Neighbour not replacing fence

Dan-Dan

!!!!!! wrote: »

Or arrogant dog owners who believe its somebody else's job to prevent their dog straying and causing a possible danger as the OP seems to be.

If you read it that way , then it says more about you than the op

System

Dan-Dan wrote: »

If you read it that way , then it says more about you than the op

Not really. You seem to think the neighbour is lazy and careless for not doing something that he neither has a legal obligation nor a need to do.

And to top it all you call him filth

I suggest you look to yourself first before questioning other people.

JimmyTheWig

aallank wrote: »

he is a builder by trade (although not been working for the last at least 2 years) so i know he is more than capeable of repairing/replacing himself. Its just frustrating that he hasn't (if it was a money thing for him, then i think that the 2 take aways they have delivered every week could surely cover the cost if they were to go without them)

It's obviously not a priority for him.
Does he have a moral responsibility to maintain the fence? Arguably so.
Does he have a legal responsibility to maintain the fence? No.
If that's not what he wants to spend his money on then he doesn't have to. You can't force him.

Maybe a solution is for you to offer to provide the materials if he puts the fence up? Would be cheaper for you than paying someone to put a fence up on your side of the boundary.

Dan-Dan

!!!!!! wrote: »

Not really. You seem to think the neighbour is lazy and careless for not doing something that he neither has a legal obligation nor a need to do.

And to top it all you call him filth

I suggest you look to yourself first before questioning other people.

I suggested erecting panels for the dog issue , i would also suggest with two young children , the OP`s neighbour does have a need to do it

No interest further to that in discussing with someone who obviously doesnt have any pride in where they live

JustinR1979

Can't you patch it up a bit with some off cuts, enough to secure it for now?
Not sure why he's getting grief for having a wanker for a neighbour, poor bloke.

DRP

Dan-Dan wrote: »

I suggested erecting panels for the dog issue , i would also suggest with two young children , the OP`s neighbour does have a need to do it

No interest further to that in discussing with someone who obviously doesnt have any pride in where they live

tbf dan-dan, you have a bit of a 'history' with fence disputes, so may be less impartial than some concerning the op...

Norman_Castle

Dan-Dan wrote: »

You cant help lazy , careless filth , as your neighbour seems to be , some people just dont care , and you cant change that

Lazy, careless, filth. :rotfl: Thats a bit harsh for someone who's indifferent about fence repairs.

jbainbridge

Why not offer to go halves on it ... seems like you'd both benefit from it?

aallank

I don't see myself as being unreasonable - like i said i've just paid a lot of money to have my fence (as stated in the deeds) to be replaced. this is his side (as stated in the deeds) so i assumed that he would need to replace it. unreasonable? i don't see how.

u call me an arrogant dog owner? how? i came on to ask for advice as to whether there was a legal requirement for him to replace his fence that has been damaged to stop his children (who are partial to being nosey in my garden and before you say i have nothing against children as i also have young children myself who would not go wondering into other peoples gardens) coming into my garden and to stop my dogs going into his. dogs are naturally inquisitive and i would have thought it would be 'allowed' to let the dogs into their own garden without me having to have them on leads to stop them going into his garden.
I don't see why i should have to pay for and erect (as i know he wont just to be awkward like 2 years ago) if i do erect a fence i will have to do it along side his which will of course then mean he will take his down and low and behold have gained an extra few inches of garden. now i know that doesn't sound like much but its just extremely frustrating!!

phill99

aallank wrote: »

I don't see myself as being unreasonable - like i said i've just paid a lot of money to have my fence (as stated in the deeds) to be replaced. this is his side (as stated in the deeds) so i assumed that he would need to replace it. unreasonable? i don't see how.

u call me an arrogant dog owner? how? i came on to ask for advice as to whether there was a legal requirement for him to replace his fence that has been damaged to stop his children (who are partial to being nosey in my garden and before you say i have nothing against children as i also have young children myself who would not go wondering into other peoples gardens) coming into my garden and to stop my dogs going into his. dogs are naturally inquisitive and i would have thought it would be 'allowed' to let the dogs into their own garden without me having to have them on leads to stop them going into his garden.
I don't see why i should have to pay for and erect (as i know he wont just to be awkward like 2 years ago) if i do erect a fence i will have to do it along side his which will of course then mean he will take his down and low and behold have gained an extra few inches of garden. now i know that doesn't sound like much but its just extremely frustrating!!

You don't getit do you?

If your dogs get loose as a result if you not securing your boundaries and cause injury, you will be dragged through the courts.

You are being particularly arrogant in this.