Ownership of land

rainbow143

My question is how I find out who owns some land. I have looked on the Land Registry website but it only seems to give details of larger pieces of property – e.g. houses etc.
I live in a rural area and at the bottom of my garden I have a fenced boundary. The other side of the fence is a public footpath – and the other side of that is another fence which is the boundary for another house. So basically there are 2 housing estates with a public footpath running between them.
My side of the path is bordered with very tall trees. One of these blew down over Christmas last year and landed on my shed (causing very little damage to the shed). The council came out and removed the tree – but grumbled that they didn’t own the path.
These trees have grown so high that the branches overhang my garden by at least 5ft. Some of the trees are over 40ft high and my worry is that in high winds another one might come down – and probably destroy my bungalow.
I have had a tree surgeon out to assess the situation and he tells me that there is a lot of ivy growing on the trees which is compromising their strength.
I have written to the Council about this but they insist they don’t own the land – it seems the farmer who once owned all the fields on which the 2 estates are built did not sell the path. The Council are responsible for maintaining the path but that is all. No-one seems to know where the farmer is now – my bungalow is over 40 years old. I have spoken to my neighbours about this and they have been trying to get the Council to do something for years - I have only lived here since last year.
Any advice please?
Many thanks.

moneyistooshorttomention

There are Councils (at least in some parts of the country) that make a habit of denying they own land its quite obvious they do own and, funnily enough, it seems to happen when the owner has some expenditure to make on the land:cool:

The Land Registry, as I understand it, does general boundaries (ie accurate to within 1 metre), so if the path is wider than that, then they might have a title plan for it.

I would tend to take the tack of asking the Council "Well, if you don't own it, then just who does?" and see what their reply to that is.

Maybe the County Council will help?

Maybe your MP will help?

Maybe an article in the local paper will produce some useful comments? (cue photo of you standing by tree that might harm your house).

If the Council say they don't own the land, then ask them why they are maintaining someone else's property?

rainbow143

Thanks for the reply. The Council have stated - 'our responsibility would not alter and remained to deal with stopping of obstruction and keeping the surface of the path free of obstructive undergrowth'.
I do not think the Council own the land for a few reasons.
The 2 estates were built at different times - first was my estate - so when it was first built the boundary fence had the trees there but the other side was still fields. It was 20 years later that the other field was sold for the 2nd estate - leaving the footpath between the estates. I have recently bought my house and the conveyancer is very particular - always informs me of the finer details of the deeds - and she did not mention these trees.
My uncle used to own my house - 25 years ago - and he had problems with these trees then - and the farmer wouldn't trim then down then - but offered to sell them to him!!
My problem is finding who owns the land - none of the neighbours have had any luck over the years.
Perhaps I should make some enquiries with the Land Registry.
I have just read the Council's reply once again and they have made a statement about their responsibility - 'This would include requiring the owners of hedges to cut back hedges if they imposed a restriction on access'.
So maybe we need to inform the Council that the path itself is getting obstructed by these trees - which it is in places. It sounds like they would be responsible for dealing with this. Even if that responsibility is just to ensure the owners deal with the problem - the least they can do is find out who owns the land. I think they could find that information easier than I could.
Thanks - you've made me think about this again!! Lateral thinking - you can't beat it.

paddyrg

Is there any chance you could annexe the land and sit tight for a while - if nobody complains for 20 years or so, you've got your bagsies. Or maybe you could claim to have annexed it a long time ago and trim the trees yourself on safety grounds?

Debt_Free_Chick

Generally, it's the County Council that have responsibilities for Public Footpaths, not the local/District/Borough Council. Try a call or a visit to your CC website, to find the person/department responsible for Public Footpaths in your area.

As an example [url=]here's the link[/url] for the Rights of Way page for East Sussex CC.

