Easement problem

Ozzuk

If you are completely sure of your position and the new land has no claim whatsoever then I'm surprised your original sale fell through. That would have been the time to send a cease and desist letter stating he has no access - that could have been enough to placate your buyer. If the sale fell through because of it I'd have been tempted to sue the person causing the issue for costs.

This would be driving me up the wall, spend an hour or two with a solicitor who knows about land issues, get a letter drawn up and tell the new land owner if they cause any issues with future sales you will be taking legal action to recover costs. When you do sell, include the dispute, tell them it's resolved and there is no claim.

Land_Registry

The OP has clearly researched this area extensively and has a broad understanding of how things work re boundaries, disputes etc. There's nothing really to add to that.

One post refers to the good old days when a plan would state the measurements but that does not change the OP's correct understanding as any plan is merely a representaiton of a person's view and measurements taken at a certain point in time. Of some use but we don't know where they measured from e.g. inside or outside of a fence post and/or what account was made for the lie of the ground e.g. measured along the ground or otherwise. So plans with measurements change very little when trying to establish the exact legal boundary line.

The Adjudicator can be involved and in many cases that is the route to go simply because a court looks very simply on such matters being brought before them - they can end up in court of course so best to check with a solicitor or those who have chosen such a route to learn from their experiences.

Reading the thread it is still unclear what the exact position is although I assume the path is in fact unregistered but the OP (and other neighbour) have a right of way/access over it. The developer is claiming the path is theirs for planning permission purposes.

As another poster mentions Planning won't be checking whether the applicant owns the land or not as that the applicant's concern and not theirs. They will be looking at size, shape, materials, fitting in with the neighbouring builds etc

OP refers to lodging a boundary dispute but lodge with who? It would not be us but you could consider a Determined Boundary application but I assume you have already considered that but rejected it

The problem is how do I stop the owner of the adjacent land disrupting the sale of my property by simply claiming, without any evidence, that he owns it, and continuing to do so unless I agree to give it to him?

Logical way is to back up your claim as to ownership by applying to register the land. As mentioned I am unclear as to the position as like others would question if you owned it why would you have an easement over it. But I think you have covered that with the suggesiton that you did have a right over it but evidence/word of mouth implies/confirms that the land was in fact included with the property at some point.

That though needs testing by applying to register your claim/ownership.

AnotherUserName

Hi Ozzuk, and many thanks for contributing to this thread.

A quick explanation as to the easements, at least as far as I can understand them.

Picture a rectangle divided into three.

The right hand rectangle is a row of cottages, been there since mid-1900's or earlier.
The middle section was a garden plot for the cottages, divided up by pathways.
The left hand section was a garden plot and two garages.

The owner of one of the cottages owned the left hand plot.
In order to access the path to his garages, he had an easement over the plot in the middle.

The deeds contain the following convoluted wording, the same wording appears in both my deeds and the deeds of the cottage that originally owned the garages.

"Together also with a right of way in common with others so far as the
vendor can and legally may convey the same over the road or way
coloured blue on the said plan and Together with a right in common with
the owners of the adjoining premises on the north east side of the
premises hereby conveyed to pass and repass over the path coloured
green on the said plan and Together also with a right to pass and
repass in common with the owners of the adjoining cottages over and
along the path coloured brown on the said plan but subject as to the
coloured yellow on the said plan as to the right of the owners and
occupiers of the said premises on the the north east side likewise to
pass and repass thereover."

The only place that the coloured pathways appear is on the 1950 title plan for the cottage on the right hand side of the area. These are so intermingled on the plan that it is pretty much impossible to separate them. However, as the paths are clearly shown on old satellite images, it is evident where they go.

I have spent a Kings ransom downloading title plans and deeds, applying via an OC2 etc for archive plans etc, the last attempt resulted in LR simply sending me back a copy of the plan that I had included and charging me for it. I am currently awaiting a response to a letter I have sent asking them to read what I had sent them, and what I was requesting. I even enclosed satellite images, other plans etc. I am attempting to obtain a clearly coloured plan for my own property that will leave no doubt. If I went to Adjudication with the smudged version that I have been sent, they would probably laugh at me and I would lose. The LR printers merge all of the colours?

I have tried the LR forum, tried writing for information, done 8 months of research, contacted the RICS, spoken to a surveyor etc etc. The only way that I have been able to obtain any definitive information has been by persevering with the research, which is endless.

My concern is that yes, I could pay a surveyor. But if I do that then someone can challenge his findings. This opens a doorway to huge legal bills as I would have to pay to support those findings. The surveyor, as far as I am aware would not defend his findings, I would have to pay for that.

