blocked access to garage.

colino

You also need the legend to go along with the maps (which incidentally have a lot less "tag", a, b, c, etc. than I remember) which more accurately indicates boundaries.
It looks like in the deeds your garage, to prevent access problems, has had the concrete apron outside added on to your ownership and the others, with straight line access, do not.
The kerb looks historical and you can't do much about that, but I very much doubt your PIA neighbour has any right to park outside her garage, she is obstructing you, and the council or other owner of that area is the one to take it up with. (In effect the garage owner has retained the rights to the access portion of most of the garage area and probably at some time would have made their ransom strip rights clear).
At one point I rented 12 single garages as a block, 6 in a row facing another 6 in a row. Very handy they were too, but in the lease I technically had access over the road only and was not allowed to stop anywhere but in the garages!

NBLondon

beddycov wrote: »

Norman castle im not sure. Originally i possibly thought 'access' but then thought it may be just to show which garage. Although thats what the red boundary is for.

Well the arrow certainly looks like it shows an access route.

It makes sense that the end garage is the only one to have exclusive rights to the space in front - since by parking there you won't restrict access to anyone else's garage. So on that basis - you are right and the neighbour does not have the right to park in front (and presumably the same at the other end of the row).

I agree with mikey that it looks as if the neighbour with the bamboo fence has extended their garden into what was originally public land. Presumably without planning permission and the council should pick up on that. If a dropped kerb (to match the other side) gives you extra room to get the van in then that's a solution you could put to the council. Good Luck:)

Wongsky

flashg67 wrote: »

Your neighbour's not exactlly being neighbourly either with the way they're parking. They can see ther's a problem but seem to be parking right over to the side and back from their garage - can you discuss this with them?

Agreed - surely if they parked more central in their space in front of their garage, and closer to the garage door - good for security, 'cos it might make it harder for scrotes to get into their garage, there'd be enough room to be able to drive something out of the gap from your space?

skivenov

Dave_C wrote: »

Back on topic, is it possible to park on the road behind the offending car, leaving just enough manoeuvring room for a 63 point turn.

Dave

I'm with you on that. Be nice, until there's a reason not to, then be as big a !!!!!! as the person you're dealing with.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

i'd be inclined to try and figure out what time she puts it there and what time she moves it on regular basis, then allow her to block you in and then when you need out keep knocking her door and asking for her to move, with the view of saying back in 10 mins see you then. soon get fed up of moving in and out and extra wear on her clutch.

System

Problem is that it is not obstruction if the OP can't put the vehicle back so neighbour doesn't need to move.

Wig

The garden infront does not belong to that neighbour. However, they may have occupied the garden infront as their own land for more than 20 years.......and as such would now have adverse possession of it, maybe they applied for adverse possession already, but even if they have not yet applied for it, they would have the right to take adverse possession (on paper) just by applying for it.....However as of midnight tonight squatting is to be criminalised so presumably adverse possession laws may be changing too, and this could stop them from aquiring the land if they have not already done so.

In other words, although it would be nice to tear down that bamboo curtain and drive over the flower bed, you could find yourself being charged with criminal damage, if they have the right of adverse possession.

What I would do - as I said in the previous post is go to council highways dept ask them if they own the triangular section which should probably be a grass verge, and ask them to come to take possession back from the tresspasser who has created a garden on top of it. Then assuming they can take back possession....you need to ask the council (you offer to pay for the work) to re align the kerb stones so that you can leave your garage in a straight line onto the highway.

If the above does not work, you have to find out who owns the land infront of the garages (except yours because you own the land infront of yours) or if it is actually supposed to be highway.....Ask the highways dept if it is highway. There is no border on the maps between the highway and the garage forecourt, so it could be highway. Even the bit infront of your garage could be highway, (you own the land underneath the highway). If it is highway you can park there...in the absence of yellow lines, but she cannot park there and block you in, that would be wilfull obstruction on her part.

If it is not highway there should be something in the deeds of her garage about access to the garage and parking infront on the forecourt. The absence of such a clause would help to suggest that the forecourt is to be intended as highway. But you need the highways dept to agree that it is all supposed to be highway before you can do anything.

Lum

Wig, got any more info on these new laws?

I took adverse possession of a garage back in 2007, as had most of my neighbours in the area after the land registry decided they didn't exist. I'm currently patiently waiting until 2017 to make it officially mine.

Will be quite annoyed if I can't do that now.

Wig

Sorry Lum, I'm only guessing....

The squatting laws are being changed today as you you should have heard on the news. Making squatting now illegal.

I'm guessing that adverse possession is linked to squatting, you for example are squatting in that garage, you used to be able to take possession after a number of years (I thought 20, you imply it's 10) of unchallenged squatting.

If squatting is now illegal what does that say about adverse possession as a result of squatting? Whether challenged squatting or unchallenged squatting. Perhaps when you come to take possession, they will look for the owner and if the owner does not object then the garage will become yours.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

Wig wrote: »

Sorry Lum, I'm only guessing....

The squatting laws are being changed today as you you should have heard on the news. Making squatting now illegal.

I'm guessing that adverse possession is linked to squatting, you for example are squatting in that garage, you used to be able to take possession after a number of years (I thought 20, you imply it's 10) of unchallenged squatting.

If squatting is now illegal what does that say about adverse possession as a result of squatting? Whether challenged squatting or unchallenged squatting. Perhaps when you come to take possession, they will look for the owner and if the owner does not object then the garage will become yours.

i was under the impression this was to affect residential buildings. not land so i assume this law would not affect adverse land possetion and as such a garage not being a residential property or adjoined onto one as part of it then i cant see that law covering this garage.