Right of Way and legal obligations - what can I do?

crazycatlady1984

rach_k wrote: »

Would it be possible to fence off an access path for them to use for their bins etc, perhaps across the end of the garden so you just lose a narrow strip? That seems to be quite a common set-up. If you make the pathway as wide as the current gate, it wouldn't be limiting the size of what they can bring through any more than it currently is.

Well that kind of is the set-up. It's hard to explain without seeing the garden, but they have to cut right past where our door is; it's just the way it is, no other solution, and it's not really a problem, I accept they have to take their bins through. The issue is just the fact that they are leaving th gate open which is a security issue and also damages the gate (badly! We live in Aberdeen - v windy!) which we then need to repair, at our expense.

They have only started doing it since we told them we are expecting a baby. They are incredibly twisted.

Mojisola

crazycatlady1984 wrote: »

So they're the dominant tenement? Even though it's my land? That doesn't seem right to me. At all.

Your property is the servient tenement because the neighbours have rights over it.

http://www.boundary-problems.co.uk/boundary-problems/priv-r-o-w.html

crazycatlady1984

Mojisola wrote: »

Your property is the servient tenement because the neighbours have rights over it.

http://www.boundary-problems.co.uk/boundary-problems/priv-r-o-w.html

Sorry, yes, of course it is. Was getting too wound up, realised as soon as I typed that that that is the case. We are the servient tenement, still finding it hard to swallow that we have to accept damage to our property as part of the deal though.

Thank you for the link; having problems opening it on my phone at the mo, will try and have a read when I get home.

baz8790

Scottish law may be different to the above link.

On my deeds it just states that my neighbours have a one half share of the marked path that runs to the back and side of my house (end terrace)

getmore4less

Should have said

There is probably a catch or a way to mount one that allows access to open from both sides.

a quick google(double sided gate catch) finds this sort of thing, best of both worlds.

crazycatlady1984

getmore4less wrote: »

Should have said

There is probably a catch or a way to mount one that allows access to open from both sides.

a quick google(double sided gate catch) finds this sort of thing, best of both worlds.

Would this be opened with a key though? Because one side opens onto the street (ie needs to be lockable and only opens with a key).


I will take a look though, thank you. The issue now seems to be that they have a legal right to just wedge open whichever lock I get :eek:

As an aside, there is also a gate between our two gardens which my husband put up in response to their complaining about my cat "walking on their wall". They also just leave this open (bizarre, as surely that defeats the purpose of trying to keep the cat out?!) and we are constantly having to replace the latch, so we are quite often buying latches, so thank you, will check this one out

crazycatlady1984

baz8790 wrote: »

Scottish law may be different to the above link.

On my deeds it just states that my neighbours have a one half share of the marked path that runs to the back and side of my house (end terrace)

Ours is something similar; it is just a coloured path running from their garden, through ours, and then down the driveway to the street.

moneyistooshorttomention

I'm wondering why they would think of wedging the gate open on the one hand but demand you fix the lock if it's broken on the other hand. That sounds odd - though I note you say they are illogical people basically.

Have you paid the cost/used your husbands time for free to repair the gate any time they have caused it to break? It does sound as if you have.

I don't know how Scottish law might differ to the rest of the country - but my understanding of a ROW to use a road, for instance, means that the ROW user (ie the dominant tenement) has no right to demand that the road-owner keeps the road in good repair. However, the law allows the road-user to do the maintenance work and pay for it themself as I understand it.

So - I can't demand the road-owner in my road fixes it - but I could pay to do the job myself if I chose to.

I would have thought the same sort of logic would apply to the gate/lock on gate - ie that they could pay to fix the broken lock themselves if they like but they can't demand you pay (or use your time) to fix it.

Personally - I would be inclined to give them a bill for it every time they cause the lock to be broken and say "You want it fixed - you pay to fix it". I certainly wouldnt have my hubby giving his time for free to fix it.

It does sound like they are trying to drive you out before your child is born. Ignore them. Time will solve that problem for you....:cool:

Mojisola

crazycatlady1984 wrote: »

I live in an upper conversion and another couple live in the lower flat. There is no access from their garden so they have a right of way through our garden and then down our driveway in order to take their bins out to the street etc.

There is a wall with a gate in it which secures the back of the house and the garden.

The issue is that this couple consistently leave the gate unlocked and not even closed properly.

You could play hardball and tell them that, if they continue to leave the gate open to blow about or unlocked, you will be taking it away.

They have the right of free movement along the ROW; they don't have any rights to make you secure the garden.

While it could be a nuisance for yourselves for a while, it may make them treat your gate with more respect.

On the other hand, it might also set them off to find other ways of making your life uncomfortable.

moneyistooshorttomention

I see your point Mojisola.

I can't really see how they could make OP's life harder - even if they are deliberately trying to.

The boot is rather on the other foot there - that OP lives above them and not vice-versa. I'm guessing that this couple are being deliberately awkward (if that's the case) because they fear the coming baby will be allowed to cry and scream for hours - which probably would come through as noise into their flat. That much I understand - but they are rather assuming there will be increased noise because of a baby nearby - rather than waiting to see if there is.