HTH

Mojisola

rainbow143 wrote: »

These trees have grown so high that the branches overhang my garden by at least 5ft. Some of the trees are over 40ft high and my worry is that in high winds another one might come down – and probably destroy my bungalow.

rainbow143 wrote: »

My uncle used to own my house - 25 years ago - and he had problems with these trees then

So the trees have been a long-running problem which you knew about and you could see the current height of trees when you bought the house last year? I would have got this sorted out before buying or looked elsewhere.

You may end up having to deal with the trees yourself and hoping an owner doesn't appear after the work has been done to complain about it.

DirectDebacle

Your Common Law rights allow you to remove branches that cross over your boundary without the need to seek your neighbour's permission. Notifying your neighbour of your intentions is always advisable. However, you must not cross the boundary to do so. For example, leaning a ladder over the boundary to rest against the trunk of the tree could be classed as trespass. You should not dispose of the branches or any other waste material from the tree over your fence into your neighbour's garden, but first ask your neighbour if they wish to have the material returned to them. If they don't want it, it will be your responsibility to dispose of it. If a tree is protected by a Tree Preservation Order, or because it is located within a Conservation Area, the Common Law right is removed and you will need to seek formal permission from the Council before undertaking work to living parts of the tree.

Mojisola

DirectDebacle wrote: »

Your Common Law rights allow you to remove branches that cross over your boundary without the need to seek your neighbour's permission. Notifying your neighbour of your intentions is always advisable. However, you must not cross the boundary to do so. For example, leaning a ladder over the boundary to rest against the trunk of the tree could be classed as trespass.

As the trees are growing on a footpath, I don't think this would be a problem.

DirectDebacle

Clearly the OP is entitled to trim the branches back to his boundary. Site conditions will dictate how this is achieved. I get the feeling that a bigger concern is a whole tree(s) falling on his property. OP needs to investigate thoroughly who owns the land with the trees. Somebody owns it as it was once part of a single piece of farmland that has been split and sold.

moneyistooshorttomention

paddyrg wrote: »

Is there any chance you could annexe the land and sit tight for a while - if nobody complains for 20 years or so, you've got your bagsies. Or maybe you could claim to have annexed it a long time ago and trim the trees yourself on safety grounds?

1. It's a public footpath.

2. Many people are too moral to steal land (there are some of us out there:) and I've certainly had several people suggest I steal a bit of land near me, but I won't be doing so, mainly because I don't believe its right to do so). Perhaps OP is one of the moral ones and I have the feeling that they are.

Personally, I'd get that tree surgeon back and have them lop off all relevant parts of the tree and remove them (the owner of the land is hardly likely to come along at that point and object to the fact that they weren't handed the wood back). If, by some odd chance, the owner DID turn up at that point and demand their wood (make that a 1% chance they will then....) then you would find out who the owner actually is at that point.

You could safeguard yourself against that highly unlikely event of owner demanding their wood by keeping it stashed somewhere safe for a suitable length of time in case they did so. I recall that, many years ago, a little ******* had me sent some goods I had apparently ordered and I contacted the firm to explain that I hadn't ordered those goods and requesting to know how to return them to the firm. The firm never did respond. So, I looked up the law as to how long the firm had to claim their goods back in, after which point they would be deemed to be mine (even though they weren't) and I think it was somewhere between 1-3 months?????. I had no intention of keeping their property. I just wanted to know when I could safely dispose of it with no comeback. After that time had elapsed I just disposed of the item by giving it to charity. The point being that I suspect the same sort of reasoning will apply re that tree wood.

paddyrg

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

1. It's a public footpath.

2. Many people are too moral to steal land (there are some of us out there:) and I've certainly had several people suggest I steal a bit of land near me, but I won't be doing so, mainly because I don't believe its right to do so). Perhaps OP is one of the moral ones and I have the feeling that they are.

Yeah, it was a half-hearted suggestion
1) fair enough
2) yeah, I wouldn't either, but I know some people do adopt unadopted bits of land, so OP would have another (if less moral) option.