I looked as Adjudication, but the LR site is a maze. I have been there often, but end up clicking on link after link and going down rabbit holes with no end. I usually just give up. Attempting to establish the answer to a simple question such as 'What is the process for Adjudication, what does it cost, and what evidence do I need to present?' usually results in a universal 'Consult a Lawyer' statement.

The deeds for the land on which the proposed new build is planned do not show any easements at all. On this basis, the easements shown above do not apply to that plot of land but to mine and the original right side cottage(s).

If the easements do not apply to the new build land, and the easements apply to the paths, then the path adjoining my property must by default be within my boundary. The edge of the path denotes my boundary. No fence has been erected as neither the builder of my property nor myself have any desire to attract a 'blocking easements' action.

I hope all of this makes sense. It is the paths together with the easements over them that are the key. The paths are within boundaries, and the easements are over the paths within those boundaries. Only one of the paths is within mine, but I fully acknowledge that other properties have an easement over it.

The owner of the new build land has never formally claimed the path in three years, if he did I could contest it, but I cannot stop him doing what he threatened to do, and did do, which was to simply send an email telling 'me' to tell the buyer that there was no easement, and that they could not use the rear access. He has done nothing illegal, but...it worked. I had to declare it and the buyer disappeared.

AnotherUserName

If the Land Registry chap sees this could he let me know? I can't log in to the Land Registry Q&A area, trying to use my Google login etc just seems to send me around in circles of being logged in , and then the system asking me to log in when I try and post anything??

I am still no further forward with this issue. Not heard a word out of the developer, though having taken a look at coloured original 1950's plans, there are no easements at all over the path. All easements shown in my deeds relate to my easement over various paths on surrounding land (that I will never use), but no one has an easement over mine.

These plans seem to support the 2009 planning permission plans for my property, that include the path.

I have however taken the step of 3D printing boundary markers that I have attached with resin down the outer edge of the path.

I know that this may seem like a remarkably stupid question, but the only solution that I can see is claiming adverse possession of my own path. I can support this with:
Sales particulars.
Letter of confirmation from my conveyancing solicitor.
Planning Permission, which contains plans and specific references to rear access.
Planning Permission objections. There are none, which means that the previous owner of the adjoining land had no dispute with the boundary position shown, the path, fences or anything else.
1950's deeds.
Letter from builder of my property.
My ownership and use of the path.
Statements from the lady who sold the land to the builder. She can state that she used the path as a child (she is now in her seventies, and that it was her fathers path, which he used as access to his garages).
Statements from owners of other land that adjoins the path. They have confirmed that as far as they are concerned it belongs to me and have no claim on it. They have now fenced off their land from the path, and no longer have access to it.

My question is, even armed with all of this evidence, can the developer who is attempting to gain my path, successfully contest any attempt that I make to formalise the boundary (adverse or determined) armed 'only' with a title plan showing a general boundary marked in red? Do I need surveyors plans, or will photographs of the path suffice? I have satellite images back to 1999, plus of course current ones.

In an ideal world I would just pay for the path to be fenced off from his land, find a lawyer that understands boundary law, and get a cease and desist letter issued. I can't seem to find anyone who will advise me on anything without charging me hundreds to tell me what I already know??

Land_Registry

I have read your further post.
Login issues with any service (not just ours) in my experience at least, can relate to the device being used. For example using an iPad differs from a PC as far as how the system reacts.
You mention having posted on our forum previously so your details should still be stored. If unable to login I would suggest trying a different device or let me know your User name and I can check and/or have your details removed so you can register again?

As far as the plan issue is concerned it reads as if you have already been in touch with us and obtained all the information we have on record albeit not as you might have hoped/expected - apologies if so and our service let you down

Unfortunately the quality of deed plans can be an issue where the starting point is poor, the older the deed the poorer the quality although not always the case.

Copiers can 'merge colours' but that is not usually as a result of our scanning. But quality can be an issue although in this case the registered easement appears to be unrelated to the actual footpath you are contesting. Not ideal if merged/smudged but the impact on the specific footpath issue is perhaps lessened?

I mentioned in my earlier post that submitting an application might be worth considering. You say it would be in respect of 'your own path' but at this point that ownership is unproven, hence the need for clarification.

A wealth of evidence can exist/be presented but the initial objective is to satisfy the complex legal requirements hence the advice/need to seek legal advice. I totally appreciate and understand that you already have a better/wider understanding of the specific issues but clearly others disagree hence the need to find the legal way forward.

