Boundary issue

Regulator101

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

Remove the land from the title deeds and keep it. Go round every weekend and have a barbecue on it, talking loudly and playing music.

A few weeks later offer to sell it to the new owners for many times more than it cost you to vary the plans.

That is genius! If only we had the time ...

Regulator101

elsien wrote: »

Yes, I was going to suggest that if the boundary is the issue find another cheaper way of marking it. You don't need to move the wall and if you put up a cheap fence (or even a few posts and a bit of string!) then it will prove to them the neighbour isn't objecting. If they still want the wall moving after that, they're taking the proverbial.

In fact, the boundary is already marked with edging stones at the edge of the neighbour's driveway. Hence why I don't want to rebuild it at all. We've already suggested just bringing the wall down but they won't accept that as a compromise. Maybe they will when they realise that we're not paying for it.

moneyistooshorttomention

If they've had/or heard of people having boundary problems before now - then the thought of just edging stones to mark it still feels worrying.

A (decent-looking) fence put at correct boundary location might be a possible compromise. I'm picturing, say, wooden posts spaced at few feet intervals with 2 wood "bars" across between each set of fence-posts. Only needs to be about 2-3' high and the wall taken down (so as not to create confusion with two boundary markers being there) and it's quite clear your (soon to be their) garden goes up to the wood fence and that fence is yours (soon to be theirs).

Another possibility being to take the wall down - and put up those wood fence-posts at intervals and put attractive lengths of chain (the type used to stop neighbours trespassing in vehicles) across between those posts.

They may or may not accept this as a compromise - as the advantage of a wall is that it can't mysteriously "move" location as fences can/do sometimes (eg coming back from holiday to find the neighbour has decided to replace the fence - and, funnily enough, moved it whilst doing so). Easier to keep out adjoining plants with a wall too.

Regulator101

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

If they've had/or heard of people having boundary problems before now - then the thought of just edging stones to mark it still feels worrying.

A (decent-looking) fence put at correct boundary location might be a possible compromise. I'm picturing, say, wooden posts spaced at few feet intervals with 2 wood "bars" across between each set of fence-posts. Only needs to be about 2-3' high and the wall taken down (so as not to create confusion with two boundary markers being there) and it's quite clear your (soon to be their) garden goes up to the wood fence and that fence is yours (soon to be theirs).

Another possibility being to take the wall down - and put up those wood fence-posts at intervals and put attractive lengths of chain (the type used to stop neighbours trespassing in vehicles) across between those posts.

They may or may not accept this as a compromise - as the advantage of a wall is that it can't mysteriously "move" location as fences can/do sometimes (eg coming back from holiday to find the neighbour has decided to replace the fence - and, funnily enough, moved it whilst doing so). Easier to keep out adjoining plants with a wall too.

Just to point out that on the same estate (which was built in 2000/2001) there are houses with no visible physical boundary at all. So effectively shared drives and shared front gardens. And these houses have sold without problem.


I can't help but feel that if there was no wall at all and the 2 driveways were joined together as a single piece of tarmac, there would be no problem.


The fence idea is one that we'd thought of too - we will probably do this, along with knocking the wall down, at our expense.

DaftyDuck

Agree to do whatever you feel comfortable doing, but have it written into contract to be done between exchange and completion. That way, no pull out by them, no further demands.

G_M

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

Remove the land from the title deeds and keep it. Go round every weekend and have a barbecue on it, talking loudly and playing music.

A few weeks later offer to sell it to the new owners for many times more than it cost you to vary the plans.

Pretty much the only serious suggestion in the thread. Though instead of a barbecue, I'd have tea and cake.

BISCUIT1

Having lived through a boundary issue for the last year where what it looks like on the ground doesn't match the plans I would also want this nailing down. I naively believed my seller that a previous dispute was resolved only for the nightmare neighbour to raise it again with me and another new neighbour a couple of years after we both moved in ..they had agreed a compromise with my seller but didn't alter the deed plans accordingly so the the neighbour felt he could try again with us as he thought we wouldn't be able to prove anything or have the knowledge to fight him. Due to this I can understand why your buyers would want it to look right on paper i.e a boundary wall on the boundary...you only have to look at today's paper where neighbours have gone to court over a shared access issue that has resulted in the loser having to pay £200,000 costs to see why they might be worried about future issues.

Regulator101

BISCUIT1 wrote: »

Having lived through a boundary issue for the last year where what it looks like on the ground doesn't match the plans I would also want this nailing down. I naively believed my seller that a previous dispute was resolved only for the nightmare neighbour to raise it again with me and another new neighbour a couple of years after we both moved in ..they had agreed a compromise with my seller but didn't alter the deed plans accordingly so the the neighbour felt he could try again with us as he thought we wouldn't be able to prove anything or have the knowledge to fight him. Due to this I can understand why your buyers would want it to look right on paper i.e a boundary wall on the boundary...you only have to look at today's paper where neighbours have gone to court over a shared access issue that has resulted in the loser having to pay £200,000 costs to see why they might be worried about future issues.

Yes, I get this. Though I understand from the buyer that the land ownership is not the issue - they've been advised by their solicitors that their lender will not accept the situation. I find that hard to believe as the patch of land in question does absolutely nothing to the value of the property, which is presumably all the lender is bothered about. On a map we're talking the thickness of a felt tip pen (if that)!

smem18

I would just suck it up and agree to knock the wall down and rebuild it where they want, only between exchange an completion. I wouldn't specify the standard to which this would be done however and I would use the absolute cheapest methods and materials possible. If they wanted something done that looks nice, they should have done it themselves. As others have suggested, I would try seeing if they would accept a fence instead of a wall too.

moneyistooshorttomention

BISCUIT1 wrote: »

Having lived through a boundary issue for the last year where what it looks like on the ground doesn't match the plans I would also want this nailing down. I naively believed my seller that a previous dispute was resolved only for the nightmare neighbour to raise it again with me and another new neighbour a couple of years after we both moved in ..they had agreed a compromise with my seller but didn't alter the deed plans accordingly so the the neighbour felt he could try again with us as he thought we wouldn't be able to prove anything or have the knowledge to fight him. Due to this I can understand why your buyers would want it to look right on paper i.e a boundary wall on the boundary...you only have to look at today's paper where neighbours have gone to court over a shared access issue that has resulted in the loser having to pay £200,000 costs to see why they might be worried about future issues.

Absolutely:T

Which just proves the point there are some neighbours that will "try it on". Even if the current next door neighbour is fine/a fair-minded person there is nothing to say they won't flog the house next year to someone that isn't.

My sympathies - as I was in a similar situation where the lack of absolute/categoric boundary feature at correct point meant the neighbours were trespassing right, left and centre into my garden to start with and astonishing me by doing it quite openly at that. I was gobsmacked the first, second, third, etc time I noticed them doing it - and then put the boundary situation right to stop all that nonsense (which it duly did and no problem now). I just never knew when I would spot a stranger or neighbour in my garden until then.