Stopping a supermarket from erecting scafolding on my land

Marktheshark

Its not maintenance its construction.
Several projects have been stopped in their tracks by refusal of access by land owners, hence why its often a good idea to build within the confines of your own land and keep a boundary strip for access.

mishkanorman

Marktheshark wrote: »

The Nazi invasion of our great country was also "going ahead"
Some things you have to fight for, even if the odds are clearly stacked against us, just like they were in 1941.

Not quite the same though is it ?

the OP doesnt even know if this will happen right now, seems ike an awful lot of stress and worry brought on themselves when they can ill afford it. No one should be a pushover in life but equally dont make your life harder than it needs to be :money:

Doozergirl

Marktheshark wrote: »

Its not maintenance its construction.
Several projects have been stopped in their tracks by refusal of access by land owners, hence why its often a good idea to build within the confines of your own land and keep a boundary strip for access.

It's maintenance. Rendering an existing building is maintaining the building.

lovelyhead

Marktheshark wrote: »

Get some signs made for the wall stating private property, no trespassing.
Your position is stronger if it is clearly defined that it is a boundary, it is no longer a dispute then, its trespass and I have never heard of a court granting orders to trespass, its common law and can not be over ruled.

Yes it very clearly and unmistakably defined as belonging to the group of terraced houses both by boundary walls and also in the title deeds. In the deeds it reads:

"Together with a right in common along with the proprietors of the seven adjoining terraced dwelling houses to all common and / or mutual parts, walls and fences, including the pathway surrounding the subjects shown tinted yellow on the said plan, serving the whole of the said dwelling houses"

The pathway I am talking about is the pathway shown tinted yellow on the deeds.

What you say chimes with what the lawyer has advised.

I don't get why people are so keen for me just to roll over and accept this. What is the point of owning property if you don't get to decide what happens on said property?

Marktheshark

I admire the people for not lying down and letting a greedy corporation walk all over them.
At least there are some people with some fight left in them.
Everyone else who thinks this corporation should just hawk up on his his property and make themselves a few more million.
Well, you have had it kicked out of you, sorry but you have.

Hats off to them, make them have to work for it and not walk all over the small guys.

lovelyhead

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

Perhaps not.


But if the supermarket builders want access to property that is not belonging to the plot then they should suitably compensate them.


If sufficient compensation is paid it might enable the OP to move away.

This is what I am thinking. Why shouldn't I be fairly compensated?

lovelyhead

mishkanorman wrote: »

Not quite the same though is it ?

the OP doesnt even know if this will happen right now, seems ike an awful lot of stress and worry brought on themselves when they can ill afford it. No one should be a pushover in life but equally dont make your life harder than it needs to be :money:

It is happening.

lovelyhead

Doozergirl wrote: »

It's maintenance. Rendering an existing building is maintaining the building.

I would disagree.

They are going to be knocking down a section of the building, knocking holes in the walls for new windows, blocking up other windows, removing the whole first floor of the building, re-rendering and cladding the building for aesthetic reasons, adding brand new signage, creating a service area, installing an ATM...

Those are just some things off the top of my head that are going to be taking place. Does that sound like maintenance of a building to you?

Doozergirl

lovelyhead wrote: »

I would disagree.

They are going to be knocking down a section of the building, knocking holes in the walls for new windows, blocking up other windows, removing the whole first floor of the building, re-rendering and cladding the building for aesthetic reasons, adding brand new signage, creating a service area, installing an ATM...

Those are just some things off the top of my head that are going to be taking place. Does that sound like maintenance of a building to you?

Sigh. You told us the erection of scaffolding was for the rendering. That is the only thing that affects your land and the only reason they might need to come onto it.

It is not that people don't have compassion for you, people can see you are on a hiding to nothing. You have to choose your battles wisely. Your ally on this thread has likened your situation to fighting the Nazis and you think that person is the only reasonable one?

I'm out.

POPPYOSCAR

Marktheshark wrote: »

I admire the people for not lying down and letting a greedy corporation walk all over them.
At least there are some people with some fight left in them.
Everyone else who thinks this corporation should just hawk up on his his property and make themselves a few more million.
Well, you have had it kicked out of you, sorry but you have.

Hats off to them, make them have to work for it and not walk all over the small guys.

So do I.


I would not let them on my property either.


At our last house the builders next door asked if we could do them a favour and let them use our electricity until they had the electrics in place in the two houses they were building.


Builders will take liberties if you let them.