Mortgage terms and conditions and home improvements

Kitler_2

Doozergirl wrote: »

Let me catch up, is this genuinely another forum or just your neighbour?

A party wall is a wall that the two of you share that forms part of, or directly alongside of, the boundary. If you had a window on your party wall, it would be looking directly into her house from yours, or directly into her garden from an extension - if that were the case, by the sound of her she'd have already kicked off.


As for the ROW, the woman is going way too far but it's nice if you can make agreements before it goes to planning. The ROW can be re-routed within the deeds quite easily so that your path starts at a new point on the boundary.

If you are going to lodge an opposition to a neighbour on the grounds of their extension, I'd really recommend calling into the Planning Department and having a quick chat with the officers to ensure that your objection is grounded first.



How big is it exactly?

Thanks Doozergirl

I'll try to explain... my initial worries were around work I've had done in my home, including the conversion of the former back door to a window. Someone on a different forum, purporting to be a solicitor, scared the pants off me by stating that I should have asked the mortgage lender first ... otherwise they could repossess. I asked for advice on this forum as how best to remedy the situation with regards to building regs etc.

The proposed extension would be built on the ROW and yes this would mean diverting it and moving the entry gate further down the garden. This would mean that the raised flower bed that I've had built alongside the boundary fence (only last year) would be demolished and dug out to accomodate steps to the new entry gate.

The plans for the extension do not give any measurements at all ... but it looks like it will be built on the boundary line approx 2ft (maybe less) from my living room window. It is a substantial 2 storey extension but I'm sure it's overall size will probably be within the rules of development.

The window in question (that she objects to) faces in the direction of her garden but there is the boundary fence and access gate to the ROW separating the two. This window was formerly the kitchen door ... it was a partly glazed door with clear glass. I was worried that this might be a party wall.. it is not a party wall I have since been told (but still am not convinced that this is right). Also it was a FENSA registered window company that installed the window so it meets the safety regs.

I did suggest that we sit down together to see if we could reach a compromise... she flatly refused (as I'm sure, she has a right to do so) and yes this is when she came to show me the plans .. she told me that she would be submitting them regardless. I registered my objections as I was invited to do when notification of the application arrived. She was aggrieved by this.

The dog is a threat and an obstruction to me making full use of the ROW. I do not object to the dog per se ... but I do object to being attacked as I cross the ROW. Farm animals are one thing .... domestic animals are another and I think most would agree that the dog owner should take responsibilty for how the dog behaves. He has been muzzled in the past but still has charged and head butted people (he is a big dog). He has attacked and bitten others (her friends) as well as me. He is unpredictable so what am I supposed to do ... not use the ROW? This may well give her grounds to claim "abandonment" or go for possessory title through "adverse possession".

According to the Land Registry documents ... this easement is the only legal access I have from the back of my house to the street. I have pointed this out to her yet she has still asked me to give up the ROW on two subsequent occasions.

My house is also being developed (inside). The front door opens directly onto the street. When the living room is finished I will no longer use the front door... I will use the back doors for access to the street which means I will be using the ROW on a daily basis. This is quite a common practice as it gives more usable square footage in the living room. She is aggrieved by this because she has been practically undisturbed with regards to usage of the ROW in the past. I have always been willing to sit down and negotiate... she is not. I have already given up a part of the ROW and also an outbuilding that is situated in her garden so that she can develop the outbuilding into a home office and set up a business practice .... all this for "nil consideration"... in other words I have given it to her for nothing.

I am thinking very hard about this ... it may just be easier to give in to her terrorist type approach to the matter. It is all too stressful for me... and she knows this. I have had a life threatening illness and am still in treatment. I am not looking for sympathy .. just presenting the facts of the matter.

Actually I think I am on the wrong forum for all of this stuff... oh well ..it may be my last post on the subject :eek:

jc808

heres an idea:

- use your front door
- stop going through her back garden (ie if you need to get out of the house from the garden, go through the house and out the front door, crazy i know...)
- stop being so bloody silly

Doozergirl

I'm starting to think that you have something to give on this as well.

Using your neighbours back garden as main entry to your house really isn't the idea of these ROWs. It's not your land, it is hers. She can keep her dangerous dog on it if she wants to, whilst there might be some kind of liability if the dog bit, it doesn't involve the ROW per se.

She can't claim adverse possession or whatever because it is already her land! It already sounds like a game of tit for tat...

