Stopping a supermarket from erecting scafolding on my land

lovelyhead

Hi all.

A supermarket has just gained planning permission to convert a disused nursing home that is next door to us into a (you guessed it!) supermarket. In order to do the conversion it seems extremely likely that they will need to erect scaffolding on our access path that runs up the side of our house. This access path is owned and shared between us and 7 other houses in our terrace block. The supermarket / care home has no right of access or ownership to this path.

I contacted a lawyer looking for information on how feasible and legal it would be for me to stop them from erecting scaffolding on the path and this was their reply:

"In short - assuming that your position is correct (ie you do in common own the area concerned and they have no right to do so) then you stand in a perfectly sound position to refuse entry (if you can) to these developers for the erection of scaffolding. If you own and there are no other rights then you have an exclusive right, or perhaps a right in common with others, to use the property. If entry is forced then you can seek to enforce in court by way of an interdict (injunction) with damages for breach"

Does anyone have any experience with such matters? Any advice to offer?

Thanks.

System

Why do you want to stop them?

lovelyhead

the_r_sole wrote: »

Why do you want to stop them?

Our house is within 2 meters of the Supermarkets service area and we generally don't want to live next door to a supermarket. We also have a new born baby due in a couple of weeks as well and don't think living next to a supermarket is a safe environment to bring up a child.

When we bought the house 2 years ago the site had planning permission for 5 houses which we were happy with but that fell through.

System

Since they already have planning permission stopping them erecting a scaffold isn't going to prevent development, there will be a way around it for them - did you object to their planning application?

lovelyhead

the_r_sole wrote: »

Since they already have planning permission stopping them erecting a scaffold isn't going to prevent development, there will be a way around it for them - did you object to their planning application?

We fought them via the planning process vigorously.

It may or may not stop the development but why should we, if we can avoid it, allow them to use our land to achieve their goal, which we are so opposed to?

They are required to roughcast the entire side of a building and block up windows. The building is very tall. At that side of the building there is about 50cm of space within their boundary. I would imagine that the only way to roughcast a building of that height without scaffolding would be to overhang the building in some way. I would imagine this would still be classed as accessing our property though.

mishkanorman

I dont think making a pain of yourself with do anything other than occupy you for a few weeks, get in touch with your local planning department and find the details - get them on side and see if there is anything you can effectively do

phoenix_w

Stopping them for erecting scaffold may make you feel a little better, but it'll be a hollow victory - they'll either work around it, get an order from the court to allow it or their contractor will erect it anyway and it'll be dismantled before you can take any action.

Please don't let it consume you.

tired_dad

No expert, but a supermarket legal team will run rings round everyone. Personally pointless fighting it. Move on. On the bright side, getting supplies of milk/eggs etc will be transformed.

If it really bothers you I would look to move

Marktheshark

Unless the boundary is clearly marked and defined then it will fall under a boundary dispute.
These are costly and time consuming and by that time it will be finished.

So start be clearly marking this boundary so there is no confusion.

Doozergirl

Why should you allow it? Because, regardless of what you do now, there is a supermarket going there.

There is a buddhist teaching “By doing this you are like a man who wants to hit another and picks up a burning ember or excrement in his hand and so first burns himself or makes himself stink.”

No one at the supermarket is going to have sleepless nights over this, but you probably will, if your lovely new bundle of joy doesn't stop you sleeping altogether.

You gain nothing, you cause yourself work, cost and concern, whereas you will be a minor inconvenience to someone else's working day. You will be the most inconvenienced by your ongoing (losing) battle and you have far more important things to be concerned with right now.

I don't mean to be blunt but that is the way it is. You only stand to make yourself stink, as it were

lovelyhead

phoenix_w wrote: »

Stopping them for erecting scaffold may make you feel a little better, but it'll be a hollow victory - they'll either work around it, get an order from the court to allow it or their contractor will erect it anyway and it'll be dismantled before you can take any action.

Please don't let it consume you.

I'd quite happily cause them delays and extra expense. I don't see how they would be able to just go to court and get a court order to access my property without my permission. I was of the belief that you could only do that if you needed to make vital repairs to a building. Not to completely refit and re-purpose a building.

For instance how would this differ from a neighbor who want's to build a two story extension right up to your boundary? They would have no right to use your property for access using scaffolding
.

tired_dad wrote: »

No expert, but a supermarket legal team will run rings round everyone. Personally pointless fighting it. Move on. On the bright side, getting supplies of milk/eggs etc will be transformed.

If it really bothers you I would look to move

Our goal is to move eventually as we don't want to bring our child up next to a supermarket.