Right of way amendment - advice please

elrichio86

I agree with other posters above. If they want to adjust the right-of-access, then the best way would be to remove the access entirely and give the OP a strip at the bottom of the garden in exchange. It seems the "cleanest" solution IMO.

laidbackgjr

elrichio86 wrote: »

I agree with other posters above. If they want to adjust the right-of-access, then the best way would be to remove the access entirely and give the OP a strip at the bottom of the garden in exchange. It seems the "cleanest" solution IMO.

This would be a clean solution - but in this instance the neighbour's property would be devalued by having a smaller garden, so I can only see this working if the OP is prepared to buy the strip of garden from his neighbour. If the neighbour is buying with a mortgage I can't see this working as I doubt the mortgage company would approve the garden being given away in exchange for the neighbour giving up the ROW across the garden.

elrichio86

laidbackgjr wrote: »

This would be a clean solution - but in this instance the neighbour's property would be devalued by having a smaller garden, so I can only see this working if the OP is prepared to buy the strip of garden from his neighbour. If the neighbour is buying with a mortgage I can't see this working as I doubt the mortgage company would approve the garden being given away in exchange for the neighbour giving up the ROW across the garden.

Yes, its an unfair exchange in value, thats the point really. If the neighbours/buyers/solictor/whoever wants to remove or adjust the right-of-access then they need to make it worthwhile to the OP. Why should the OP agree to any changes that are detrimental to them - they would be happy enough with the status-quo surely?

Besides, is a strip of land up to 1m (for example) wide really going to make much difference to the overall value of the property?

moneyistooshorttomention

DTDfanBoy wrote: »

I'm not sure why so many people think that the ROW is needed by the OP to access their own garden, they have made it clear that that isn't the case.

.

That's been puzzling me too - as to why people are saying "You'd have problems accessing your own garden"????

They have access to their own garden. What we are talking about is whether they can go through someone else's garden to access an alleyway or no.

LateStarter

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

That's been puzzling me too - as to why people are saying "You'd have problems accessing your own garden"????

They have access to their own garden. What we are talking about is whether they can go through someone else's garden to access an alleyway or no.

As an example, how exactly would they get a shed into the garden? If you've read the posts, they live on the upper floor, and have access via steps from the kitchen down to their garden. Are you suggesting they take the shed upstairs through the front door, through the flat, and then back down the kitchen steps? Okay, so that's not a regular occurrence. What about a bicycle? The right of access is there for a purpose.

bouicca21

That sort of arrangement is very common. Down the road from where I used to live there was a row of ten - they all had access from an alleyway along the back of their gardens. It never bothered them.

Presumably OP's neighbour has never been bothered about it either. The buyers either put up with it or walk. I just can't imagine why anyone would think it needs to cause hassle. If I were OP I'd tell them to take a running jump, though perhaps a tad more politely than that.

moneyistooshorttomention

In OP's position - I would perfectly understand why someone wanted to ensure strangers didn't have the right to come and go as they pleased through the garden.

On from that - yep....I would go back to this buyer and say "I do understand your concerns and some people would be really invasive of your privacy with that right of access. However, I suggest you sell me a narrow strip of your garden that I can use to access that alleyway and, in return, I would no longer have any rights over the rest of your garden".


Then its up to these would-be buyers as to whether they decide to:
- sell OP that narrow strip (though, in their position, I would want a written undertaking of that fact and the price payable before I would proceed with my purchase of the other flat)

OR

- accept that their flat would come with a back garden that didn't have any privacy and hope the neighbours weren't going to abuse the privilege of being able to walk through my garden

OR

- forget the whole idea and look for another property to buy

AdrianC

Not sell. Swap. With them paying all the legals, of course.

insomniac_ut

I'd like to address a few further points.

One of the bedrooms of the downstairs property overlooks our garden half, and the other bedroom overlooks their garden half. So the crux of the matter hinges on how much advance notice we give them.

The buyer's argument - a legitimate one - is that they don't want us invading their privacy willy nilly.

We already have a garden shed in the property, and have extensively refurbished our garden so we don't anticipate major work in the coming years.

However, regardless of how we re-draft the ROW agreement, I do want exceptions for things like compost, plants, gravel, outdoor furniture, potential future building works and the occasional lost cat.

I'm trying to be reasonable and pragmatic, since these are people we will be sharing the freehold with, and we'll be jointly responsible for the roof, pointing, etc.

I'm just trying to not get screwed in the process of being pragmatic.

G_M

I'd raise another important point. In previous posts above you and others have referred variously to "24 hours notice" and "24 hours approval".

These are VERY different. 'Notice' means you tell them you're going to use the access in 24 hours time. 'Approval' means you ask them and they can say no (eg if they have planned a BBQ that day, or simply feel vindictive).

If you go down this route, make sure the wording used is what you want!

But frankly the whole idea is mad. The suggestion that it does not matter as you have direct access from your flat is irrelevant. As Latestarter suggested, the next owner of your flat (or you, your partner, your kids) one day might want to keep a bike in the back shed for daily use. Do you really want to lug it through your flat, on a wet day, with the wheels covered in mud.....?

The obvious solution as suggested above, is to extend the alley at 90 degrees along the rear of their garden so that you have permenant and unrestricted access round the back rather than through their garden. This of course, means they lose a bit of garden space.

I don't see that you could justify charging them for this change of route, but of course they should bear the cost of:

* your legal advice
* the costs of drawing up/registering the new ROW
* the costs of physically creating the extension to the alley
* the cost of fencing off the extended alley from their garden
* any other related costs I've missed!

If they are not happy with that, then simply refuse.