In your position, I'd do the proper research on the extension before submitting an objection. And if you want that ROW then you need to consider moving the flowers from the bed. She is allowed to build an extension as well.

What do you think the suitable compromise is? As it sounds from this side, there isn't really one. You want the ROW where you want it, you want to use it as generally access rather than for bins or the usual intention of these things. You want her to contain her dog permanently on her own land so you can traipse across her back garden night and day.

How would you feel if the boot was on the other foot?

Kitler_2

Doozergirl wrote: »

I'm starting to think that you have
something to give on this as well.


Doozergirl.... Thanks for this but with regards to the situation described in my post. Read it ....again!

I have absolutely nothing to gain and everything to lose from this.

What more do you suggest I give her? Perhaps I should abandon the ROW completely (this is what she wants). How then would I have access to the back of my house, this being the only means of access?

I have never objected to her developing in principle... just the way she intends.

I have already given her the outbuilding (yes given her - for no fee) and I have already given up part of the ROW for her to develop her business premises.

Using your neighbours back garden as main entry to your house really isn't the idea of these ROWs. It's not your land, it is hers. She can keep her dangerous dog on it if she wants to, whilst there might be some kind of liability if the dog bit, it doesn't involve the ROW per se.

I can use the ROW as a footpath to the street. I am not limited to how many times I can use this. I can use the back of my house as the main entry if I so wish, in fact as I said, it is commonplace and generally accepted for this to be done in the city where I live. Many semi's and terraces operate in this way. People do not use their front door... it's a personal choice.

She can't claim adverse possession or whatever because it is already her land! It already sounds like a game of tit for tat...

She can seek "Possessory Title through a claim of "abandonment". This is why she locks the gate and has refused to give me access (I have access now but I had to ask several times for this).

In your position, I'd do the proper research on the extension before submitting an objection. And if you want that ROW then you need to consider moving the flowers from the bed. She is allowed to build an extension as well.

I have seen the plans ... she brought them and showed them to me. I told her I wasn't happy with certain points. I suggested that she might consider a loft conversion to get the two extra bedrooms she wants and a conservatory. She did not want to consider modifying them in any way and told me she would submit them regardless. She did and I registered my objections when invited to do so.


What do you think the suitable compromise is? As it sounds from this side, there isn't really one. You want the ROW where you want it, you want to use it as generally access rather than for bins or the usual intention of these things. You want her to contain her dog permanently on her own land so you can traipse across her back garden night and day.

Clearly you lack understanding about Easements and ROW. Can you explain what you think a ROW is usually intended for?

Allow me to explain... A ROW is just that.... a ROW. It is a footpath and cannot be used for any other purpose than that for which it was intended when granted. (It states the intended use on the Title Deeds). She is now deliberately obstructing it with her dustbins. It is not for storage and it is actionable as "substantial interference".

I have since discovered that the dog issue is also actionable as "substantial interference". If the dog is menacing or intimidating I am quite legally entitled to ask her to control it (see Dangerous Dogs Act). I am entitled to use the ROW free from intimidation or danger... this includes fouling of the ROW by the dog. She fails to exercise control over the dog and it bites me AGAIN... then a destruction order could be put in place, this would not be my decision to make .. it is a decision taken by the courts. I happen to love dogs.. and would never want this. All I am asking is that I am allowed to use the ROW as I am legally entitled to do.

Yes I want the ROW where it is... I do not want my garden demolished for her to create a new entry point.


I no longer have any idea what a suitable compromise would be... she has waged war ... not me. Perhaps mediation wold be helpful.... but something tells me she would refuse.

I have not brought it to dispute. I have merely registered my objections to her plans ... that is not a dispute. I have also exercised my right to use the ROW... neither is that a dispute. She has now erected another gate to the ROW (which encroaches onto my land) that serves only one purpose... and that is to impede and obstruct my access.... now that is bringing it into dispute!!!


How would you feel if the boot was on the other foot?

Probably P'eed off.... but I would not have bought a property burdened with easement if I wanted to develop it. Her conveyancer should have pointed this out to her at the point of sale. If he or she did not... then she should take up the issue with him/her. She is the "Servient Tenement" meaning she is burdened with the easement.

I would buy a different house... I would not begin a bullying and harrassment campaign on my neighbour to get my own way. I am an adult and a professional... I do not behave in such a manner.