Land registry and boundary dispute

Norman_Castle

Looks like the best course of action to get my own surveyor, was hoping to avoid the expense!!!! No idea how much these things cost

As the boundary has been considered correct for over 40 years and the supposed misplacement is 8cm I would investigate the likelihood of a court now insisting it is wrong.

Try phoning a few surveyors for a bit of free advice. Ask if historic boundaries are ever considered wrong with an 8cm discrepancy.

moneyistooshorttomention

Davesnave wrote: »

Let's hope you are also now awake enough to spot irony.

Gimme me a break Dave..it took me many years to learn a sense of humour and irony took a while longer:rotfl:

Just thinking that some people take things very literally...for whatever reason (speaks as one of them......). No wonder I actually like reading legal stuff (every word carefully considered):rotfl:

moneyistooshorttomention

Norman_Castle wrote: »

As the boundary has been considered correct for over 40 years and the supposed misplacement is 8cm I would investigate the likelihood of a court now insisting it is wrong.

Try phoning a few surveyors for a bit of free advice. Ask if historic boundaries are ever considered wrong with an 8cm discrepancy.

There is a process called "boundary determination". My understanding is that the Land Registry won't do this, but will take account of one they are provided with that matches up to their criteria.

As far as I've been able to ascertain to date it costs hundreds of £s (each - to both the households involved) to do this.

As far as I've been able to ascertain even that isn't so dead precise that it will measure to literally within 1 cm tolerance. Without checking...from memory...I think even "boundary determination" allows for around 10 centimetres variance. I couldn't swear that's the precise figure involved from memory. So, in fact, boundary determination would fix a boundary pretty darn closely and certainly much more so than the Land Registry's general boundaries rule allows for, but there is this minute tolerance allowed for even there.

princeofpounds

Hi there.

This is an unfortunate set of circumstances. Because possibly a lot of money is going to be spent on what is essentially a trifle.

It is highly like that the fence does mark the boundary. As many posters have noted, land registry plans indicate only the general location of the boundary and it is not possible to locate normal boundaries through measurement in the way they seem to be attempting to do.

http://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2247
http://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3149

Normally boundaries are determined by a physical feature indicated by the boundary plan such as a fence, ditch or wall.

There might be an exeption in the 'narrative' boundary case, where the deeds say something like the boundary is halfway beween the two walls. But even in this case your parents almost certainly have adverse possession of the land through long and exclusive use.

The difficulty here is that it is such a small amount of land, the courts will be angry if it reaches them. There is a legal principle that the law does not concern itself with 'trifles' and a judge may even refuse to hear the case. For this reason, your insurance solicitors may not ever want to pursue legal action.

If they do hear it, then they might be quite brutal in ordering costs. I suspect that they would punish the party overturning the status quo (the neighbours) rather than your parents, but it is essential that they show sincere efforts not to escalate to the courts.

So if they need to do anything at all, then they should probably offer mediation through surveyors in order to create a determined boundary, which would be far more preferable.

http://www.boundary-problems.co.uk/Jon-Maynard-Boundaries/jmb-determined-bdy.html

Mojisola

Conveyancer gives some useful info here -
https://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3149

Land_Registry

Clearly a very difficult situation and some interesting advice/views expressed.

princeofpounds has hit the nail on the head in my view whilst some of the other views expressed clarify how such things can invariably be resolved through discussion and agreement between neighbours.

Everyone will invariably have a view on where a legal boundary might be and how a plan, deeds or indeed the wording of a surveyor's report might be interpreted. But within all of those the soundest advice is to take on board all available information and then agree. If you cannot agree then it is in my experience rarely a question of court action, for the reasons princeofpounds mentions, but more of an issue of how far things are taken in an effort to prove a point or uphold a principle.

From a registration perspective our online guidance around boundaries explains some of the basic but the other links already provided also add valuable insight to the mix.

Some key points to perhaps note although I suspect you have already done so are

No matter how old/new a plan is or what techniques were used to create it it remains a one dimensional interpretation of the physical features on the ground as decided upon by someone at a given time.