You will have read our Practice Guide 5 I'm sure which explains what supporting evidence should be submitted. Once again a solicitor should be able to advise on what is required from a legal perspective and match that to our own requirements.

We will not consider the evidence until it is submitted in the form if an application. With such an application we will, if it passes the initial consideration of that evidence as in the 'essentials' referred to in the PG, then survey the site ourselves. Whilst you can provide satellite imagery, photographs etc there is still a need for 'our own eyes' to check and report also.

If everything is all still in play we may notify adjoining landowners of your application to give them an opportunity to consent/object. This is especially true of course if they have access to the land and/or may use it - see essentials again
At that point further consideration is possible and any dispute as a result may well be referred to the tribunal.

The weight of evidence is of course important, from both sides. But until an application is made it woukd not be considered by us.

AnotherUserName

I am curious about the Land Registry title plan, and the red boundary line. Are you able to confirm how you arrive at the location of the line? Is this line drawn on the basis of information provided by whoever has registered a title to the land, or is it drawn on the basis of where someone at the Land Registry thinks it might be, by looking at the OS map?
There has to be a decision making process somewhere, but I cannot find any reference to that process anywhere.

Land_Registry

AnotherUserName - the title plan is created using the OS base map detail available at the time of the application/consideration.

The submitted deeds/documents will be considered alongside that detail and if necessary adjoining registered titles also form part of that consideration.

If there are concerns over the applied for/OS extent we may request a survey to clarify.

See PG 40 supplement 5 for more details of how a title plan is created and what it will show.

Section 4, albeit brief, explains how we create a title plan. The key being we consider the application, what is already registered and what OS have surveyed

AnotherUserName

I took a look at the link, which explains the basics, however there is a further hyperlink to 'surveys' within the text that comes up page unavailable.

My issue is that I have three LR plans (in addition to the site plan drawn up when my property was built.

Plan 1. The general boundary plan drawn up in 2009. Simple OS with thick red boundary line over the path.
Plan 2. The original boundary plan from the 1950's showing the original cottage, and marked with all pathways and easements over the land between the cottage and the land on which my property is built.
Plan 3. The general boundary plan for the land adjoining the path on which the new build is proposed. This one has a very thin red boundary line right up against my house wall, thus placing the path within the title of the adjoining land.

The site survey plan drawn up when my property was built places the path within my boundary, and is clearly marked with the site boundary indicated and annotated as including the path. The path is also referred to within the design and access statement as being my rear access.

The planning permission consent for the new build includes the following wording:

Other Representations
4.6
Local Residents
Six comments have been received from local residents. Of these, there are
5no.comments of objections:
Access
 Existing concrete path along side of application site appears is to be
used for rear access, but this is owned by No. 22;
 Existing path is fixed to the side of No. 22 and it is feared footfall will be
felt in the property;
 The boundary of the proposed development should be limited to the
edge to avoid becoming a nuisance and permanent intrusion to No. 22;
 Proposed plan shows the rear garden of new dwellings adjoining No. 22
garden fence with no gap;
 Existing footpath should not be used by new dwellings/occupiers;
 No access to rear of proposed dwellings, only via existing shared access
path (for access to back of No. 12 – 18);
 Application seems to assume a right of access to rear of 3 bedroom
property which does not exist;
 Pathway between application site and cottages is privately owned (right
of access for cottages only);

As you can see, numerous residents have highlighted the 'land grab' surrounding the new build, however I am only concerned with the aspect that affects my title.

The easements that I have around the surrounding land stop when they get to the path in question. The reason for this is that although the original owner of my site needed to walk across the land between his house and his garden/garage, he did not need an easement to walk up the path that was on his land to his garage.

I hope this makes sense. There really appears to have been an assumption at the Land Registry that the path does not exist (it is shown as a dotted line on the 1950's plan - not on the upated 2009 one), hence someone simply drew a red line in what seemed the logical place, rather than the correct one.

This was then exacerbated when the boundary for the adjoining land was drawn. Anyone looking at my 2009 plan would assume that the boundary was against my house wall, not at the edge of the adjoining path which runs alongside it.

As mentioned previously, when the planning application for my property was approved in 2009, no residents of any surrounding land objected to the site boundary, the path, or the fencing that was proposed. They most certainly would have if there was any question as to where the boundaries lay. One resident is still here, I have spoken to him, and he has confirmed that my boundary includes the path as it did not belong to him, but to the owner of the garages.

My next question is what is the process for getting a Land Registry representative to take a look at this case. I can send all of the documentation, photographs, and plans that I have to any surveyor at the LR if this helps.

