted. Other views may, of course, differ - and only a judge can give a really definitive opinion.
But then what? You can't stop them using the right of way. You can't wheelclamp or tow their car away. What've you gained, apart from a costly and unpleasant neighbour dispute?
TooMany2cvs said:
Parking on it is not explicitly forbidden, either, so long as it doesn't prevent that right of way from being exercised. The only question is whether the concept of a right of way "for any purpose" itself includes parking.
You're looking at it from the wrong perspective. A right over land owned by another is limited by the express wording of the grant, not whether it expressly restricts something.On the face of it, the right to pass over an area of land to access the rear of a property is very different to a right to park on an area of land owned by someone else which is subject to the a right to allow others to pass over it.
Of course, neighbour will either already know that and choose to ignore it, or be too stupid to appreciate the distinction and continue to insist that she is entitled to do so, forcing OP to either put up with it or take action to stop it.
OP, check your home insurance to see whether it includes legal expenses cover. If it does, register a claim and get them to cover the cost of getting some advice and potentially sending a snotty letter to your bolshy neighbour.
Usually a ROW is that only and is usually shown in a different colour outlined on the title plan deeds. Title deeds also usually state what type of access is allowed, either foot etc or on a property I owned by a wheelbarrow. Next door (whose land I had the right to pass over with my wheelbarrow threatened to reduce the 8ft width of the ROW so that it was only wide enough for a wheelbarrow i.e put approx 6ft barrier across. Legal advise was that the wheelbarrow access had to be provided over any part of the 8ft width and a solicitors letter prevented any sort of barrier being erected.
So suggest
1) look at deeds to see what type of ROW ie. foot etc
2) Look at plans to see if any indication of width of ROW, this may be unlikely but rough scale may give some indication
3) your boundary wall gap is obviously wide enough for a car to pass through, but do of the adjoined terrace properties have original walls/gates that would indicate original width of ROW its unlikely to be wider than the original gates.
4)Highly unlikely that anyone is allowed to park on the actual ROW even if its over your own land.
HTH
So suggest
1) look at deeds to see what type of ROW ie. foot etc
2) Look at plans to see if any indication of width of ROW, this may be unlikely but rough scale may give some indication
3) your boundary wall gap is obviously wide enough for a car to pass through, but do of the adjoined terrace properties have original walls/gates that would indicate original width of ROW its unlikely to be wider than the original gates.
4)Highly unlikely that anyone is allowed to park on the actual ROW even if its over your own land.
HTH
herewego said:
I'm wondering what this area looks like if neighbours think it is a general parking area. Can it not be redesigned to clarify that it is part of your property and therefore out of bounds? Fences, walls, garden areas, planters etc.
It looks like a paved inviting road, almost like a supermarket car park. That could be changed, but at reasonable expense. I'm going to just scream and shout instead I think. Maintaining good relations isn't that important to me really, I'm just trying not to stoop to their level. Thanks for the comments.
As others have said you need to look at the plan and the wording and where the access points are etc. The right of way should be shown marked on the plan and if it is only 3ft wide its not going to be wide enough for a car. However as others have said if by parking on it, you or others are blocking it then that is wrong.
Northernchimp said:
herewego said:
I'm wondering what this area looks like if neighbours think it is a general parking area. Can it not be redesigned to clarify that it is part of your property and therefore out of bounds? Fences, walls, garden areas, planters etc.
It looks like a paved inviting road, almost like a supermarket car park. That could be changed, but at reasonable expense. I'm going to just scream and shout instead I think. Maintaining good relations isn't that important to me really, I'm just trying not to stoop to their level. Thanks for the comments.
I work in housing (social) for a living- thus deal with access rights a lot.
so typically with terraces- the issue is- if you have landlocked rear gardens- each neighbour must allow walking access from garden to garden.
this is ususally a 3' wide strip directly against the backs of houses- not wandering across gardens and around stuff.
basically its to allow reasonable bin access- back when people had a dustbin and put "ashes" out, or for coal delivery etc.
now in social housing, issues come up when houses get sold and an "owner" suddenly starts restricting access- building fences and so on.
equally it can be a problem if people want to extend.
now for owners, usually the right of access gets forgotten about- because everyone usually wants a private garden/area. also you don't have a coal man and potentially wheelie bins can be kept at the front.
yr issues are problematic to solve without proper pictures: but I suspect someone is parking wrongly and using yr land to their benefit- the access allowed is only temporary for other residents to gain access to their homes.
problem is, people are terribly selfish and lazy when it comes to parking.
how about dumping some big rocks in the way ? or even starting yr own garage build ?
equally a couple of posts and some chain ?
but we need some pictures !
so typically with terraces- the issue is- if you have landlocked rear gardens- each neighbour must allow walking access from garden to garden.
this is ususally a 3' wide strip directly against the backs of houses- not wandering across gardens and around stuff.
basically its to allow reasonable bin access- back when people had a dustbin and put "ashes" out, or for coal delivery etc.
now in social housing, issues come up when houses get sold and an "owner" suddenly starts restricting access- building fences and so on.
equally it can be a problem if people want to extend.
now for owners, usually the right of access gets forgotten about- because everyone usually wants a private garden/area. also you don't have a coal man and potentially wheelie bins can be kept at the front.
yr issues are problematic to solve without proper pictures: but I suspect someone is parking wrongly and using yr land to their benefit- the access allowed is only temporary for other residents to gain access to their homes.
problem is, people are terribly selfish and lazy when it comes to parking.
how about dumping some big rocks in the way ? or even starting yr own garage build ?
equally a couple of posts and some chain ?
but we need some pictures !
Used to live in a terrace with a gitty / jitty and had exactly the same with a right of access across both the back and front of the terrace, however it was stated in the deeds as access by 'foot and barrow'. you are going to have to explain that the woman is effectively parking in your garden.
Good luck with this, parking issues seem to bring out the worst in most people.
Good luck with this, parking issues seem to bring out the worst in most people.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff