Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Skutter47
    • By Skutter47 2nd Oct 17, 11:45 AM
    • 9Posts
    • 22Thanks
    Skutter47
    Neighbour constantly trespassing in yard, claims right of way.
    • #1
    • 2nd Oct 17, 11:45 AM
    Neighbour constantly trespassing in yard, claims right of way. 2nd Oct 17 at 11:45 AM
    Hi All,

    My neighbours have a back door that opens into my privately owned yard, one member of the household constantly ignores our polite requests (both verbal and written) to respect our privacy and not use our back yard for access to their house, further they deliberately leave the back gate to our yard open, simply to annoy us. They have a front door, and thus no easement of neccessity to use the yard as access. It is only one visitor to the household, all the others are happy to respect our rights, but their mother refuses and wanders through our yard whenever she visits them, which is often. The arrogance of it is upsetting, as we have asked for no more than our private property to be respected, which is perfectly reasonable.

    I have inspected both the title register and plan to their property, it makes no mention at all of any right of way over any neighbouring property, and no specific mention of the back yard at all. Their title plan shows a red outline of their property, and no other markings at all.

    Our title register and title plan also make no mention of any right of way and show no other markings other than the property boundaries.

    There are two flats in my building, we share the freehold, and the lease states that neither of us may allow anybody to establish a right of way over the property. Neither of us wish them to use the yard.

    I am confident that neither the owners nor the tenants have a right of way over the property.

    I wish to make certain that no easement by prescription be established over time, and to simply lock the back gate with a padlock and put up a sign stating it is private. My thinking is that this would mean they would have to use legal "force" to enter the back garden, by breaking the lock or scaling the wall and ignoring the sign.

    Do you concur? Any other advice? Any pitfalls to this approach?
Page 5
    • chappers
    • By chappers 6th Oct 17, 3:44 PM
    • 2,705 Posts
    • 1,531 Thanks
    chappers
    The 2 houses could have been owned by the same person, but when either or both were sold on, any potential ROW was erroneously not documented.

    I think this is one of those situations where the true facts will never be known.
    Originally posted by lincroft1710
    That's the most likely situation
    Rights of way are usually written into the transfer of the sold property which is in turn itemised into the title of the property that retains the freehold of the land over which the ROW is granted and it has been thus since forever.
    If this came up before the land tribunal, they would look back through all of the previous titles and transfers and if they couldn't find any record of the right of way having been removed legitimately, they would probably rule that it still exists.
    Assuming that the current set up is original and the neighbours haven't at some point just decided to build a back door on to a yard that wasn't theirs.
    If the setup was original and all the buildings and yard were contemporary to each other they would make the assumption that both houses would originally have had access to the yard.

    This is where decent solicitors earn their money, making sure transfers truly reflect what is actually being transferred, so problems don't rear their heads down the line.
    Lazy conveyancing causes these sorts of problems.
    Last edited by chappers; 06-10-2017 at 3:47 PM.
    • Davesnave
    • By Davesnave 6th Oct 17, 6:21 PM
    • 23,324 Posts
    • 88,924 Thanks
    Davesnave
    This is where decent solicitors earn their money, making sure transfers truly reflect what is actually being transferred, so problems don't rear their heads down the line.
    Lazy conveyancing causes these sorts of problems.
    Originally posted by chappers
    The solicitor can usually only do this with the purchaser's help, though. At some stage the question has to be asked, "Does the title plan and documentation reflect the real situation on the ground?' 'Are the conditions, rights, responsibilities, covenants etc reasonable and as outlined by the vendor?'

    In the case of our house, the answer was 'No,' four times over, one of which was a logical inconsistency, which ought to have been picked-up several transfers before. That was the only one which could be found without a site visit.

    I do wonder what % of people who've taken the budget route through an on-line conveyancing factory will later regret it.
    Last edited by Davesnave; 06-10-2017 at 8:06 PM. Reason: typo
    'A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they'll never sit in.'
    • paulandjanine
    • By paulandjanine 6th Oct 17, 6:38 PM
    • 57 Posts
    • 201 Thanks
    paulandjanine
    The solicitor can usually only do this with the purchaser's help, though. At some stage the question has to be asked, "Does the title plan and documentation reflect the real situation on the ground?' 'Are the conditions, rights, responsibilities, covenants etc reasonable and as outlined by the vendor?'

    I do wonder what % of people who've taken the budget route through an on-line conveyancing factory will later regret it.
    Originally posted by Davesnave
    I have a relative with this situation. We've discovered she has no legal access to her property, via the access she was told. This is so obvious when seeing the property in the flesh.

    However she forgot to mention where the front door is to the solicitor, so it was never picked up. She argued the conveyancer should have told her, but as the title plans look like a regular property, there was no way the solicitor could have known unless expressly told. And the firm was 200 miles away.

    It's a bit of a mess...
    • chappers
    • By chappers 6th Oct 17, 7:46 PM
    • 2,705 Posts
    • 1,531 Thanks
    chappers
    The solicitor can usually only do this with the purchaser's help, though. At some stage the question has to be asked, "Does the title plan and documentation reflect the real situation on the ground?' 'Are the conditions, rights, responsibilities, covenants etc reasonable and as outlined by the vendor?'

    In the case of our house, the answer was 'No,' four times over, one of which was a logical inconsistency, which ought to have been picked-up several transfers before. That as the only one which could be found without a site visit.

    I do wonder what % of people who've taken the budget route through an on-line conveyancing factory will later regret it.
    Originally posted by Davesnave
    yep absolutely, I know someone who bought a house with a separate parcel of land across the road. I have no idea how it happened but several transfers previously this piece of land got registered incorrectly with the title to the house. Several people bought the house thinking they owned the land and then sold it on again in good faith. It wasn't until the rightful owner put in a planning application to develop the land that it all flagged up.
    It caused a right palaver it took several years to resolve. I don't know the full ins and outs but it involved tracking down people from previous transactions and money changed hands through the previous transactions.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

4,633Posts Today

6,192Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @LordsEconCom: On Tuesday Martin Lewis, Hannah Morrish & Shakira Martin gave evidence to the Cttee. Read the full transcript here: https?

  • Ta ta for now. Half term's starting, so I'm exchanging my MoneySavingExpert hat for one that says Daddy in big letters. See you in a week.

  • RT @thismorning: Can @MartinSLewis' deals save YOU cash? ???? https://t.co/igbHCwzeiN

  • Follow Martin