Whilst measurements and scales are useful they do not indicate where to measure from (inside or outside of a post for example)

8cm is miniscule when looked at on a 1:1250 or 1:500 plan as explained by others. The thickness of a line is a larger distance than 8cm at such scales.

Photographs can help to convince others of where something once was - sadly fences can disappear overnight or whilst you are away on holiday so may help to restore things asa appropriate.

Surveyors can be extremely helpful in resolving such matters and the RICS website will help as well. But a surveyor, just like anyone else including a Land Registry employee, are merely offering a view/interpretation which whilst professional and based on experience may or may not be accepted by either neighbour. I have seen examples where two surveyors have offered differing views and as such this is simply reinforces the premise that if neighbours can agree a way forward then this is invariably the best way to go.

And finally, the only enforcement agency re matters of law is a Court but as princeofpounds has stated their view on a dispute over 8cm is unlikely to be looked on too kindly as they too, based on much of what has already been posted, take the view that such things should be resolved by neighbours and not by them.

killerkev

Thank you for your post I can't agree more 8cm is such a small amount and of no monetary value. If it was not happening to to my parents I would properly have said just give them what they want as some on here suggest.
Even thought it seem clear to me that under Adverse Possession the low level fence should not be moved as it has been so long established.
So do I give in or call their bluff ???? The 64 million dollar question!!

Pricivius

If it helps at all, I have mentioned my parents' boundary disputes on previous threads, but some info may be relevant here...

Our dispute was over a one foot thick wall which stood three feet high. The neighbour moved in and asserted that it was a party wall with the boundary line in the middle. We have lived in the property for 20 years at that point and the wall had always been considered ours, with the boundary line on the face of it on the neighbour's side. So, a row over a 6 inch wide strip of land. However, the neighbour was determined to remove the whole wall and replace it with a 6 foot high fence, so the implications were more than the size of the land.

For four years we debated, discussed, argued and pleaded with our neighbour, involving the police on 3 separate occasions and various friends and a previous owner of the house in an effort to solve the matter amicably. Eventually, we either gave in to him or took him to Court. We commenced court action which reached a final hearing over 2 years later, more than 6 years since the dispute began. We won and were awarded 82% of our costs.

So how did the Court decide? Several things were taken in to account. The wall was identical to the wall that surrounded three sides of my parents' house so the Judge felt that it did not make sense for one side of it to be a party wall whilst the rest was owned outright by my parents. My parents' house was built in the late 1800s whereas the neighbour's house was built in the 1950s and it was deemed likely that the wall had been in situ long before the 1950s. The land the neighbour's house sat on was sold off from my parents' garden so it did not make sense for the previous owners to have sold with a party wall, rather than retain ownership of their boundary. My parents were very fortunate in that they remained friends with their original neighbour who had owned the house for 30 years and gave witness evidence that the wall was ours, that the boundary was at the face of it and that he had erected fences on his side of it to keep his dogs in the garden. We also had photographs going back to the early 1980s when we originally moved in, showing the wall in situ. The Title Plan was no use and the deeds were silent so the LR docs gave no support at all. Both parties instructed surveyors who gave opposite opinions and the Judge confirmed that he was ignoring them both as it was simply a matter of opinion. As part of the judgment, the boundary was delineated at the LR with a copy of the judgment added to both LR entries.

It is fair to say that the Judge was not happy at having to decide the matter, but he realised quite quickly that our neighbour was intransigent and had been entirely unwilling to enter mediation, arbitration or instruct a joint expert prior to us embarking on Court action. The Judge realised that we either gave in or fought it, and this is reflected in the costs award; the Judge could have refused to award costs if he felt we were wasting his time.

AdrianC

Pricivius - what sort of order of magnitude was your 18% share of the final bill?

moneyistooshorttomention

Gawd! 6 years of hassle and having to pay 18% of the costs when the evidence of eyes (ie the neighbours eyes) should have told them the facts. Crikey!

It does tend to confirm my view that some people derive "life blood" from fighting for the sake of it (ie that neighbour). Unless there was something wrong with them? Was the neighbour ill in any way or just not very bright that they started that - or was it they are the sort of person who gets "life blood" from it (ie reason to live)?

Congratulations that the right person won in the end - ie your parents.