Land_Registry

Surveys is in section 12 of the same Guide - I'll ask colleagues to repair the link so thank you for highlighting it

As far as your 3 plans go I am unsure what general or original boundary plans are. You say that they are all LR plans but their importance will be defined by the context in which they are drawn and when so are they title plans, deed plans or perhaps something else?

For example a title plan is drawn to define the general boundaries only. A deed plan is drawn to provide a visual explanation of what the deed is seeking to do

You also refer to a 'site survey plan' but the purpose/context is again important. Was it a site plan drwan by the architect to show how the site was to be laid out/developed? If yes then that was it's purpose so it's relevance to the end result is perhaps limited as not all builds follow the first site plan.

Plans will often refer to reference points to aid the visual aspect. They are of course helpful but the context/purpose of the plan impacts on how important they might be if used in a different context.

Essentailly a title plan or deed plan will not stand stand on it's own as the register and deed respectively set the context/purpose

The planning permission consent for the new build includes the following wording:

The planning process and evidence submitted in support of that process are quite separate from the registration aspects. Naturally they can impact/influence a person's view on such matters but from simply a registration perspective they have very little relevance as the deeds and title plan carry more weight.

In my experience they may come into play for eample where the deeds are lost or someone is seeking to claim land to which they have no evidence other than their 'claim'. It may help them to support the claimed context but little more than that.

Your posts imply that you have already raised this with us and presumably received our replies. So there is nothing I can usefully add to the specifics involved other than my general comments above.

Registraiton is based on a number of factors and as you already appreciate OS details and deeds plus plans will imact on the decisions made. It would be foolish to suggest that assumptions are not made but the reality is that there will always be a degree of assumption as no plan will define the exact legal boundaries so even after all the plans are added to the mix the reality on the ground and the views/approach of the neighbouring landowners also come into play.

So, if you have already raised the issue with us as an enquiry the only next step you have to 'for getting a Land Registry representative to take a look at this case' is to make a formal application. Whether that is to register your claim to ownership of the land or to rectify your own or the neighbouring title; or claim an easement over the footpath is really up to you.

I assume you have not made a formal application but have raised it as an enquiry to date. If so then I would have expected us to have set out the options for you in any replies - is that not the case here?

AnotherUserName

I am referring to

GR330750 6 Jul 1950
GR345278 My Property
GR402277 Adjoining land

and yes, the architects plans for the original site boundary. The boundary is marked by the concrete path that has been in existence for decades.

If you have access to these at your office, you will see that there are discrepancies between where the boundaries have been drawn. GR402277 has the west boundary inside the east boundary for GR345278.

On GR345278 there is a gap between the west house wall and the boundary, which is where the path is located.

On GR402277 there is no gap at all, and actually runs inside of my current garden fence which is on the west side of the path?

All title plans and deeds, and easements, match up except the boundary that has been drawn on the west side of GR402277.

https://www.bing.com/maps?osid=6c333812-f5d7-4147-a8ec-33de1cb7010b&cp=51.449427~-2.48675&lvl=19&dir=38.82305&pi=-6.891248&style=x&mo=z.0&imgid=c3e4f513-559d-44b4-8108-bc5f73885bd1&v=2&sV=2&form=S00027

I am not claiming unregistered land, unless my entire plot is unregistered, which it isn't as far as I am aware. It was simply a plot of land, the owner laid a concrete path up one side of it decades ago. The bottom end of the land was a garden, the top end was two garages. The path, as you can see runs from the bottom to the top. When my property was built, the path was left in place, fresh concrete applied to the top end down to the rear access, and a fence erected between the path and the rear garden. The planning permission shows a fence up the entire length of the path, it was not erected for no reason other than access between friendly neighbours at that time. The current neighbour has fenced off the path from their land.

GR402277 places the boundary against my property wall, not against the edge of the path. On this basis alone, the new owner of the land shown in GR402277 is claiming that the path is now his.

I have spent money I can ill afford on trying to get this sorted out, and countless hours on preparing documents for solicitors, researching and reading case law, and letters to the Land Registry. None of this is due to any action on my part, I am not claiming anything that isn't mine, or that isn't evidenced by anything. The appearance of GR402277 is the only cause of this nightmare, and no matter who I ask or when I ask, I just get told to look at a webpage, see a solicitor, see a surveyor, or I am eternally drip fed information. None of those options will determine where the boundary is. I need a resolution so that I can sell my house.

If you are not able to view these documents, it will not be possible to see the discrepancy, in which case is my best option to arrange an appointment at Glos office so that I can put them on a desk in front of someone, and ask them to explain to me how all of these plans can be correct?